North Queensway Business Park Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Appendices
Appendix B – Ecology & Nature Conservation
[intentionally blank] North Queensway Business Park Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Appendices
Appendix B.1 : Figures
[intentionally blank] Sites D Conse
Source:
Figure Map Sc
Habita
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Habitats SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSI !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! Figure !!!!!!! Map Sc
Develo
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Habitats SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSI !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! Figure Map Sc
North Queensway Business Park Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Appendices
Appendix B.2 : Ecology Baseline Report
[intentionally blank]
QUEENSWAY NORTH HASTINGS, SUSSEX
Ecology Baseline Report
November 2007
Client: Sea Space (Clive Taylor)
Title: Queensway North, Hastings, Sussex. Ecology Baseline Report
Project No: AEL project no. 052
Date of Issue: 12 November 2007
Status: Final Report
Signed on behalf of Applied Ecology Ltd:
……………………………………………………………………. Dr Duncan Painter Director
CONTACT DETAILS:
APPLIED ECOLOGY LTD
St. John's Innovation Centre Cowley Road Cambridge CB4 0WS
Tel: 01223 422 116 Fax: 01223 420 844 Mobile: 07725 811 777 Email: [email protected]
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Contents 1 Introduction ...... 3 1.1 Background...... 3 2 Existing Biological Records...... 5 2.1 Sources of Information ...... 5 2.2 Wildslife Site Designations...... 5 2.3 Protected Species Records ...... 6 3 Habitats...... 7 3.1 Survey Approach ...... 7 3.2 Survey Findings ...... 7 3.3 Evaluation ...... 10 4 Badger...... 11 4.1 Introduction ...... 11 4.2 Survey Approach ...... 11 4.3 Survey Findings ...... 11 4.4 Evaluation ...... 12 5 Dormouse ...... 13 5.1 Introduction ...... 13 5.2 Survey Approach ...... 14 5.3 Survey Findings ...... 14 5.4 Evaluation ...... 16 6 Bats...... 18 6.1 Introduction ...... 18 6.2 Survey Approach ...... 18 6.3 Survey Findings ...... 19 6.4 Evaluation ...... 19 7 Birds...... 21 7.1 Introduction ...... 21 7.2 Survey Approach ...... 22 7.3 Survey Findings ...... 22 7.4 Evaluation ...... 24 8 Great Crested Newt ...... 26 8.1 Introduction ...... 26 8.2 Survey Approach ...... 26 8.3 Survey Findings ...... 27 8.4 Evaluation ...... 27 9 Reptiles ...... 29 9.1 Introduction ...... 29 9.2 Survey Approach ...... 29 9.3 Survey Findings ...... 30 9.4 Evaluation ...... 31 10 Terrestrial Invertebrates ...... 33 10.1 Introduction ...... 33 10.2 Survey Approach ...... 33
Applied Ecology Ltd
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
10.3 Survey Findings ...... 36 10.4 Evaluation ...... 37 11 Implications for Development Planning...... 40 11.1 Retention of Habitats...... 40 11.2 Protection of Designated Habitats...... 40
Applied Ecology Ltd 2
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
In July 2006 Applied Ecology Ltd (AEL) was commissioned by Sea Space to undertake an ecological appraisal of a proposed development site (the ‘Site’) at Queensway North, Hastings, Sussex. This initial appraisal included a review of existing biological records, a Phase 1 Habitat survey and a protected species walkover of the Site. These surveys were undertaken by AEL on the 31 July 2006 and reported in August 20061.
In summary, the site was found to support a range of semi-natural habitats, notably broadleaved woodland (including some of semi-natural ancient character), semi- improved, infrequently managed neutral grassland and substantial areas of mixed woody and bramble scrub. A full badger survey of physically accessible land areas was also undertaken as part of the protected species walkover, and confirmed that badgers were active in the local area, as indicated by the presence of badger paths, signs of foraging and dung pits/latrines. However, no badger setts were recorded within the site, or elsewhere, during the survey.
Given the range of habitats present, together with the site’s high degree of connectivity to other semi-natural habitats (including a statutory wildlife site with known protected species interest), the site was recognised as possessing the potential to support a range of protected animal species. On this basis, a range of protected species surveys were recommended (see below) and were completed by AEL in September 2006 – October 2007.
The following report provides:
A summary of existing biological records (Chapter 2);
A summary of the Phase 1 Habitat survey, including an updated habitat map and a specific botanical assessment of open grassland habitat (Chapter 3);
Badger survey, undertaken July 2006 and 7 February 2007 (Chapter 4);
Dormouse survey, undertaken October 2006 – October 2007 (Chapter 5);
Bat survey, undertaken May 2007 (Chapter 6);
1 Applied Ecology Ltd (2006) Queensway North, Hasting, Sussex: A Preliminary Ecological Assessment Report. An unpublished report to Sea Space. August 2006.
Applied Ecology Ltd 3
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Breeding bird survey, undertaken March 2007 – June 2007 (Chapter 7);
Great crested newt survey, undertaken March – May 2007 (Chapter 8);
Reptile survey, undertaken September – October 2006 (Chapter 9);
Terrestrial invertebrate survey, undertaken June 2007 (Chapter 10).
The implications of the surveys findings for development planning are summarised in Chapter 11.
Applied Ecology Ltd 4
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
2 EXISTING BIOLOGICAL RECORDS
2.1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION
In August 2006, the Sussex Biodiversity Records Centre (SBRC) provided information on statutory and non-statutory wildlife sites, and a number of records of rare and protected species for an area of search centred on Marline Valley and its surrounding area including grid squares TQ 7711 to TQ 7913. It must be noted that the SBRC data is not a definitive species list for the search area, as biological recording often takes place on an ad hoc basis, and some species groups are better recorded than others.
2.2 WILDSLIFE SITE DESIGNATIONS
Statutory sites
Marline Valley Woods Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which is also designated as ancient woodland and a large proportion (86%) of which is a Sussex Wildlife Trust (SWT) nature reserve, adjoins the site, and has the potential to be directly and indirectly adversely effected by the proposed development. The SSSI citation is provided in Appendix 1 for reference purposes.
Non-statutory sites
A number of non-statutory Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI) occur to the east of the B2092 Queensway and are listed in Table 2.1. All of these sites are separated from the site by a main road and existing residential and industrial development and are considered unlikely to be adversely effected by development within the study area.
Table 2.1 Non-statutory wildlife sites
Site name (ref code) Grid ref and (approx Main habitat(s) Site area distance from (ha) Queensway North site) Angustus way pond (no. 4) TQ 792 125 (275m) Open water with marginal 0.2 vegetation Churchwood complex and TQ 785 113 (400m) Woodland and meadow 27.6 meadows (no. 9) Hollington valley (no. 15) TQ 793 125 (300m) Semi-natural woodland with 13.9 associated stream and meadow Ledsham close (no. 16) TQ 798 123 (>1000m) Managed grassland verge 0.2 Wainwright close (no. 21) TQ 778 114 (900m) Grassland, scrub and a pond 0.5
Applied Ecology Ltd 5
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
2.3 PROTECTED SPECIES RECORDS
Of particular relevance were records that relate specifically to the Marline Valley Sussex Wildlife Trust Reserve and Queensway within close proximity to the site. These included a number of rare and scarce lower plants that are associated mainly with woodland habitats, nationally scarce aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate species including the hairy dragonfly Brachytron pratense (Nationally Notable B2), a jewel beetle Agrilus laticornis (NNB), a woodland butterfly pearl-bordered fritillary Boloria euphrosyne, (Biodiversity Action Plan short list species), and three spider species Coelotes terrestris (NNB), Zilla diodia (NNB), and Argiope bruennichi (Nationally Notable A3).
In terms of species protected by wildlife law, historic records of great crested newt Triturus cristatus exist for a pond at Stonebridge Farm (TQ 772 120), which is located approximately 1km to the west of the site.
Records of slow-worm Anguis fragilis exist for allotment land (TQ 792 126) 1km to the northwest of the site, and a number of bat species (serotine Eptesicus serotinus, noctule Nyctalus noctula, pipistrelle Pipistrellus sp. and brown-long eared bat Plecotus auritus) have been recorded within the Marline Valley.
Finally, three records of common dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius exist for Marline and Park Wood.
2 taxa thought to occur in between 31 and 100 10km squares in Britain 3 taxa thought to occur in 30 or fewer 10km squares in Britain
Applied Ecology Ltd 6
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
3 HABITATS
3.1 SURVEY APPROACH
A Phase I Habitat survey4 of the entire site was completed on 31 July 2006 by an experienced ecologist from AEL. Habitats were mapped in the field using an aerial photograph base (dated 1999-2000) at approximately 1:5,000 scale. Botanical target notes were taken of a representative range of habitat types, as well as any habitat areas of particular note and areas that were too small to map accurately. The Phase 1 Habitat field map was subsequently digitised using a Geographic Information System (GIS, ArcView).
Due to lack of active habitat management, notably grass cutting and/or grazing, mixed woody and bramble scrub was encroaching significantly into open grassland areas. Mapping the exact extent of encroaching scrub was difficult due to the significant changes that had occurred in the field when compared to the aerial photograph, and the lack of fixed reference points which could be used to measure habitat changes. The Phase 1 Habitat map has been updated using the most up to date aerial photograph available (dated 2004), with field verification completed 4 June 2007.
A botanical assessment of open grassland habitat, including a list of the plant species present within each of the distinct grassland units against the DAFOR scale, was also undertaken on the 4 June 2007.
3.2 SURVEY FINDINGS
The updated Phase 1 Habitat map is shown in Figure 1, and associated target notes are provided in Appendix 2. A summary of the Phase 1 Habitat and grassland results is provided below, and plant species lists for open grassland areas are provided in Appendix 3.
Woodland and scrub
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland
Areas of semi-natural woodland present within the Site do not currently possess any nature conservation designations and are technically not considered by Natural
4 Joint Nature Conservation Committee (1993) Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey – a technique for environmental audit. JNCC. Peterborough.
Applied Ecology Ltd 7 Queensway Phase I Habitat Map
Key:
Broadleaved semi-natural woodland 1 Broadleaved plantation woodland
Mixed plantation woodland
Dense scrub 5 Semi-improved neutral grassland
Semi-improved grassland/tall ruderal
Continuous bracken 4 Tall ruderal 2 Amenity grassland 3 Hardstanding
Scattered scrub
Target notes (13)
Study area
Date of survey: 4th June 2007 Job reference no: 0052 Status: Final Drawn by: LJB Checked by: RH
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
England to be of ancient woodland origin5 (on the basis that they are not designated as ancient woodland). However, the majority of this woodland was found to be indistinguishable in ecological character to adjoining off-site woodland areas located to the west and north that are designated as both ancient woodland and SSSI. In summary, the findings of the current survey suggest that most of the non-designated woodland areas are of ancient woodland character, and of similar ecological value to those that fall within the current SSSI boundary.
These woodland areas were typically associated with undulating topography and often possessed distinct woodland boundary earthen banks and possible hammer ponds6. They were dominated by mature oak Quercus robur with occasional ash Fraxinus excelsior (including some mature coppice) and hazel Corylus avellana coppice. A wide range of other tree and woody shrub species occurred, including elm Ulmus species, field maple Acer campestre, sweet chestnut Castinea sativa, elder Sambucus nigra, hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, holly Ilex aquifolium, hazel Corylus avellana, hornbeam Carpinus betulus and honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum. The ground flora included extensive patches of dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis and bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta, with occasional plants of enchanter's-nightshade Circaea lutetiana, nettle Urtica dioica, broad buckler-fern Dryopteris dilatata, ground ivy Glechoma hederacea and ivy Hedera helix.
Broadleaved plantation woodland
A single, relatively large linear block of broadleaved plantation woodland occurs to the east of the site parallel with the B2092 Queensway road embankment (Target Note 3). This woodland comprised relatively young (probably 15-20 years old) even- aged field maple Acer campestre, hawthorn Crataegus mongyna and ash Fraxinus excelsior, together with occasional sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus regeneration. The ground flora was sparse and species-poor.
Mixed plantation woodland
A very small area of mixed plantation woodland that included broadleaved tree species and a single Scot’s pine Pinus sylvestris was recorded in the west of the site.
5 Ancient woodland is land that has had continuous woodland cover since 1600AD and has only been cleared for under-wood or timber production. 6 Defined by English Heritage as ‘a pond created specifically for providing power to water-powered forges, blast furnaces, helve or other hammers’.
Applied Ecology Ltd 8
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Scrub
Extensive areas of dense and scattered woody scrub occurred across the site, along woodland edges and within grassland areas, which were subject to increasing scrub encroachment due an absence of active habitat management. Areas of dense scrub included stands dominated by bramble Rubus fruticosus, together with more mixed stands of hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, blackthorn Prunus spinosa, field maple Acer campestre, and elm Ulmus species.
Grassland
Semi-improved neutral grassland
Pockets of semi-improved neutral grassland occurred across the site. All of the grassland areas appeared to have been unmanaged for many years, and have developed a rank structure with significant woody scrub encroachment. Although many of the swards were still relatively species-rich, it is likely that their botanical interest had suffered, and will continue to decline in the absence of active management.
The majority of this grassland was of similar character being dominated by red fescue Festuca rubra, and common bent Agrostis capillaris, together with a wide range of occasional and locally distributed plant species. These included Yorkshire-fog Holcus lanatus, sweet vernal-grass Anthoxanthum odoratum, cock's-foot Dactylis glomerata, common bird's-foot-trefoil Lotus corniculatus, yarrow Achillea millefolium, ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata, common fleabane Pulicaria dysenterica, bramble Rubus fruticosus agg., common knapweed Centaurea nigra, common sorrel Rumex acetosa, lesser stitchwort Stellaria graminea, meadow vetchling Lathyrus pratensis, hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris and smooth tare Vicia tetrasperma. In addition, a large area of coarse grassland dominated by false oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius occurred to the west of the site.
Continuous bracken
Stands of species-poor dense and continuous bracken Pteridium aquilinum were recorded very locally along woodland edges and clearing.
Tall ruderal vegetation
Many of the grassland areas possessed distinct tall ruderal components, including nettle Urtica dioica, creeping thistle Cirsium arvense and rosebay willowherb
Applied Ecology Ltd 9
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Chamerion angustifolium.
In addition, Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica, an alien and notifiable plant species, was recorded to the west of the site (Target Notes 11, approx TQ 78493 12475) and close the area of amenity grassland shown on Figure 1 on the site boundary and close to the static homes park (approx. TQ 78596 12525).
Amenity grassland
A single very small area of regularly mown amenity grassland was recorded around a former bonfire site and local fly-tipping (garden waste) area in close proximity to a mobile home site.
3.3 EVALUATION
A summary of the Phase 1 Habitat types present, their area in hectares (calculated using GIS) and their associated ecological value, which has assigned using a standard geographical framework and using professional judgement, is provided in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Phase 1 Habitat types and their associated coverage in hectares
Phase 1 Habitat type Area (ha) Ecological value
Semi-natural broadleaved woodland 2.46 National Broadleaved plantation woodland 0.93 Local Mixed plantation woodland 0.05 Local Dense scrub 3.45 District Semi-improved neutral grassland 1.5 Local Continuous bracken 0.23 Local Tall ruderal 0.02 Local Amenity grassland 0.03 Negligible Hard-standing 0.03 N/A
Total 8.7
Applied Ecology Ltd 10
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
4 BADGER
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Badgers Meles meles are protected by the Protection of Badgers Act, 1992. The Act makes it a criminal offence to:
Wilfully, kill, injure, take or possess or cruelly ill-treat a badger, or to attempt to do so;
Interfere with a sett by damaging or destroying it;
Obstuct access to, or any entrance of, a badger sett;
Disturb a badger when occupying a sett.
Badger survey information can be regarded to be in need of updating after a period a 12 months has elapsed.
4.2 SURVEY APPROACH
A walkover survey of all physically accessible land areas within the site was completed on 31 July 2006. The aim of this survey was primarily to search for badger setts, foraging signs and latrines. A repeat walkover survey to verify the 2006 findings, and to search for additional evidence of badger activity during winter vegetation conditions, was completed on 7 February 2007.
4.3 SURVEY FINDINGS
The initial badger survey confirmed that badgers commute across the site, utilise grassland areas within the site for foraging, and historically have dug setts within woodland within the site. A six dung pit latrine with fresh badger dung containing wheat kernels and chaff was recorded within the broad-leaved plantation woodland to the north east of the site (TQ 78812 12579). A badger path connecting the latrine to the scrub covered road embankment was also recorded. Two small areas of badger foraging activity were recorded within two separate semi-improved grassland fields within the site (near target note 3 and 11), but on the whole relatively little evidence of badger feeding activity was seen.
Two apparently disused mammal dug holes of a size consistent with badger were found within embankments within broad-leaved woodland within the site (TQ 78650 12424 and TQ 78462 12335). Both were single holes that lacked any associated
Applied Ecology Ltd 11
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
evidence of recent badger occupation, and did not possess badger hair in either the spoil or tunnel soil. No other potential badger setts were found. However a relatively large proportion of the site consists of dense and impenetrable bramble scrub that could possibly support badger setts. It is not possible to confirm the absence of badger setts from these areas, without undertaking selective scrub removal.
The repeat badger survey undertaken in February 2007 confirmed the findings of the 2006 survey, and no further evidence of badger activity within the site was found. Although physical access to and visibility within dense scrub habitats was eased due to winter vegetation die-back, large areas of the site remained physically inaccessible for survey.
4.4 EVALUATION
No badger setts are currently known to occur within the site, and no specific badger mitigation or development related badger licences are likely to be necessary in relation to future development of the site. However, clearance of dense bramble scrub should be undertaken using hand tools, rather than tractor mounted flails. Vegetation clearance should stop if a potential badger sett is found during the course of this work, and advice sought from a suitably experienced ecologist.
Given the extensive areas of valuable badger foraging habitat in the local area, including ancient woodland and permanent grassland meadow, it is unlikely that habitat loss would have significant implications for any badger groups with territories that over-lap the proposed development site.
Applied Ecology Ltd 12
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
5 DORMOUSE
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The common or hazel dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius is given full protection under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended. Protection to the species is also afforded by Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations, 1994, making a dormouse a European protected species. These two pieces of legislation operate in parallel, although there are some small differences in scope and wording. Under the provisions of Section 9 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act, it is an offence to:
Intentionally kill, injure or take a dormouse [Section 9(1)];
Possess or control and live or dead specimen or anything derived from a dormouse [S 9(2)] (unless it can be shown to have been legally acquired);
Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any structure or place used for shelter or protection by a dormouse [S 9(4)(a)];
Intentionally or recklessly disturb a dormouse while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose [S 9(4)(b)].
Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations, 1994 make it an offence to:
Deliberately capture or kill a dormouse (Regulation 39(1)(a)];
Deliberately disturb a dormouse [R. 39(1)(b)];
Damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of a dormouse [R. 39(1)(d)];
Keep transport, sell or exchange, or offer for sale or exchange a live or dead dormouse or any part of a dormouse [R. 39(2)].
Any activity that would result in a contravention of the above legislation would require a RDS licence to avoid committing an offence. Dormouse is also a UK priority BAP species.
Applied Ecology Ltd 13
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
5.2 SURVEY APPROACH
Hazel nut search
A preliminary sample of 50 mammal opened/gnawed hazel nuts were collected from across the site and inspected for the characteristic signs of dormouse feeding during the walkover survey in July 2006.
The majority of the nuts collected had been opened by grey squirrel, and none possessed signs of dormouse opening. The English Nature Dormouse Conservation Handbook, states that if 100 rodent-opened hazel nuts (that have not been opened by squirrels or collected from rodent caches) can be found and checked for dormouse tooth-marks, and no signs of dormouse are found, then this is probably sufficient effort to prove dormouse absence from a site. However, as the majority of the nuts collected had been opened by grey squirrel, the use of dormouse nest tubes was employed to verify dormouse presence/absence in 2006/7.
Nest-tube survey
A total of 79 nest tubes were installed in suitable dormouse habitats across the site on 6 October 2006. All suitable areas of potential dormouse habitat were sampled, including plantation and semi-natural broadleaved woodland, mixed woody scrub and dense stands of bramble. To aid their relocation tubes were numbered consecutively and placed at approximately 20m intervals along pre-planned transect routes. The route of these transects, together with the start and end dormouse tube numbers were mapped in the field on an aerial photograph. Tubes were firmly fixed to the undersides of low horizontal tree branches, or to robust stems of horizontal bramble or other woody shrubs, as appropriate.
The nest tubes were checked on five separate occasions between November 2006 and October 2007 by an experienced dormouse surveyor (under Natural England licence no. 20070595). Any unoccupied wood mouse and bird nests, as well as unoccupied suspected dormouse nests that were in a damp and rotting condition found during each survey were removed. Ten tubes in bramble could not be re-located in June 2007 due to excessive bramble growth, all of these tubes were replaced on 21 June 2007 in the same approximate location they were lost.
5.3 SURVEY FINDINGS
A summary of positive dormouse evidence recorded during the nest tube survey is
Applied Ecology Ltd 14
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
provided in Table 5.1. Of the 79 nest tubes placed around the site, 14 possessed evidence of dormice use on at least one occasion during the survey period. Figure 2 shows the distribution of the nest tubes, with those coloured red and numbered indicating the tubes with evidence of dormouse use. Other animal species recorded using the nest tubes during the survey period included occasional wood mouse, great tit and/or blue tit, and a single common lizard.
Table 5.1: Results of dormouse nest-tube survey (only evidence of dormouse presence is shown in the table, evidence of other rodent or bird species is omitted)
Nest tube no. and Date and associated evidence of dormice use habitat type 2 Nov 2006 9 March 2007 4/5 June 2007 2 Aug 2007 5 Oct 2007 possible nest unoccupied 10. bramble scrub - (nest-tube - nest (nest- - cleaned) tube cleaned) unoccupied live adult 20. bramble scrub - - - nest (nest- with nest tube cleaned) unoccupied unoccupied 21. bramble scrub - - - nest nest unoccupied 26. blackthorn nest (nest- - - - - scrub tube cleaned) 27. semi-natural unoccupied broadleaved nest (nest- - - - - woodland edge tube cleaned) 33. semi-natural unoccupied broadleaved nest (nest- - - - - woodland tube cleaned) 34. semi-natural unoccupied adult with broadleaved nest (nest- - - - nest woodland tube cleaned) adult female 35. semi-natural with nest two adults adult with adult with broadleaved - (nest-tube with nest nest nest woodland cleaned) 41. bramble scrub unoccupied adult and two adults unoccupied with ash nest (nest- - immature with nest nest regeneration tube cleaned) with nest 43. bramble scrub unoccupied with ash nest (nest- - - - - regeneration tube cleaned) 52. semi-natural three broadleaved - - - - immature woodland edge with nest unoccupied adult female unoccupied unoccupied 76. bramble scrub nest (nest- - with nest nest nest tube cleaned) unoccupied unoccupied 78. bramble scrub nest (nest- - - - nest tube cleaned) unoccupied 79. oak woodland/ nest (nest- - - - - bramble scrub tube cleaned)
Applied Ecology Ltd 15 76
78 79 21 20
52 41 43
10
26 27 N
35 33 34
Approximate site boundary
Dots represent approximate positions of dormouse tubes. Nest-tubes with positive evidence of dormouse use are coloured red and numbered.
The aerial photograph represents a 0.5 km x 0.5 km square
Figure 2: Location of Dormouse Nest Tubes Queensway North, Ecology Baseline Surveys
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
5.4 EVALUATION
Given the high degree of suitable habitat connectivity across the site, the results of the survey indicate that dormice are likely to be present in all areas of semi-natural broadleaved woodland, and in mixed woody and bramble scrub habitats across the site. However, it is of note that no evidence of dormouse use was found from the area of relatively young broadleaved plantation woodland that runs parallel with the B2092 Queensway road embankment. This area of woodland plantation currently lacks arboreal and ground layer structural diversity, and appears not to possess sufficient cover or shelter habitat to be of value to this species.
Although areas of dense bramble scrub clearly provide important habitat for dormice within the site, their use of such habitats may be seasonal and is likely, for example to increase during periods of greatest food supply i.e. to coincide with autumn blackberry production. Given the relatively open internal habitat structure of some areas of broadleaved woodland found within the site, fringing woody scrub and bramble habitats may provide a critical source of food and shelter for the local dormouse population at certain times of year. It is of note that a dormouse survey of an adjoining land area of similar character to the site, found evidence to support the theory that fringes of scrub provide an important seasonal resource for dormice7.
The widespread distribution of dormice within suitable habitat across the site means that the loss of any semi-natural woodland, and/or woody and bramble scrub will have adverse affects on the local dormouse population. It is strongly recommended that loss of valuable dormouse habitat is minimised through sensitive development design, and that woodland habitat links across the site are maintained to avoid/minimise habitat fragmentation.
The removal of any dormice habitat will need to be undertaken under the auspices of a licence issued by Natural England’s European licensing department. Although mitigation will be dependant on exact development proposals, recommendations are likely to include:
Removal of suitable dormice at an appropriate time of year - Habitat clearance must be undertaken between mid-September and mid-October. At this time of year dormouse will be active, and the year’s young will be independent of the
7 Martin Newcombe (2004) Land at Queensway, Hastings, East Sussex. Dormice Second Report. Unpublished report 5 October 2004.
Applied Ecology Ltd 16
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
parent animals. Timing the works to take place before the end of October should ensure that dormice have sufficient undisturbed time to feed and put on fat reserves prior to the start of the winter hibernation period.
Creation of new dormouse habitat – The extent of new habitat creation that is required as mitigation will be partly dependant on the area of suitable habitat to be lost. Replacement of habitat is likely to include new woodland and scrub planting, particularly to maintain and enhance habitat connectivity across the site.
Applied Ecology Ltd 17
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
6 BATS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
All British bat species are protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended, and Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994.
The Act and Regulations together make it illegal to:
Intentionally or deliberately kill or capture (take) bats;
Deliberately disturb bats (whether in a roost or not);
Damage, destroy or obstruct access to bat roosts (whether or not bats are in residence);
Possess or transport a bat, or any part of a bat, unless acquired legally.
In addition, Article 6 of the Regulation requires member states to set up Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) for the natural habitat types in Annex I, and the species in Annex II present on such sites. Annex II species are greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum, lesser horseshoe bat R. hipposideros, barbastelle bat Barbastella barbastellus and bechstein’s bat Myotis bechsteini.
6.2 SURVEY APPROACH
A general bat activity survey was carried out on the evening of 24 May 2007 in weather conditions that were considered to be optimal for bat activity. Sunset occurred at 20.59 hrs.
Time expansion bat detectors (Tranquillity Transect) set to record at 320ms at 32 division and linked to digital dictaphones were positioned on the ground in two locations within the site (Figure 3), chosen because they were considered to represent valuable bat foraging habitat. The first (Detector 1) was located in grassland close to mature woodland in the north of the site, and the second (Detector 2) towards the south of the site, on the edge of a grassland area adjacent to sheltered woodland edge near a pond. A third detector (Detector 3) was located 115m to the southwest of the site boundary on the far side of the B2092 Queensway road in the centre of the amenity grassland road island junction to Napier Road i.e. the potential site of wind- turbine being considered by Sea Space.
Applied Ecology Ltd 18 Detector 1 78
Detector 2
N
B2092 (Queensway)
35
Approximate site boundary
Bat detector 3 was located 115m to the south west of the site, and south of the B2092 (Queensway) road, in the location of the proposed wind-turbine.
The aerial photograph represents a 0.5 km x 0.5 km square
Figure 3: Location of Bat Detectors Queensway North, Ecology Baseline Surveys
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
The dictaphones were set in voice activation mode such that every bat call picked up by the detector and the time it was heard were recorded. The dictaphone time clocks were synchronised prior to the survey commencing. The equipment was active from shortly before sunset until two hours after.
6.3 SURVEY FINDINGS
All bat calls recorded were downloaded onto a computer and analysed using Batsound software in an attempt to identify bat species involved. Apart from a single registration of a noctule Nyctalus noctula bat, over Detector 1, at 23.16 hrs (135 minutes after sunset), all other bat registrations were only of common (45 kHz) pipistrelle bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus. At both detector locations within the site boundary, bats were first recorded at approximately nine minutes after sunset. At the northern location (Detector 1), common pipistrelle calls were not recorded during the last half hour of the two-hour survey period. At the southern location (Detector 2), calls of this species were recorded throughout the two-hour survey period. The third detector located off site in habitat not considered optimal for foraging bats, but none the less still relatively close to woodland, first recorded common pipistrelle bat calls at 11 minutes after sunset.
It was not possible to assess, with confidence, the numbers of individual bats recorded by each detector, however the average number of bat calls recorded per minute at the two locations within the site were similar at 0.275 (Detector 1), and 0.294 (Detector 2). The off site detector (no. 3) located in less favourable habitat for foraging bats recorded fewer calls per minute at 0.152.
6.4 EVALUATION
The medium roost emergence time for common pipistrelle bat is approximately 20 minutes after sunset. It is likely therefore that any bats recorded before or close to this time after sunset are likely to have roosted nearby either in a building and/or a tree. In this case, all three detectors registered this species very early in the evening (at nine and eleven minutes after sunset) and it is therefore probable that these bats roosted in close proximity to the detectors, either within or very close to the site.
No specific survey of individual trees for the presence of features of value to roosting bats (i.e. holes, splits, and cavities) has been undertaken at this stage as details on tree loss are not currently known. However, it is clear that areas of semi-natural broadleaved woodland within the site did possess mature trees of theoretical value to roosting bats, and on this basis, it is recommended that areas of woodland,
Applied Ecology Ltd 19
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
particularly those with mature trees, be retained and protected throughout the development, and dark (unlit) flight corridors around the periphery of the development close to retained woodland edge are maintained to minimise disturbance to bats. In addition, if it is necessary to use after-dark lighting to illuminate paths to car-parks, for example, these should be subtle and low-level lights that minimise light spill.
Once, development plans are more advanced, a tree survey should be completed that identifies any tree with potential features or value to roosting bats, and additional survey completed as considered necessary to verify its use by roosting bats if it is to be removed and features of high value to roosting bats are present.
Applied Ecology Ltd 20
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
7 BIRDS
7.1 INTRODUCTION
All UK species of wild bird and their nests and eggs are protected by law (for the whole or part of the year) by the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended and strengthened by the Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act, 2000). This makes it an offence, with certain exceptions, to intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take any wild bird, and take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while it is in use or being built. Some bird species with high individual levels of conservation importance are protected at all times under Schedule 1 of the 1981 Act.
The population status of birds regularly found in the UK, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man is reviewed every five years to provide an up-to-date assessment of conservation priorities8. A total of 247 species has been assessed and placed onto one of three lists of Conservation Concern – Red, Amber or Green. Forty species are Red-listed, 121 are Amber-listed and 86 are Green-listed.
Seven quantitative criteria are used to assess the population status of each species and to place it on the Red, Amber or Green list. These were: global conservation status, recent decline, historical decline, European conservation status, rare breeders, localised species and international importance.
Red-list species are those that are Globally Threatened according to the IUCN criteria; those whose population or range has declined rapidly in recent years; and those that have declined historically and not shown a substantial recent recovery.
Amber-list species are those with an unfavourable conservation status in Europe; those whose population or range has declined moderately in recent years; those whose population has declined historically but made a substantial recent recovery; rare breeders; and those with internationally important or localised populations.
Green-list species are those that do not fulfil any of the Red- or Amber-list criteria and they are not considered further here.
8 Gregory, R D; Wilkinson, N I; Noble, D G; Robinson, J A; Brown, A F; Hughes, J; Procter, D A; Gibbons, D W and Galbraith, C A (2002) The Population Status of Birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man: an Analysis of Conservation Concern 2002-2007. British Birds 95: 410-450.
Applied Ecology Ltd 21
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
7.2 SURVEY APPROACH
The entire site was surveyed according a slightly modified version of the recognised methodology of the British Trust for Ornithology’s (BTO) Common Bird Census (CBC).
Five visits were made to the site, all between approximately 30 minutes after sunrise and mid-day, during spring 2007. The dates of visits were 28 March, 5 April, 24 April, 25 May, and 5 June. No adverse weather conditions were encountered which could have significantly reduced the degree of bird activity.
All habitats within the site were surveyed, and the site was small enough to enable to the field surveyor to gauge his location and the position of recorded birds accurately. The site was surveyed at a very slow walking pace, with many stops throughout, and frequent forays to investigate particular bird calls and fleeting glimpses. The location, identity and activities of all birds seen and heard were marked accurately on large scale field maps.
Following the final visit, species maps for the whole site were prepared, on which all registrations for a single species were marked. The resulting clusters of registrations, together with information on the activities of the birds, were used to assess and to give minimum figures for the number and distribution of species’ territories. For this survey, where only five visits were made, no species with fewer than three registrations in a cluster was included in the territory-assessment exercise, since just one or two registrations through the breeding season were judged more likely to represent birds not holding territory. The result of this was that there were some records of birds which did not translate on the species maps to unequivocal territories. This is why figures for territories are considered to represent minimum assessments.
7.3 SURVEY FINDINGS
A total of 43 bird species was recorded using the site during CBC work. Species of gull, (black-headed, lesser black-backed and herring) deemed to be flying over without relating in any way to the area were not included in survey results.
Table 7.1, with Red- and Amber-listed birds marked with ‘R’ and ‘A’ respectively, summarises the results of the CBC on the site. A minimum of 86 breeding territories were held by 14 species. Owing to the small size of the site and its proximity to areas with further suitable breeding bird habitat, such as mature woodland, scrub and
Applied Ecology Ltd 22
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
gardens, many partial territories were recorded which extended beyond the site’s boundary. Furthermore, several species which were not allocated breeding territories within the site, for example, green woodpecker and house sparrow, almost certainly nested very close to the site and used it as part of their foraging territories.
No Schedule 1 species, four Red-listed species and 11 Amber-listed species were recorded, although of these, only the Amber-listed dunnock and the Red-listed song thrush certainly held breeding territories within the site.
Table 7.1: Results of Common Bird Census (X = present, but no certain territory held; (A) = Amber list species and (R) = Red list species)
Bird species Scientific name Estimated no. of territories within the site barn swallow (A) Hirundo rustica X Blackbird Turdus merula 7 Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla 5 blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus 8 bullfinch (R) Pyrrhula pyrrhula X carrion crow Corvus corone X coal tit Periparus ater X collared dove Streptopelia decaocto 1 common buzzard Buteo buteo X common chaffinch Fringilla coelebs 6 common chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita 4 common cuckoo (A) Cuculus canorus X common kestrel (A) Falco tinnunculus X common pheasant Phasianus colchicus X common starling (A) Sturnus vulgaris X common swift Apus apus X common whitethroat Sylvia communis 1 dunnock (A) Prunella modularis 7 Eurasian jay Garrulus glandarius X Eurasian nuthatch Sitta europaea X Eurasian sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus X Eurasian treecreeper Certhia familiaris X goldcrest (A) Regulus regulus X Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis X great spotted woodpecker Dendrocopos major 1 great tit Parus major 11 green woodpecker (A) Picus viridis X Greenfinch Carduelis chloris 3 house martin (A) Delichon urbicum X house sparrow (R) Passer domesticus X linnet (R) Carduelis cannabina X long-tailed tit Aegithalos caudatus X Magpie Pica pica 2 mistle thrush (A) Turdus viscivorus X Robin Erithacus rubecula 15
Applied Ecology Ltd 23
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
rock / feral pigeon Columba livia X Rook Corvus frugilegus X song thrush (R) Turdus philomelos 5 stock dove (A) Columba oenas X western jackdaw Corvus monedula X white / pied wagtail Motacilla alba X willow warbler (A) Phylloscopus trochilus X wood pigeon Columba palumbus X Wren Troglodytes troglodytes 11
Total territories 86
Of the 86 territories recorded throughout the site, 59 (68%) belonged to just six species, namely wren, dunnock, robin, blackbird, and blue and great tit.
Of the four Red-listed species recorded, only song thrush definitely bred within the site, holding five full or partial territories. House sparrow was recorded frequently on the northern periphery of the site but was judged to be associated with houses and gardens there, and not with the site itself. Linnet and bullfinch were both recorded fewer than three times, as foraging species; there was no indication that they bred within the site although there was suitable habitat for them.
Of the 11 Amber-listed species, only dunnock unequivocally bred within the site, holding seven full or partial territories. None of the other Amber-listed species recorded, produced enough registrations for their inclusion as holders of territories within the site. Some, such as swallow and house martin, certainly did not nest on the site, but others, such as mistle thrush and goldcrest, may have done, since suitable habitat existed there.
7.4 EVALUATION
No attempt is made here to assign statistical population density and diversity figures to the results. The following discussion of the value of the site is based upon our professional judgement based on experience.
Fuller (1980)9 devised standard procedures for evaluating breeding bird communities on sites. Recording the number of species on a site can provide a simple measure of species diversity from which to confer a level of conservation importance to a site. For breeding birds, the standard qualifying levels provided by Fuller are as follows: National Importance, 85+ species; Regional Importance, 70-84 species; County Importance, 50-69 species; Local Importance, 25- 49 species.
9 Fuller, R.J. (1980) A method for assessing the ornithological importance of sites for nature conservation. Biological Conservation 17: 229-239
Applied Ecology Ltd 24
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
The species-list for the whole site numbered 43, which falls within the range for Local Importance. For many of these species, proof that breeding territories were held was not achieved, but there is no doubt that the site provided valuable foraging habitat for most of them.
In spite of the presence of Red- and Amber-listed species, none of the species recorded on the site can be considered especially scarce or unexpected. They are a typical population, in terms of diversity and density, of birds to be found in the mixed habitats of southern English broad-leaved woodland, scrub and grassland, close to urban and sub-urban habitats.
An important factor affecting the diversity and density of bird populations often relates to the amount of ‘edge’ habitat available, and the site offered a considerable amount of this. Areas of grassland gave way to scrub of varied density, which in turn gave way to woodland of different ages, providing diversity of habitat character and structure. For a small site, it may be argued that the bird species-list was quite long. Few species that could be expected in such a situation were absent, and this, we judge, was related to the relatively large amount of available ‘edge’ habitat.
No ground nesting bird species were recorded from the open grassland habitats. However, pre-development site clearance of the scrub and woodland habitats should take place outside the bird breeding season (March – late July) in order to avoid destruction of nests. Post-development, the creation of habitats, particularly woodland, scrub and grassland mosaics, consisting of native species, and linked to existing similar habitat features will be necessary.
Applied Ecology Ltd 25
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
8 GREAT CRESTED NEWT
8.1 INTRODUCTION
Great Crested Newt Triturus cristatus (GCN) is fully protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981, (as amended and as strengthened by the CROW Act, 2000) and the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 that implements the EC Directive 92/43/EEC in the UK. It is an offence, with certain exceptions, to:
Intentionally or deliberately capture, kill, or injure GCN;
Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy, and disturb GCN in a place used for shelter or protection, or obstruct access to such areas;
Damage or destroy a GCN breeding site or resting place;
Possess a GCN, or any part of it, unless acquired lawfully;
Sell, barter, exchange, transport, or offer for sale GCN or parts of them.
The legislation covers all newt life stages such that eggs, tadpoles and adult newts are all equally protected. Actions that are prohibited can be made lawful by a licence issued by the appropriate statutory authority. In the case of development related effects that are contrary to the legislation, the statutory authority in England is RDS, who seek advice on licence applications from Natural England. GCN is also a priority BAP species in the UK.
GCN breed in ponds but spend much of their lives on land, and commonly moving 250m between ponds. However, this movement is dependent on the lack of physical barriers to dispersal, such as fast-flowing rivers or busy roads.
8.2 SURVEY APPROACH
A total of four ponds were identified as occurring within 250m of the proposed development site from the 1:25,000 OS map (Figure 4). The first of these (pond 1) was located around 50m from the site, but was discounted from survey given its location on the southern side of the Queensway road, which would act as a physical barrier to newt movement.
The remaining three ponds all comprised small woodland ponds and were present close to or within the site’s south-west boundary. Two of these (ponds 2 and 3) were located very close together (the northern of which was outside the site boundary)
Applied Ecology Ltd 26 76 78
21 52
Pond 4
N
Pond 1 (not surveyed)
Ponds 2 and 3 (not surveyed)
Approximate site boundary
The aerial photograph represents a 0.5 km x 0.5 km square.
Figure 4: Location of Ponds Queensway North, Ecology Baseline Surveys
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
and were almost dry in spring and summer 2006 and 2007. Both were entirely shaded by overhanging trees and lacked submerged aquatic and emergent vegetation. These two ponds were considered unsuitable for breeding GCN and were not subject to specific survey.
The final pond (pond 4) was located just beyond the site boundary, but within that of the neighbouring SSSI woodland. This pond was also very shaded but did possess open water conditions, and a small amount of emergent aquatic vegetation. This pond was subject to specific GCN survey.
Double funnel-ended traps (40cm x 20cm) with a 3mm square mesh were used to live-capture newts in the pond on four occasions from late March to May 2007, during the amphibian breeding season. The traps work on the same principle as bottle traps but allow the transfer of dissolved oxygen between the surrounding water body and the water within the trap itself, to the benefit of any animals trapped. A number of traps (ranging from 8-10) were placed in the pond late in the evening and retrieved shortly after dawn the following day. Trapped newts were identified, sexed and counted, and then released immediately back into the pond.
8.3 SURVEY FINDINGS
The results of the funnel-trap surveys are shown in Table 8.1. In summary, no GCN were caught on any of the four survey occasions. The pond was found to support a population of palmate newts, and a single male smooth newt was trapped on the final survey visit. No fish, or other aquatic species, were captured from the pond.
Table 8.1: Results of the GCN survey
Date in 2007 No. of traps palmate newt smooth newt male female male female 28 March 10 51 20 - - 5 April 8 21 5 - - 24 April 8 6 6 - - 25 May 8 8 7 1 -
8.4 EVALUATION
The results of the survey indicate that only a single potentially suitable pond for GCN breeding is found within 250m of the proposed development site and is not separated from the Site by a significant barrier to newt movement. Specific survey of this pond (pond 4) confirmed that breeding GCN were not present. No adverse impacts on GCN are therefore anticipated in relation to future development of the
Applied Ecology Ltd 27
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
site and no mitigation for this species is considered necessary.
Applied Ecology Ltd 28
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
9 REPTILES
9.1 INTRODUCTION
All UK native reptile species are protected by law. The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (and later amendments) provides the legal framework for this protection. Sand lizard Lacerta agilis and smooth snake Coronella austriaca are rare species that have restricted distributions in the UK and the greatest level of legal protection. These species are not considered likely to occur at the Queensway North site and need not be considered further by this study.
The more widespread and common reptile species, namely common lizard Lacerta vivipara, slow-worm Anguis fragilis, grass snake Natrix natrix, and adder Vipera berus, and are protected against deliberate or reckless killing and injury. Natural England (formerly English Nature10) considers that reptiles are likely to be threatened and the law breached by activities such as the following:
Archaeological and geotechnical investigations;
Clearing land, installing site offices or digging foundations;
Cutting vegetation to a low height;
Laying pipelines or installing other services;
Driving machinery over sensitive areas;
Removing rubble, wood piles and other debris.
Under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, a conviction can result in a fine, and/or up to six months imprisonment for each offence. Harm to more than one animal may be taken as separate offences. The police can also confiscate any item, such as equipment, vehicles or machinery used to commit the offence.
9.2 SURVEY APPROACH
Site wide reptile survey
A standard reptile survey of all open grassland habitat area was undertaken in
10 English Nature (2004) Reptiles: guidelines for developers.
Applied Ecology Ltd 29
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
September 2006. A total of 91 artificial reptile basking/shelter refugia (referred to hereafter as tins) consisting of corrugated tin (1 x 1.5m sheets) or bituminous roofing felt (1 x 1.5m sheets) were placed in all semi-improved grassland locations on 15 September 2006. Refugia were re-inspected to record reptiles basking on or sheltering under tins on six separate occasions thereafter between 26 September and 4 October 2006.
9.3 SURVEY FINDINGS
The results of the 2006 reptile survey are provided in Table 9.1. Three reptile species were recorded: slow-worm (maximum site total recorded on one day, being 46); common lizard (maximum one day site total, 69) and grass snake (a single adult recorded on one occasion). Reptile numbers declined dramatically by the time of the fifth survey visit (4 October), and we attribute this to the onset of reptile hibernation.
Table 9.1 Results of the reptile survey
Survey visit and Total no. of reptiles observed date in 2006 slow-worms common lizards grass snake 26 Sept 33 48 - 27 Sept 43 50 - 28 Sept 46 30 1 29 Sept 32 69 - 04 Oct 13 14 - 05 Oct 5 19 -
As part of ground investigation works completed in 2007 to inform development planning, 13 plots of grassland (average size being 99.6m2) within the site were fenced with reptile proof fencing and cleared of reptiles to enable ground investigation work to proceed without endangering reptiles. This work was agreed with the Borough Ecologist and Natural England and is detailed in a separate report11.
The plots were fenced during the week commencing 6 August 2007, and visited twice daily between 14 August and 14 September (32 days in total). All reptiles seen on, under, or between tins in each plot were moved to grassland outside each plot. Surface vegetation was removed in each plot over week in mid-July using hand shears to increase the rate of reptile capture (i.e. to remove potential areas of shelter) Daily captures of reptiles had declined significantly by early September within only
11 Applied Ecology Ltd. (July 2007). Queensway North Ground Investigation Mitigation Approach. Report for Sea Space issued 30 July 2007
Applied Ecology Ltd 30
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
low numbers of individual animals being caught in a few of the plots. The last reptile captures were made on 27 September, after this point, no further reptiles were seen within any of the plots up until the end of September.
A summary of the reptile capture results, plot areas, and reptile density is provided in Table 9.2. The total predicted number of reptiles found within the site has been calculated using the average reptile density figures per m2 captured from the 13 plots, multiplied by the area of semi-improved grassland habitat (m2) present within the site based on the 2007 Phase 1 Habitat map.
Table 9.2: Results of reptile plot clearance
Plot no. (area Total no. of reptiles captured Density of reptiles (no. per m2) Total in m2) between 14 August – 27 Sept 2007 reptile slow-worm common lizard slow-worm common lizard density (per m2) BH1. (98.6) 8 - 0.08 - 0.08 BH2. (83.9) 10 17 0.12 0.20 0.32 BH3. (101.1) 50 1 0.49 0.01 0.50 BH4. Amenity grassland and not subject to reptile capture BH5. (59.1) 4 1 0.07 0.02 0.09 BH6. (59.7) 15 15 0.25 0.25 0.5 BH7. (93.6) 52 48 0.56 0.51 1.07 BH8. (164.7) 52 24 0.32 0.15 0.47 BH9. (159.6) 17 29 0.11 0.18 0.29 TP1. (85.6) 14 7 0.16 0.08 0.24 TP2. (120.6) 59 8 0.49 0.07 0.56 TP3. (115.7) 12 8 0.10 0.07 0.17 TP4. (61.9) 8 13 0.13 0.21 0.34 TP5. (91.3) 17 21 0.19 0.23 0.42
On the basis of the reptile capture work completed in 2007, the average reptile density (all species) utilising the semi-improved grasslands within the site is calculated to be 0.39 animals per m2. In terms of species density, slow-worm occurs at a density of 0.24m2, and common lizard 0.15m2.
Given that 15,000m2 (1.5ha) of suitable reptile habitat (semi-improved neutral grassland) occurs within the site, the total reptile population of the site can be estimated to be 5,850 individual animals, consisting of 3,600 slow-worms and 2,250 common lizard.
9.4 EVALUATION
On the basis of these results, and referring to standard criteria for assessing reptile population size, it may be concluded that the site’s grassland habitats support
Applied Ecology Ltd 31
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
“exceptional” breeding populations of both slow-worm and common lizard, and a “small” population of grass snake. The site is likely to be at, or close to, its reptile carrying capacity, with all un-shaded areas of grassland and scrub edge supporting slow-worm and common lizard in high numbers.
Given that future development of the Site may be concentrated in open grassland habitat, it is not considered feasible, given that reptiles occupy all un-shaded grassland areas, to retain the reptile population within the Site. For this reason a suitable off-site translocation site will need to be identified to enable reptiles to be moved to in advance of site clearance operations commencing.
All suitable reptile habitat will probably need to be subject to reptile capture and translocation prior to any development proceeding. Guidance for reptile capture effort is based upon the size of the reptile population being captured. For large populations, such as this, a minimum of 90 suitable trapping days between March and September is suggested12.
12 Herpetofauna Groups of Britain and Ireland. Evaluating local mitigation/translocation programmes: Maintaining best practice and lawful standards. HGBI advisory note for Amphibian and Reptile Groups (ARGs).
Applied Ecology Ltd 32
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
10 TERRESTRIAL INVERTEBRATES
10.1 INTRODUCTION
Terrestrial invertebrates are the object of relatively little conservation-related legislation. However PPS 9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (August 2005), which sets out Government’s national planning policy on these issues, refers to biodiversity as the variety of life in all its forms, and includes biodiversity in the wider environment as well as legally protected species. On this basis, invertebrates may therefore be a material planning consideration and should, in appropriate circumstances, be assessed accordingly.
The results of the Phase 1 Habitat survey and preliminary protected species walkover indicated that the site may have the potential to support nationally scarce and/or UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) invertebrate species. In particular, areas of broadleaved woodland of ancient character, in association with woody scrub and infrequently managed semi-improved grassland habitats were considered to represent habitats of significant potential invertebrate interest.
10.2 SURVEY APPROACH
Field Survey
The invertebrate survey was undertaken by Dr Peter Kirby (a recognised national invertebrate specialist) on 11 June 2007, during predominantly overcast conditions, but warm and still, with occasional sunny periods.
All woodland and grassland areas were surveyed, together with representative areas of transitional habitats. However, considerable areas of bramble scrub and transitional habitats between scrub, grassland and trees could not be closely examined owing to the impenetrable nature of the vegetation. Where physical access allowed, a range of sampling methods were employed, namely:
Sweep-netting of herbaceous vegetation;
Beating of woody vegetation;
Sieving of plant litter;
Direct search of important invertebrate habitats, particularly dead wood, fungal fruiting bodies, tree-trunks, walls, and the underside of logs and stones;
Applied Ecology Ltd 33
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Collection of individual insects from flowers;
Observation of large and readily identified insects in flight.
In addition, a total of six invertebrate pitfall traps, three each in two areas of grassland around TQ 78440 12398 and TQ 78699 12546, were installed by AEL on the 24 May 2006. The traps comprised plastic cups sunk to their rims in the ground, with ethylene glycol as a preservative. The traps were collected by AEL on the 4 June 2007. Collected specimens were filtered from the collecting fluid, sealed in polythene bags and posted to Dr Kirby for laboratory identification. The samples were preserved in 60% iso-propanol immediately on arrival pending sorting and identification.
It is important to note that the assessment is based on a single visit only and on limited pitfall trapping. Nevertheless, the visit was timed to coincide with a period of high invertebrate activity when a broad spectrum of taxonomic and ecological groups could be examined. The list generated was considered to be a sufficient basis for site assessment, but inevitably it was a partial list of what was present on the site and much must be inferred from the data. The dead wood fauna is particularly liable to be under-recorded by sampling on a single visit or over a limited period of time. This limitation is important, because in almost any site containing mature woody vegetation, the dead wood fauna tends to include a large proportion of the species with relatively high formal conservation status.
Assessment of invertebrate statuses
Each species recorded during the invertebrate survey, and listed in the tables of results (Appendix 5), has been assigned a status. The following statuses are used:
Red Data Book category K (RDBK) - Insufficiently Known - Taxa in Great Britain that, because of lack of information, are suspected, but not definitely known, to belong to one or other Red Data Book category. Included are: taxa recently discovered or recognised in Great Britain, which may prove to be more widespread in the future; taxa with very few or perhaps only a single known locality but which belong to poorly recorded or taxonomically difficult groups; taxa known from very few localities but which occur in inaccessible habitats or habitats which are seldom sampled; taxa with very few or perhaps only a single known locality and of questionable native status, but not clearly falling into the category of recent colonist, vagrant or introduction;
Applied Ecology Ltd 34
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Nationally Notable category A (Na) - Taxa which do not fall within RDB categories but which are nonetheless uncommon in Great Britain and are thought to occur in 30 or fewer hectads of the National Grid or, for less well-recorded groups, within seven or fewer vice-counties;
Nationally Scarce category B (Nb) - Taxa which do not fall within Red Data Book categories but which are nonetheless uncommon in Great Britain and are thought to occur in between 31 and 100 10km squares of the National Grid or, for less well-recorded groups, between eight and twenty vice-counties;
Nationally Scarce (N) - For some less well-recorded groups and species, it has not been possible to determine which of the Nationally Scarce categories (A or B) is most appropriate for scarce species. These species are assigned to an undivided Nationally Scarce category;
local (l);
common (c).
Nationally Scarce statuses have been assigned to the species recorded according to the most recent published lists produced by the Nature Conservancy Council and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, namely Coleoptera following Hyman & Parsons (1992) and Orthoptera following Haes & Harding (1997).
Neither "local" nor "common" have precise definitions, and are used in the context of this report only to distinguish between species of wide distribution and either broad or very commonly met habitat requirements, and those which, because of more specialised habitat requirements, lesser mobility, or other cause, are of less frequent occurrence. These categories have been applied according to personal experience and the opinions of standard texts, and must be considered in part subjective.
The species list has also been checked for any species included in the lists of threatened and declining species in the UK Biodiversity Action Plans (Biodiversity Reporting and Information Group, 2007). There is, however, rarely any very good or logical reason why the BAP status of a species on a site should affect the assessment of a site’s importance. Most BAP species also have other formal status which reflects their importance, and the addition of another status to a fraction of the scarcer species can artificially inflate their importance, or the importance of a site on which they occur.
Coleoptera (beetles) have also have been assessed for their status as indicators of the
Applied Ecology Ltd 35
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
continuity of dead wood habitats, following the list of Alexander (2004). The indicator species in this list are mostly saproxylic, and are grouped according to the extent to which they have been consistently recorded from areas of ancient woodland with continuity of dead-wood habitats, particularly in pasture woodlands. Criteria for membership of the groups are:
Group 1: species which are known to have occurred in recent times only in areas believed to be ancient woodland, mainly pasture woodland
Group 2: species which occur mainly in areas believed to be ancient woodland with abundant dead-wood habitats, but which also appear to have been recorded from areas that may not be ancient or for which the locality data are imprecise
Group 3: species which occur widely in wooded land, but which are collectively characteristic of ancient woodland with dead-wood habitats.
The symbol H is used for any species qualifying as an indicator species; the indicator symbol is qualified by the numbers 1, 2, or 3, the lowest number indicating the strongest association.
10.3 SURVEY FINDINGS
The full invertebrate report is provided in Appendix 4, and a summary is provided below.
A total of 382 species of invertebrates were recorded, of which one was a Red Data Book species, seven were Nationally Scarce, and 43 were considered to be of local distribution. Table 10.1 summarises the captures of Nationally Scarce and Red Data Book species, and those assigned habitat indicator status for dead-wood habitats.
Table 10.1 Key invertebrate species recorded
Taxon Status Occurrence Habitat requirements/ notes
Coleoptera (beetles) Biphyllidae Biphyllus lunatus H3 Several from ash in Saproxylic; especially on cramp-ball woodland fungus Daldinia concentrica on ash Cantharidae (soldier beetles) Malthinus balteatus Nb Rather frequent in Saproxylic; larvae in fine branches and woodland and beneath twigs on standing trees shade of field boundary trees Rhagonycha lutea Nb Scattered individuals at Habitat mosaics and transitions with
Applied Ecology Ltd 36
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Taxon Status Occurrence Habitat requirements/ notes
grass-scrub transitions herbaceous/grassland vegetation and scrub Chrysomelidae (leaf beetles) Mantura obtusata Nb Frequent in sorrel-rich Sorrel Rumex acetosa, especially in damp grassland grassland Cleridae (chequered beetles) Thanasimus H3 One from tree in Saproxylic; standing trees in sunny formicarius woodland, in an situations with wood-boring beetles (ant beetle) unusually shaded position Curculionidae (weevils) Attactagenus plumbeus Nb Frequent in grassland Grassland; a wide range of reasonably close to bramble and tall dense grasslands and grass/scrub scrub mosaics, including hay meadows Mordellidae (tumbling flower beetles) Mordellistena RDBK One male by sweeping Probably a recent arrival in Britain, acuticollis grassland and tall herbs increased in recent years, and no longer worthy of formal conservation status Mycetophagidae (fungus beetles) Mycetophagus H3 One on bracket fungus Saproxylic; beneath bark and on bracket atomarius on log in woodland fungi on broadleaved trees Pyrochroidae (cardinal beetles) Pyrochroa coccinea Nb,H3 One on herbaceous Saproxylic; larvae beneath bark on large (black-headed vegetation at woodland diameter standing timber and logs cardinal beetle) edge Salpingidae Lissodema Nb Several beaten from Saproxylic; in twigs and branches of quadripustulata small dead branches in broadleaved trees and shrubs, woodland and especially standing rosaceous shrubs boundary hedge
Orthoptera (grasshoppers and crickets) Tettigoniidae (bush-crickets) Conocephalus ?discolor Na Many nymphs in Only nymphs found, so identification (long-winged cone- grassland; strictly not not absolutely certain, but unlikely to head) certainly identified to be incorrect; a greatly increased species species, but unlikely to in recent years, no longer worthy of be incorrect formal status and of no conservation significance
10.4 EVALUATION
The proportion of species of terrestrial invertebrate with formal conservation status may be used as a rough estimate of species quality for the overall fauna. A figure of 5% is a convenient and reasonably reliable indication of significant, though not necessarily very great, interest. Therefore, the overall proportion of 2.1% obtained for the site was decidedly low, and did not suggest significant invertebrate interest there.
Of the eight species with formal conservation status recorded, two were considered not to be worthy of the status and were of little if any value in site assessment. Of
Applied Ecology Ltd 37
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
the remaining six, three were saproxylic i.e. dead wood species, two were grassland species, and one was associated with transitions and mosaics of grassland and woody vegetation. Though a small set of species, they clearly covered the habitat range on the site rather well, and indicated some interest for all its elements.
The remaining records tended to support the rough division of interest indicated by those species with formal conservation status. The additional indicators of habitat continuity listed in Table 10.1, and a number of other local species supported the value of dead wood on the site. There were a few other grassland species of local occurrence; and there was rather little recorded interest from the scrub, or from scrub/grassland transitions. This is, perhaps, surprising, in view of the prominence of these features on the site and their general potential for invertebrates. The grassland was almost certainly genuinely not of high invertebrate interest. The richest and most interesting-looking areas were the damper parts but these areas were, perhaps, too small and isolated to develop their full potential. Most of the dead wood species recorded were beetles. In theory, records of dead wood beetles may be used to assess the importance of a site on a national scale. In practice, the small number of species recorded made it impossible to do so with confidence.
Nonetheless, the dead wood fauna seemed likely to be a substantial one. The figure of 35 dead wood beetles, though small from the point of view of calculation of site interest, is a good total for a single day’s surveying, only a small part of which was specifically devoted to search for the dead wood fauna. The extent and variety of dead wood certainly provides at least the potential for a large and varied fauna. Thus, even if the species quality on current records appears to be fairly low, the dead wood fauna may well, in terms of the number of uncommon species, be one of the more important, and quite possibly the most important, component of the invertebrate assemblage. It is probably the component of the fauna most likely to include species of high rarity not recorded during survey work.
Overall, on current evidence, it would seem that:
the greatest invertebrate potential is amongst dead wood species associated with the older trees and shrubs, and to a lesser extent with fallen wood
a small but characteristic component of additional interest is present in the grassland, and this is concentrated in the areas of reasonably open sorrel-rich grassland
Applied Ecology Ltd 38
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
there appears, considering their extent, to be remarkably little contribution to the overall interest from the scrub elements of the vegetation, or from the transitions from scrub to grassland
the varied conditions and structural variety of the site favour high diversity of invertebrates and large populations of some species, but are less obviously suited, in their current state, to support large numbers of uncommon species
the quality of the invertebrate fauna is probably in decline as a result of neglect, and the superficially attractive mosaic structure masks the fact that a more traditional mosaic of managed hedges and grazed grasslands would be more interesting
On the sole basis of the records obtained by survey in 2007, the site would be afforded only low value for invertebrates. The likelihood of significantly more interest amongst some components of the fauna, especially saproxylic species, and the likelihood, hinted at by records of indicators and likely on the grounds of habitat character, that these include species associated with habitat continuity, suggest that a higher grading would be appropriate. Only more detailed survey would enable an accurate assessment of the level of interest. It seems possible that the invertebrate fauna of the woodland and field boundaries would be best estimated as of county value. The remainder of the habitat components seem unlikely, in their own right, to prove of more than district value, but in practice they should be regarded as part of a habitat mosaic.
These findings, we suggest, show that the site’s broad-leaved woodland component, characterised by its long period of continuity as such, and with its plentiful dead wood, is the most ecologically valuable habitat with respect to important invertebrates. Clearly, therefore, the retention of areas of woodland should be a major objective of the development masterplan.
Applied Ecology Ltd 39
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
11 IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
11.1 RETENTION OF HABITATS
The Phase 1 habitat survey has confirmed that there are areas of broadleaved woodland within the site boundary that are of very similar ecological character and value to areas of woodland designated as SSSI. For example the SSSI woodland in the southwest corner of the site is continuous with a relatively large area of non designated woodland that is indistinguishable from the adjoining SSSI in terms of its habitat structure, tree species composition, and ground flora. From an ecological perspective these areas are identical and their loss or damage would be regarded as a significant adverse impact that would be difficult if not impossible to compensate on account that ancient woodland, by its very definition, is impossible to recreate within the lifetime of the development.
In light of the value of the broadleaved semi-natural woodland within the site, both in terms of its inherent nature conservation value, and as a habitat of high nature conservation interest that supports protected species (breeding birds, roosting bats, dormouse, and a variety of rare invertebrates), it is strongly recommended that as much of this habitat type as possible is retained and protected as part of the development.
11.2 PROTECTION OF DESIGNATED HABITATS
Three of the four management compartments that comprise Marline Valley Woods SSSI (86.13% of the entire SSSI) are managed by the Sussex Wildlife Trust and are reported by Natural England to be in favourable conservation status. The fourth unit (not managed by SWT), incorporating Coneyburrow Wood and Birchen Wood at the eastern end of the SSSI, is reported to be in unfavourable status and in need of management.
Development next to the SSSI woodland could lead to direct and indirect negative effects on the SSSI, and careful consideration of the type of development and its effects on the woodland will need to be given. The creation of a business park adjacent to the SSSI is likely to be more benign in terms of its ecological impact than a new residential development, for example, where the introduction of a new population of domestic pets (cats and dogs), increased disturbance and risk of vandalism and fly-tipping from residential users could lead to an adverse indirect effect on the ecological integrity of the woodland.
Applied Ecology Ltd 40
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
In terms of minimising potential adverse negative effects of a business park development on the SSSI woodland, it is recommended that a wide buffer strip of new native woodland edge with scrub and grassland is incorporated around the boundary of the SSSI as a basic design principle. This habitat should be managed to meet only nature conservation objectives for the lifetime of the development. Ideally this buffer strip should be well established before construction of the development commences.
In addition to new habitat creation, care should be taken to ensure that new buildings and associated infrastructure are designed and sited to minimise permanent shading effects on the SSSI and to minimise light pollution into the woodland after dark.
Applied Ecology Ltd 41
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Appendix 1
SSSI Citation
Applied Ecology Ltd 42
[intentionally blank]
! " # $ # % ! # % & ' ( % ! ) %) & # % *+ ! , $)$ ! %) %&- ) # ./+.0
#$ 1$%% %2 , & - , & & # %# $
%$ & ) ! & %# 3 4+5.** & 6605 ',0( .760+* '#0(
&)%%# &8 - , .65555 .// ..5555 3 4.
! ) '%) & ./9/ #( ./:6
! ) '%) & ./+. #( ./+: ! 8 % ./+/
, & %! &; % 1& ! , & &8 ! , < $)$ ! & 0 , = ! &; &$- >% =% &$ % )0
% ! & ! # % , %# % = )$%) % ), & $- %) = & %?& )2 $$ %) % & ) ; % ) ?- % %$$- %# ;; % = )$%) -" 0 8$ ?$ ! & ! , , " ) ) & ; 8$$ - '2,-$$( =, #, # % % "$% , ,8 % Q $% #R ) & ? %0 , $ %#$ ) % & ! " # B& #, % ;"& 8 ) 2& $%) % %$$- ) #$ % %2 ,? 0
, % %$$- %# ;; % " ) %# $ >B? &%? ; '? &#,B,C $ 8& %( = )$%) -" ) ; % , = ) 0 , & ; 8& % % # ;" % ) $ #$ ) !! & %# % )& %2 $ -" $ " %) ;%2 ; %0 , & , &- ! ;%2 ; % %) & , # "" # = ,B %)&) - ;0 , 2,-$$ , ? % #& ) ?- 8 2 & ) =%# %2 ! , & ; ,& 2, , ! %) % =, #, %) &$ , ), & #$-0 , ; %) =&; ; #& #$ ; =, #, !8 & Q $% #R "$% % = & & # ) % & % , $) %) , = ! , # %&-0
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
, & ; 8$$ - "" & :. " # ! ?&- ",- '; %) $ 8 &= & ( %#$ ) %2 7 %# ;; % Q $% #R " # & ' %) ( 0 , & "$% ! , 2,-$$ & %#$ ) ! , $) ! &% ) " %) ?& ) ? #>$ & ! &% % 0
, 2& # $ &$$- % ;"& 8 ) " & "" & " # B& #, % &$ 2& $%) !$ & ) ; % ) ?- $ & >%"= ) & ) ! # %) # ;; % ? % 0 , & " # )) %2 , % & ! , " & %#$ ) )) &R B %2 ! &% * " )- &R 2& %= ) $ D > %2 2& ( %) # ;; % " )B &#, ) % "( "0
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Appendix 2
Phase 1 Habitat Target Notes
Applied Ecology Ltd 43
[intentionally blank]
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
1. Unmanaged semi-improved neutral grassland situated between stands of dense bramble Rubus fruticosus scrub. The table below lists the plant species recorded together with the relative abundance of each species according to the DAFOR scale.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Agrostis capillaris common bent Abundant Festuca rubra red fescue Abundant Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Frequent Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Frequent Lotus corniculatus common bird's-foot-trefoil Frequent Achillea millefolium yarrow Occasional Anthoxanthum odoratum sweet vernal-grass Occasional Dactylis glomerata cock's-foot Occasional Plantago lanceolata ribwort plantain Occasional Pulicaria dysenterica common fleabane Occasional Rubus fruticosus agg. bramble Occasional Centaurea nigra common knapweed Rare Epilobium hirsutum great willowherb Rare Rumex acetosa common sorrel Rare Stellaria graminea lesser stitchwort Rare
2. Dense bramble Rubus fruticosus scrub around 1.5m high with occasional scattered woody scrub comprising of young tree species, including ash Fraxinus excelsior and oak Quercus robur. Occasional nettle Urtica dioica and creeping thistle Cirsium arvense also occurred among the bramble.
3. Relatively young (probably 15-20 years old) broadleaved plantation woodland situated on a plateau at the top of a scrub dominated road embankment. The woodland comprised of even-aged field maple Acer campestre, sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus (natural regeneration), hawthorn Crataegus mongyna and ash Fraxinus excelsior.
4. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland dominated by young/semi-mature oak Quercus robur and ash Fraxinus excelsior, with rarely occurring apple Malus sylvestris. The table below provides a list of the plant species recorded from the ground layer together with the relative abundance of each species.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Rubus fruticosus agg. bramble Abundant Dryopteris dilatata broad buckler-fern Occasional Galium aparine cleavers Occasional Geranium robertianum herb-robert Occasional Hedera helix ivy Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Occasional
Applied Ecology Ltd 44
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Rumex sanguineus wood dock Occasional Urtica dioica common nettle Occasional Epilobium montanum broad-leaved willowherb Rare Hypericum androsaemum tutsan Rare
5. Unmanaged semi-improved neutral grassland (50-60cm high) with patches of bramble Rubus fruticosus scrub and scattered young trees/woody scrub throughout. Although the grassland was unmanaged, select rabbit grazing has maintained some short sward grassland areas. The table below lists the plant species recorded together with the relative abundance of each species according to the DAFOR scale.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Festuca rubra red fescue Abundant Agrostis capillaris common bent Frequent Anthoxanthum odoratum sweet vernal-grass Frequent Dactylis glomerata cock's-foot Frequent Centaurea nigra common knapweed Occasional Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Occasional Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Occasional Lathyrus pratensis meadow vetchling Occasional Lotus corniculatus common bird's-foot-trefoil Occasional Plantago lanceolata ribwort plantain Occasional Rumex acetosa common sorrel Occasional Stellaria graminea lesser stitchwort Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Rare Ranunculus acris meadow buttercup Rare Taraxacum officinale agg. dandelion Rare
6. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland situated on an area of undulating topography. The woodland is dominated by mature oak Quercus robur with occasional ash Fraxinus excelsior (including some mature coppice), elm Ulmus species, field maple Acer campestre, sweet chestnut Castinea sativa, elder Sambucus nigra, hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, holly Ilex aquifolium, hazel Corylus avellana and honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum. The ground flora is relatively sparse, but includes occasional bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta, dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis, broad buckler- fern Dryopteris dilatata, ground ivy Glechoma hederacea and ivy Hedera helix.
7. Unmanaged, rank semi-improved neutral grassland with conspicuous tall ruderal and woody scrub component. The table below lists the plant species recorded together with the relative abundance of each species according to the DAFOR scale.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Abundant
Applied Ecology Ltd 45
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Festuca rubra red fescue Abundant Fraxinus excelsior (sapl.) ash Frequent Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Frequent Plantago lanceolata ribwort plantain Frequent Ranunculus repens creeping buttercup Frequent Rubus fruticosus agg. bramble Frequent Urtica dioica common nettle Frequent Agrostis capillaris common bent Occasional Anthoxanthum odoratum sweet vernal-grass Occasional Centaurea nigra common knapweed Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Occasional Rumex crispus curled dock Occasional Vicia tetrasperma smooth tare Occasional Equisetum arvense field horsetail Rare Lotus corniculatus common bird's-foot-trefoil Rare Poa pratensis smooth meadow-grass Rare Quercus robur (sapl.) pedunculate oak Rare Senecio jacobaea common ragwort Rare Stellaria graminea lesser stitchwort Rare Trifolium repens white clover Rare Veronica chamaedrys germander speedwell Rare
8. Fringe of dense woody scrub comprised of bramble Rubus fruticosus, nettle Urtica dioica, hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, creeping thistle Cirsium arvense and blackthorn Prunus spinosa.
9. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland dominated by semi-mature oak Quercus robur and hazel Corylus avellana coppice, with occasional holly Ilex aquifolium and blackthorn Prunus spinosa. The ground flora is sparse with scattered dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis, bramble Rubus fruticosus and ivy Hedera helix.
10. Young broadleaved semi-natural woodland (doesn’t appear to be of plantation origin) with ash Fraxinus excelsior, oak Quercus robur and wild cherry Prunus avium. The ground flora comprised of dense bramble Rubus fruticosus and nettle Urtica dioica. Some small patches of semi-improved grassland occurred within the woodland.
11. A spreading stand of Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica, along the residential fence- line.
12. Unmanaged semi-improved neutral grassland, dominated by rank false-oat grass Arrhenatherum elatius. The table below lists the plant species recorded together with the relative abundance of each species according to the DAFOR scale.
Applied Ecology Ltd 46
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Latin name English name Relative abundance Arrhenatherum elatius false oat-grass Dominant Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Frequent Fraxinus excelsior (sapl.) ash Frequent Dactylis glomerata cock's-foot Occasional Festuca rubra red fescue Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Occasional Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Occasional Rumex acetosa common sorrel Occasional Rumex crispus curled dock Occasional Senecio jacobaea common ragwort Occasional Urtica dioica common nettle Occasional Quercus robur (sapl.) pedunculate oak Rare
13. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland with possible old (ancient?) woodland ditch boundary features. The woodland is dominated mature standard oak Quercus robur and hazel Corylus avellana coppice stools, together with occasional holly Ilex aquifolium, field maple Acer campestre, elder Sambucus nigra, ash Fraxinus excelsior and hornbeam Carpinus betulus. The ground flora included patches of dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis and bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta, with occasional plants of enchanter's-nightshade Circaea lutetiana, nettle Urtica dioica and broad buckler-fern Dryopteris dilatata.
Applied Ecology Ltd 47
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Appendix 3
Grassland plant species
Applied Ecology Ltd 48
[intentionally blank]
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Latin name English name Grassland field number (central grid ref) and relative abundance according to the DAFOR, where D=Dominant, A=Abundant, F=Frequent, O=Occasional, and R=Rare Field 1 Field 2 Field 3 Field 4 TQ 78713 12565 TQ 78546 12385 TQ 78309 12452 TQ 78603 12482 Agrostis capillaris common bent A F D - Anthoxanthum odoratum sweet vernal-grass A A F A Festuca rubra red fescue A O O A Rubus fruticosus bramble LA LA O O Dactylis glomerata cock's-foot F - - - Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog F R F F Rumex acetosa common sorrel F A A O Stellaria graminea lesser stitchwort F F O O Cirsium arvense creeping thistle O O R O Fraxinus excelsior (sapling) ash O O O O Galium aparine cleavers O - - - Lotus pedunculatus greater bird's-foot-trefoil O O - - Plantago lanceolata ribwort plantain O O F F Poa trivialis rough meadow-grass O A F A Quercus robur (sapling) pedunculate oak O - O - Ranunculus acris meadow buttercup O R R R Ranunculus repens creeping buttercup O O O F Veronica chamaedrys germander speedwell O R R F Vicia sepium bush vetch O - - - Centaurea nigra common knapweed R O - - Heracleum sphondylium hogweed R - - - Lathyrus pratensis meadow vetchling R O R R Luzula campestris field wood-rush R - R - Rumex crispus curled dock R R - R Cerastium fontanum common mouse-ear - R F -
Applied Ecology Ltd 49
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Latin name English name Grassland field number (central grid ref) and relative abundance according to the DAFOR, where D=Dominant, A=Abundant, F=Frequent, O=Occasional, and R=Rare Field 1 Field 2 Field 3 Field 4 TQ 78713 12565 TQ 78546 12385 TQ 78309 12452 TQ 78603 12482 Galium aparine cleavers - - R - Glechoma hederacea ground-ivy - O - - Juncus conglomeratus compact rush - R - - Lotus corniculatus common birds-foot trefoil - O - - Pulicaria dysenterica common fleabane - O - - Senecio jacobaea ragwort - O F - Vicia sativa common vetch - O O O Arrhenatherum elatius false oat-grass - - LA - Dactylis glomerata cock’s-foot - - O - Heracleum sphondylium hogweed - - R R Lolium perenne perennial rye-grass - - R - Prunella vulgaria self-heal - - F - Prunus spinosa blackthorn - - R - Rumex obtusifolius broad-leaved dock - - R R Urtica dioica nettle - - R O Veronica serpyllifolia thyme-leaved speedwell - - R - Achillea millefolium yarrow - - - R Equisetum arvense field horsetail - - - R Vicia tetrasperma smooth tare - - - -
Species no. 24 25 30 21
Applied Ecology Ltd 50
Queensway North Ecology Baseline Report
Appendix 4
Invertebrate survey report
Applied Ecology Ltd 51
[intentionally blank] Queensway, Hastings Invertebrate survey 2007
P. Kirby
Report to Applied Ecology Ltd June 2007 Contents
Introduction 1
Methods 1
Date and extent of survey 1 Sampling methods 2 Target groups 2
Statuses 3
Nomenclature 4
Constraints and limitations of survey 4
The invertebrate fauna recorded 5
Assessment of invertebrate interest 6
References 9
Appendix 1. Complete list of recorded species 11
Appendix 2. Notes on Nationally Scarce and Red Data Book species 21
Map 1. Locations of centres of intensive survey 23 Introduction
Queensway supports a quite complex mosaic of habitat structure. It is based on an old pattern of grass fields, separated by hedges with trees and generally dry drainage channels, and areas of woodland. Cessation of formal management of the grasslands has led to extensive invasion by scrub, brambles, bracken and ruderal tall herbs, but substantial areas of grassland remain, partly maintained by rabbit grazing. Though none of the areas of grassland is especially species-rich, there are large populations of some important invertebrate food-plants, with sorrel Rumex acetosa amongst the most conspicuous. Most of the grassland is fairly dry, but there are damper areas with fleabane Pulicaria dysenterica.
The site has many features which are of potential value for invertebrates, in particular: ancient woodland; old trees; dead wood, especially large diameter standing dead wood and logs within the woodland but also in the boundary hedges; well-structured transitions between woody vegetation and grassland; large amounts of nectar flowers, especially of bramble and flowering shrubs; invasive scrub of various species, oak being possibly the species with the most conspicuous potential; sheltered conditions provided by well-developed woody vegetation; woodland pools.
On the other hand, there are features which might limit interest: the woodland, and the dead wood and pools it contains, is mostly quite heavily shaded, and the successional changes resulting from neglect have tended to exacerbate this; the spread of hedges, while leading to well-structured transitions to grassland, has similarly increased the extent of shade to the central portions, especially to older trees and dead wood; the extent of open grassland, though still substantial, is much less than formerly; most of the grassland is rather dense and tall, much with a fairly substantial litter layer, which restricts the range of species which are likely to be associated; bramble and coarse herbs provide habitat diversity, foodplants and nectar sources, but the extent of these components is greater than is needed to support any associated fauna, and from an invertebrate point of view most of the area occupied by these habitat components must be regarded as rather limited potential.
The invertebrate fauna of the Queensway site has been assessed in 2007 on the basis of a single survey visit in June, supplemented by pitfall trapping in late May and early June. This report presents the results of the survey, and assesses the significance of the invertebrate fauna recorded.
Methods
Date and extent of survey
The site was surveyed on 11 June 2007, between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm. The weather during survey work was predominantly overcast, but warm and still, with occasional sunny periods.
As much as possible of the site, including all areas of remaining grassland, all areas of woodland, and at least representative areas of transitional vegetation, were visited, However, a substantial proportion of the site is occupied by brambles and other dense and often almost impenetrable vegetation, so considerable areas, especially of the transition between grassland and scrub or trees, either could not be closely examined, or could not be usefully sampled. Sampling, particularly by sweep-netting, was carried out throughout the examination of the site, but more intensive survey was undertaken over areas where access was relatively easy, establishing a temporary base in an area of grassland or woodland, and sampling over a series of circuits or radii to the limits of straightforward access, using a variety of sampling methods or sampling different elements of the vegetation. The locations of the main centres of intensive survey are shown and coded on Map 1.
1 In addition, two groups of pitfall traps were run by Applied Ecology Ltd personnel between 24 May and 4 June.
Because of the complexity of the site, the recurrence of various features and structures in different parts, and the limited recording possible in any one area, records have been separated into habitat/structural categories rather than into geographical areas or recording compartments. The following categories have been used: saproxylic species, developing or living in dead wood, under bark on dead wood, or in fungi associated with dead wood; species associated with the foliage, branches or trunks of living trees; species associated with woodland, but not specifically with woody vegetation; species associated with grassland and tall herbs; species associated with the foliage or stems of living shrubs, or occurring only where scrub is associated with more open habitats, or at shrubby transitions at wood margins; generalists - species which occur over a wide range of habitats and which cannot, even at a site-specific level, be assigned to any one habitat type.
More specific location details have been kept only for scarcer species. In order to record the locations of capture of these species, they have been assigned the codes given to the centres of intensive survey work with which they were associated (Map 1).
Sampling methods
Invertebrates were sampled during active survey by a small range of collecting methods: sweep-netting of herbaceous vegetation; beating of woody vegetation; sieving of plant litter; direct search of important invertebrate habitats, particularly dead wood, fungal fruiting bodies, tree-trunks, walls, and the underside of logs and stones; collection of individual insects from flowers; observation of large and readily identified insects in flight.
Pitfall traps used plastic cups sunk to their rims in the ground, with ethylene glycol as a preservative. Collected specimens were filtered from the collecting fluid, sealed in polythene bags and posted for laboratory identification. The samples were preserved in 60% iso-propanol immediately on arrival pending sorting and identification.
A small number of readily identified species (butterflies, dragonflies, grasshoppers, ladybirds, for example) were noted in the field. Representative examples of most recorded species were taken away for laboratory confirmation of identity. Most were removed alive either in individual glass tubes or in pooters; a few were preserved in 60% iso-propanol in the field.
Target groups
The survey has been taxonomically wide-ranging, and the range of taxa recorded has been determined more by the habitats present for sampling than by any pre-determined targeting. However, emphasis has been placed on those groups considered likely to be particularly informative as to conservation interest. It was never the intention to attempt to generate comprehensive lists of any of these groups for the site, but rather to use taxonomically widespread recording to indicate the quality of the overall fauna of particular features and areas. The extent to which the various groups are represented in the records has been determined partly by the time of year of sampling. Important groups in the final species list, either because of the number of included species or because of the inclusion of scarcer species, are: Coleoptera (beetles), particularly phytophagous groups and species associated with dead wood; Diptera (flies) including hoverflies and craneflies; Hemiptera (bugs), especially Heteroptera (true bugs).
2 Statuses
Each species recorded during the invertebrate survey, and listed in the tables of results, has been assigned a status. The following statuses are used in this report:
Red Data Book category K (RDBK) - Insufficiently Known Taxa in Great Britain that, because of lack of information, are suspected, but not definitely known, to belong to one or other Red Data Book category. Included are: taxa recently discovered or recognised in Great Britain, which may prove to be more widespread in the future; taxa with very few or perhaps only a single known locality but which belong to poorly recorded or taxonomically difficult groups; taxa known from very few localities but which occur in inaccessible habitats or habitats which are seldom sampled; taxa with very few or perhaps only a single known locality and of questionable native status, but not clearly falling into the category of recent colonist, vagrant or introduction.
Nationally Notable category A (Na) Taxa which do not fall within RDB categories but which are nonetheless uncommon in Great Britain and are thought to occur in 30 or fewer hectads of the National Grid or, for less well- recorded groups, within seven or fewer vice-counties.
Nationally Scarce category B (Nb) Taxa which do not fall within Red Data Book categories but which are nonetheless uncommon in Great Britain and are thought to occur in between 31 and 100 10km squares of the National Grid or, for less well-recorded groups, between eight and twenty vice-counties.
Nationally Scarce (N) For some less well-recorded groups and species, it has not been possible to determine which of the Nationally Scarce categories (A or B) is most appropriate for scarce species. These species are assigned to an undivided Nationally Scarce category.
local (l)
common (c)
Nationally Scarce statuses have been assigned to the species recorded according to the most recent published lists produced by the Nature Conservancy Council and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, as follows:
Coleoptera Hyman & Parsons 1992 Orthoptera Haes & Harding 1997
Neither "local" nor "common" have precise definitions, and are used in the context of this report only to distinguish between species of wide distribution and either broad or very commonly met habitat requirements, and those which, because of more specialised habitat requirements, lesser mobility, or other cause, are of less frequent occurrence. These categories have been applied according to personal experience and the opinions of standard texts, and must be considered in part subjective.
The species list has also been checked for any species included in the lists of threatened and declining species in the UK Biodiversity Action Plans (Biodiversity Reporting and Information Group, 2007). There is, however, rarely any very good or logical reason why the BAP status of a species on a site should affect the assessment of a site’s importance. Most BAP species also have other formal status which reflects their importance, and the addition of another status to a fraction of the scarcer species can artificially inflate their importance, or the importance of a site on which they occur.
Coleoptera (beetles) have also have been assessed for their status as indicators of the continuity of dead wood habitats, following the list of Alexander (2004). The indicator species in this list are mostly saproxylic, and are grouped according to the extent to which they have been consistently recorded from areas of ancient woodland with continuity of dead-wood habitats, particularly in pasture woodlands. Criteria for membership of the groups are:
3 Group 1: species which are known to have occurred in recent times only in areas believed to be ancient woodland, mainly pasture woodland Group 2: species which occur mainly in areas believed to be ancient woodland with abundant dead-wood habitats, but which also appear to have been recorded from areas that may not be ancient or for which the locality data are imprecise Group 3: species which occur widely in wooded land, but which are collectively characteristic of ancient woodland with dead-wood habitats.
The symbol H is used for any species qualifying as an indicator species; the indicator symbol is qualified by the numbers 1, 2, or 3, the lowest number indicating the strongest association.
Nomenclature
Checklists and other sources used for names in this and in individual site reports have been selected as far as possible on the basis of easy availability, broad coverage, specific reference to the British fauna, of being reasonably recent, and of their availability in printed form. There are few occasions when all these criteria are met. The following sources have been used:
Mollusca Anderson 2005 Crustacea Hopkin 1991 Araneae Harvey et al 2002 Opiliones Hillyard & Sankey 1989 Chilopoda Barber & Keay 1988 Diplopoda Lee 2006 Coleoptera “The Coleopterist” website, November 2006 Dermaptera Haes & Harding 1997 Diptera Chandler 1998 Auchenorhyncha Le Quesne & Payne 1981 Heteroptera Aukema & Rieger 1995-2006 Hymenoptera BWARS website, November 2006 Lepidoptera Bradley 1998 Mecoptera Plant 1997 Neuroptera Plant 1997 Odonata Merritt et al. 1996 Orthoptera Haes & Harding 1997
Constraints and limitations of survey
The assessment is based on a single visit and limited pitfall trapping. The visit was timed to coincide with a period of high invertebrate activity when a broad spectrum of taxonomic and ecological groups could be examined. The list generated is of a good length, and the number and range of species recorded is, coupled with consideration of the character and location of the site, a sufficient basis for assessment, but inevitably it is a very partial list of what is present on the site. Individual rare species might easily be missed, and much must be inferred from the limited data.
The dead wood fauna is particularly liable to be under-recorded by sampling on a single visit or over a limited period of time, because insects breeding in dead wood are inaccessible for much of the time, and recording using active methods depends in considerable measure on chance encounters with the animals themselves or with circumstances which render them unusually readily captured (such as large and accessible bracket fungi, or active and readily examined seepages). This limitation is important, because in almost any site containing mature woody vegetation, the saproxylic (dead wood) fauna tends to include a large proportion of the species with relatively high formal conservation status.
The site is physically difficult to survey adequately. Substantial areas are effectively inaccessible because of dense scrub and bramble growth, or at least not accessible without causing so much disturbance that the invertebrate fauna would be seriously affected; elsewhere considerable field time has to be devoted simply to getting around the site and finding the best areas for detailed sampling. An
4 inevitable consequence is that the time spent in active sampling is reduced, and the number of species recorded likely to be less than would otherwise be the case.
The invertebrate fauna recorded
A total of 382 species of invertebrates has been recorded, of which one is Red Data Book, seven are Nationally Scarce, and 43 are considered to be of local distribution. Appendix 1 is a complete list of recorded species. Appendix 2 provides more detailed notes on the ecology and distribution of the Nationally Scarce species. Table 1, below, summarises the captures of Nationally Scarce and Red Data Book species, and those assigned habitat indicator status for dead-wood habitats.
Table 1 Key species recorded
Taxon Status Occurrence Habitat requirements/notes Coleoptera (beetles) Biphyllidae Biphyllus lunatus H3 Several from ash in Saproxylic; especially on woodland cramp-ball fungus Daldinia concentrica on ash Cantharidae (soldier beetles) Malthinus balteatus Nb Rather frequent in Saproxylic; larvae in fine woodland and branches and twigs on standing beneath shade of field trees boundary trees Rhagonycha lutea Nb Scattered individuals Habitat mosaics and transitions at grass-scrub with herbaceous/grassland transitions vegetation and scrub Chrysomelidae (leaf beetles) Mantura obtusata Nb Frequent in sorrel- Sorrel Rumex acetosa, rich grassland especially in damp grassland Cleridae (chequered beetles) Thanasimus formicarius H3 One from tree in Saproxylic; standing trees in (ant beetle) woodland, in an sunny situations with wood- unusually shaded boring beetles position Curculionidae (weevils) Attactagenus plumbeus Nb Frequent in grassland Grassland; a wide range of close to bramble and reasonably tall dense grasslands scrub and grass/scrub mosaics, including hay meadows Mordellidae (tumbling flower beetles) Mordellistena acuticollis RDBK One male by Probably a recent arrival in sweeping grassland Britain, increased in recent and tall herbs years, and no longer worthy of formal conservation status Mycetophagidae (fungus beetles) Mycetophagus atomarius H3 One on bracket Saproxylic; beneath bark and on fungus on log in bracket fungi on broadleaved woodland trees Pyrochroidae (cardinal beetles) Pyrochroa coccinea Nb,H3 One on herbaceous Saproxylic; larvae beneath bark (black-headed cardinal beetle) vegetation at on large diameter standing woodland edge timber and logs Salpingidae Lissodema quadripustulata Nb Several beaten from Saproxylic; in twigs and small dead branches branches of broadleaved trees in woodland and and shrubs, especially standing
5 Taxon Status Occurrence Habitat requirements/notes boundary hedge rosaceous shrubs Orthoptera (grasshoppers and crickets) Tettigoniidae (bush-crickets) Conocephalus ?discolor Na Many nymphs in Only nymphs found, so (long-winged cone-head) grassland; strictly not identification not absolutely certainly identified to certain, but unlikely to be species, but unlikely incorrect; a greatly increased to be incorrect species in recent years, no longer worthy of formal status and of no conservation significance
Assessment of invertebrate interest
The proportion of species with formal conservation status can be used as a rough estimate of species quality for the overall fauna. As a rule of thumb, in general surveys for site assessment, it is rare for the combined total of Nationally Scarce and Red Data Book species recorded to exceed 10% of the total recorded fauna. Figures in excess of this can be taken almost invariably to indicate invertebrate assemblages of high value. A figure of 5% is a convenient and reasonably reliable indication of significant, though not necessarily very great, interest. The overall proportion of 2.1% obtained for the Queensway site is thus decidedly low, and does not of itself suggest significant invertebrate interest. However, this overall assessment needs some qualification, not only because the overall figure masks differences in the value of different components of a very varied fauna, but also because the small number of uncommon species recorded almost certainly in part reflects the facts, first, that this is a physically difficult site to survey and second, that key components of the fauna (especially saproxylic species) are rather time-consuming to record.
Of the eight species with formal conservation status recorded, two are unambiguously unworthy of the status and of little if any value in site assessment. Of the remaining six, three are saproxylic, two are grassland species, and one is associated with transitions and mosaics of grassland and woody vegetation. Though a small set of species, they thus cover the habitat range on the site rather well, and indicate some interest for all its elements. The remaining records tend to support the rough division of interest indicated by the species with formal conservation status. The additional indicators of habitat continuity listed in Table 1, and a number of other local species, support the value of dead wood in various forms; there are a few other grassland species of local occurrence; and there is rather little recorded interest from the scrub, or from scrub/grassland transitions.
The limited interest recorded from the scrub and from transitions and mosaics is interesting, in view of the prominence of these features on the site and their general potential for invertebrates. It is possible that visits at different times of year would produce different results, and also that sampling difficulties in denser areas and in more prolonged transitions with high bramble densities might mask some interest, but the overall impression was that the interest was genuinely limited. In part this probably reflects the successional state of the site. Some of the interest of transitions and mosaics depends on the quality of the components of the mosaic, and the grassland component is often rather poor on this site – very dense, replaced by coarse herbs, or seriously invaded by brambles. The fauna associated with the shrubs themselves might reasonably be expected to be better, but considerable survey effort failed to locate much interest, and at least some of the lack of interest appears to be genuine. Invasive oaks, for example, can support a rich fauna. Many young oaks in the northernmost field were very easily sampled, and almost all were examined by sweep-netting or beating, but only a smattering of common species was found. Many species associated with oak foliage peak quite early in the year, and it might be that scarcer species were missed, but there was little evidence that the oak foliage had ever been seriously exploited – the leaves were, for the most part, completely intact – quite unusually so for oaks anywhere.
The grassland is almost certainly genuinely not of high invertebrate interest. It supports a varied fauna, very large populations of some species (notably, a the time of survey, the sorrel-feeding weevils Perapion curtirostre and P. violaceum) and some uncommon species, but most of the grassland is rather dense for high interest even if it were botanically richer, and some parts (with high densities of
6 false oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius) are of low potential. The richest and most interesting-looking areas were the damper parts, but despite considerable recording effort these produced no scarce species and remarkably few invertebrates specific to the plants found there. These areas are perhaps too small and isolated to develop their full potential. The best-structured areas of grassland were rabbit-grazed.
Most of the saproxylic species recorded are beetles. In principle records of saproxylic beetles can be used to assess the importance of a site on a national scale. In practice, the small number of recorded species makes it impossible to do so with confidence.
Two measures of the value of a site for saproxylic beetles have been devised. Alexander (2004) provides the most recent version of an Index of Ecological Continuity (IEC), based on the lists of species associated with habitat continuity described in the preceding section. A score of one is given to Grade 3 indicators, a score of two to Grade 2 indicators, and a score of 3 to Grade 1 indicators. The index is calculated by summing the scores for all species recorded. Because this score is cumulative, it is dependent on recording effort. Only four Grade 3 indicators were captured, giving an IEC of 4, which is very low, but a single visit to a site can never provide enough data to give a realistic score. It is impossible to distinguish with confidence between limited interest and limited effort, but the absence of more highly-scoring species conforms to expectations based on the presumed origins and observed character of the site.
The second scoring system (Fowles et al. 1999) calculates a Saproxylic Quality Index which is intended to be less dependent on recording effort than the Index of Ecological Continuity. Scores are assigned to saproxylic species according to their national status rather than the extent of their association with sites of long ecological continuity. Fowles et al. (1999) provide a complete list of species and their scores. Summation of the scores for all species provides the Saproxylic Quality Score (SQS): dividing this score by the number of scoring species (N) and multiplying by 100 gives the Saproxylic Quality Index (SQI).
A minimum of forty scoring species is recommended for the calculation of a reliable SQI, and only 35 scoring saproxylic species are included on the list from the present site. Table 2, below, lists these beetles and their scores. Calculation of the score from these figures gives an SQI value of 220.0. Though no great significance can be attached to the figure obtained from such a small number of captures, this is a low value, and gives no reason to expect high interest in the saproxylic fauna.
Nonetheless, the saproxylic fauna seems likely to be a substantial one. The figure of 35 saproxylic beetles, though small from the point of view of calculation of interest, is a good total for a single day’s surveying, only a small part of which was specifically devoted to search for the saproxylic fauna. The extent and variety of dead wood certainly provides at least the potential for a large and varied fauna. So, even if the species quality on current records appears to be fairly low, the saproxylic fauna may well, in terms of number of uncommon species, be one of the more important, and quite possibly the most important, component of the invertebrate assemblage. It is also probably the component of the fauna most likely to include species of high rarity not recorded during survey work.
Table 2 Saproxylic beetles recorded
Taxon Status Score SQI IEC Hemicoelus fulvicornis c 1 Ochina ptinoides l 2 Ptilinus pectinicornis c 1 Biphyllus lunatus l 4 1 Malthinus balteatus Nb 8 Malthinus flaveolus c 1 Malthinus sereipunctatus c 2 Malthodes pumilus l 2 Clytus arietis c 1 Grammoptera ruficornis c 1 Pogonocherus hispidus l 2 Rutpela maculata c 1
7 Taxon Status Score SQI IEC Tetrops praeustus l 2 Cis bilamellatus c Cis boleti c 1 Ennearthron cornutum l 2 Octotemnus glabriculus c 1 Thanasimus formicarius l 4 1 Dryocoetes villosus l 2 Euophryum confine c Hylesinus crenatus l 2 Hylesinus oleiperda l 2 Denticollis linearis c 1 Sinodendron cylindricum l 2 Dasytes aeratus l 2 Malachius bipustulatus c 1 Mordellistena variegata l 8 Mycetophagus atomarius l 2 1 Mycetophagus multipunctatus l 2 Mycetophagus quadripustulatus l 2 Pyrochroa coccinea Nb 4 1 Pyrochroa serraticornis c 1 Lissodema quadripustulata Nb 8 Rhinosimus planirostris c 1 Anaspis pulicaria c 1
Total species 35 Score 220.0 4
Notes Malthodes pumilus is included in this table, because it is considered a saproxylic species by Alexander et al. 1999; however, it was recorded from the grassland at Queensway, and has been recorded elsewhere from grassland in the absence of obvious dead wood habitats, so its inclusion is considered dubiously appropriate Two species on the list, Euophryum confine and Cis bilamellatus, are relatively recent arrivals in Britain and for this reason do not have Species Quality scores.
Table 3, below, summarises the features and habitats of the site which are considered to have some significance for invertebrates, arranged in approximate order of estimated importance.
Table 3 Significant habitat characteristics
Feature Characteristics and potential Old trees and dead The amount and variety of dead wood provides a large and potentially wood valuable resource suitable for a large range of saproxylic invertebrates, including uncommon species. Sorrel-rich grassland A large area in varied but generally good condition, though with a limited range of plants in good populations and too dense a sward for high general interest; high populations of a small range of species, and some uncommon specialists, but unlikely to support a very high diversity or very high overall species quality. Mosaic structure The very varied structure and abundant transitions have high general potential for invertebrate diversity and abundance, though not obviously likely to support a wide range of scarce species and with little survey evidence for interest associated specifically with the structure. Woody vegetation The variety of species and characteristics of woody vegetation should support a high diversity of invertebrates, but the potential for uncommon
8 Feature Characteristics and potential species is not very great. Woodland herbs and Shade limits the development of the herb layer and the likely range of litter associated invertebrates; the litter layer is more likely to include uncommon species, especially where there is year-round litter. accumulation or a substantial component of fine dead wood. It is unlikely, however, that the interest will be high. Invasive scrub There is potential for species associated specifically with invasive scrub, but very little evidence for the presence of such specialists. Shaded pools Potential is limited by fairly heavy tree shade; an interesting feature adding significantly to diversity, but probably not at all to value. Damp, relatively These are interesting sheltered areas with reasonable populations of species-rich grassland invertebrate foodplants, but survey has produced little of interest; the potential would be considered higher, and key species may have been overlooked (or be out at a different season) but high interest can probably be ruled out. Nectar flowers These plants provide a large and valuable nectar source for a wide range of (especially bramble) invertebrates, especially bees and wasps, hoverflies, some groups of beetles; such features are, however, only as important as the adjoining habitats and features which provide nectar-feeding insects to visit.
Overall, on current evidence, it would seem that: the greatest invertebrate potential is amongst saproxylic species associated with the older trees and shrubs, and to a lesser extent with fallen wood; a small but characteristic component of additional interest is present in the grassland, and this is concentrated in the areas of reasonably open sorrel-rich grassland; there appears, considering their extent, to be remarkably little contribution to the overall interest from the scrub elements of the vegetation, or from the transitions from scrub to grassland; the varied conditions and structural variety of the site favour high diversity of invertebrates and large populations of some species, but are less obviously suited, in their current state, to support large numbers of uncommon species; the quality of the invertebrate fauna is probably in decline as a result of neglect, and the superficially attractive mosaic structure masks the fact that a more traditional mosaic of managed hedges and grazed grasslands would be more interesting.
On the sole basis of the records obtained by survey in 2007, the site would be afforded only low value for invertebrates. The likelihood of significantly more interest amongst some components of the fauna, especially saproxylic species, and the likelihood, hinted at by records of indicators and likely on the grounds of habitat character, that these include species associated with habitat continuity, suggest that a higher grading would be appropriate. Only more detailed survey would enable an accurate assessment of the level of interest. It seems possible that the invertebrate fauna of the woodland and field boundaries would be best estimated as of county value. The remainder of the habitat components seem unlikely, in their own right, to prove of more than district value, but in practice they should be regarded as part of a habitat mosaic.
References
ALEXANDER, K.N.A. 2004. Revision of the Index of Ecological Continuity as used for saproxylic beetles. Peterborough: English Nature (English Nature Research Reports, no. 574).
ANDERSON, R. 2005. An annotated list of the non-marine Mollusca of Britain and Ireland. Journal of Conchology, 38: 607-633.
AUKEMA, B. & RIEGER, C. 1995-2006. Catalogue of the Heteroptera of the Palaearctic region. 5 volumes. Wageningen: The Netherlands Entomological Society.
9 BARBER, A.D & KEAY, A.N. 1988. Provisional atlas of the centipedes of the British Isles. Abbots Ripton: Biological Records Centre.
BIODIVERSITY REPORTING AND INFORMATION GROUP. 2007. Report on the Species and Habitat Review. Report to the UK Bodiversity Partnership. .
BRADLEY, J.D. 1998. Checklist of Lepidoptera recorded from the British Isles. Fordingbridge & Newent: J.D. & M.J. Bradley.
CHANDLER, P. (ed.) 1998. Checklists of insects of the British Isles (new series). Part 1: Diptera. Handbooks for the identification of British Insects, 12(1).
FOWLES, A.P., ALEXANDER, K.N.A. & KEY, R.S. 1999. The Saproxylic Quality Index: evaluating wooded habitats for the conservation of dead-wood Coleoptera. The Coleopterist, 8: 121-141.
HAES, E.C.M. & HARDING, P.T. 1997. Atlas of grasshoppers, crickets and allied insects in Britain and Ireland. London: The Stationery Office.
HARVEY, P.R., NELLIST, D.R. & TELFER, M.G. 2002. Provisional atlas of British spiders (Arachnida, Araneae). 2 volumes. Abbots Ripton: Biological Records Centre.
HILLYARD, P.D. & SANKEY, J.H.P. 1989. Harvestmen: keys and notes for the identification of species. Synopses of the British fauna (new series), 4. , i-viii, 1-120.
HOPKIN, S. 1991. A key to the woodlice of Britain and Ireland. Shrewsbury: Field Studies Council.
HYMAN, P.S. & PARSONS, M.S. 1992. A review of the scarce and threatened Coleoptera of Great Britain. Part 1. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee. (UK Nature Conservation, no. 3).
LE QUESNE, W.J. & PAYNE, K.R. 1981. Cicadellidae (Typhlocybinae) with a check list of the British Auchenorhyncha (Hemiptera-Homoptera). Handbooks for the identification of British Insects, 2(2c).
LEE, P. 2006. Atlas of the millipedes (Diplopoda) of Britain and Ireland. Sofia: Pensoft Publishers.
MERRITT, R., MOORE, N.W. & EVERSHAM, B.C. 1996. Atlas of the dragonflies of Britain and Ireland. London: The Stationery Office.
PLANT, C.W. 1997. A key to the adults of British lacewings and their allies (Neuroptera, Megaloptera, Raphidioptera and Mecoptera). Shrewsbury: Field Studies Council.
10 Appendix 1 Complete list of recorded species
The site is structurally complex, and particular habitat types tend to occur in multiple areas. A complex subdivision into small recording areas would be unproductive for the majority of the commoner species recorded. In this table, therefore, each species has, as far as possible, been assigned to a broad habitat type, rather than to a particular area of the site; many would be found wherever the appropriate habitat or host-plant occurred. More precise locations have been recorded only for the scarcer species, and these are given in the Results section.
Habitat types and abbreviations are as follows: Saprx saproxylic species, developing or living in dead wood, under bark on dead wood, or in fungi associated with dead wood Tree species associated with the foliage, branches or trunks of living trees Wood Species associated with woodland, but not specifically with woody vegetation Grass species associated with grassland and tall herbs Scrub species associated with the foliage or stems of living shrubs, or occurring only where scrub is associated with more open habitats, or at shrubby transitions at wood margins Gen Generalist: species which occur over a wide range of habitats and which cannot, even at a site- specific level, be assigned to any one habitat type. This category has also been used for species which disperse widely as adults (dragonflies, some hoverflies) and which may not breed on the site; these tend in practice to be recorded in the more open areas, especially on bramble flowers and where transitional structure provides good hunting opportunities.
The assignment of habitat to individual species is not always straightforward, and some of the commoner species could have been assigned to a wider habitat range. As far as possible, each species has been assigned to the single habitat where it is most likely to be found. For some species, the assignment is site-specific, rather than general: for example, no separate wetland category has been used, chiefly because there are few wetland species recorded, and none of particular note. All the recorded species with strong wetland affinities are from the pools in the woodland and their immediate vicinity, and these species have therefore been assigned to the woodland category.
In the species list, taxonomic arrangement of a sort governs the positioning of the highest taxa in the lists, with molluscs and worms preceding crustaceans, spiders, myriapods and insects. Otherwise, listing has been as far as possible alphabetical. Most records are of insects. Within this group, orders are arranged alphabetically, families alphabetically within orders, and species alphabetically within families. No groupings between family and order, or between genus and family, are used.
Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Mollusca Clausiliidae Clausilia bidentata c + Cochlodina laminata c + Discidae Discus rotundatus c + Helicidae Cepaea nemoralis c + Cornu aspersum c + Crustacea Armadillidiidae Armadillidium vulgare c + + Oniscidae Oniscus asellus c + Philosciidae Philoscia muscorum c + + Porcellionidae +
11 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Porcellio scaber c Trichoniscidae Trichoniscus pusillus c + Chilopoda Lithobiidae Lithobius forficatus c + Lithobius variegatus c + Diplopoda Glomeridae Glomeris marginata c + Polydesmidae Polydesmus angustus c + Araneae Amaurobiidae Amaurobius fenestralis c + Araneidae Araniella opisthographa c + + Araneus sturmi l + Gibbaranea gibbosa c + Nuctenea umbratica c + Dictynidae Dictyna arundinacea c + Dictyna latens l + Dysderidae Harpactea hombergi c + Linyphiidae Linyphia triangularis c + Lycosidae Alopecosa pulverulenta c + Pardosa amentata c + Pardosa pullata c + Trochosa terricola c + Philodromidae Philodromus aureolus c + + Philodromus cespitum c + + Pisauridae Pisaura mirabilis c + Salticidae Euophrys frontalis c + Segestriidae Segestria senoculata c + Tetragnathidae Pachygnatha degeeri c + + Theridiidae Achearanea lunata l + Anelosimus vittatus c + + Neottiura bimaculata c + + Theridion sisyphium c + Theridion tinctum c + Thomisidae Xysticus cristatus c + Opiliones Nemastomatidae Nemastoma bimaculatum c + + Sclerosomatidae Homalonotus quadridentatus l + +
12 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Trogulidae Anelasmocephalus cambridgei l + + Coleoptera Anobiidae Hemicoelus fulvicornis c + Ochina ptinoides c + Ptilinus pectinicornis c + Apionidae Apion cruentatum c + Exapion ulicis c + Ischnopterapion loti c + Ischnopterapion modestum c + Perapion curtirostre c + Perapion violaceum c + Protapion apricans c + Protapion nigritarse c + Biphyllidae Biphyllus lunatus l + Byturidae Byturus tomentosus c + Cantharidae Cantharis pellucida c + Cantharis rufa c + Cantharis rustica c + Malthinus balteatus Nb + Malthinus flaveolus c + Malthinus sereipunctatus c + Malthodes pumilus l + Rhagonycha limbata c + Rhagonycha lutea Nb + Carabidae Abax parallelepipedus c + + Amara communis c + + Amara familiaris c + Amara lunicollis c + + Amara similata c + Dromius linearis c + Ocys harpaloides c + Leistus spinibarbis c + Notiophilus biguttatus c + Platynus assimilis c + Pterostichus madidus c + + Cerambycidae Clytus arietis c + Grammoptera ruficornis c + Pogonocherus hispidus l + Rutpela maculata c + Tetrops praeustus l + Cerylonidae Cerylon ferrugineum l + Chrysomelidae Bruchus rufimanus c + Cassida flaveola l + Cassida rubiginosa c + Chaetocnema concinna c + Chaetocnema hortensis c + +
13 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Hermaeophaga mercurialis l + Longitarsus luridus c + Mantura obtusata Nb + Neocrepidodera transversa c + Oulema melanopus agg. c + Sphaeroderma testacea c + Ciidae Cis bilamellatus c + Cis boleti c + Ennearthron cornutum l + Octotemnus glabriculus c + Cleridae Thanasimus formicarius l + Coccinellidae Adalia bipunctata c + Adalia 10-punctata c + Calvia 14-guttata c + Coccinella 7-punctata c + Exochomus 4-punctatus c + Propylea 14-punctata c + Psyllobora 22-punctata c + Rhyzobius litura c + Tytthaspis 16-punctata c + Curculionidae Acalles misellus l + Amalus scortillum l + Archarius pyrrhoceras c + Attactagenus plumbeus Nb + Barypeithes pellucidus c + Curculio venosus c + Dryocoetes villosus l + Euophryum confine c + Glocianus distinctus c + Hadroplontus litura c + Hylesinus crenatus l + Hylesinus oleiperda l + Liophloeus tessulatus c + Mecinus pascuorum c + Mecinus pyraster c + Nedyus quadrimaculatus c + Otiorhynchus singularis c + Parethelcus pollinarius c + Phyllobius argentatus c + Phyllobius pyri c + Phyllobius roboretanus c + Polydrusus pterygomalis c + Rhinoncus pericarpius c + Sciaphilus asperatus l + Strophosoma melanogrammum c + Tychius tibialis c + Dytiscidae Hydroporus nigrita c + + Hydroporus tessellatus c + + Elateridae Agriotes acuminatus c + Agriotes lineatus c + +
14 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Agriotes obscurus c + + Agriotes sputator c + Athous haemorrhoidalis c + Denticollis linearis c + Lucanidae Sinodendron cylindricum l + Melyridae Cordylepherus viridis c + Dasytes aeratus l + Malachius bipustulatus c + Mordellidae Mordellistena acuticollis RDBK + Mordellistena variegata l + Mycetophagidae Mycetophagus atomarius l + Mycetophagus multipunctatus l + Mycetophagus quadripustulatus l + Nitidulidae Cychramus luteus c + Glischrochilus hortensis c + + Oedemeridae Oedemera lurida c + Oedemera nobilis c + Pyrochroidae Pyrochroa coccinea Nb + Pyrochroa serraticornis c + Rhynchitidae Deporaus betulae c + Involvulus caeruleus c + Salpingidae Lissodema quadripustulata Nb + Rhinosomus planirostris c + Scirtidae Cyphon coarctatus c + Microcara testacea c + Scraptiidae Anaspis maculata c + Anaspis pulicaria c + Scydmaenidae Neuraphes angulatus l + + Staphylinidae Quedius fuliginosus c + + Ocypus aeneocephalus c + + Tasgius ater l + + Tachyporus hypnorum c + + Tachyporus nitidulus c + + Tenebrionidae Isomira murina c + Throscidae Trixagus carinifrons c + Dermaptera Forficulidae Forficula auricularia c + Diptera Asilidae Leptogaster cylindrica c +
15 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Dioctria atricapilla c + Dioctria baumhaueri c + Machimus atricapillus c + Conopidae Siccus ferrugineus c + Dolichopodidae Argyra vestita c + Bathycranium bicolorellum l + Dolichopus trivialis c + Dolichopus ungulatus c + Dolichopus wahlbergi c + Sciapus platypterus c + Empididae Empis lutea c + + Empis pennipes c + + Empis tessellata c + Hilara cornicula c + Hilara hirtipes c + Phyllodromia melanocephala c + Heleomyzidae Suillia variegata c + Hybotidae Hybos culiciformis c + + Platypalpus parvicauda c + + Platypalpus pectoralis c + + Keroplatidae Macrocera centralis c + Macrocera phalerata c + Macrocera vittata c + Limoniidae Achyrolimonia 10-maculata c + Austrolimnophila ochracea c + Dicranomyia fusca c + Dicranomyia mitis c + Epiphragma ocellare c + Erioptera hybrida c + Ilisia maculata c + Limonia nubeculosa c + Limonia phragmitidis c + Lipsothrix nervosa l + Molophilus approximatus c + Molophilus medius c + Neolimnophila batava c + Neolimnophila nemoralis c + Ormosia nodulosa c + + Paradelphomyia senilis c + Phylidorea ferruginea c + Pseudolimnophila lucorum c + Tasiocera murina c + Ptychopteridae Ptychoptera minuta l + Rhagionidae Chrysopilus asiliformis c + Chrysopilus cristatus c + Rhagio scolopacea c + + Rhagio tringarius c + +
16 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Sciomyzidae Coremacera tristis l + Limnia unguicornis c + Pherbellia cinerella c + Tetanocera elata c + Tetanocera hyalipennis c + Stratiomyidae Beris vallata c + + Chloromyia formosa c + Microchrysa flavicornis c + Syrphidae Baccha elongata c + Cheilosia albimana c + Cheilosia illustrata c + Cheilosia pagana c + Cheilosia variabilis c + Cheilosia vernalis c + Chrysotoxum bicinctum l + Dasysyrphus albostriatus c + Episyrphus balteatus c + Eristalis nemorum c + Eristalis pertinax c + Eristalis tenax c + Eumerus strigatus c + Eupeodes corollae c + Eupeodes luniger c + Helophilus pendulus c + Melanostoma mellinum c + Melanostoma scalare c + Paragus haemorrhous c + Pipizella viduata c + Platycheirus albimanus c + Platycheirus peltatus c + Platycheirus rosarum c + Rhingia campestris c + Sphaerophoria scripta c + Sphegina clunipes l + Syritta pipiens c + Syrphus ribesii c + Volucella bombylans c + Volucella pellucens c + Xanthogramma pedissequum l + Xylota segnis c + Tachinidae Phasia pusilla c + Tephritidae Terellia ruficauda c + Urophora cardui c + Urophora stylata c + Tipulidae Nephrotoma quadrifaria c + + Tipula fascipennis c + Hemiptera-Auchenorhyncha Cercopidae Aphrophora alni c + + Cercopis vulneratus c +
17 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Philaenus spumarius c + + Cicadellidae Agallia ribauti c + Aphrodes albifrons c + Aphrodes makarovi c + Arthaldeus pascuellus c + Balclutha punctata c + + Deltocephalus pulicaris c + Eupteryx aurata c + Eupteryx urticae c + + Iassus lanio c + Oncopsis avellanae l + Oncopsis flavicollis c + Oncopsis tristis c + Psammotettix confinis c + Ribautiana scalaris l + Speudotettix subfusculus c + + Zyginidia scutellaris c + Cixiidae Cixius nervosus c + + Tachycixius pilosus c + + Delphacidae Ditropis pteridis c + Javesella pellucida c + Stenocranus minutus c + Issidae Issus coleoptratus l + + Membracidae Centrotus cornutus l + Hemiptera-Heteroptera Anthocoridae Anthocoris nemoralis c + + Anthocoris nemorum c + Cardiastethus fasciiventris l + Orius niger c + Berytidae Metatropis rufescens c + Lygaeidae Kleidocerys resedae c + Peritrechus geniculatus c + Scolopostethus thomsoni c + Microphysidae Loricula elegantula c + Loricula pselaphiformis c + Miridae Acetropis gimmerthali l + Amblytylus nasutus c + Bryocoris pteridis c + + Capsus ater c + Campyloneura virgula c + + Cyllecoris histrionicus c + Deraeocoris lutescens c + + Deraeocoris ruber c + Dicyphus epilobii c + Dicyphus errans c + + Dryophilocoris flavoquadrimaculatus c +
18 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Heterotoma meriopterum c + Leptopterna dolobrata c + Leptopterna ferrugata c + Liocoris tripustulatus c + Lygocoris contaminatus c + Lygocoris pabulinus c + + Miris striatus c + Notostira elongata c + Phylus coryli c + Phylus melanocephalus c + Phylus palliceps c + Pithanus maerkeli c + Plagiognathus arbustorum c + + Plagiognathus chrysanthemi c + Psallus betuleti c + Psallus confusus c + Psallus flavellus c + Psallus lepidus c + Psallus perrisi c + Psallus varians c + Rhabdomiris striatellus c + Nabidae Himacerus apterus c + + Himacerus mirmicoides c + Nabis flavomarginatus c + Nabis rugosus c + Pentatomidae Aelia acuminata c + Dolycoris baccarum c + Palomena prasina c + Pentatoma rufipes c + Podops inuncta c + + Hymenoptera Apidae Apis mellifera c + Bombus lapidarius c + Bombus lucorum c + Bombus pascuorum c + Bombus pratorum c + Chrysididae Trichrysis cyanea c + Formicidae Lasius flavus c + Lasius niger c + Leptothorax acervorum c + Myrmica rubra c + Myrmica ruginodis c + + Myrmica scabrinodis c + + Sphecidae Crossocerus podagricus c + Crossocerus quadrimaculatus c + Pemphredon lethifera c + + Pemphredon lugubris c + Lepidoptera Hesperiidae Ochlodes venata c +
19 Taxon Status Pitfalls Habitat category Saprx Tree Wood Grass Scrub Gen Lycaenidae Lycaena phlaeas c + Polyommatus icarus c + Noctuidae Callistege mi l + Euclidea glyphica l + Nymphalidae Aglais urticae c + Coenonympha pamphilus c + Cynthia cardui c + Inachis io c + Pararge aegeria c + Pieridae Pieris brassicae c + Pieris napi c + Mecoptera Panorpidae Panorpa communis c + + Panorpa germanica c + + Neuroptera Chrysopidae Chrysopa perla c + + Chrysoperla carnea c + Hemerobiidae Hemerobius humulinus c + Micromus variegatus c + + Odonata Coenagriidae Coenagrion puella c + Libellulidae Libellula depressa l + Orthoptera Acrididae Chorthippus parallelus c + Omocestus viridulus c + Tettigoniidae Conocephalus ?discolor Na + Leptophyes punctatissima c + Pholidoptera griseoaptera c +
20 Appendix 2 Notes on Nationally Scarce and Red Data Book species
Attactagenus plumbeus (Coleoptera, Curculionidae) Nationally Scarce category B A slow-moving greyish-brown weevil whose larvae are polyphagous on the roots of plants. Adults are usually found close to the ground, but also climb higher in the vegetation and are sometimes found on the foliage of shrubs. It has been recorded from a wide range of grasslands, and can occur in large numbers in hay meadows, but it perhaps especially characteristic of habitat mosaics and transitions, where tall grassy vegetation grows close to low shrubs. It is widespread in England, with the possible exception of the south-west, but is recorded only very locally in Wales and Scotland.
Conocephalus discolor (Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae) Nationally Scarce category A The long-winged conehead. A bush cricket found in tall grassland, usually either unmanaged or lightly grazed, including ungrazed downland turf, urban wasteland, woodland rides and clearings, coastal reed- beds, the upper levels of ungrazed saltmarshes, and wet and dry heathland. At one time a considerable rarity, this species has expanded its range considerably over recent decades, and especially over the last few years, and is now known to occur in many southern English counties up to the south midlands. Its status as a Nationally Scarce species is no longer appropriate.
Lissodema quadripustulata (Coleoptera, Salpingidae) Nationally Scarce category B A small but distinctively marked beetle found in dead wood and beneath bark of trees and shrubs, seemingly with a preference for exposed and sunny branches. It is found in woodland, pasture-woodland, and hedgerow trees and large shrubs. Recorded hosts include elm, beech, field maple, hawthorn, holly, sycamore and pine. The species appears decidedly local on a small scale, being apparently absent from many places with seemingly suitable hosts, but can occur in moderate numbers on single trees or small stretches of hedgerow or wood margin. The extent of under-recording of such a species is difficult to estimate. It is widespread in England, except the north-west, but is more frequent in the south-east than elsewhere.
Malthinus balteatus (Coleoptera, Cantharidae) Nationally Scarce category B A small soldier beetle found on the foliage of trees and shrubs such as willow, hazel and lime, especially damp woodland, carr, and other sites where the water table is regularly high. Larvae are believed to develop in dead twigs and small branches. M. balteatus is widespread but local in southern England and south Wales. All records are south of the Wash, except for a small outpost on the Carboniferous limestone north of Morecambe Bay.
Mantura obtusata (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) Nationally Scarce category B A small brown-black flea beetle which feeds on common sorrel Rumex acetosa. The larvae are believed to be leaf-miners. It is found where there are large populations of the host plant, predominantly in somewhat damp neutral grassland, also in open space in woodlands and at wetland fringes. Larvae develop in mid to late summer, and so are likely to be sensitive to management by cutting. Though widely distributed in England and Wales, and extending north to Cumberland, this is a very local species.
Mordellistena acuticollis (Coleoptera, Mordellidae) Red Data Book category K (Insufficiently Known) A black jumping beetle, the larvae of which develop in the stems of thistles, often creeping thistle Cirsium arvense. The first confirmed British specimens were captured in 1984 and 1985 in Kent, which led to Red Data Book designation. Old records of members of the genus are often of doubtful validity because of taxonomic changes and the difficulty of identifying all-black members of the genus. This species is now quite frequent and widespread in the south-east, and it seems likely that the first records reflected an early stage in the process of colonisation. M. acuticollis is found in a fairly wide range of open sunny habitats, but is probably most frequent in ruderal habitats.
21 Pyrochroa coccinea (Pyrochroidae) Nationally Scarce category B The black-headed cardinal beetle. A large deep red beetle found mostly in ancient broad-leaved woodland and pasture-woodland. Its larvae develop beneath the bark and within the wood of dead branches and trunks of broadleaved trees, taking two or three years to mature. It can use both standing and fallen timber, but is chiefly found in timber of large diameter. It is widespread in England, and though more frequent in the south, its range extends to Cumbria. It does not extend far into the south- west and reaches only the border counties of Wales.
Rhagonycha lutea (Coleoptera, Cantharidae) Nationally Scarce category B A medium-sized and distinctively coloured soldier beetle found in woodland rides and margins, parkland, hedgerows and scrubby grassland, seemingly with a preference for calcareous soils. The exact requirements of the species are not known; the larvae are believed to be active predators. The sites where the species has been found almost always have a mixture of grassland with scrub or low tree foliage, and it seems likely that this juxtaposition is the key requirement. It may be that it is more widespread along hedgerows than is currently realised. This species is widespread in England, though seemingly absent from the south-west, and its range extends to Wales and south-west Scotland.
22 Map 1 Locations of centres of intensive survey
G grassland W woodland B field boundaries
23 North Queensway Business Park Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Appendices
Appendix B.3 : Reptile Capture & Release Report
[intentionally blank]
QUEENSWAY NORTH REPTILE CAPTURE AND RELEASE PROJECT
Final Report
November 2008
Client: Hastings and Bexhill Renaissance Ltd (trading as Sea Space)
Title: Queensway North Reptile Capture and Release Project,
Project No: AEL 52
Date of Issue: 27 November 2008
Status: Final
Signed on behalf of Applied Ecology Ltd:
Dr Duncan Painter Director
CONTACT DETAILS:
APPLIED ECOLOGY LTD
St. John's Innovation Centre Cowley Road Cambridge CB4 0WS
Tel: 01223 422 116 Fax: 01223 420 844 Mobile: 07725 811 777 Email: [email protected]
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
Contents
1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background...... 1 1.2 Reptile Legislation & Ecology ...... 1 2 Methods ...... 4 2.1 Capture and Release...... 4 2.2 Surface Vegetation Removal ...... 5 2.3 Receptor Site Monitoring ...... 5 3 Data analysis...... 6 3.1 Site-wide...... 6 3.2 Species-specific...... 7 3.3 Compartment-specific ...... 7 3.4 Sex and Age Groups ...... 8 3.5 Receptor Site ...... 9 4 Summary...... 11 4.1 Project Evaluation ...... 11 4.2 Recommendations...... 11
Applied Ecology Ltd
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Applied Ecology Ltd. (AEL) was commissioned by Seaspace to capture and relocate common lizards (Lacerta vivipara) and slow worms (Anguis fragilis) from a proposed business development site called Queensway North, Hastings, East Sussex. This work was deemed necessary after reptile surveys (also carried out by AEL) in 2006 and 2007 confirmed the presence of large populations of both species within the grassland areas found on the site. As they are protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), both species need to be relocated, insofar as is possible, prior to any development taking place on the site. Of prime importance is the capture and release of a sufficient number of individuals to maintain populations of both species on the proposed receptor site.
In 2007, depletion sampling from reptile-proof compartments produced an overall population estimate of 5,600 reptiles. Prior to the translocation, the Hastings Borough Ecologist and Natural England were consulted and both agreed that the use of an off-site receptor site capable of supporting this number of individuals in the long term was the only feasible translocation option given the nature and scale of the development and limited availability of suitable habitat surrounding the site. This site, which is not owned by Seaspace, is located in the High Weald, 17 miles from the Queensway North site.
1.2 REPTILE LEGISLATION & ECOLOGY
Legislation
All UK native reptile species are protected by law. The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (and later amendments) provides the legal framework for this protection. Sand lizard Lacerta agilis and smooth snake Coronella austriaca are rare species that have restricted distributions in the UK and the greatest level of legal protection.
The more widespread and common reptile species, namely common lizard, slow worm, grass snake Natrix natrix, and adder Vipera berus are protected against deliberate or reckless killing and injury. Natural England (formerly English Nature1) considered that reptiles are likely to be threatened and the law breached by activities such as the following:
1 English Nature (2004) Reptiles: guidelines for developers.
Applied Ecology Ltd 1
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
Archaeological and geotechnical investigations
Clearing land, installing site offices or digging foundations
Cutting vegetation to a low height
Laying pipelines or installing other services
Driving machinery over sensitive areas
Removing rubble, wood piles and other debris.
Under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, a conviction can result in a fine, and/or up to six months imprisonment for each offence. Harm to more than one animal may be taken as separate offences. The police can also confiscate any item, such as equipment, vehicles or machinery used to commit the offence.
Ecology
Reptiles are cold-blooded and as such are unable to generate their own body heat relying instead on external heat sources to elevate their body temperatures. Most species achieve this by basking in the sun. This reliance on external heat sources explains why the majority of English reptiles hibernate between October and March, when daily temperatures are least favourable for activity. From April to September activity levels are much higher, but still depend on weather conditions. Typically, reptiles are most active in warm weather, but avoid prolonged exposure to the sun on very hot days. During the night most species are inactive and seek shelter.
In the UK, lizards tend to have small ranges and frequently remain associated with small landscape features, such as embankments. Common lizards spend much time basking, while slow-worms tend to hide in vegetation, under refuges or underground. Both species eat invertebrates such as insects, spiders and woodlice, but slow-worms tend to eat more soft-bodied species, such as slugs and earthworms.
Common lizard
Found throughout England in a range of different habitats, including grasslands, woodland edges, brownfield sites, heaths and dunes. This species is often seen on linear features, such as hedgerow bases, stone walls and railway embankments. They can reach a length of around 14 cm (including the tail). Females usually have dark sides and a vertebral stripe, and often exhibit a number of light streaks and scattered ocelli (eye-spots) on the body. In males, these ocelli are better developed and the dorsal stripe is usually absent. Males are also readily identified by the
Applied Ecology Ltd 2
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
presence of hemipenal bulges either side of the tail-base. Great variation exists in both pattern and scaling, even within populations. Common lizards are insectivorous.
Slow worm
Also found throughout England in a wide variety of habitats; the slow worm is the most frequently encountered reptile in urban areas. Despite its snake-like appearance, the slow worm is, in fact, a species of lizard that has evolved to have no limbs. Adults can reach up to about 50cm total length, although they are typically smaller. Males are usually uniform grey-brown in colour, whereas females tend to be brown with dark sides and a black vertebral stripe. Sub-adult slow worms are much harder to sex as both sexes tend to exhibit the female colour pattern. Gender is best determined by examining the neck region, which is better defined in males. Some males also have white or blue spots in the neck region. Juvenile slow worms (also born live) are unmistakeable: gold or silver above with very dark sides, belly, and vertebral stripe. Slow worms primarily feed on slugs and earthworms.
See Appendix 1 for images of both species.
Applied Ecology Ltd 3
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
2 METHODS
2.1 CAPTURE AND RELEASE
Reptile capture and release work began on 28 April 2008, subsequent to the compartmentalisation using reptile proof fencing of six areas of grassland (hereafter referred to as compartments) on the Queensway North site (Appendix 2).
Capture
In order to capture reptiles, tiles of roofing felt measuring 1 m x 0.5 m were laid out inside all six compartments. Tiles were also placed at roughly 5m intervals around the outer perimeter of each compartment to collect reptiles from the habitat created between the reptile-proof fencing and the undergrowth (mostly bramble). Under suitable weather conditions these tiles provide optimal basking conditions for common lizards, slow worms, and other reptile species as they absorb and retain heat to a greater extent than other elements in the natural habitat. Reptiles congregate underneath the tiles in order to thermoregulate. As a result, by systematically lifting tiles, reptiles can be located and captured by hand. Initially, there were 846 tiles cut and positioned on site. On 13 June 2008 a further 50 tiles were added in order to improve capture rate, making up a total of 896 tiles.
Upon capture, the species, sex and age group of each individual was recorded. Juveniles were not sexed.
The entire site was checked daily by an AEL ecologist every week day from 28 April to the end of the project in September. A total of 95 separate daily reptile capture visits were completed.
Release
Both common lizards and slow worms were temporarily placed into a plastic bucket whilst the tiles in each compartment were being checked. They were then transferred to plastic storage boxes with tight-fitting hinged lids for transfer to the receptor site (see Appendix 1). The two species were kept apart in separate boxes. Cotton bags were placed into each box to provide shelter for the animals and reduce stress.
Once all tiles had been checked on each checking day, captured reptiles were taken to the receptor site. Reptiles were released in small batches at different points
Applied Ecology Ltd 4
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
around the edge of the receptor site, close to plant cover.
Reptiles were always released within the receptor site on the same day they were captured.
2.2 SURFACE VEGETATION REMOVAL
When reptiles were no longer being caught inside compartments on more than five consecutive days, phased surface vegetation clearance began using hand-operated tools under ecological superivsion. Care was taken to aovid removing any dense scrub vegetation, notably large drfits of bramble that could be considered to have the potential to support dormouse. Surface vegetartion removal took place in two phases. The first phase involved the removal of 50% of the grass vegetation from all compartments, so as to reduce the amount of cover available to reptiles and encourage them to use areas of vegetation where tiles were located. In this way the chances of capturing any remaining reptiles were improved.
Phase two began in September after total reptile captures declined to very low levels on a daily basis across the site. At this point it was decided that no further significant numbers of reptiles were present within the fenced compartments. All remaining surface vegetation inside all six compartments was cut (with the exclusion of large areas of bramble), inlcuding sapling trees.
2.3 RECEPTOR SITE MONITORING
In order to evaluate the success of the relocation project, 25 corrugated metal tins were laid out across the receptor site during the month of August. Tins measured approximately 1 m x 0.7 m and were arranged in a rough zig-zag pattern across the site, separated by a distance of approximately 20 m. The tins were checked on seven separate occasions in Seoptember in suitable weather conditions in order to determine two things: firstly, whether or not reptiles were continuing to use the site after relocation; and secondly, to provide an indication of popualtion size. Individual reptiles were not sexed during monitoring, as when large numbers of reptiles were encountered under tins they dispersed very quickly, leaving insufficient time capture them all.
Applied Ecology Ltd 5
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
3 DATA ANALYSIS
3.1 SITE-WIDE
A total of 1,426 reptiles were captured and relocated to the receptor site over a 95 day period between the dates of 6 May to 24 September 2008. There was a clear drop in the number of reptiles captured per day over the course of the project (Fig. 3.1). Daily capture totals decreased dramatically from the end of May until the beginning of July, after which the decline in numbers was more gradual (presumably because the bulk of the reptiles had been removed) (Fig. 3.1). Figure 3.1 shows clearly that average daily temperatures did not greatly influenced reptile capture rate (i.e. more reptiles were not caught on hotter days; and vice versa), suggesting that other weather variables may have had more of an effect on days when relatively few individuals were captured.
Data from 6 May 2008 to 24 September 2008
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 1 3 5 7 9 11131517192123252729313335373941434547495153555759616365676971737577798183858789919395 Day Number Total Reptiles Relocated Average Temperature (°C)
Figure 3.1 Total number of reptiles captured and average daily temperature for each day.
Applied Ecology Ltd 6
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
3.2 SPECIES-SPECIFIC
In total, 224 common lizards and 1,202 slow worms were captured and relocated, suggesting that the slow worm population on the Queensway North site far exceeded that of common lizards (Fig. 3.2). Slow worms were found under tiles with a far greater frequency than common lizards, suggesting that the discrepancy between the two species in terms of the number of individuals captured reflected a true difference in population size.
16%
84%
Common lizards Slow worms
Figure 3.2 Proportion of all reptiles captured made up by each species.
3.3 COMPARTMENT-SPECIFIC
The total captures for each compartment (Fig. 3.3) show clearly that the highest numbers of reptiles were caught in association with compartments 1 and 6. This is unsurprising, as these were the two largest compartments and also offered the best reptile habitat in the form of rank and well-lit grassland. A better idea of reptile density in each compartment can be obtained by looking at the number of reptiles caught versus the number of tiles in each compartment (Fig. 3.4). Using this method it is clear that, in terms of reptile density, the six compartments are not as different as Fig. 3.3 suggests. However, even under this analysis, the highest reptile densities are associated with compartments 1, 4 and 6.
Applied Ecology Ltd 7
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
800
700
600
500
400
300 Total ReptilesCaptured
200
100
0 123456 Compartment Perimeter Inside
Figure 3.3 Total reptiles captured in association with each compartment.
2.20
2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
Mean reptiles per tile per reptiles Mean 0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00 123456 Compartment Reptiles per tile
Figure 3.4 Mean reptiles captured per tile in association with each compartment.
3.4 SEX AND AGE GROUPS
In any capture and release program, a major aim is to relocate sufficient individuals of each sex to maintain the species in its new locale in the future. Fig. 3.5 shows the number of individuals relocated from each sex and age group. Given the presence of
Applied Ecology Ltd 8
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
small populations of both species on the receptor site prior to introduction of animals from the Queensway North site, the data in Fig. 3.5 is very reassuring, as it shows that large numbers of male and female individuals of both species have been moved. It is of note that, in both species, the sex ratio appears to be skewed in favour of females.
Fig. 3.5 suggests that very few juvenile common lizards were captured. This is not so surprising: common lizards give birth in late summer, so juveniles would only have started to appear towards the end of the project. Juvenile and sub-adult common lizards appear to lie on a continuum in terms of their size, so determining one from the other is not easy. This may also help to explain the apparent lack of captured juvenile common lizards as some may have been classed as sub-adults. Slow worms appeared to have much clearer size differences relating to the three age categories.
700
600
500
400
300 Total captured
200
100
0 AM AF SM SF J Age/Sex Common lizards Slow worms
Key to groups: AM = Adult male; AF = Adult female; SM = Sub-adult male; SF = Sub-adult female; J = Juvenile.
Figure 3.5 Number of individuals of both species captured from each sex and age group.
3.5 RECEPTOR SITE
Data from monitoring reptile numbers on the receptor site are shown in Table 3.1. It is clear that both species are still present on the site and that all age classes are represented. The fact that several tins were devoid of any reptiles on each monitoring day suggests that the site has yet to reach carrying capacity for reptiles,
Applied Ecology Ltd 9
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
although this will be monitored going forward.
Table 3.1 Total number of individuals (of each age group, for both species) observed underneath tiles for each day of monitoring.
No. No. No. No. empty Day Species Adults Sub-adults Juveniles tins (of 25) CL 9 0 3 1 6 SW 23 15 11 CL 1 0 4 2 8 SW 21 14 12 CL 7 1 2 3 12 SW 7 11 11 CL 0 0 1 4 11 SW 17 11 16 CL 0 0 7 5 10 SW 16 11 15 CL 2 0 5 6 13 SW 6 6 9 CL 0 1 0 7 16 SW 8 2 7
Key: CL = common lizard; SW = slow worm
Applied Ecology Ltd 10
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
4 SUMMARY
4.1 PROJECT EVALUATION
A total of 1,426 reptiles were successfully captured and relocated over the 95 day capture period from the QWN site. Towards the end of this time period, reptile numbers declined significantly across the site, suggesting strongly that the majority of individual animals had been captured from within the fenced compartments.
Monitoring of the receptor site has confirmed that, according to Froglife assessment criteria, the site supported an exceptional population of slow worm2 and a good population of common lizard3 as of September 2008, but the site had far from reached its potential reptile carrying capacity. Monitoring of the receptor site reptile population in September 2009 and beyond will verify any change in the population status of both species, and its breeding status.
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Prior to the onset of construction operations it is recommended that the grassland within the six fenced compartments is maintained as short-turf sward by regular mowing during the growing season March-October. It is recommended that the grass is cut at least once a month during this period in order to maintain the areas as habitat that is unattractive to reptiles and minimise the risk of reptile re-colonisation. The reptile fencing around the perimeter of each compartment should be kept in place for the duration of this time period, but all compartment internal reptile fencing should be removed to enable the mowing machinery easy access around the site, and prevent small localised areas of long grass developing along the internal fence lines.
Removal of the internal fencing and the first grass cutting completed in March 2009 should be supervised by an ecologist.
2 >20 individual slow worm seen by observation and/or under tins placed at a density of up to 10 per hectare) by one person in one day 3 5-10 individual common lizard seen by observation and/or under tins placed at a density of up to 10 per hectare) by one person in one day
Applied Ecology Ltd 11
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
Appendix 1
Illustrative Photographs
Applied Ecology Ltd 12
[intentionally blank] Supervised reptile proof fence construction Constructed reptile proof fence around compartment (compartment no. 6) April 2008. no. 4 - April 2008.
Adult common lizards on a felt. Juvenile slow worms under felt.
Adult slow worm under felt. Slow worm transportation box.
Queensway North - Reptile Translocation 2008 Illustrative photographs (sheet 1 of 2) QWN compartment no. 2 cleared of surface vegeta- Receptor site (former grazing/hay pasture) located 17 tion by hand mowing in September 2008. Note bram- miles from QWN in the High Weald AONB - ble drift within the compartment left undisturbed. September 2008.
One of 25 permanent monitoring stations (tins) Adult slow worms under tin in receptor site - within the receptor site - September 2008. September 2008.
Adult slow worms under tin in receptor site - Juvenile (born 2008) common lizard on monitoring September 2008. tin in receptor site - September 2008.
Queensway North - Reptile Translocation 2008 Illustrative photographs (sheet 2 of 2)
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
Appendix 2
Queensway North Compartment Plan
Applied Ecology Ltd 13
[intentionally blank]
Reptile Capture and Release Project Queensway North
Applied Ecology Ltd 14 North Queensway Business Park Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Appendices
Appendix B.4 : Ecology Update
[intentionally blank]
QUEENSWAY NORTH HASTINGS, SUSSEX
ECOLOGY UPDATE
Report for
East Sussex Energy Infrastructure and Development Limited
January 2012
Client: East Sussex Energy Infrastructure and Development Limited
Title: Queensway North, Hastings, Sussex – Ecology Update
Project No: AEL 052
Date of Issue: 09 January 2012
Status: Final
Signed on behalf of Applied Ecology Ltd:
Dr Duncan Painter Director
CONTACT DETAILS:
APPLIED ECOLOGY LTD St. John's Innovation Centre Cowley Road Cambridge CB4 0WS
Tel: 01223 422 116 Fax: 01223 420 844 Mobile: 07725 811 777 Email: [email protected]
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
Contents 1 Introduction ...... 2 1.1 Background...... 2 1.2 Current Survey ...... 3 2 Survey Approach...... 4 2.1 Walkover Survey...... 4 3 Survey Findings ...... 5 3.1 Habitats ...... 5 3.2 Protected Species...... 5 3.3 Badger...... 5 3.4 Dormouse...... 6 3.5 Reptiles ...... 7 4 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 8 4.1 Conclusions...... 8 4.2 Recommendations...... 8
Applied Ecology Ltd
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Previous Ecology Assessment
1.1.1 In July 2006 Applied Ecology Ltd (AEL) was commissioned by Sea Space to undertake an ecological appraisal of a proposed development site at Queensway North, Hastings, Sussex. This initial appraisal included a review of existing biological records, a Phase 1 Habitat survey and a protected species walkover of the site. These surveys were undertaken by AEL on the 31 July 2006 and reported in August 20061.
1.1.2 In 2006 the site was found to support a range of semi-natural habitats, notably broadleaved woodland (including some of semi-natural ancient character), semi- improved, infrequently managed neutral grassland and substantial areas of mixed woody and bramble scrub. A full badger survey of physically accessible land areas was also undertaken as part of the protected species walkover, and confirmed that badgers were active in the local area, as indicated by the presence of badger paths, signs of foraging and dung pits/latrines.
1.1.3 Follow-up protected animal species surveys were subsequently completed over the period September 2006 – October 20072. The key findings from these surveys were as follows:
- Evidence of badger commuting across the site and utilising grassland areas within the site for foraging and two disused outlying badger setts;
- Dormouse present in semi-natural broadleaved woodland and scrub habitats across the site;
- Moderate levels of bat activity and the suspected presence of common pipistrelle bats roosting on or near to the site;
- An assemblage of breeding birds of “local” importance (43 breeding species recorded);
1 Applied Ecology Ltd (2006) Queensway North, Hasting, Sussex: A Preliminary Ecological Assessment Report. An unpublished report to Sea Space. August 2006. 2 Applied Ecology Ltd (2007) Queensway North, Hasting, Sussex: Ecology Baseline Report. Issued to Sea Space on 12 November 2007.
Applied Ecology Ltd 2
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
- Ponds on, or near to, the site that supported a medium sized population of palmate newts but NOT great crested newts;
- Three common reptile species were present across the site: ‘exceptional’ populations of both common lizard and slow-worm; and a ‘small’ population of grass snake.
Previous Ecology Mitigation
Reptile Translocation
1.1.4 AEL was commissioned by Sea Space, in 2008, to undertake a reptile capture and release programme in order to clear reptiles from all areas of reptile-friendly grassland habitat within the site in advance of development related site clearance operations commencing. Reptiles capture and release ran from the end of April until the end of September 2008 (95 capture visits in total), and resulted in 1,426 reptiles being relocated to a receptor site in the High Weald, 17 miles from the Queensway North site.
1.1.5 Following confirmation that all reptiles had been cleared from the site, a programme of regular mowing of the areas originally suitable for reptiles was implemented in order to prevent reptiles from recolonising the site.
1.2 CURRENT SURVEY
1.2.1 In December 2011, AEL was commissioned by East Sussex Energy Infrastructure and Development Limited (hereafter referred to as ESEIDL), to undertake an update ecological appraisal of the Queensway North site.
1.2.2 The results of this update survey are discussed in the remainder of this report.
Applied Ecology Ltd 3
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
2 SURVEY APPROACH
2.1 WALKOVER SURVEY
2.1.1 An ecological walkover survey of the Queensway North site was completed on 12 December 2011 by Dr Duncan Painter (CEnv MIEEM) and Dr Martin Brammah (MIEEM) with the specific aim of identifying any significant changes on site, in terms of ecology, relative to the findings of the previous survey.
2.1.2 The entire site was surveyed and changes in habitat distribution and field evidence of protected species were noted. The survey was undertaken in dry and sunny weather conditions, with a total of four hours spent by DP and MB completing the survey.
2.1.3 Specific searches were also made for the presence of wooden dormouse nest boxes that were erected in a grid pattern across the site (50 boxes put up in total) in 2009 to enable the dormouse population to be monitored to inform a future Natural England dormouse licence application to legally enable the future clearance of dormouse habitat in relation to future development planning. Following their erection, the boxes were never re-visited as work on QWN was put on hold.
Applied Ecology Ltd 4
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
3 SURVEY FINDINGS
3.1 HABITATS
3.1.1 Overall, the habitat types present within the QWN site boundary remained unchanged from the 2007 survey2, with the site being dominated by broadleaved semi-natural woodland with dense scrub and semi-improved neutral grassland. There were, however, small changes in the distribution of habitat types on site with the balance between semi-improved grassland and dense scrub changing in relation to past mowing management and management neglect which are showon on an updated Phase 1 Habitat map provided in Appendix 1 of this report.
3.1.2 A small stand of the invasive alien plant Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica was recorded previously at an entrance onto the site from an adjoining mobile home park to the west. This stand of plants was still evident on site in 2011, and had not appeared to have spread.
3.2 PROTECTED SPECIES
3.2.1 As highlighted above, most of the habitats on site were largely unchanged since they were last surveyed in 2006-2007, and it is reasonable to assume that the list of protected animal species reported in the 2007 survey2 as being present (or likely to be present) is still valid.
3.2.2 In light of the current development proposals, however, three species/species groups require additional attention to inform planning, these being badger, dormouse and reptiles.
3.3 BADGER
3.3.1 Two mammal-dug holes of a size consistent with badger were found within an embankment situated in broad-leaved woodland within the site (TQ 78472 12355). Both holes lacked any associated evidence of badger occupation, and did not possess badger hair in either the spoil or tunnel soil. One of the holes appeared to be occupied at the time by fox. For the purposes of development planning, both holes should be treated as disused outlying badger setts.
3.3.2 The previously identified disused badger outlying setts in an embankment at TQ 78650 12424 & TQ 78662 12335 were both inaccessible due to dense bramble growth and could not be reached during the current survey.
Applied Ecology Ltd 5
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
3.4 DORMOUSE
3.4.1 ESEIDL has expressed a desire to carry out select vegetation clearance within the site to be able to demarcate the locations of proposed development platforms. This would involve the clearance of predominantly bramble scrub in certain areas of the site. In addition ESEIDL would like to remove a number of trees from the plantation woodland in the east of the site for similar reasons.
3.4.2 Given that such clearance vegetation could potentially have a negative impact on the resident dormouse population, these works would almost certainly need to be carried out under the auspices of a European Protected Species licence issued by Natural England.
3.4.3 The only means by which clearance could take place without the need for a licence would be if the extent of the clearance was of a sufficiently small scale that the likelihood of committing an offence would be negligible. The amount of vegetation clearance that qualifies as ‘small scale’ is highly subjective and would therefore have to be agreed on site between AEL and ESEIDL. In addition, some form of official documentation outlining the agreed approach would ideally need to be provided to Natural England and the Local Planning Authority to justify any decision to not apply for a licence.
3.4.4 Vegetation has been cleared previously on a small scale within the Queensway North site before, without the need for a dormouse licence. This took place in 2007 to enable ground investigations on site to test soil conditions and sink boreholes to enable ground water levels and quality to be monitored. A plan showing the location of the ground investigations was revised following a meeting between AEL and the project engineers. This was then used as the basis for mitigation discussions between AEL, the project engineers, Natural England, Sussex Wildlife Trust, and Murray Davidson (Hastings Borough Council’s Ecologist) to agree the proposed work. Care was taken to minimise vegetation and habitat connectivity loss, and the approach was approved3 and vegetation clearance went ahead as planned.
3 Applied Ecology (2007) Queensway North Ground Investigation – Mitigation Approach. Issued to Sea Space on 30 July 2007.
Applied Ecology Ltd 6
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
3.5 REPTILES
3.5.1 Following the reptile capture and re-location work implemented in 2008, the reptile-proof fencing that was used to compartmentalise the areas of suitable reptile habitat across the site was taken down in places to enable mowers to access the site. The mowing regime has since stopped (the exact date is unknown), and as a result the old compartments are currently open to reptile colonisation. This, along with vegetation over-growth from surrounding land means that reptiles could conceivably have re-colonised the previously cleared areas, albeit in densities lower than those seen prior to the capture and release programme in 2008, and further survey is needed to verify reptile presence/absence.
Applied Ecology Ltd 7
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 CONCLUSIONS
4.1.1 Overall the habitat ands protected species interest of the Queensway North site remains largely as described previously, with small scale changes in habitat distribution being recorded as a result of recent grassland mowing activity and more recent management neglect and scrub encroachment.
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Badger
4.2.1 Despite the fact that a new outlying badger sett was identified by the current survey, there was no evidence of significant badger occupation and use of the site, and as such it would appear that the overall levels of badger activity are unchanged from the previous report. However, it remains important that a watching brief for badger setts is maintained during future construction related site clearance as scrub habitat could easily mask a sett.
Dormouse
4.2.2 In 2009 AEL installed 50 wooden dormouse boxes across the site in order to estimate the size of the resident dormouse population and inform a future licence application.
4.2.3 During the current survey, AEL confirmed that these boxes are still in place and should be used to monitor dormouse presence on site and assess the size of dormouse population size as originally intended but never implemented as a dormouse licence will ultimately be required for development of the site (irrespective of the short-term proposals in terms of vegetation clearance)
Reptiles
4.2.4 A full reptile survey of all reptile-friendly habitats on site is required to determine whether or not reptiles have recolonised the areas from which they were translocated in 2008. Once the distribution and population density of reptiles across the site has been established, appropriate mitigation advice can be given as necessary.
Applied Ecology Ltd 8
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
Appendix 1
Updated Phase 1 Habitat Map
Applied Ecology Ltd
[intentionally blank] Queensway Phase I Habitat Map
M1 M4 M2 SSSSIIII SSSSIIII Key: 3 SSSSIIIIM 5 Broadleaved semi-natural woodland SSSSIIIIM SSSSIIII Broadleaved plantation woodland 1 SSSSIIII Mixed plantation woodland SSSSIIII SSIISSSSIIII Dense scrub M9 M8 SSII SSSSIIII Dense scrub/tall ruderal M11 MSS7II SSI Semi-improved neutral grassland SSSSIIII SI SSSIII SSI Semi-improved grassland/tall ruderal X SSSSIIIIX Continuous bracken SSSIII SSII M6 X X SSSSIIII12 XSSSIII Tall ruderal M X SSSIIIX X SSII AA X M10 Amenity grassland SSSSIIIISSSIII X SSIIIIS X Hardstanding XX XX SSSIIISSIXX X X Scattered scrub XX IIX S SI Study area M Target notes (13)
Date of survey: 12 December 2011 Job reference no: M13 0052 Status: Final Drawn by: LJB Checked by: RH
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
Appendix 2
Phase 1 Habitat Target Notes
Applied Ecology Ltd
[intentionally blank]
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
1. Track crossing through embankment.
2. Dense bramble Rubus fruticosus scrub around 1.5m high with occasional scattered woody scrub comprising of young tree species, including ash Fraxinus excelsior and oak Quercus robur. Occasional nettle Urtica dioica and creeping thistle Cirsium arvense also occurred among the bramble.
3. Relatively young (probably 15-20 years old) broadleaved plantation woodland situated on a plateau at the top of a scrub dominated road embankment. The woodland comprised of even-aged field maple Acer campestre, sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus (natural regeneration), hawthorn Crataegus mongyna and ash Fraxinus excelsior.
4. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland dominated by young/semi-mature oak Quercus robur and ash Fraxinus excelsior, with rarely occurring apple Malus sylvestris. The table below provides a list of the plant species recorded from the ground layer together with the relative abundance of each species.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Rubus fruticosus agg. bramble Abundant Dryopteris dilatata broad buckler-fern Occasional Galium aparine cleavers Occasional Geranium robertianum herb-robert Occasional Hedera helix ivy Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Occasional Rumex sanguineus wood dock Occasional Urtica dioica common nettle Occasional Epilobium montanum broad-leaved willowherb Rare Hypericum androsaemum tutsan Rare
5. Unmanaged semi-improved neutral grassland (50-60cm high) with patches of bramble Rubus fruticosus scrub and scattered young trees/woody scrub throughout. Although the grassland was unmanaged, select rabbit grazing has maintained some short sward grassland areas. The table below lists the plant species recorded together with the relative abundance of each species according to the DAFOR scale.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Festuca rubra red fescue Abundant Agrostis capillaris common bent Frequent Anthoxanthum odoratum sweet vernal-grass Frequent Dactylis glomerata cock's-foot Frequent
Applied Ecology Ltd
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
Centaurea nigra common knapweed Occasional Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Occasional Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Occasional Lathyrus pratensis meadow vetchling Occasional Lotus corniculatus common bird's-foot-trefoil Occasional Plantago lanceolata ribwort plantain Occasional Rumex acetosa common sorrel Occasional Stellaria graminea lesser stitchwort Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Rare Ranunculus acris meadow buttercup Rare Taraxacum officinale agg. dandelion Rare
6. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland situated on an area of undulating topography. The woodland is dominated by mature oak Quercus robur with occasional ash Fraxinus excelsior (including some mature coppice), elm Ulmus species, field maple Acer campestre, sweet chestnut Castinea sativa, elder Sambucus nigra, hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, holly Ilex aquifolium, hazel Corylus avellana and honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum. The ground flora is relatively sparse, but includes occasional bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta, dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis, broad buckler-fern Dryopteris dilatata, ground ivy Glechoma hederacea and ivy Hedera helix.
7. Unmanaged, rank semi-improved neutral grassland with conspicuous tall ruderal and woody scrub component. The table below lists the plant species recorded together with the relative abundance of each species according to the DAFOR scale.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Abundant Festuca rubra red fescue Abundant Fraxinus excelsior (sapl.) ash Frequent Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Frequent Plantago lanceolata ribwort plantain Frequent Ranunculus repens creeping buttercup Frequent Rubus fruticosus agg. bramble Frequent Urtica dioica common nettle Frequent Agrostis capillaris common bent Occasional Anthoxanthum odoratum sweet vernal-grass Occasional Centaurea nigra common knapweed Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Occasional Rumex crispus curled dock Occasional Vicia tetrasperma smooth tare Occasional Equisetum arvense field horsetail Rare Lotus corniculatus common bird's-foot-trefoil Rare Poa pratensis smooth meadow-grass Rare
Applied Ecology Ltd
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
Quercus robur (sapl.) pedunculate oak Rare Senecio jacobaea common ragwort Rare Stellaria graminea lesser stitchwort Rare Trifolium repens white clover Rare Veronica chamaedrys germander speedwell Rare
8. Fringe of dense woody scrub comprised of bramble Rubus fruticosus, nettle Urtica dioica, hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, creeping thistle Cirsium arvense and blackthorn Prunus spinosa.
9. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland dominated by semi-mature oak Quercus robur and hazel Corylus avellana coppice, with occasional holly Ilex aquifolium and blackthorn Prunus spinosa. The ground flora is sparse with scattered dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis, bramble Rubus fruticosus and ivy Hedera helix.
10. Young broadleaved semi-natural woodland (doesn’t appear to be of plantation origin) with ash Fraxinus excelsior, oak Quercus robur and wild cherry Prunus avium. The ground flora comprised of dense bramble Rubus fruticosus and nettle Urtica dioica. Some small patches of semi-improved grassland occurred within the woodland.
11. A spreading stand of Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica, along the residential fence-line.
12. Unmanaged semi-improved neutral grassland, dominated by rank false-oat grass Arrhenatherum elatius. The table below lists the plant species recorded together with the relative abundance of each species according to the DAFOR scale.
Latin name English name Relative abundance Arrhenatherum elatius false oat-grass Dominant Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Frequent Fraxinus excelsior (sapl.) ash Frequent Dactylis glomerata cock's-foot Occasional Festuca rubra red fescue Occasional Heracleum sphondylium hogweed Occasional Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Occasional Rumex acetosa common sorrel Occasional Rumex crispus curled dock Occasional Senecio jacobaea common ragwort Occasional Urtica dioica common nettle Occasional Quercus robur (sapl.) pedunculate oak Rare
Applied Ecology Ltd
Queensway North, Hastings Ecology Update Report
13. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland with possible old (ancient?) woodland ditch boundary features. The woodland is dominated mature standard oak Quercus robur and hazel Corylus avellana coppice stools, together with occasional holly Ilex aquifolium, field maple Acer campestre, elder Sambucus nigra, ash Fraxinus excelsior and hornbeam Carpinus betulus. The ground flora included patches of dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis and bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta, with occasional plants of enchanter's-nightshade Circaea lutetiana, nettle Urtica dioica and broad buckler-fern Dryopteris dilatata.
Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway Business Park Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Appendices
Appendix B.5 : Survey Report
[intentionally blank] North Queensway, Hastings
2012 Survey Report
Produced for Sea Change Sussex By Applied Ecology Ltd October 2012 Document Control:
Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by 1.0 3.10.12 Final RJH DP DP Prepared for: Sea Change Sussex Title: North Queensway, Hastings 2012 Survey Report Project nummber: 0052 Document version: 1.0 Document status: Final Document date: 3 October 2012 Signed on behalf of Applied Ecology Ltd:
Dr Duncan Painter Director APPLIED ECOLOGY LTD St. John's Innovation Centre Cowley Road Cambridge CB4 0WS Tel: 01223 422 116 Fax: 01223 420 844 Mobile: 07725 811 777 Email: [email protected] Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
Contents
Executive Summary i
1 Introduction 1 Background 1
2 Habitats 2 Approach 2 Results 2 Evaluation 2
3 Badger 4 Approach 4 Results 4 Evaluation 4
4 Dormice 5 Approach 5 Results 5 Evaluation 5
5 Bats 7 Approach 7 Results 7 Evaluation 10
6 Breeding Birds 11 Approach 11 Results 11 Evaluation 13
7 Reptiles 15 Approach 15 Results 15 Evaluation 15
8 Conclusions 17
Tables Table 5.1: Results of the bat transect survey – Transect A 9 Table 5.2: Results of the bat transect survey – Transect B 9 Table 5.3: Results of static bat detectors 10
03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
Table 6.1: Results of the 2007 and 2012 breeding bird surveys at North Queensway 11
Figures Figure 2.1: Phase 1 Habitat map 3 Figure 4.1: Location of dormice nest boxes 6 Figure 5.1: Bat transect survey and static detectors 8 Figure 6.1: Breeding bird survey 14 Figure 7.1: Reptile survey 16
03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
Executive Summary
A number of ecology surveys were completed by Applied Ecology Ltd in relation to future development proposals for North Queensway, Hastings. The surveys were necessary to verify and update previous (2006 2009) survey findings, and included an updated Phase 1 habitat survey, and surveys for badger, dormice, bats, breeding birds and reptiles. The key findings of the 2012 surveys are: The site is dominated by neglected semi improved grassland, dense bramble and woody scrub and broadleaved woodland. No significant changes to the habitats present have occurred since the 2007 habitat survey. Two active subsidiary badger setts, and two disused outlying setts are present within the site. Precautionary checks for badger setts will need to be completed during future site clearance of dense bramble scrub as it is not possible to be certain that other low status setts do not occur in bramble habitat. Dormice are present in woodland and scrub habitats across the site, although the majority of the habitats present are likely less valuable to dormice than the extensive areas of ancient woodland adjoining and surrounding the site. The site is used by common and soprano pipistrelle bats for feeding and commuting, and a suspected roost(s) of both species is thought to be located off site to the north on the basis of the 2012 bat survey work. Nyctalus bats were recorded across the site as high flying commuting individual bats only. The breeding bird assemblage has not changed significantly since 2007, with most species found to be associated with areas of mature woodland, rather than grassland and bramble scrub habitats. Two bird Species of Principal Importance in England, dunnock and song thrush, hold territories within the site. Previous reptile capture and relocation from grassland areas has been successful in clearing the site of reptiles as only two individual slow worms were recorded across the site by the 2012 reptile survey.
i 03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
1 Introduction
Background
1.1 Applied Ecology Ltd (AEL) was commissioned by Sea Change Sussex in May 2012 to complete a number of baseline ecology surveys of the North Queensway site, with the purpose of verifying and updating findings of previous survey work undertaken by AEL over the period 2006 2009. 1.2 The scope of the 2012 surveys was based on the results of a walkover survey undertaken by AEL in January 2012, and responded to a formal scoping opinion co ordinated by Hastings Borough Council (dated 27 April 2012). The surveys completed in 2012 were: Phase 1 Habitat survey – updating the Phase 1 habitat survey, including refined classification and mapping of woodland and scrub habitats. Badger – maintaining a watching brief for new badger setts while undertaking other surveys. Dormice – monitoring of fifty dormice nest boxes installed across the site in 2009. Bats – completion of a bat activity transect and static bat detector survey. Breeding birds – transect survey (single visit). Reptiles –reptile survey using artificial refugia of suitable habitat to confirm reptile presence/absence. 1.3 The remainder of this report provides details of the survey approach and results, and highlights any changes to the 2006 2009 baseline.
1 03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
2 Habitats
Approach
2.1 A survey to update the existing Phase 1 habitat survey was undertaken on the 2 and 3 May 2012. As part of the update survey, all areas of woodland and scrub within the site were classified according to a refined and bespoke classification developed by AEL to map variation not captured by the standard Phase 1 habitat classification. The types of woodland and scrub habitats recorded and mapped during the survey were: Broadleaved semi natural woodland; Poor secondary woodland; Mixed plantation woodland; Broadleaved plantation woodland; Young open tree regeneration; Dense woody scrub; Bramble scrub with occasional scrub and/or young trees; Bramble / gorse scrub with occasional scrub and/or young trees. Results
2.2 The results of the updated and refined habitat map are presented in Figure 2.1. In summary, no significant changes to the habitats present within the site had occurred since 2007, with only minor changes in the extent of scrub and grassland. Evaluation
2.3 No significant habitat changes had occurred since the 2007 Phase 1 Habitat survey and the baseline conditions described in the 2007 baseline report remain accurate and valid.
2 03 October 2012 Habita
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Habitats SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !! SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SI S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!! FigureFigure !!!!!!! Map Sca Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
3 Badger
Approach
3.1 A watching brief for evidence of badger presence within the site, including changes to existing setts and the creation of new setts, was maintained while undertaking other ecology survey work in 2012. Particular care was taken to walk the boundaries of dense bramble stands to check for mammal paths and evidence of badger that might indicate the presence of badger setts in these areas. Results
3.2 A total of four individual badger setts have been recorded within the site since 2006. Two of these setts are single hole disused outlying setts that show no evidence of recent badger use. 3.3 The third sett is located on a steep wooded earth bank at TQ 7847,1236, and currently comprises six individual holes, of which three were active, having been subject to recent badger excavation, one was partially used, and two were disused. On the basis of sett size, associated activity and the pattern of periodic use, the sett is assessed as being a subsidiary badger sett. 3.4 The fourth sett is located along a woodland strip close the sites western boundary at TQ 7843,1250. It consists of six holes, four active and two partially used, and is also assessed as being a subsidiary sett. Evaluation
3.5 Badgers are present and currently occupy two active subsidiary setts within the site. Large parts of the site are, however, physically inaccessible as a result of the presence of extensive areas of dense bramble scrub. A watching brief should be maintained to assess future changes to badger setts and the creation of new setts within the site.
4 03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
4 Dormice
Approach
4.1 Fifty dormice nest boxes were installed across the site in 2009 in order to assess dormouse population size. These have been checked on 24 May, 7 June, 1 August, and 17 September 2012. Further checks will be completed in October and November 2012. Results
4.2 The location of the nest boxes, including those with evidence of dormice occupation in 2012 is shown by Figure 4.1. 4.3 In summary, nest box checks in 2012 are on going, but to date (four out of six checks completed), two boxes (4% of the total number of nest boxes available) have been found to possess complete but unoccupied dormice nests during the August check. One of these boxes was located in a belt of semi natural woodland between the two eastern grassland clearings at TQ 7865,1248, and the second in dense bramble at TQ 7847,1243. Evaluation
4.4 Dormice have been recorded from within the site during nest tube/box surveys completed in 2006/7, 2009 and 2012. A total of 14 individual nest tubes (18% of the total number of nest tubes put out) were found to have evidence of dormice occupation in 2006/7, a single nest box (2% of the total number of nest boxes available) in 2009, and two nest boxes (4% of the total number of nest boxes available) in 2012.
5 03 October 2012 9 1 5 3 2 6 13 7 4 21 17 10
14 24 11 8 38 18 35 12 42 39 28 25 22 15
48 37 36 26 23 43 19 31 16
40 20 49 32
44 33 29 27
34 30 45
46 41 47 50
150m Key study area N dormouse nest-box
dormouse nest-box with evidence of dormouse occupa on in 2012
North Queensway, Has ngs Figure 4.1: Dormouse nest-box survey 2012 results Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
5 Bats
Approach
5.1 A bat activity survey and an overnight automated bat detector survey of the site were completed by two experienced AEL ecologists/bat surveyors on 31 July 2012. Two transect routes were established across the site to cover a representative range of habitats as shown by Figure 5.1. 5.2 Each transect was walked by a single surveyor equipped with an Anabat SD2 electronic bat detector. Both transect surveys commenced 15 minutes before sun set and continued for two hours between 20.30 and 22.30 (sun set was at 20.45). Each surveyor made regular stops along the transect to record bat activity for five minute recording periods such that approximately 50% of the survey time was spent stationary. The time and location of all bat calls heard was noted, together with details of bat species, number of individuals, behaviour (i.e. foraging, commuting) and number of bat passes, where this information was supported by visual observation. 5.3 In addition to the transect survey, four tripod mounted Anabat SD2 bat detectors were set up in different and well spaced locations across the site as shown by Figure 5.1. These detectors were left to record bat calls all night from 20.30 until five minutes after sun rise the following morning. Results
Transect Survey
5.4 The results of the transect survey are shown by Figure 5.1, and by Tables 5.1 and 5.2. In summary, three bat species were recorded from Transects A and B during the survey. These were common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus, soprano pipistrelle Pipistellus pygmaeus and Nyctalus (suspected noctule bat). 5.5 Both pipistrelle species were recorded feeding and commuting across the site. Surveyor observations and the early first recorded call times for both species indicate that a possible roost(s) of both species is located off site in residential housing to the north. No evidence of bat roosting within trees on the site was found during the survey. 5.6 No Nyctalus bats were seen, but they were occasionally heard as probable high flying and commuting individuals at times after sun set that did not indicate roosting within the site or nearby.
7 03 October 2012 TRANSECT B
6 Anabat 1 5
SP(b) 4
3 7
SP(c) 1 2 8 SP(a) TRANSECT A 9
Anabat 2 SP(b) 1 5 6 Anabat 3 8
4 9 7
2
10 SP(c)
Anabat 4 3 SP(a)
150m Key study area N transect route
SP(a) stopping point and ID
Anabat 1 anabats le to record overnight
observed bat ight paths
1 observa on reference number (see Tables 5.1 and 5.2)
North Queensway, Has ngs Figure 5.1: Bat transect survey set-up, route and results Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
Table 5.1: Results of the bat transect survey – Transect A
Minutes after Location Number of Time Species Activity sunset tag bats 20:59:00 14 1 55 pip 1 Foraging 21:09:00 24 2 45 pip Not seen 21:11:00 26 3 55 pip 1 Foraging 21:17:00 32 2 55 pip 1 Foraging 21:18:00 33 4 55 pip 1 Foraging 21:19:00 34 5 55 pip 1 Commuting 21:20:00 35 4 45 pip 1 Foraging 21:22:00 37 6 45 + 55 pip 2 Commuting 21:23:00 38 6 45 + 55 pip Not seen 21:27:00 42 1 45 pip 2 Commuting 21:28:00 43 7 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:30:00 45 3 Nyctalus Not seen 21:33:00 48 3 Nyctalus Not seen 21:35:00 50 7 Nyctalus Not seen 21:38:00 53 7 Nyctalus Not seen 21:39:00 54 1 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:42:00 57 8 55 pip Not seen 21:44:00 59 8 45 pip 1 Foraging 22:07:00 82 1 45 pip Not seen 22:17:00 92 9 45 pip Not seen 22:18:00 93 9 45 pip Not seen 22:20:00 95 1 45 pip Not seen 22:22:00 97 8 45 pip Not seen 22:24:00 99 8 45 pip Not seen 22:31:00 106 10 45 pip Not seen Table 5.2: Results of the bat transect survey – Transect B
Minutes after Location Number of Time Species Activity sunset tag bats 21:10:00 25 1 45 pip Not seen 21:11:00 26 2 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:12:00 27 2 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:13:00 28 2 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:15:00 30 2 45 pip 2 Commuting 21:16:00 31 2 45 pip 6 Commuting 21:18:00 33 3 45 pip 3 Commuting 21:21:00 36 4 45 pip Not seen 21:21:00 36 5 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:22:00 37 5 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:22:00 37 6 45 pip Not seen 21:24:00 39 6 45 pip Not seen 21:28:00 43 6 Nyctalus Not seen 21:32:00 47 7 55 pip 1 Foraging 21:33:00 48 8 Nyctalus Not seen 21:34:00 49 9 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:36:00 51 SP(c) 45 pip Not seen 21:38:00 53 SP(c) 45 pip Not seen 21:39:00 54 9 45 pip 1 Commuting 21:57:00 72 SP(a) Nyctalus Not seen
Automated Survey
5.7 The results of the four automated bat detectors left to record bat calls overnight within the site are summarised in Table 5.3. Calls of four bat species were recorded, with common
9 03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle recorded by all four detectors, Nyctalus by three of the detectors, and a Myotis species by one detector. The first recorded times of these species suggest that roosts of common and soprano pipistrelle may be located within the site or nearby, but Nyctalus and Myotis had day roosts at locations at considerable distances from the site. Table 5.3: Results of static bat detectors
First call recorded within typical emergence Calls recorded Anabat time period for the species concerned number 45 pip 55 pip Nyctalus Myotis 45 pip 55 pip Nyctalus Myotis 1 Yes Yes No Yes No No No 2 Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No 3 Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No 4 Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Evaluation
5.8 The results of the 2012 bat survey are broadly consistent with the 2007 findings, suggesting roosts of both common and soprano pipistrelle bats are present within or close to the site – most likely in existing residential housing to the north. Nyctalus bat calls were also recorded during the survey, with bats suspected as being high flying commuting bats, and no calls recorded sufficiently close to sun set or sun rise to suggest individuals were roosting within or close to the site. 5.9 Given the presence of mature trees within the North Queensway site, and the fact that bats will use and regularly switch between many known local roost sites, the presence of tree roosting bats within the site would need to be confirmed by specific survey once any tree removal proposals are known.
10 03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
6 Breeding Birds
Approach
6.1 A single transect survey visit was carried out on 24 May 2012 following the same route and methods as those in 2007 as shown by Figure 3.1. The 2007 and 2012 survey was completed by the same experienced ornithologist – Rick Goater (AEL). The objective of the 2012 survey was to make a general assessment of North Queensway’s bird population in order to recognise any significant changes that may have occurred since 2007. Results
6.2 A comparison of the 2007 and 2012 survey results is provided in Table 6.1. In summary, the 2012 survey recorded a total of 22 bird species, of which 17 species were judged to hold 88 territories within North Queensway. Two Species of Principal Importance in England were recorded, namely dunnock and song thrush, with 1 and 4 territories, respectively. Table 6.1: Results of the 2007 and 2012 breeding bird surveys at North Queensway
Estimated number of territories within the site Bird species Scientific name 2007 2012 Barn swallow Hirundo rustica X Blackbird Turdus merula 76 Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla 56 Blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus 810 Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula X Carrion crow Corvus corone XX Coal tit Periparus ater X Collared dove Streptopelia decaocto 11 Common buzzard Buteo buteo XX Common chaffinch Fringilla coelebs 63 Common chiffchaff Phylloscopus collybita 44 Common cuckoo Cuculus canorus X Common kestrel Falco tinnunculus X Common pheasant Phasianus colchicus X Common starling Sturnus vulgaris X Common swift Apus apus XX Common whitethroat Sylvia communis 1 Dunnock Prunella modularis 71 Eurasian jay Garrulus glandarius X1 Eurasian nuthatch Sitta europaea X
11 03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
Estimated number of territories within the site Bird species Scientific name 2007 2012 Eurasian sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus X Eurasian treecreeper Certhia familiaris X1 Garden warbler Sylvia borin 3 Goldcrest Regulus regulus X Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis X Great spotted woodpecker Dendrocopos major 11 Great tit Parus major 11 8 Green woodpecker Picus viridis X Greenfinch Carduelis chloris 3 House martin Delichon urbicum X House sparrow Passer domesticus X Linnet Carduelis cannabina X Long tailed tit Aegithalos caudatus X Magpie Pica pica 23 Mistle thrush Turdus viscivorus X Robin Erithacus rubecula 15 15 Rock / feral pigeon Columba livia X Rook Corvus frugilegus X Song thrush Turdus philomelos 54 Stock dove Columba oenas XX Western jackdaw Corvus monedula XX White / pied wagtail Motacilla alba X Willow warbler Phylloscopus trochilus X Wood pigeon Columba palumbus X4 Wren Troglodytes troglodytes 11 17 Total territories 86 88 Notes: X = present, but no certain territory held; bold typeface = Species of Principal Importance in England; = not recorded. 6.3 Given that only a single visit took place in 2012, it is perhaps not surprising that only approximately half the total number of species recorded in 2007 were recorded in 2012. However, the number of species confidently assessed as holding territory within the site had increased from 14 to 17, which is a small change and is not considered particularly significant. In addition, the number of territories held by each species was remarkably similar between the two years, as were the two total territory figures of 86 and 88 respectively. No Schedule 1 bird species have been recorded from the site, with two Species of Principal Importance in England record in 2007 and in 2012, namely dunnock and song thrush in both years.
12 03 October 2012 Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
Evaluation
6.4 The results of the 2007 and 2012 surveys are broadly similar and significant changes to the bird assemblage or the overall numbers of territories have not occurred over this period.
13 03 October 2012 150m Key study area N transect route
North Queensway, Has ngs Figure 6.1: Breeding bird survey transect route Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
7 Reptiles
Approach
7.1 Artificial reptile basking/shelter refugia (115, in 23 groups of five) comprising 0.5m2 sheets of bitumastic roofing felt were placed across all suitable reptile habitat – namely open grass clearings and scrub edges on 27 March 2012 as shown by Figure 7.1. Refugia were inspected on seven separate occasions during suitable weather conditions on 23, 26 and 30 April, 2, 3 and 24 May, and 7 June 2012. Results
7.2 The results of the survey are shown by Figure 7.1. In summary, a single juvenile slow worm (presumably the same individual) was seen on two separate occasions (23 and 26 April) beneath the same refugia in the eastern grassland clearing, and a single adult male slow worm was seen on one occasion (2 May) beneath a refuge in the western clearing. Evaluation
7.3 The results have confirmed that reptiles have not re colonised the grassland areas since the completion of the 2008 reptile capture and relocation, and that only very small numbers of residual reptiles remain. On this basis, further reptile translocation is not considered necessary, and a watching brief for reptiles during site clearance is considered appropriate. Impacts on reptiles are not considered further as part of this EcIA.
15 03 October 2012 150m KEY N study area
group of 5 ar fcial rep le refuges
single slow-worm found during survey
Queensway North, Has ngs Figure 7.1: Loca on of ar cial rep le refuges Applied Ecology Ltd North Queensway, Hastings – 2012 Survey Report
8 Conclusions
8.1 The results of the 2012 habitat, badger, dormice, bat, breeding bird and reptile update and verification surveys are broadly consistent with 2006 9 survey findings. This is not unexpected given habitats within the site have not changed over this period.
17 03 October 2012
© Applied Ecology Ltd, 2012 North Queensway Business Park Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Appendices
Appendix B.6 : Marline Valley SSSI Citation
! " # $ # % ! # % & ' ( % ! ) %) & # % *+ ! , $)$ ! %) %&- ) # ./+.0
#$ 1$%% %2 , & - , & & # %# $
%$ & ) ! & %# 3 4+5.** & 6605 ',0( .760+* '#0(
&)%%# &8 - , .65555 .// ..5555 3 4.
! ) '%) & ./9/ #( ./:6
! ) '%) & ./+. #( ./+: ! 8 % ./+/
, & %! &; % 1& ! , & &8 ! , < $)$ ! & 0 , = ! &; &$- >% =% &$ % )0
% ! & ! # % , %# % = )$%) % ), & $- %) = & %?& )2 $$ %) % & ) ; % ) ?- % %$$- %# ;; % = )$%) -" 0 8$ ?$ ! & ! , , " ) ) & ; 8$$ - '2,-$$( =, #, # % % "$% , ,8 % Q $% #R ) & ? %0 , $ %#$ ) % & ! " # B& #, % ;"& 8 ) 2& $%) % %$$- ) #$ % %2 ,? 0
, % %$$- %# ;; % " ) %# $ >B? &%? ; '? &#,B,C $ 8& %( = )$%) -" ) ; % , = ) 0 , & ; 8& % % # ;" % ) $ #$ ) !! & %# % )& %2 $ -" $ " %) ;%2 ; %0 , & , &- ! ;%2 ; % %) & , # "" # = ,B %)&) - ;0 , 2,-$$ , ? % #& ) ?- 8 2 & ) =%# %2 ! , & ; ,& 2, , ! %) % =, #, %) &$ , ), & #$-0 , ; %) =&; ; #& #$ ; =, #, !8 & Q $% #R "$% % = & & # ) % & % , $) %) , = ! , # %&-0
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
, & ; 8$$ - "" & :. " # ! ?&- ",- '; %) $ 8 &= & ( %#$ ) %2 7 %# ;; % Q $% #R " # & ' %) ( 0 , & "$% ! , 2,-$$ & %#$ ) ! , $) ! &% ) " %) ?& ) ? #>$ & ! &% % 0
, 2& # $ &$$- % ;"& 8 ) " & "" & " # B& #, % &$ 2& $%) !$ & ) ; % ) ?- $ & >%"= ) & ) ! # %) # ;; % ? % 0 , & " # )) %2 , % & ! , " & %#$ ) )) &R B %2 ! &% * " )- &R 2& %= ) $ D > %2 2& ( %) # ;; % " )B &#, ) % "( "0