East Cambridgeshire District County Wildlife Sites Supplementary Planning Document June 2010 © THE WILDLIFE TRUST FOR BEDFORDSHIRE, CAMBRIDGESHIRE, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE & PETERBOROUGH LTD and EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL All rights reserved. No part of the text of this publication may be reproduced, stored in any type of retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, photocopying, mechanical, recording or otherwise) without the permission of the copyright owners All mapping is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Cambridgeshire County Council 100023205 (2005). EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE DISTRICT COUNTY WILDLIFE STIES REGISTER CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 METHODOLOGY 2 2.1 Field Survey 2 2.2 Assessment of Sites 3 2.3 Output Format 3 3 RESULTS 4 3.1 Statistics 4 COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES REGISTER ANNEXE Criteria for the Selection of County Wildlife Sites Version 5 (2009). CONTENTS PAGE EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES SPD 1 Introduction 1.1 The East Cambridgeshire District Council (ECDC) County Wildlife Sites Supplementary Planning Document has been produced to update the East Cambridgeshire District County Wildlife Sites Register 2005 so that it can be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) to the East Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework (LDF). 1.2 On the 20th October 2009 East Cambridgeshire District Council adopted its Core Strategy Development Plan Document as part of its LDF. The adoption of the Core Strategy means that most of the policies in the East Cambridgeshire District Local Plan 2000 have been superceded. The East Cambridgeshire District County Wildlife Sites Register 2005 had been adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance to the East Cambridgeshire District Local Plan 2000, linked to Policy 56– Wildlife Protection. On adoption of the Core Strategy, Policy 56 of the Local Plan was replaced by Policy CS6 – Environment, and Policy EN6 - Biodiversity and Geology. As a result it has been necessary to update this document to supplement the new policies that the Core Strategy has introduced. 1.3 Project Aims and Background 1.3.1. The aim of this project is to update the East Cambridgeshire County Wildlife Sites Register 2005 and adopt the updated version as SPD to the East Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework. The study is intended to assist the Council in meeting its obligations under Planning Policy Statement 9:Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, which requires that local plan policies should be based on up to date information about the environmental characteristics of their areas, including relevant biodiversity and geological resources. The ECDC County Wildlife Sites SPD provides detailed background information, which supports Policy CS6 and Policy EN6 of the East Cambridgeshire District Council Core Strategy DPD, and ensures that these policies are based on up to date information about the environmental characteristics of the area, including relevant biodiversity and geological sources. Development proposals on County Wildlife Sites will be assessed against Policy CS6 and Policy EN6. 1.3.2. The East Cambridgeshire District County Wildlife Sites Register 2005 completed a full re- survey of 74 out of the 78 County Wildlife Sites (CWS) located in the District of East Cambridgeshire, at that time, in order to provide updated information for the East Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework. These sites were originally identified through the Cambridgeshire County Habitat Survey undertaken between 1992 and 1997. However, by 2005 changes had occurred to some sites, both through changes to land use and changes in management. There was therefore a need to review both the status and boundaries of sites to ensure that the Local Development Framework would be based on reliable and up-to-date information. A number of new sites were also surveyed. The only sites not surveyed were the four main river sites, The River Lark and associated habitat, the Little River Ouse, the River Cam and the River Great Ouse. The criteria for such river sites were in the process of being reviewed. 1.3.3. In addition, to inform the 2005 project, a limited review of the County Wildlife Site Selection Criteria was undertaken. The CWS selection criteria were developed during the 1990’s and are substantially based on Guidelines for Selection of Biological SSSIs published by the Nature Conservancy Council (succeeded by English Nature, now Natural England) in 1989. It is necessary to update the criteria from time to time to reflect increased scientific knowledge and the changing status of species and habitats within the country and county. 1.3.4. By 2005, the original criteria were 10 years old and in need of updating in several areas, based on new information that has become available. The main focus of this work was a review of Nationally Scarce and County Rare vascular plant lists, as well as the development of new criteria for veteran trees. Both existing CWS and a limited number of potential new CWS were assessed against these revised criteria (County Wildlife Sites Selection Criteria, Version 4.2,2005). 1 EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES SPD 1.3.5. The 2005 project did not aim to undertake a full review of all the County Wildlife Site Selection Criteria, or to assess all sites against all the criteria. Sites were mainly assessed against the habitat and vascular plant criteria (section 1-6 of the Selection Criteria), with only a handful of sites assessed against the fauna criteria. The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Biological Records Centre is in the process of collating biological records for a wide range of taxonomic groups. As this work proceeds it will become possible to assess more sites, particularly against the lower plant and fauna criteria (sections 7– 11 of the Selection Criteria). This is likely to result in the identification of new County Wildlife Sites as well as existing sites qualifying under multiple criteria. 1.3.6. The CWS criteria have been updated since 2005. The latest update, County Wildlife Sites Selection Guidelines, Version 5, 2009, is attached as an annex to this document. (It should be noted that all sites in this document have been assessed against County Wildlife Selection Criteria, Version 4.2 but that the updated selection criteria are attached as an Appendix as these are the criteria that will be used to assess County Wildlife Sites in the District in the future.) 1.3.7. The list of current approved CWS is prepared and maintained by the Wildlife Trust and shared with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Biological Records Centre (CPBRC) in conjunction with the CWS Panel. The CWS Register is updated at least annually. CWS Panel members are: . Cambridge City Council . Cambridgeshire County Council . ECDC . Environment Agency . Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group . Fenland District Council . Forestry Commission . Huntingdonshire District Council . Natural England . Peterborough City Council . South Cambridgeshire District Council 2 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Field Survey 2.1.1 In the four years prior to 2005 22 County Wildlife Sites had been surveyed, leaving 56 sites to re- survey in the 2005 field season. The main objectives of the surveys were the verification of the qualifying criteria for each site (each site to be assessed as to whether they still qualified under the updated CWS selection criteria) and the checking and if necessary amendment of site boundaries. Finally, the surveys provided an opportunity to review management practices for the sites. 2.1.2 The field survey was carried out during the period May to July 2005 with survey work timetabled so that sites were visited at the optimum time for their botanical interest, i.e. woodlands surveyed in May and grassland sites in July. All owners were initially contacted by letter to request access permission and explain the purpose of the survey. This was then followed by a courtesy phone call confirming arrangements close to the time of visit. 2.1.3 When on site the surveyor explored the site to determine and map visually distinct plant communities and habitat types. The habitat classification scheme employed was essentially the NCC Phase 1 scheme with individual communities being further identified within the broad habitats defined in that system. The National Vegetation Classification (NVC) was also employed for those habitats for which an NVC community is relevant in the CWS criteria or where it seemed possible that a site might qualify as a CWS under an NVC habitat criterion. A physical description was written 2 EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL COUNTY WILDLIFE SITES SPD for the habitats and vegetation communities within each site. Detailed vascular plant species lists were compiled for each distinct habitat/community and an estimate of abundance for each species present was made using the standard DAFOR scale (Dominant, Abundant, Frequent, Occasional, Rare). In addition to the standard Phase 2 data recorded, other information was gathered about each site including, notes on current management, other features of interest e.g. for fauna, casual observations of animals and potential interest for other groups requiring further data collection / collation. 2.2 Assessment of Sites 2.2.1. Following the field survey and data collation all sites were objectively assessed against the Cambridgeshire County Wildlife Selection Criteria Version 4.2. The initial assessment was carried out by the field surveyor and then reviewed by the Wildlife Trust’s Conservation Manager. 2.2.2. The only sites not surveyed were the four main river sites, The River Lark and associated habitat, the Little River Ouse, the River Cam and the River Great Ouse. The criteria for such river sites were in the process of being reviewed. It was therefore considered more appropriate to wait for the publication of these newly revised criteria before undertaking a new survey of these sites.