Paul Sizeland SNH 10 May 2017 #Ecocolife the Project Background …

ialeUK STUDENT WORKSHOP 2017

Modelling in landscape ecology: new directions A Practitioners perspective

Paul Sizeland SNH 10 May 2017 #EcoCoLife The project background …

“Implementation of integrated habitat networks to improve ecological coherence across the Central Scotland Green Network” Background

• EU LIFE+ funded project; September 2014 – August 2018 • Partners; SNH (“coordinating beneficiary”), and RSPB, SEPA, SWT, Buglife, Butterfly Conservation, East Ayrshire Coalfield Environment Initiative • £2.3M for habitat restoration / creation within Central Scotland Green Network area to improve ecological coherence 50/50 match funding • “improved ecological coherence” aims to improve habitat and species resilience, and contribute to wider ecosystem services • “ecological coherence protocol” (ECP) to test sites , target action in the best possible places , to maximise socio-economic and ecological benefits • habitat mapping and modelling, bringing science and stakeholders together • a number of sites / management zones already identified, mainly post industrial with new zones to identify using the ECP • 4 broad habitat types; peatland, wetlands, freshwater and open mosaic habitats Background

“Ecological coherence is a legally-defined term that lacks any clear conceptual or empirical basis in ecological science. Its definition, assessment and implementation are directly linked to the statutory duties associated with the designation and management of Natura 2000 sites, i.e. Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation” (Catchpole, R. 2013)

The project’s adopted view … Ecological Coherence - A working definition; In summary, these are: • Dispersal, migration, genetic exchange between sites • Resilience to disturbance or damage (natural or man-made)

And maybe: • Include critical areas for rare, threatened + endemic species

In general: • ‘more, bigger, better, and better connected’ Ecological Coherence elements:

• Patch size • Biological diversity • Connectivity; structural and functional (networks) • Ecological functionality • Presence of endangered, rare or endemic species

Ecological Coherence qualitative assessment:

A model approach • Identification of source areas • Least-cost connectivity Habitat analysis to map Networks networks • Low, medium and high dispersal distances • Identification of source areas • Least-cost connectivity Habitat analysis to map Networks networks • Low, medium and high dispersal distances Opportunity Areas

• Locations where an action is feasible • Parameters include elevation, slope, land-use, land unit size, proximity to water courses, water levels … • Accessible nature • Identification of • Education source areas • Green travel • Least-cost • Carbon storage connectivity • Local climate Habitat analysis to map regulation Networks networks • Air purification • Low, medium and • Noise regulation high dispersal • Water distances purification Ecosystem Opportunity • Pollination Services Areas

• Locations where an action is feasible • Parameters include elevation, slope, land-use, land unit size, proximity to water courses, water level … The best places to work • Accessible nature for people and wildlife • Identification of • Education source areas • Green travel • Least-cost • Carbon storage connectivity • Local climate Habitat analysis to map regulation Networks networks • Air purification • Low, medium and • Noise regulation high dispersal • Water purification distances • Pollination Ecosystem Opportunity Services Areas

• Locations where an action is feasible • Parameters include elevation, slope, land-use, land unit size, proximity to water courses, water levels …

Central Scotland Green Network

A case study Inner Forth Black Devon Wetlands

Central Scotland Green Network

Lowlands Wetlands creation Black Devon wetlands, Clackmannanshire; RSPB

Habitat Networks

Ecosystem Services

Ecosystem Services Service Environmental capacity Regulatory demand and societal needs indicators indicators Accessible nature Site accessibility, perceived Health, Index of Multiple Deprivation, likelihood naturalness of use Education Site accessibility, habitat Number of young people, education, Index of diversity Multiple Deprivation, distance from schools Green travel Perceived naturalness, Cost distance from origin and destination travel access routes locations. Carbon storage Carbon content per habitat All assumed to have demand

Local climate regulation Cover of woodland Urban areas and domestic houses. Population at risk from heat events. Air purification Purification score per Road type, sealed surfaces, population, health habitat Index of Multiple Deprivation. Noise regulation Regulation score per habitat Predicted noise levels (cumulative), population, health Index of Multiple Deprivation Water purification Roughness score, slope Soil erosion risk, pollution risk, distance to water angle courses. Pollination Pollinator visitation Distance to arable, orchards and allotments. likelihood Ecosystem Services Service Environmental capacity Regulatory demand and societal needs indicators indicators Accessible nature Site accessibility, perceived Health, Index of Multiple Deprivation, likelihood naturalness of use Education Site accessibility, habitat Number of young people, education, Index of diversity Multiple Deprivation, distance from schools Green travel Perceived naturalness, Cost distance from origin and destination travel access routes locations. Carbon storage Carbon content per habitat All assumed to have demand

Opportunity areas

Inner Forth Opportunity areas;

• Lowland wetland conservation • Riparian buffer strip conservation • Mires (peatlands) conservation • OMH conservation • OMH conservation – grasslands • Lowland wetland creation • Floodplain wetlands creation • Riparian buffer strip creation • River restoration (in channel) • River restoration adjacent land • Peatlands – ditch blocking • Peatlands tree removal • OMH creation • Green roof creation • Green roof creation – grasslands Inner Forth Opportunity areas;

Lowlands Wetlands creation Black Devon wetlands, Clackmannanshire; RSPB

Inner Forth Opportunity areas;

A few more examples … Cambus Pools, Clackmannanshire; SWT Opportunity; lowland wetland conservation

Cambus Pools, Clackmannanshire; SWT Opportunity; lowland wetland conservation

Bog restoration on the Slamannan Plateau Fannyside Muir, North Lanarkshire; Buglife

Bog restoration Airds Moss East Ayrshire; EACEI

Wetlands creation Whitesands Quarry, East Lothian; RSPB

Restoring a coastal quarry site with RSPB & tarmac Wetlands creation Whitesands Quarry, East Lothian; RSPB

Restoring a coastal quarry site with RSPB & tarmac Peatland restoration on National Nature Reserves Flanders Moss and Blawhorn Moss; SNH

Peatland restoration on National Nature Reserves Flanders Moss and Blawhorn Moss; SNH Habitat enhancement in Freshwater Glazert Catchment; SEPA

Habitat enhancement in Freshwater Glazert Catchment; SEPA

At CSGN scale (Eunis land cover maps)

At CSGN scale – river restoration adjacent land

Opportunity maps (without ecosystem services) across all CSGN for;

• lowland wetland creation • riparian buffer strip creation • river restoration - in stream • River restoration - adjacent land • peatland restoration by ditch blocking • peatland restoration by tree removal • open mosaic habitat creation • green roof creation

No easy answers …

• Establishing the priority - the “best place” habitats vs species vs people – where do we start? • Expert / organisation bias – what conservation priorities? • Appliance of science – how deep should we go? • Reliance on models and data – how far can / do we go? • Relative values of ecosystem services & people benefits – what matters most? • Visualising / interpreting the results e.g. connectivity, migration, dispersal – what does it mean for action? • Opportunity bias – the low hanging fruit or cream of the crop? References and thanks to;

• www.ecoco.org.uk , contact [email protected] • EcoCo LIFE Scotland, “Implementation of integrated habitat networks to improve ecological coherence across the CSGN. LIFE13 BIO/UK/000428” • Catchpole, R. 2013. Ecological coherence definitions in policy and practice. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 552. • Scottish Natural Heritage ; www.snh.gov.uk • Central Scotland Green Network www.centralscotlandgreennetwork.org • Ecoserv GIS; Jonathan Winn [email protected] • Ecoco Partners;

SNH’s Integrated Habitat Networks modelling tool

Thanks for listening

Questions…