Honeysuckle Cottage Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

HONEYSUCKLE COTTAGE

BAT SURVEYS AND MITIGATION STRATEGY

A Report to: BHB Architects

Report No: RT-MME-123256

Date: November 2016

Triumph House, Birmingham Road, Allesley, Coventry CV5 9AZ Tel: 01676 525880 Fax: 01676 521400 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.middlemarch-environmental.com Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

REPORT VERIFICATION AND DECLARATION OF COMPLIANCE

Report Date Completed by: Checked by: Approved by: Version Jemma Gaskin Nick Steggall CEnv. David Smith MCIEEM MCIEEM (Principal Final 29/11/2016 MCIEEM (Protected (Ecology and Technical Ecological Species Manager) Landscapes Director) Consultant)

The information which we have prepared is true, and has been prepared and provided in accordance with the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management’s Code of Professional Conduct. We confirm that the opinions expressed are our true and professional bona fide opinions.

DISCLAIMER

The contents of this report are the responsibility of Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. It should be noted that, whilst every effort is made to meet the client’s brief, no site investigation can ensure complete assessment or prediction of the natural environment.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd accepts no responsibility or liability for any use that is made of this document other than by the client for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared.

VALIDITY OF DATA

The findings of this study are valid for a period of 12 months from the date of survey. If works have not commenced by this date, an updated site visit should be carried out by a suitably qualified ecologist to assess any changes in the habitats present on site, and to inform a review of the conclusions and recommendations made.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 1 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

BHB Architects commissioned Middlemarch Environmental Ltd to undertake Bat Surveys at Honeysuckle Cottage (formerly known as Richards Cottage). The surveys are required to restore the cottage into a habitable condition. Surveys were undertaken in 2015, following which the project was put on hold. The project was restarted in 2016 and the bat surveys were updated.

This report details the results of the 2015 and 2016 bat surveys to establish current bat roosting status on site. It also details the bat mitigation which will be required to maintain the bat species at a Favourable Conservation Status.

Three bat roosts were identified during the surveys:

Greater Horseshoe Bat A single greater horseshoe bat was observed on two of the six survey occasions in the coom space to the adjacent property. The breeding status of this bat was inspected on the fourth daytime visit to determine the roost type and it was found to be a male bat. It was also observed in the same location on the fifth visit, however to avoid any undue disturbance the bat nor this small attic space was entered in full.

With the individual male only being present during two of the six survey visits, this indicates that this roost is a summer day roost. The national conservation significance of a day roost is of "low to moderate” value for rarer species (English Nature, 2004). This roost will be permanently lost during the refurbishment works as access to the roosting location through Honeysuckle Cottage will be lost when the building is reoccupied. It is also not possible to create a new opening within the roof where this bat is currently roosting due to the small roof space involved.

Brown Long-Eared Bat A single brown long-eared bat was observed on five of the six survey occasions. The observation of low numbers of droppings and feeding remains in the attic indicates that this building is used as a day and feeding roost by a low number of individuals. The national conservation significance of this roost is of “low value” for commoner species (English Nature, 2004).

The proposed refurbishment works to the cottage will result in the permanent loss of the feeding location within the attic, however the access point into the crevice area between the bitumen sarking and the roof tiles can be reinstated post works. Under Natural England guidelines, the reinstatement of the crevice roost between the roof tiles and the bitumen membrane is appropriate mitigation which would allow for this species to be maintained on the site at a favourable conservation status.

Common Pipistrelle Bat A single common pipistrelle bat was observed on three of the six survey occasions. The observation of low numbers of droppings in the attic indicates that this building is used as a day roost by a low number of individuals. The national conservation significance of this roost is of “low value” for commoner species (English Nature, 2004). The access point into the crevice area between the bitumen sarking and the roof tiles can be reinstated post works. Under Natural England guidelines, the reinstatement of the crevice roost between the roof tiles and the bitumen membrane is appropriate mitigation which would allow for this species to be maintained on the site at a favourable conservation status.

Prior to any works being undertaken which are likely to result in a breach of the legislation, a development licence must be obtained from Natural England.

The bats on site will be maintained at a Favourable Conservation Status by following the bat mitigation detailed in Chapter 5. This includes the provision of bat boxes and the conversion of an alternative building for bats to use during the works, along with the reinstatement of the common pipistrelle roost and the brown long-eared bat roost post works.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 2 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 4

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND ...... 4 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT ...... 4 1.3 DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED ...... 4 2. METHODOLOGY ...... 5

2.1 PRELIMINARY BAT ROOST ASSESSMENT ...... 5 2.2 NOCTURNAL EMERGENCE AND DAWN RE-ENTRY SURVEYS ...... 6 2.2.1 Overview of Nocturnal Emergence and Dawn Re-entry Surveys ...... 6 2.2.2 Nocturnal Emergence Bat Surveys ...... 6 2.2.3 Dawn Re-entry Bat Surveys...... 6 3. SURVEY RESULTS ...... 7

3.1 SURVEY PERSONNEL ...... 7 3.2 WEATHER CONDITIONS ...... 7 3.3 BUILDING DESCRIPTION ...... 8 3.4 DAYTIME SURVEY RESULTS ...... 10 3.5 NOCTURNAL EMERGENCE AND DAWN RE-ENTRY SURVEY RESULTS ...... 11 4. POPULATION ASSESSMENT AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 13

4.1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS ...... 13 4.2 POPULATION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 13 5. BAT MITIGATION AND PROTECTION MEASURES ...... 15

5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 15 5.2 MITIGATION ...... 15 6. DRAWINGS ...... 18 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 22 APPENDIX 1 ...... 23

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 3 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND BHB Architects commissioned Middlemarch Environmental Ltd to undertake Bat Surveys at Honeysuckle Cottage (formerly known as Richards Cottage). The surveys are required to restore the cottage into a habitable condition. Surveys were undertaken in 2015, following which the project was put on hold. The project was restarted in 2016 and the bat surveys were updated.

All UK bat species are European protected species and they are capable of being material considerations in the planning process. A summary of the legislation protecting bats is included within Appendix 1. This section also provides some brief information on the ecology of British bat species.

1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT The Honeysuckle Cottage is located within the Highclere Castle grounds, in Newbury, Hampshire and is centred at National Grid Reference SU 444 593.

Honeysuckle Cottage is situated in a small complex of former agricultural buildings including residential cottages with parkland surrounding. There are scattered mature trees, pasture, riverine habitats and woodland within the castle grounds. The wider landscape is dominated by large blocks of woodland, grassland and arable fields. The A34 road is located approximately 1 km east of the castle.

1.3 DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED The conclusions and recommendations made in this report are based on information provided by the client regarding the scope of the project. Documentation made available by the client is listed in Table 1.1.

Document Name / Drawing Number Author Richards Cottage Proposed Plan North and West Elevations Unknown, supplied by BHB Architects RC/2016/01A Richards Cottage South Elevation Unknown, supplied by BHB Architects RC/2016/01A Bat Mitigation Proposal 2178-050 BHB Architects Table 1.1: Documentation Provided by Client

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 4 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1 PRELIMINARY BAT ROOST ASSESSMENT In line with the specifications detailed in Bat Mitigation Guidelines (English Nature, 2004) and Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (Collins, 2016), a Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment of the building was conducted during daylight hours. A visual assessment was undertaken to determine the presence of any Potential Roost Features (PRFs), together with a general appraisal of the suitability of the site for foraging and commuting. Table 2.1 provides examples of PRFs. Any accessible PRFs were inspected using binoculars, a torch and endoscope for evidence of possible bat presence. The building was surveyed externally and internally.

For reasons of health and safety, the survey was only undertaken in areas accessible from 3.5 m ladders.

Based on the PRF’s present, the survey area was assessed using the suitability classes detailed within Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (Collins, 2016), as detailed in Table 2.2.

Example of Potential Roost Features Externally  Access through window panes, doors and walls;  behind peeling paintwork or lifted rendering;  behind hanging tiles;  weatherboarding;  eaves;  soffit boxes;  fascias;  lead flashing;  gaps under felt (even including those of flat roofs);  under tiles/slates;  existing bat and bird boxes; and,  any gaps in brickwork or stonework permitting access into access to cavity- or rubble-filled walls.

Internally  behind wooden panelling;  in lintels above doors and windows;  behind window shutters and curtains;  behind pictures, posters, furniture, peeling paintwork;  peeling wallpaper, lifted plaster and boarded-up windows;  inside cupboards and in chimneys accessible from fireplaces.  within attic voids:  the top of gable end or dividing walls;  the top of chimney breasts;  ridge and hip beams and other roof beams;  mortise and tenon joints;  all beams (free-hanging bats);  the junction of roof timbers, especially where ridge and hip beams meet; and,  between tiles and the roof lining. Table 2.1: Potential Roost Features (Adapted from Collins, 2016)

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 5 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

Suitability Description High A structure with one or more potential roost sites that are obviously suitable for use by larger numbers of bats on a more regular basis and potentially for longer periods of time due to their size, shelter, protection, conditions and surrounding habitat. Moderate A structure with one or more potential roost sites that could be used by bats due to their size, shelter, protection, conditions and surrounding habitat but unlikely to support a roost of high conservation status (with respect to roost type only – the assessments in this table are made irrespective of species conservation status, which is established after presence is confirmed). Low A structure with one or more potential roost sites that could be used by individual bats opportunistically. However, these potential roost sites do not provide enough space, shelter, protection, appropriate conditions and/or suitable surrounding habitat to be used on a regular basis or by larger numbers of bats (i.e. unlikely to be suitable for maternity or hibernation). Negligible Negligible habitat features on site likely to be used by roosting bats. Table 2.2: Classification of Structures with Bat Potential (Adapted from Collins, 2016)

2.2 NOCTURNAL EMERGENCE AND DAWN RE-ENTRY SURVEYS

2.2.1 Overview of Nocturnal Emergence and Dawn Re-entry Surveys A bat roost has been identified within the building during the Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment. As such, in line with Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (Collins, 2016), a minimum of three bat surveys were carried out in the most recent survey season. An additional three surveys have already been carried out during 2015. Each yearly survey consisted of two nocturnal emergence bat surveys and one dawn re-entry bat survey (six surveys over two years). The aim of these surveys was to determine whether bats are roosting within the building, and to enable a profile of site utilisation by bats to be compiled.

2.2.2 Nocturnal Emergence Bat Surveys The surveys commenced 20 minutes prior to sunset and continued until 120 minutes after sunset. The nocturnal emergence surveys were conducted using electronic bat detectors (Echometer Touch and Bat Box Duet with associated recording devices) to facilitate the detection of bats and to aid in the determination of species of bat using the site. Subsequent computer analysis of recordings allowed all species of bat using the site to be identified.

2.2.3 Dawn Re-entry Bat Surveys Bats swarm at their roost site 10-90 minutes prior to entering the roost at dawn (Mitchell-Jones & McLeish, 2004). Surveying for dawn swarming by bats is an efficient way of detecting bat roosts. The dawn surveys commenced 120 minutes prior to sunrise and continued until 15 minutes after sunrise. To facilitate the detection of bats and to aid in the determination of species of bat using the site, the dawn surveys were conducted using electronic bat detectors (Echometer Touch and Bat Box Duet with associated recording devices). Computer analysis of bat detector information collected was utilised to identify all species recorded on the site.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 6 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

3. SURVEY RESULTS

3.1 SURVEY PERSONNEL This assessment and the survey team was led and overseen by Nick Steggall, Protected Species Manager at Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Nick has been at Middlemarch Environmental for the past 15 years. He is a full member of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management and a Chartered Environmentalist.

He is licensed by Natural England to undertake advanced bat survey techniques under Natural England’s bat Class Licences 19 and 20. He is currently one of just over one hundred bat workers Natural England have permitted to be a Registered Consultant under the recently introduced Bat Low Impact Class Licence 21. To become a Registered Consultant under Class Licence 21, strict minimum criteria must be demonstrated to Natural England prior to them permitting the applicant to commence the training course and subsequent test. The applicant must be able to demonstrate sufficient knowledge and experience of bat species, bat impact assessment, mitigation and implementation of the bat works.

Nick sits on the British Standards Institute Committee being one of the main contributing authors for the first British Standard Institute Guide specifically for bat surveys, BS 8596:2015, “Surveying for bats in trees and woodland – Guide”.

Nick’s wide range in experience varies from small scale barn conversions to major infrastructure works. He is the lead ecologist responsible for delivering the ecology works and was the expert witness at public inquiry, for the M1 J19 Catthorpe Interchange Improvement Works, a major road improvement works estimated at £191 million.

The remaining survey team consisted of the following experienced Middlemarch Environmental staff:

 Jemma Gaskin (Principal Technical Ecological Consultant, Licensed Bat Surveyor CL18);  Anna Dudley (Principal Technical Ecological Consultant, Licensed Bat Surveyor CL17);  Sophie Meredith (Senior Ecological Consultant, Licensed Bat Surveyor CL18);  Angel Fernandez (Ecological Consultant);  Sian Comley (Ecological Project Officer); and,  Sue Meredith (Ecological Project Officer).

3.2 WEATHER CONDITIONS The weather conditions recorded at the time of the 2015 surveys are detailed in Table 3.1 and the 2016 surveys are detailed in Table 3.2.

Conditions Parameter First Nocturnal First Dawn Second Nocturnal Emergence Survey Re-entry Survey Emergence Survey (19/08/2015) (26/08/2015) (24/09/2015) Sunset/Sunrise Sunset: 20:19 Sunrise: 06:06 Sunset: 18:59 Start: 14 Start: 17 Start: 14 Temperature (C) Finish: 15 Finish: 15 Finish: 10 Start: 100 Start: 40 Start: 30 Cloud Cover (%) Finish: 100 Finish: 100 Finish: <10 Start: Nil Start: Nil Start: Nil Precipitation Finish: Nil Finish: Nil Finish: Nil Start: F3-4 Start: F2-3 Start: F3 Wind Speed (Beaufort) Finish: F3-4 Finish: F2-3 Finish: F1-2 Table 3.1: Weather Conditions During the 2015 Surveys

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 7 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

Conditions Parameter Third Nocturnal Second Dawn Fourth Nocturnal Emergence Survey Re-entry Survey Emergence Survey (26/07/2016) (09/08/2016) (23/08/2016) Sunset/Sunrise Sunset: 21:01 Sunrise: 05:40 Sunset: 20:09 Start: 18 Start: 11 Start: 22 Temperature (C) Finish: 17 Finish: 12 Finish: 20 Start: 80 Start: <10 Start: 0 Cloud Cover (%) Finish: 80 Finish: <10 Finish: <10 Start: Nil Start: Nil Start: Nil Precipitation Finish: Nil Finish: Nil Finish: Nil Start: F2-3 Start: F0-2 Start: F0-2 Wind Speed (Beaufort) Finish: F2-3 Finish: F2-3 Finish: F0-2 Table 3.2: Weather Conditions During the 2016 Surveys

3.3 BUILDING DESCRIPTION

Honeysuckle Cottage forms the northern wing of a group of buildings forming a horseshoe shape. The central and southern wing are already occupied residences. Honeysuckle Cottage has been vacant for a significant period of time and is now uninhabitable in its present condition.

External Assessment The building is a brick-built structure with a pitched tiled roof (Plate 3.1). One of the roof ends abuts an adjacent roof forming a valley, whilst the opposite end on the western elevation has a small hip which only extends part way down the roof. Attached to the western wall of the building is a brick outbuilding with a half- pitched roof which still contains the old outside lavatory.

The wooden door frames and window frames were tightly fitted with no gaps suitable for bats to enter. The roof was generally in a good condition, however small gaps suitable for bats to enter were present at the eaves and under slipped/warped tiles.

The chimney contained a large flue suitable for bats to use as access (this was confirmed during the internal survey).

Plate 3.1: Honeysuckle Cottage

It was not possible to inspect the roof access points due to the height at which they were located, and as such it was not possible to establish if bats had used these features to enter a roost location at the time of surveying.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 8 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

Internal Assessment Internally the building was divided into three levels.

The basement level was accessed through an open stairwell. The walls of the basement were smooth with no crevices for bats to utilise (Plate 3.2).

The ground floor was split into three sections. An entrance corridor was present to the east of the building, which leads to a toilet room and a small set of stairs which no longer go anywhere. Above the set of stairs, a small roof void was present, leading into the coom space of the adjacent property (Plate 3.3) The roof in this space was lined with a breathable membrane which provides a suitable crevice location for bats to utilise between the membrane and the roof tiles.

The two main sections of the ground floor are divided by a large chimney along with the former ovens associated with the fireplace (Plate 3.4). The fireplace and flue are large enough for bats to gain entry into the building. The associated oven structures are in poor condition and provide flight access for bats into the upper sections of the building.

The upper sections of the building are accessed via a staircase on the western end of the building. They form two rooms within the roof space which are in poor condition (Plate 3.5). The roof has been historically boarded over which has now deteriorated and is hanging from the roof with small coom spaces on the edge. Again, the plaster is in poor condition with numerous holes present. The roof is lined with breathable membrane which provides a suitable crevice location for bats to utilise between the membrane and the roof tiles.

It was not possible to fully inspect all features within the roof space (i.e. the area between the felt sarking and roof tiles) without destroying/damaging this potential roost feature. In addition, small sections of the roof could not be accessed by the surveyor, as the floor was deemed to be unsafe.

All inaccessible areas were surveyed during the suite of emergence and re-entry surveys detailed below.

Plate 3.2: Basement Plate 3.3: Coom Space of Adjacent Property

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 9 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

Plate 3.4: Fireplace Plate 3.5: Roof Space

3.4 DAYTIME SURVEY RESULTS Prior to the emergence surveys, the internal areas of the buildings were searched for fresh evidence of bats deposited since the previous bat surveys. The findings of these searches are recorded in Table 3.3.

Survey Observation Approximately 100 scattered droppings resembling those of brown long-eared bat in the main roof space (this is actually a room located where the roof would be) of the building and the staircase. 19/08/2015 Scattered droppings (approximately <25) resembling those of a small bat such as pipistrelle. Bat feeding remains, approximately 30 pairs of wings from yellow-underwing moth and tortoiseshell butterfly. Less than 10 obviously fresh droppings resembling those of brown long-eared bat and a small bat 26/08/2015 species such as pipistrelle. Less than 10 obvious fresh droppings resembling those of brown long-eared bat and a small bat species such as pipistrelle. 24/09/2015 Bat feeding remains, less than five obviously fresh and 30 pairs of wings from yellow-underwing moth and tortoiseshell butterfly. A single greater horseshoe bat was observed hanging up in the small coom space of the adjacent property (Plate 3.6) which joins honeysuckle cottage at a right angle and is situated on the south elevation of the adjacent residential property. This roof void is accessed through honeysuckle cottage. The breeding status of this bat was inspected to determine the roost type and it was found to be a male bat (Plate 3.7). 26/07/2016 Approximately 20 fresh droppings in ovoids of three resembling those of a greater horseshoe bat. Approximately 50 scattered fresh droppings resembling those of brown long-eared bat in the main roof space of the building and the staircase. Scattered droppings (approximately <15) resembling those of a small bat such as pipistrelle. Bat feeding remains, approximately 15 pairs of wings from yellow-underwing moth and tortoiseshell butterfly. A single greater horseshoe bat was observed hanging up on the coom space as described above. This bat was not handled to determine status nor this section of the roof searched to avoid undue disturbance to the bat. Less than 10 obvious fresh droppings in ovoids of three resembling those of a greater horseshoe 09/08/2016 bat. Less than 10 obvious fresh droppings resembling those of brown long-eared bat and a small bat species such as pipistrelle. Bat feeding remains, less than five obviously fresh and 30 pairs of wings from yellow-underwing moth and tortoiseshell butterfly. Less than 10 obvious fresh droppings resembling those of brown long-eared bat and a small bat species such as pipistrelle. 23/08/2016 Bat feeding remains, less than five obviously fresh and 30 pairs of wings from yellow-underwing moth and tortoiseshell butterfly. Table 3.3: Evidence of Bats Observed During the Daytime Surveys

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 10 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

Plate 3.6: Greater Horseshoe Bat within Roost Plate 3.7: Greater Horseshoe Bat

3.5 NOCTURNAL EMERGENCE AND DAWN RE-ENTRY SURVEY RESULTS

Emerging or re-entering bats Table 3.4 details the bats observed emerging from or re-entering Honeysuckle Cottage.

Survey Species Observation A single individual was observed emerging from a First Nocturnal Emergence Survey lifted roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the Brown long-eared bat (19/08/2015) chimney. This bat commuted straight off site to the north east. A single individual was observed entering a lifted First Dawn Re-entry Survey Brown long-eared bat roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the (26/08/2015) chimney. A single individual was observed emerging from a Second Nocturnal Emergence Survey lifted roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the Brown long-eared bat (24/09/2015) chimney. This bat commuted straight off site to the north east. A single individual was observed emerging from the chimney and commuting straight off site to the Greater horseshoe bat east. The chimney is of the large open type which provides the greater horseshoe bat with light access. A single individual was observed emerging from a Third Nocturnal Emergence Survey lifted roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the (26/07/2016) Brown long-eared bat chimney. This bat commuted straight off site to the north east. A single individual was observed emerging from a lifted roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the Common pipistrelle chimney. This bat commuted straight off site to the north east. A single individual was observed entering the Greater horseshoe bat chimney. A single individual was observed entering a lifted Second Dawn Re-entry Survey Brown long-eared bat roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the (09/08/2016) chimney. A single individual was observed entering a lifted Common pipistrelle roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the chimney. A single individual was observed emerging from a Fourth Nocturnal Emergence Survey lifted roof tile on the north elevation adjacent to the Common pipistrelle (23/08/2016) chimney. This bat commuted straight off site to the north east. Table 3.4: Emerging and Re-entering Bat Observations

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 11 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

Foraging or commuting individuals The building was not observed to be a key commute or foraging feature for bats with less than five individual common pipistrelles observed on any one evening commuting over the complex of buildings from the south east to the north west. The main commute route for the common pipistrelles was located at the opposite side of the clearing along the tree line to the north where up to 15 individuals were observed commuting from the east to the west. This commute route would indicate that a maternity bat roost for common pipistrelle is located away from the buildings to the east or south east where further buildings are located.

The clearing and tree line located to the north of Honeysuckle Cottage was infrequently used for foraging with a pass recorded every 5-10 minutes for common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle.

Infrequent bat passes (less than five per night) were recorded in this area for Natterers, an unidentified Myotis species most closely resembling the call of whiskered (Myotis echolocation calls can overlap and as such only in hand identification can be used to accurately separate certain Myotis species), noctule, Leisler’s and brown long-eared bat.

In addition, on the fourth nocturnal emergence survey a single bat bass from a barbastelle bat was detected to the north of honeysuckle cottage. Although this individual was not observed, the surveyor was observing the building, it did not emerge from the building and was likely to be foraging along the tree line to the north.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 12 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

4. POPULATION ASSESSMENT AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS The surveys are required to restore the cottage into a habitable condition. The cottage has been uninhabited for a significant period of time with the majority of the wood in poor condition and requiring replacement. This will result in the roof and floor boards/timbers being replaced along with the wall plaster and all electrical and water supplies. It is understood that the room within the roof space will require new roof lights to provide natural illumination.

4.2 POPULATION AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greater Horseshoe Bat A single greater horseshoe bat was observed on two of the six survey occasions. This bat was observed within the small half-pitch attic space which joins Honeysuckle Cottage at a right angle and is situated on the south elevation of the adjacent residential property. This roof void is accessed through Honeysuckle Cottage with the nocturnal survey identifying that the bat commutes through Honeysuckle Cottage and exits the roost via the chimney. The breeding status of this bat was inspected on the fourth daytime visit to determine the roost type and it was found to be a male bat. It was also observed in the same location on the fifth visit, however to avoid any undue disturbance to the bat this small attic space was not entered in full.

Other than the emerging and re-entering individual, no echolocation calls were detected around the building for greater horseshoe bat.

With the individual male only being present during two of the six survey visits, it indicates that this roost is a summer day roost. The national conservation significance of a day roost is of "low to moderate” value for rarer species (English Nature, 2004).

Greater horseshoe bats have a limited geographic range being predominantly a south western species. They are classed as one of our rarer species.

Greater horseshoe bats are a void dwelling species, roosting in voids such as old barns, attic spaces, cellars and caves. They require flight access into roost locations as their anatomical structure does not permit them to easily crawl into crevice spaces, and as such they are generally found hanging within the voids.

This roost will be permanently lost during the refurbishment works as access to the roosting location through Honeysuckle Cottage will be lost when the building is reoccupied. It is also not possible to create a new opening within the roof where this bat is currently roosting due to the small roof space involved.

Brown long-eared bats are nationally widespread and common.

Brown long-eared bats are generally a crevice roosting species, preferring to roost in confined spaces such as tree hollows where they can emerge directly into the understorey. When this species roosts within buildings, the crevice roosting location is usually combined with a void such as an attic space which this species can utilise to fly within prior to emerging.

In the absence of mitigation, the works would have a low impact upon the bat with day roosting locations being affected temporarily and a feeding roost being affected permanently. However, under Natural England guidelines the reinstatement of the crevice roost between the roof tiles and the bitumen membrane is

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 13 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy appropriate mitigation which would allow for this species to be maintained on the site at a favourable conservation status.

Common pipistrelle bats are nationally widespread and common.

Common pipistrelle bats are a crevice roosting species, preferring to roost in confined spaces such as under hanging tiles, behind weather boarding, in wall cavities and between roof tiles and its underlay.

In the absence of mitigation, the works would have a low impact upon the bat with day roosting locations being affected temporarily prior to its reinstatement. Under Natural England guidelines the reinstatement of the crevice roost between the roof tiles and the bitumen membrane is appropriate mitigation which would allow for this species to be maintained on the site at a favourable conservation status.

Foraging and Commuting The bats observed commuting past the cottage and foraging in close proximity to the cottage will not be adversely affected by the works.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 14 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

5. BAT MITIGATION AND PROTECTION MEASURES

All recommendations provided in this section are based on Middlemarch Environmental Ltd’s current understanding of the site proposals, correct at the time the report was compiled. Should the proposals alter, the conclusions and recommendations made in the report should be reviewed to ensure that they remain appropriate.

5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS As a bat roost/resting place has been identified in the Honeysuckle Cottage no unlicensed work can be undertaken which will contravene the legislation outlined in Appendix 1.

Examples of works which will breach this legislation include:  Roof modifications/repairs/removal;  Timber treatment;  Noise, vibrations and storage of odorous and dangerous chemicals;  Alterations to bat entrance/exit points;  Investigations works in the roof as this can cause bats to abort their young/awake from hibernation and can alter the roof temperature/humidity; and,  Works in the main body of the building.

N.B. This is not an exhaustive list and a bat worker should be consulted to determine if the works are likely to breach any legislation.

Prior to any works being undertaken which are likely to result in a breach of the legislation, a development licence must be obtained from Natural England. A registered consultant on Natural England Bat Low Impact Class Licence Application (Class Licence 21) has assessed the site and although only day roosts and feeding roosts have been identified, one of the day roosts is for greater horseshoe bat, a species which is excluded from the low impact licence and as such the site cannot be registered under this licence. Instead a full site specific licence must be applied for from Natural England. Prior to a licence being issued, all of the relevant planning requirements must be met (e.g. full planning permission/listed building consent) and relevant conditions relating to protected species and habitat issues must be discharged.

5.2 MITIGATION Removal of Roosting Locations A pre-works survey will be carried out immediately prior to works commencing on site to ensure that the status of the site has not changed since the survey work was carried out. This will include a daytime assessment (externally and internally) and a dusk emergence survey (only required if the works are undertaken during the bat activity season). As only day roosts have been identified, there is no restriction on the timing of works. If it is identified that the status of the roost has altered/increased, no destructive works will be carried out until advice from Natural England has been sought. If the status of the roost has not altered, the works will proceed as per this method statement.

Prior to demolition, six Schwegler 2F-DFP bat boxes (three per crevice dwelling species identified) will be installed on appropriate trees on the woodland edge to the north and west of the Honeysuckle Cottage. The suitable trees will be identified on site by the ecologist. In addition, an existing building will be converted for use by the greater horseshoe bat as described below.

Three bat boxes will be placed on each tree at approximate 120 degree angles to provide a variety of climatic conditions (i.e. sun and shade at different times of the day). All bat boxes will be situated higher than 3 m from the ground to prevent any negative interference. These boxes will be left in situ for their natural life and a minimum of 5 years.

A ‘toolbox’ talk will be held with the works team before any works to the building are undertaken to ensure that the contractors are aware of the bat issues associated with them. This will also include the adoption of appropriate methodologies to remove the features around the buildings to ensure no harm to bats occurs. If a bat is identified, this will be quickly transported by the ecologist (captured by hand and transported in a

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 15 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy cotton bag) to one of the bat boxes or the converted building. A written record of this tool box talk will be made by the ecologist and also the site manager to confirm that it was undertaken in line with this method statement.

All features around the building which are being removed will be subject to removal (by hand) supervised by the bat worker. This will involve the roof tiles. This will ensure that all potential roosting locations are carefully destroyed/repaired by hand and that no bats will be killed or injured in the process. The destructive works will be undertaken by the repair contractors and overseen by the ecologist. The site works will not be undertaken when it is raining to ensure that the bats do not get wet when re-located to their new roost location. No hibernation roosts have been identified, however all buildings have the potential to be used by bats in the hibernation season. If any incidental finds of common pipistrelle bat or brown long-eared bat are identified, then these will be moved into the bat mitigation area. If a hibernating greater horseshoe bat is found during the pre-works inspection, then works will cease and Natural England will be informed and the licence amended (if required).

In the unlikely event that a bat becomes injured, any injured bats will be immediately taken into care (as directed by Bat Workers Manual, 2004). Details of a bat carer are known.

Roost retention and modification The crevice between the roof void and underlay utilized by the brown long-eared and common pipistrelle bat will be reinstated post works. The ecological clerk of works will measure the access point dimensions and the roosting area during the roof removal and these measurements will be used to recreate these roosts. These measurements can only be taken whilst the roof is being removed and thus the bat roost being temporarily unusable. The new roof will only be lined with bitumastic 1F felt. Due to the dangers and harm to bats which can be caused by breathable membranes, breathable membrane will not be used.

Roost Creation It will not be possible to recreate access to the greater horseshoe roost post works due to the flight access required taking up a significant portion of the roost void and also increasing the internal levels of illumination. Therefore, an existing building has been identified which will be converted for use by the greater horseshoe bat. There are currently no bats using this building and the addition of suitable access points and roosting features will enhance this building for bat usage.

The building is located 26 m away from Honeysuckle cottage to the south within the secluded walled garden. This location is close to the existing roost and as such it is anticipated that the bats will find it. The secluded nature of the walled garden reduces the disturbance from the residents from the new tenants of Honeysuckle Cottage and also the existing occupied residences which are attached to Honeysuckle Cottage.

The building to be converted is illustrated on BHB Architects Drawing Number 2178-050 Bat Mitigation Proposal (Chapter 6). The building is 6.5 m long, 2.6 m wide and 3 m high. This is considerably wider and higher than the existing roost void which is approximately 6 m long, 1.6 m high and 1.6 m wide. The new building has vertical brick walls on the lower which increases the void volume of the roosting location from the existing half-pitch roof space. Half of the building is brick walls with the western half forming feather edge timber on a timber frame (with one wall being that of the brick walled garden). The roof is entirely slate with no underlay. This type of roost is a favourite for horseshoe bats due to the quick transfer of solar heat into the roof space which it offers.

The access will be formed by placing a flight access hopper on the western gable wall which will be situated two thirds up the wall in the center.

The ‘hopper’ style access point will measure 500 mm x 500 mm. The access point will have a wooden ‘hopper’ built behind (within the unit) to allow bats to fly into the unit whilst deterring the entrance of birds. The ‘hopper’ will also act as a baffle for the light maintaining dark internal conditions within the roost unit.

The ‘hopper’ is a triangular wooden box with 500 mm sides located over the access point in the existing doorway (500 mm x 500 mm). The ‘hopper’ will form a solid wooden triangular structure with a sloping panel (covered wood) extending from just below the entrance point which stops just after it reaches the top level of the access hole to allow bat access over the top and into the unit. This sloping panel should extend upwards at a 45-degree angle and be covered by metal sheeting (i.e. lead flashing, anodised aluminium, stainless steel or galvanised steel sheet). This will prevent birds gaining purchase on this slope and accessing the bat

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 16 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy unit. Bats will be able to enter the unit and fly up and over the ‘hopper’. A wooden panel/baffle will extend from the ridge to 300 mm below the edge of the hopper and set back 1000 mm from the back end of the ‘hopper’. This will further deter birds from entering the building and also blocks light entering the roost unit.

The general design of the hopper is illustrated on drawing number C123256-01 (Chapter 6).

The internal roosting features for greater horseshoe bats consist of the wooden roof batons which the greater horseshoe bats use naturally and a hot box.

The hotbox will be installed in the eastern half of the building. The hot box will be installed at the ridge and will incorporate two triangular panels and will measure 1.5 m in length and the sides will measure 0.5 m in height. This hot box will incorporate a floor and is designed to trap the naturally occurring heat at the apex of the roof. A bat access point measuring 0.5 m x 0.5 m will be cut out of the base of the ‘hot box’ to allow bats to fly into the unit and up to the ridge. The ‘hot box’ will be created from plywood which is rough sawn to allow bats to grip onto the surfaces. These panels will have a thickness of 6 mm or more. Internally the hot boxes will have a fake ridge beam and wooden battons (representing the battons of the roof) for greater horseshoe bats to hang from. The general design for the hot box can be found illustrated on Middlemarch Environmental Ltd Drawing Number C123256-02 (Chapter 6) which will be adapted to take into account the half-pitch nature of the roof area.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 17 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

6. DRAWINGS

BHB Architects Drawing Number 2178-050 Bat Mitigation Proposal.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd Drawing C123256-01 – General Design of Hopper Access Point.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd Drawing C123256-02 – General Design of Hot Box.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 18 Notes : A3

slate covered mono pitch roof

Feather edge timber Feather edge timber cladding on a timber frame cladding on a timber frame

brickwork e l e v a t i o n B e l e v a t i o n A B 2540 brickwork

Feather edge timber cladding on a timber frame A Site Plan Extended with OS plan information- BD Sept 2016 AM Rev Details Date Checked By

6500 B R O W N H I L L H A Y W A R D B R O W N

C H A R T E R E D A R C H I T E C T S

G E O R G I A N H O U S E 2 4 B I R D S T R E E T L I C H F I E L D S T A F F S W S 1 3 6 P T A TEL. 01543 254357 FAX. 01543 416540 e-mail. [email protected] p l a n FOR GUIDANCE ONLY Client The Earl of Carnarvon Honeysuckle Cottage - 9 Moorhouse Road, Highclere Estate 1:20 - 0 200mm 400mm 600mm 800mm 1000 Project 1:100- 0 1m 2m 3m 4m 5m Title Bat mitgation proposal- exsiting store 1:50 - 0 1m 2m Scale Date Drawn By Checked By Drawing Number Revision 1:5 - 0 100mm 200mm 1:50@A3 July 2016 AM 2178-050

The copyright of this drawing and design is vested in the Architect and must not be copied or reproduced without written consent. All dimensions given are to be verified on site by the responsible contractor. Do not scale dimensions from this drawing. GABLE END HOPPER ACCESS

C123256-01

Triumph House, Birmingham Road, Allesley, Coventry CV5 9AZ T:01676 525880 F:01676 521400 E:[email protected]

C123256-02

Triumph House, Birmingham Road, Allesley, Coventry CV5 9AZ T:01676 525880 F:01676 521400 E:[email protected]

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

Altringham, J (2003). British Bats. New Naturalist. HarperCollins.

Collins, J. (ed). (2016). Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (3rd edn). The Bat Conservation Trust, London.

English Nature (2004). Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough.

Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2012). UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. Available: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/UK_Post2010_Bio-Fwork.pdf

Jones, K and Walsh, A (2006). A Guide to British Bats. The Mammal Society, London.

Mitchell-Jones, A.J. & McLeish, A.P. (2004). The Bat Workers’ Manual (3nd Ed.). JNCC, Peterborough.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 22 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

APPENDIX 1

LEGISLATION Bats and the places they use for shelter or protection (i.e. roosts) receive European protection under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended (Habitats Regulations 2010, as amended). They receive further legal protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981, as amended. This protection means that bats, and the places they use for shelter or protection, are capable of being a material consideration in the planning process.

Regulation 41 of the Habitats Regulations 2010 (as amended), states that a person commits an offence if they:  deliberately capture, injure or kill a bat;  deliberately disturb bats; or  damage or destroy a bat roost (breeding site or resting place).

Disturbance of animals includes in particular any disturbance which is likely to impair their ability to survive, to breed or reproduce, or to rear or nurture their young, or in the case of animals of a hibernating or migratory species, to hibernate or migrate; or to affect significantly the local distribution or abundance of the species to which they belong.

It is an offence under the Habitats Regulations 2010 (as amended) for any person to have in his possession or control, to transport, to sell or exchange or to offer for sale, any live or dead bats, part of a bat or anything derived from bats, which has been unlawfully taken from the wild.

Whilst broadly similar to the above legislation, the WCA 1981 (as amended) differs in the following ways:  Section 9(1) of the WCA makes it an offence to intentionally kill, injure or take any protected species.  Section 9(4)(a) of the WCA makes it an offence to intentionally or recklessly* damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place which a protected species uses for shelter or protection.  Section 9(4)(b) of the WCA makes it an offence to intentionally or recklessly* disturb any protected species while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for shelter or protection. *Reckless offences were added by the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000.

As bats re-use the same roosts (breeding site or resting place) after periods of vacancy, legal opinion is that roosts are protected whether or not bats are present.

The following bat species are Species of Principal Importance for Nature Conservation in England: barbastelle bat Barbastella barbastellus, Bechstein’s bat Myotis bechsteinii, noctule Nyctalus noctula, soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus, brown long-eared bat Plecotus auritus, greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum and lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros.

The following bat species are listed on the Staffordshire local BAP: noctule, common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus and soprano pipistrelle.

The reader should refer to the original legislation for the definitive interpretation.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 23 Honeysuckle Cottage RT-MME-123256 Bat Surveys and Mitigation Strategy

ECOLOGY At present, 18 species of bats are known to live within the United Kingdom, of which 17 species are confirmed as breeding. All UK bat species are classed as insectivorous, feeding on a variety of invertebrates including midges, mosquitoes, lacewings, moths, beetles and small spiders.

Bats will roost within a variety of different roosting locations, included houses, farm buildings, churches, bridges, walls, trees, culverts, caves and tunnels. At different times of the year the bats roosting requirements alter and they can have different roosting locations for maternity roosts, mating roosts and hibernation roosts. Certain bat species will also change roosts throughout the bat activity season with the bat colony using the site to roost for a few days, abandoning the roost and then returning a few days or weeks later. This change can be for a variety of reasons including climatic conditions and prey availability. Bats are known live for several years and if the climatic conditions are unfavourable at a particular roost, they may abandon it for a number of years, before returning when conditions change. Due to the matriarchal nature of bat colonies, the locations of these roosts can be passed down through the generations.

Bats usually start to come out of hibernation in March and early April (weather dependent), when they start to forage and replenish the body weight lost during the hibernation period. The female bats then start to congregate together in maternity roosts prior to giving birth and a single baby is born in June or July. The female then works hard to feed her young so that they can become independent and of a sufficient weight to survive the winter before the weather gets too cold and invertebrate activity reduces. Males generally live solitary lives, or in small groups with other males, although in some species the males can be found living with the females all year. The mating season begins in the autumn. During the winter bats hibernate in safe locations which provide relatively constant conditions, although they may venture outside to forage on warmer winter nights.

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 24