NS&OC OPA Enivironmental Statement Volume 2, Part 2 by Beyond Green

Beyond Green Developments North Sprowston & Old Catton

Appendix 5.1: Detailed Ecology Surveys: - Designated Sites Report; - Phase I Habitats, Hedgerow and Botany Surveys Report; - Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice Report - Bat Survey Report; - Bird Survey Report; - Invertebrate Survey Report; and - Amphibians and Reptiles Surveys Report.

ES Volume 2: Technical Appendices

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Designated Sites / Report for Beyond Green

Designated Sites Report for Beyond Green

Author

Alex Prendergast BSc (Hons) MSC MIEEM

Job No.

100368 Reviewed by

Approved by

Date

Initial

Graham Hopkins

Sam Phillips

5 May 2011

Revision

Graham Hopkins

Danny Thomas

20 September 2012

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House, 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich, NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Designated Sites / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

Background

Site context and Status

Legislation and Planning Policy

METHODS

RESULTS

International Sites

Nationally Designated Sites

Crostwick Marsh SSSI

Non-Statutory Sites

OVERVIEW OF PROJECT IMPACTS

Potential Sources of Impacts

Groundwater Flows

Water Abstraction and Disposal

Recreational Disturbance

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: DESIGNATED SITES WITHIN 2KM

APPENDIX 2: SITE CITATIONS

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

LIABILITY The Ecology Consultancy has prepared this report for the sole use of the commissioning party in accordance with the agreement under which our services were performed. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the advice in this report or any other service provided by us. This report may not be relied upon by any other party without the prior written permission of The Ecology Consultancy. The content of this report is, at least in part, based upon information provided by others and on the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested. Information obtained from any third party has not been independently verified by The Ecology Consultancy, unless otherwise stated in the report.

COPYRIGHT ÂŠ This report is the copyright of The Ecology Consultancy. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person is prohibited. The Ecology Consultancy is the trading name of Ecology Consultancy Ltd.

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Designated Sites / Report for Beyond Green

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned to carry out a suite of ecology surveys for the North Sprowston and Old Catton development. The work is to contribute to the Environmental Statement and Environmental Impact Assessment process. This report presents the details of the designated sites within 2km of the survey area as well as additional information on internationally designated sites across a wider radius. No statutory designated nature conservation sites were recorded within 2km of the site. However, Crostwick Marsh is located just outside the 2km radius and this is a component site of The Broads Ramsar site and Special Area of Conservation and the Broadland Special Protection Area. At a national level it is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest. Eleven County Wildlife Sites (CWSs) are located either wholly or partially within the 2km search area. Two CWSs are close to the site boundary: Ladies Wood, Church Carr & Springs CWS and Tollshill Wood CWS, the former is partly within the site boundary and the latter is separated by the Wroxham Road. An assessment of potential impacts from the development was undertaken and an overview is included in this report Potential impacts included: Changes to groundwater flows; Impacts from water abstraction and water disposal; and Increased density of residents resulting in increased recreational impacts.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1

The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned by Beyond Green to undertake a suite of ecological surveys of a large land parcel to be developed as a proposed urban extension of Norwich. These surveys are intended to provide the baseline description of the site and to provide the technical data to support the Environmental Statement and EIA process.

1.2

This report presents the results of a desktop search for designated sites within 2km of the site boundary and provides an overview of potential impacts. SITE CONTEXT AND STATUS

1.3

The development area covers approximately 200ha, as an arc along the north-east of Norwich. The development area spans from approximately the boundary of Norwich International Airport to the Wroxham Road, south of Spixworth and north of Old Catton and Sprowston. To provide a wider landscape context for the work, a larger area was included within the scope of the ecological work (a total of approximately 350ha) and this is referred to as the survey area.

1.4

The development area is predominantly arable farmland, with small blocks of woodland and occasional parkland. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING POLICY

1.5

Appendix 3 contains details of legislation and planning policy and is provided for general guidance only. The Appendix includes: Statutory and non-statutory designated sites National Planning Policy

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

2 METHODS 2.1

Information regarding the present and historical ecological interest of the site and within a further 2km radius was requested from the Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service. In addition, a search was completed for statutory designated sites within a 2km radius of the site using the Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) on-line mapping service (www.magic.gov.uk).

2.2

The following designations are referred to in the text with expanded accounts in Appendix 3: International Sites. These are sites covered by international conventions and European directives. Those referred to here are: o Ramsar sites; wetlands variously designated for habitats, birds, plants, other animals or other significance such as cultural importance. o Special Protection Area (SAC) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC); together these are â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;European sitesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; as defined by the EC Birds and Habitats Directives respectively. The qualifying features of SPAs are birds and for SACs the qualifying features are variously habitats, plants or nonbird animals. Statutory Sites. These are designated under national legislation, principally the Wildlife and Countryside Act (as amended) relating to Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Other national designations include Local Nature Reserves (National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949) and National Parks (here, covered by The Norfolk and Suffolk Broads Act of 1988). County Wildlife Sites are defined in local and structure plans under the Town and Country Planning system and are a material consideration when planning applications are being determined. The level of protection afforded to these sites through local planning policies and development frameworks may vary between counties.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

3 RESULTS INTERNATIONAL SITES 3.1

There are no ‘international sites’ within 2km of the site boundary (Appendix 1: Figure 1).

3.2

At the nearest point The Broads Ramsar Site, The Broads Special Area of Conservation (SPA), and the Broadland Special Protection Area (SAC) are approximately 2.9km north-east of the development area., The major part of these international sites lies downstream of Wroxham, approximately 5.6km from the site across open farmland.

3.3

All three international designated sites are composed of a large number of individual component SSSI’s: 26 for Broadland SPA and 28 for The Broads Ramsar Site and SAC, the furthest of which are more than 30km distant (Table 1). The component sites not included in the Broadland SPA are: Damgate Marshes, Acle and Trinity Broads.

Table 1. Distances from the development area to individual component SSSI’s of The Broads Ramsar Site, The Broads SAC and the Broadland SPA. Distance from Component SSSI Project Boundary (km) <5 5-10 10-15

15-20

20-25 20-25 30-35

3.4

Crostwick Marsh. Bure Broads and Marshes. Yare Broads and Marshes; Alderfen Broad; Broad Fen, Dilham; Ant Broads and Marshes; Smallburgh Fen; Upton Broad and Marshes; Ducan’s Marsh, Claxton; and Cantley Marshes. Shallam Dyke Marshes; Thurne Ludham-Potter Heigham Marshes; Decoy Carr; Acle Poplar Farm Meadows, Langley; Burgh Common and Muckfleet Marshes; Limpenhoe Meadows; Calthorpe Broad; and Upper Thurne Broads and Marshes ; Damgate Marshes, Acle; and Hardley Flood. Priory Meadows, Hickling; Halvergate Marshes; Hall Farm Fen, Hemsby; Geldeston Meadows; Stanley and Alder Carrs, Aldeby. Trinity Broads. Barnby Broad and Marshes; Sprat's Water and Marshes, Carlton Colville.

The designated features of The Broads’ international sites (Table 2) are aquatic and wetland species, including: vegetation types; assemblages of rare or named plant species; assemblages of rare or named invertebrates; named animals other than invertebrates and assemblages of breeding and wintering birds.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Table 2. Qualifying Features for The Broadsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; international sites. Qualifying Feature Habitats Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae; calcium-rich fen dominated by great fen sedge (saw sedge); alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae). Alkaline fens. Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.; natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharitiontype vegetation; Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayeysilt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae); and transition mires and quaking bogs. Plants and animals (other than birds) Fen orchid Liparis loeselii; otter Lutra lutra; Desmoulin`s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana; and the ramshorn snail Anisus vorticulus. Outstanding assemblages of rare plants and invertebrates including nine British Red Data Book plants and 136 British Red Data Book invertebrates. Birds Bewicks swan Cygnus Columbianus bewickii; gadwall Anas strepera strepera; and wigeon Anas penelope. Northern shoveler Anas clypeata. Great bittern Botaurus stellaris; western marsh harrier Circus aeruginosus; hen harrier Circus cyaneus; whooper swan Cygnus cygnus; ruff Philomachus pugnax; pink footed geese; and shoveler. A large assemblage of wintering wildfowl, additionally including cormorant, great crested grebe, coot, bean goose, white-fronted goose, teal, pochard and tufted duck.

3.5

Relevant International Site The Broads Ramsar Site. The Broads SAC The Broads Ramsar Site The Broads SAC

The Broads Ramsar Site The Broads SAC The Broads Ramsar Site

The Broads Ramsar Site Broadland SPA The Broads Ramsar Site Broadland SPA

Three additional international sites are located within a 20km radius of the Project boundary (Table 3).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Table 3. Other international sites within 20km of the development area. Distance from International Site Details Project Boundary (km) 4.3

River Wensum SAC.

Norfolk Valley Fens SAC.

Breydon Water Ramsar Site and Breydon Water SPA.

Comprised of a single component site, the River Wensum SSSI, this river flows for over 70km from north-west Norfolk to the outskirts of the Norwich conurbation. At its closest point it is approximately 4.3km distant, to the west. It is designated for aquatic vegetation, fish and invertebrates. A designation with 14 component SSSI sites, the closest of which is Buxton Heath SSSI 11km to the north-west, but with others more than 50km distant. All of the sites are spring-fed fens, with qualifying features including vegetation and individual plant and animal species. Comprised of a single designated site, Breydon Water SSSI, near to Great Yarmouth and 19km distant at the closest point. It is a tidal wetland and designated primarily for wetland birds, with a small number of scarce plants also listed as qualifying features.

NATIONALLY DESIGNATED SITES 3.6

There are no nationally designated sites within 2km of the proposed development site. The nearest site is Crostwick Marsh SSSI (a component of the Broadland SPA and The Broads SAC and Ramsar site) located 2.9km to the north.

3.7

The Broads National Park is located approximately 4.1km from the proposed development.

Although the Broads does not officially have a National Park

designation it was granted equivalent status in 1989 with an Authority set up to manage the area. Mousehold Heath is a Local Nature Reserve some 1.9km south of the Project boundary, separated by the Sprowston conurbation. It is remnant of a formerly extensive heathland and supports heathland flora and fauna, most notably a suite of rare and scare invertebrates, in particular bees and wasps. 3.8

Given its proximity, additional details of Crostwick Marsh SSSI are given below and its citation is shown in Appendix 2. CROSTWICK MARSH SSSI

3.9

As described by Doarkes (1995), the upper reaches of the Bure support soligenous sloping fens dominated by rush pasture and fen meadow communities. Crostwick Marsh itself is an area of unimproved meadow, species rich fen meadow & carr woodland, situated in a tributary valley of the Bure. In places the valley is quite steeply sloping, which has encouraged the development of a series of intergrading vegetation types, from dry calcicolous vegetation on the upper slopes, through damp grassland, species rich fen meadow & tall herb fen in the valley bottom. The valley bottom tall herb fen is a topogenous sump wetland, and the remainder are thought to

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

be predominantly fed by calcium rich spring water seeping from the exposed Upper Chalk on the valley slopes. 3.10 The dominant community on Crostwick Marshes is B9 (which is equivalent to the NVC type M22 and consequently satisfies the criterion for the Annex I Alkaline Fen):

Juncus subnodulosus-Cirsium palustre fen meadow. This community is rare in Broadland, and Crostwick Marshes supports approximately half of the total area. Grasses,

small sedges & abundant small herbs characterise

the

sward.

Approximately one-third of the area is woodland or scrub, most of which has developed since 1946. 3.11 Visitor access is limited, with roadside parking for fewer than six cars and access from nearby conurbations on foot being difficult. A public footpath runs through the north part of the site. NON-STATUTORY SITES 3.12 Eleven non-statutory County Wildlife Site (CWSs) are located within 2km of the site. Four of these are only partially within the 2km search area and none are located within the Proposed Development footprint (Table 4). Two are in close proximity to the Project Area: Ladies Wood, Church Carr and Springs and Tollshill Wood. 3.13 Of particular note for their proximity to the site boundary are: Ladies Wood, Church Carr and Springs. This site is approximately 300m east of the development area. It comprises small fishing lakes and associated woodland and grassland habitat, including ancient woodland parcels. It is not connected by surface watercourses to the site but probably receives drainage from the eastern part of the site. Dobbâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Beck flows northwards from the site. Tollshill Wood. This CWS comprises a woodland block, which is separated from the site by Wroxham Road. 3.14 A summary description for each of these sites is given below in Table 4. Location maps and full descriptions of each CWS with are provided in Appendices 1 and 2 respectively.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Table 4. District Wildlife Sites within 2km of the development area. Site Name (number) Proximity and Description Location Tollshill Wood (2021). 0.02km, east. Ancient, broad-leaved semi-natural woodland. Ladies Wood, Church Carr & 0.3km east. Woodland (some of which is ancient), Springs (1393). grassland and standing water habitats. Paineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Yard Wood, The 1.06km, east. Woodland, including abundant deadwood Owlery & March Covert and stored coppice. (1392). Spixworth Meadows (1396). 1.17km, north. Damp semi-improved grassland. Crostwick Common (South) 1.3km, north. Tall herb or rank grassland with scrub. (1402). Reservoir Meadow (1404). 1.47km, north. Damp alder Alnus glutinosa carr and semiimproved, seasonally grazed grassland. Fiddle Wood & Night 1.67km, Broadleaved plantation woodland with Plantation (1468). south-west. some. Crostwick Common (North) 1.77km, north. Woodland, scrub and fen. (1403). Mousehold Heath & 1.95km, south. Former heathland, now mostly covered by ValleyValley Drive (1469). recent woodland. Also designated as a Local Nature Reserve. Racecourse Plantation 1.95km, Commercially-managed coniferous (2041). south-east. plantation and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland. Wroxham Hall Woods 1.97km, north- A series of interconnected woodlands of (1406). east. different woodland types.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

4 OVERVIEW OF PROJECT IMPACTS POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACTS 4.1

The potential impacts of the development are most likely to result from: Changes to groundwater flows; Water abstraction and disposal; and / or Recreation disturbance.

4.2

Impacts form groundwater flows are unlikely GROUNDWATER FLOWS

4.3

The interception of rainwater by the development and its disposal to a SuDS network may affect the designated sites to the north along Spixworth Beck.

4.4

The hydrogeological map of the area (1:125,000, BGS 1978 Northern East Anglia) shows that the groundwater level in the Chalk aquifer at the site approximately coincides with the base of the Norwich Crag and top of the Chalk and is at approximately between 15m and 20m below ground level, which is equivalent to about between 8m and 15m above OD. The groundwater flow direction across the site indicated by the groundwater contours on the map is generally from the southwest to the northeast towards an unnamed tributary of the Crostwick Beck that is located approximately 1.0km to the east of the site. From there the unnamed tributary flows in a generally northerly direction before its confluence with the Crostwick Beck some 4km to the northeast of the site, after which the beck flows to the east. The Crostwick Marsh SSSI is situated approximately 1km upstream (west) from the confluence and approximately 2.9km north of the site.

4.5

Based on the hydrogeology it is considered that the major component of groundwater flow from beneath the site area will travel north-east and any ground and surface water interaction will take place either towards the un-named tributary or further downstream in Crostwick Beck. The component of groundwater recharge (infiltration) from below the site reaching the Crostwick Beck near or upstream of the SSSI is anticipated to be very small, if not negligible.

4.6

In addition to this there is a thick unsaturated zone between the ground surface and the groundwater table consisting of fine grained granular soils deposits comprising Brickearth, Glacial Sand and Gravel and Norwich Crag that will provide major attenuation of any potential contaminants in the surface water run-off from the site as it move through any infiltration based SuDS scheme. Much of the runoff will be from roofs and non-vehicular hard-standings such as paths, but despite this additional safeguards will be provided where necessary such as sediment traps, settlement ponds, petrol / oil interceptors and filtration reed beds in the basins.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

WATER ABSTRACTION AND DISPOSAL 4.7

Issues relating to water abstraction and water disposal are considered within the Water Cycle Study of the Greater Norwich Development Partnership (Scot Wilson, 2010). RECREATIONAL DISTURBANCE

4.8

For the international sites, impacts from recreational disturbance cannot be easily discounted and require more comprehensive consideration to determine impacts on site integrity.

4.9

For the CWSs locally, impacts are likely to be relatively low due to several being in private ownership and without public access or generally likely to be of lower attractiveness to residents of the development. The restoration of Beeston Park is likely to provide an attractive recreational resource for residents who may otherwise visit local CWSs.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

REFERENCES Chris Blandford Associates (2008) Broadland District Landscape Assessment. Available from: http://www.broadland.gov.uk/housing_and_planning/618.aspa accessed8th February 2010 Doarks, C. (1995) Fen Management Strategy. English Nature, Norwich. Natural England (2009) Countryside Character. Volume 6: East of England. Available from: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/EoEcharacter_tcm6-5341.pdf

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 1: DESIGNATED SITES WITHIN 2KM

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Figure 1a: Location of County Wildlife Sites to the north of the proposed development area.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Figure 1b. Location of County Wildlife Sites to the south of the proposed development area.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 2: SITE CITATIONS

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Table 5. Citation for Crostwick Marsh SSSI.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Table 6. Citations for County Wildlife Sites within 2km of the site boundary. CWS number

Name

Description

1392

Paine’s Yard Wood, The Owlery & March Covert

Paine’s Yard Wood and The Owlery are varied woodlands of largely native species and of a varied structure, including abundant deadwood and stored coppice. Mature ash (Fraxinus excelsior) is a dominate species throughout, much of it arising from large coppice stools. Oak (Quercus robur) and birch (Betula pendula) are frequent and hazel (Corylus avellana) coppice dominates some areas; there are a number of non-native tree species in the canopy, including sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa) and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus). Elm (Ulmus procera) occurs in occasional dense stands, mostly in the form of young suckers. Rhododendron (Rhododendron ponticum) also occurs on the southern boundary, whilst holly (Ilex aquifolium) and rowan (Sorbus aucuparia) are rare throughout. Ornamental conifer species occur to the north. In some areas, the ground flora is dominated by large stands of bluebell (Endymion non-scriptus), with bracken (Pteridium aquilinum), soft rush (Juncus effusus) male fern and broad buckler fern common throughout. A small clearing to the south is dominated by bracken, with Yorkshire fog and climbing corydalis being common. Elsewhere, wood avens, foxglove, herb Robert, honeysuckle, hedge woundwort and bramble occur. Wood melick is occasional throughout. A derelict pond occurs on the eastern boundary. Paine’s Yard Wood narrows dramatically to the north, where the woodland follows the parish boundary, which is marked by a bank and impressive oaks, which occur as pollards and coppice stools. A mature hedge also follows the boundary and links the wood with The Owlery. The hedge is composed of dense stands of blackthorn, with some elder and occasional ash coppice. Hedgerow plants include upright hedge parsley, cow parsley, ground ivy and bramble. The Owlery is a small area of woodland to the north of Paine’s Yard and linked to it by the hedge mentioned above. The Owlery contains mature beech, probably the remnants of a larger plantation, as well as mature ash. Bluebell dominates the ground layer, with frequent red campion and bramble, as well as occasional bracken. In March Covert, Oak (Quercus robur) dominates a tight canopy with chestnut (Aesculus sativa) and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) also present. The shrub layer is mainly hazel (Corylus avellana) occasionally blackthorn (Prunus spinosa) and holly (Ilex aquilinum). Bramble (Rubus fruticosus) dominates the ground floor with patches of primrose (Primula vulgaris). Information on March Covert is based on the 1985 habitat survey (NWT)

1406

Wroxham Hall Woods

This is a large area of interconnected woodlands covering a number of different woodland types. The site is situated on sandy soils in the gently rolling landscape of the Bure valley and includes old moat diggings. There is no obvious current management except the removal of dead and dangerous trees and replanting of some areas. Much of the woodland is used for game rearing and shooting. The southern part of Big Wood is an area of old coppiced hazel (Corylus avellana) and common lime (Tilia x vulgaris) with regenerating English elm (Ulmus procera), elsewhere the scrub layer is dominated by young sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus). The ground flora is abundant dog’s mercury (Mercurialis perennis), red campion (Silene dioica) with nettle (Urtica dioica) and patches of low growing bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg) and locally frequent bluebell (Hyacinthoides non-scripta). Other areas to the north west are dominated by oak (Quercus robur) and beech (Fagus sylvatica) with little ground flora. The south east part of this wood has been replanted in the last few years, mainly with oak and sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa). The The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

CWS number

Name

Description ground flora here also contains rosebay willowherb (Chamerion angustifolium). Furze Burnt in the south is much the same with Scot’s pine (Pinus sylvestris) and a ground flora with yellow archangel (Lamiastrum galeobdolon). Beech Clump is again oak/birch dominated with areas of dense regenerating Scot’s pine and a shrub layer of rhododendron (Rhododendron ponticum) and ground-ivy (Glechoma hederacea). The majority of Cut Plantation in the north is dense mature woodland with oak, beech and sweet chestnut. The banks of a steep-sided open area of old marl-diggings are dominated by bramble and bracken. Garden Plantation woodland contains a mixture of Scot’s pine, birch and larch (Larix decidua) with two groves of yew. On the northern edge of the woodland there is oak, sweet chestnut, beech, giant sequoias (Sequioadendron giganteum) and yew (Taxus baccata)

1393

Ladies Wood, Church Carr & Springs

This site has various woodland, grassland and standing water habitats. The lakes are generally species poor and fringed by sallow (Salix cinerea) dominated carr. There are two areas of marshy grassland and one improved grassland step. Apart from an area of lime (Tilia x vulgaris) coppice the woodlands are dominated by oak (Quercus robur) and sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa). There has been some planting of deciduous trees throughout, otherwise no other discernible management. Part of this wood is ancient woodland. The majority of the site is oak dominated with a frequent sycamore understorey with occasional sweet chestnut, birch (Betula sp) and sallow. Hazel (Corylus avellana), elder (Sambucus nigra) and bird cherry (Prunus padus) further north form the shrub layer. The ground flora is dense bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) and bramble (Rubus fruticosus) with frequent raspberry (Rubus idaeus) in the south and abundant bluebell (Hyacinthoides non-scripta). Wetter areas occur, dominated by soft rush (Juncus effusus). At the southern narrow end is a dense area of sallow carr with undergrowth dominated by common reed (Phragmites australis), greater bulrush (Typha latifolia), yellow iris (Iris pseudacorus) and great willowherb (Epilobium hirsutum). Adjacent and slightly north is mature common lime coppice with occasional oak. The ground flora is relatively species rich with abundant dog’s mercury (Mercurialis perennis), ground-ivy (Glechoma hederacea), herb-Robert (Geranium robertianum), wood avens (Geum urbanum), frequent bramble (Rubus fruticosus) and occasional red campion (Silene dioica), redcurrant (Ribes rubrum), primrose (Primula vulgaris) and bluebell. Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) becomes dominant further north, hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) and elder form the shrub layer. Open area of uncut grassland which is dominated by grasses such as cock’s-foot (Dactylis glomerata), Yorkshire fog (Holcus lanatus), creeping bent (Agrostis stolonifera) and false oat-grass (Arrhenatherum elatius) with hogweed (Heracleum sphondylium) and rosebay willowherb (Chamerion angustifolium). There is a large lake partly fringed by grey willow. Floating vegetation is restricted to yellow water-lily (Nuphar lutea). Marginal vegetation is scattered lesser pond-sedge (Carex acutiformis) with bulrush, great willowherb, brooklime (Veronica beccabunga) and celery-leaved buttercup (Ranunculus sceleratus). There are also two ponds. The marshy grassland with scattered sallow is dominated by branched bur-reed (Sparganium erectum) with frequent great willowherb and redshank (Polygonum persicaria) with meadowsweet, marsh thistle (Cirsium palustre) and rosebay willowherb. It extends into a strip with hairy sedge (Carex hirta) and silverweed (Potentilla anserina), but is dominated by perennial rye-grass (Lolium perenne), Yorkshire fog, hogweed and white clover (Trifolium repens) further north

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

CWS number

Name

Description

1396

Spixworth Meadows

This site contains two shallow valleys leading to a tributary of the River Bure. The majority is damp semi-improved grassland with areas crossed by water-logged mesotrophic ditches. To the south and east of the site there are areas of scrub and woodland. The meadows are grazed by horses and the site has informal access and is mainly used by local people. The western end of the site is damp grassland dominated by Yorkshire fog (Holcus lanatus), creeping bent (Agrostis stolonifera), annual meadow-grass (Poa annua), smooth meadow-grass (Poa pratensis), rough meadow-grass (Poa trivialis) and cock's-foot (Dactylis glomerata). Nettle (Urtica dioica) forms widespread patches with celery-leaved buttercup (Ranunculus sceleratus), white dead-nettle (Lamium album), red dead-nettle (Lamium purpureum), ground-ivy (Glechoma hederacea), dog's mercury (Mercurialis perennis), common mouse-ear (Cerastium fontanum) and germander speedwell (Veronica chamaedrys). Two drains run through this area, both are very overgrown with bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg.) and hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna). The dykes support reed (Phragmites australis), reed sweet-grass (Glyceria maxima), great willowherb (Epilobium hirsutum), fool's water-cress (Apium nodiflorum) and water-crowfoot (Ranunculus aquatilis). The area is bounded by oak (Quercus robur), hawthorn, lime (Tilia x vulgaris) and sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus). There is a small area of fen to the north-east with soft rush (Juncus effusus), common valerian (Valeriana dioica), hairy sedge (Carex hirta), creeping bent (Agrostis stolonifera), ragged-Robin (Lychnis floscuculi) and common spotted-orchid (Dactylorhiza fuchsii) occurring. Much of the remainder of the site to the east is wetter grassland crossed by numerous water-logged ditches. This area is not as heavily grazed as the west and has more structural diversity with many tussocky areas with a similar species composition but has abundant hairy sedge. Ditches support a rich flora with greater pondsedge (Carex riparia), lesser pond-sedge (Carex acutiformis), soft rush, sharp-flowered rush (Juncus acutiflorus), branched bur-reed (Sparganium erectum), reed sweet-grass, lesser water-parsnip (Berula erecta), fool's water-cress and large bitter-cress (Cardamine amara). Oak and hawthorn form stands and woodland to the east and the north with alder (Alnus glutinosa) over holly (Ilex aquifolium), elder (Sambucus nigra), bramble and honeysuckle (Lonicera periclymenum) and a ground flora of herb-Robert (Geranium robertianum), lesser celandine (Ranunculus ficaria) and bluebell (Hyacinthoides non-scripta)

1402

Crostwick Common (South)

This site is situated on sandy soils containing many shallow hollows. Much of the site is tall herb or rank grassland with dense scrub although there is a small area of oak (Quercus robur) woodland. This is part of a common and is well used by visitors, particularly for walking dogs. A public footpath crosses the site. Present management seems to be restricted to path clearance and mowing near to the road. Open areas to the south are dominated by bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) whilst to the north they are dominated by Yorkshire fog (Holcus lanatus) with bluebell (Hyacinthoides nonscripta), nettle (Urtica dioica), rosebay willowherb (Chamerion angustifolium) and ground-ivy (Glechoma hederacea). In some areas climbing corydalis (Corydalis claviculata), sheep's sorrel (Rumex acetosella) and bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg.) occur, often with scattered scrub consisting of gorse (Ulex europaeus) and broom (Cytisus scoparius). These open areas are surrounded by dense scrub of sloe blackthorn (Prunus spinosa), hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), bramble, dog-rose (Rosa canina agg.) and young oak. In places tall birch (Betula pendula) and sycamore (Acer The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

CWS number

Name

Description pseudoplatanus) occur. Hollows contain dense sloe and broom whilst crab apple (Malus sylvestris) is occasional across the site. To the north-west of the site there is a war memorial and here oak woodland has developed with semi-mature trees of around 50 years. There is no shrub layer and the ground flora is patchy with bramble

1403

Crostwick Common (North)

This site is situated in the valley and consists of woodland, scrub and fen type communities. It is part of the common and has a public footpath along the south and south western edges, and is used by local people for dog walking. A band of sycamore woodland occurs at the southern end with dense bird cherry (Prunus spinosa) scrub which continues along the eastern boundary with more frequent hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), and young oak. Along the stream, a tributary of the River Bure, mainly alder (Alnus glutinosa) and sallow (Salix cinerea) carr, with some oak (Quercus robur) and silver birch (Betula pendula) on higher ground. Down the centre of the site is a wide band of fen communities including reed sweet-grass (Glyceria maxima), common reed (Phragmites australis), sedge (Carex spp.), meadowsweet (Filipendula ulmaria) along with marsh cinquefoil (Potentilla palustris), bogbean (Menyanthes trifoliata) and marsh pennywort (Hydrocotyle vulgaris) further north. The fen has a large amount of litter build up and is beginning to dry out. Scrub is encroaching from the east and west with bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg)

1404

Reservoir Meadow

This site consists of damp alder (Alnus glutinosa) carr with semiimproved grassland with areas of tall rank common reed (Phragmites australis). The grassland is seasonally grazed and the whole site is used for shooting with a game rearing pen. A number of dykes cross the site; the main water-carrying dykes run west-east; there is a small lake. The seasonally grazed grassland has a mixed sward with areas of soft rush (Juncus effusus), sharp-flowered rush (Juncus acutiflorus), hairy sedge (Carex hirta) and field wood-rush (Luzula campestris). Further north it also has areas of common reed with reed sweet-grass (Glyceria maxima) and nettle (Urtica dioica). On the south western edge is the damp alder carr woodland with some young ash (Fraxinus excelsior). The ground flora is dominated by nettle, herb-Robert (Geranium robertianum), bramble (Rubus fruticosus) and reed canary-grass (Phalaris arundinacea). The small lake has marginal reed, reed sweet-grass and branched bur-reed (Sparganium erectum) while the deep dykes additionally have soft rush.

2021

Tollshill Wood

Ancient, broad-leaved semi-natural woodland situated on the parish boundary. It is under private ownership and is managed predominantly as high forest. Recent management has included ride creation, larch plantation clear-felling, and scattered under-planting with native, broad-leaved trees. Evidence of past management includes several large coppice regrowths. A huge hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) and small-leaved lime (Tilia cordata) on the western boundary are particularly notable. A former drive to Rackheath Hall forms the woodâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s main ride, and at its eastern end the wood encompasses a section of the defunct parish boundary ditch. The wood is sited on former heathland east of Norwich and is generally dry in character, lying on light, acidic, sandy soils. There are open areas at the eastern end, one being created by treefall during the 1987 autumnal storm. The canopy is varied in structure and density, and is dominated by sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) and sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa), with frequent oak (Quercus robur) and beech (Fagus sylvatica). A small proportion of exotic

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

CWS number

Name

Description conifers is interspersed throughout, including grand fir (Abies grandis) and Scot’s pine (Pinus sylvestris). There is an open, welldeveloped understorey and shrub layer in places, with seedling generation in evidence. Species include sweet chestnut, sycamore, and bird cherry (Prunus padus). The ground flora includes areas of dense bluebell (Hyacinthoides non-scripta), particularly along the rides, wood anemone (Anemone nemorosa), with bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg.) and bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) which are codominant in places. Patches of climbing corydalis (Corydalis claviculata) are dispersed throughout, with foxglove (Digitalis purpurea), wood avens (Geum urbanum), yellow pimpernel (Lysimachia nemorum), wood dock (Rumex sanguineus), red campion (Silene dioica), and hedge woundwort (Stachys sylvatica). Wild daffodil (Narcissus pseudonarcissus) is also known to occur. There are two open areas at the eastern end of the wood. One has been planted up with native broad-leaved trees, predominantly oak. Its periphery supports vestiges of a dry grassland flora which includes sheep’s sorrel (Rumex acetosella), with wood sage (Teucrium scorodonia), wild strawberry (Fragaria vesca), pignut (Conopodium majus) and primrose (Primula vulgaris) also occurring. The second area, adjacent to the parish boundary ditch, has remained open for a longer period and is dominated by bracken, with patches of colonising silver birch (Betula pendula), goat willow (Salix caprea) and grey willow (Salix cinerea)

2041

Racecourse Plantation

A moderately large area of commercially-managed coniferous plantation and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland, over dry, sandy, acidic soils on what was historically part of Mousehold Heath. There are remnants of a double earthbank along the parish boundary to the northeast. The woodland is privately owned; archery and quad-biking take place on-site. The site is predominantly a mosaic of coniferous plantations and broad-leaved semi-natural woodland, divided into compartments by a network of rides and informal footpaths. Compartments of uniform, even-aged conifers include Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), European larch (Larix decidua) and western redcedar (Thuja plicata); together with Norway spruce (Picea abies), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and Corsican pine (Pinus nigra). The majority of broad-leaved woodland is even-aged and fairly recent. To the south, freely regenerating silver birch (Betula pendula) is interspersed with western hemlock-spruce (Tsuga heterophylla) and larch, with an understorey of goat willow (Salix caprea), sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa), oak (Quercus robur), Scots pine, and in places rhododendron (Rhododendron ponticum). To the north, older, more established areas of broad-leaved semi-natural woodland are dominated by oak, birch and hazel (Corylus avellana). The ground layer is dominated by bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) in places and honeysuckle (Lonicera periclymenum) is abundant. Dryopteris ferns, including scaly male-fern (Dryopteris affinis), wood avens (Geum urbanum), ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea), three-nerved sandwort (Moehringia trinervia), wood forget-me-not (Myosotis sylvatica), sanicle (Sanicula europaea), common figwort (Scrophularia nodosa) and wood sage (Teucrium scorodonia) are among the species present. False brome (Brachypodium sylvaticum) and giant fescue (Festuca gigantea) are occasional throughout. The extensive network of rides and paths hold the site’s main botanical interest and support components of a dry-heath and acidic grassland flora. The most significant rides are in the northwestern section. These are wide and damp in places; the most species-rich being bordered by regenerating broadleaves which are encroaching. Ling (Calluna vulgaris), bell heather (Erica cinerea) and cross-leaved heath (Erica

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

CWS number

Name

Description tetralix) occur, with heath wood-rush (Luzula multiflora), heath bedstraw (Galium saxatile), heath milkwort (Polygala serpyllifolia) and heath-grass (Danthonia decumbens). Damp sections support frequent marsh thistle (Cirsium palustre), with glaucous sedge (Carex flacca), common yellow-sedge (Carex demissa), sharp-flowered rush (Juncus acutiflorus), compact rush (Juncus conglomeratus), greater birdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s-foot- trefoil (Lotus uliginosus), chaffweed (Anagallis minima) and allseed (Radiola linoides). Other species of note in the rides include sweet vernal-grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum), common knapweed (Centaurea nigra), creeping cinquefoil (Potentilla reptans), sheepâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sorrel (Rumex acetosella) and heath speedwell (Veronica officinalis). Trailing tormentil (Potentilla anglica) is also known to occur. At the centre of the wood a quad-bike area, which has recently been extended, is delineated by raised earth bunds. These are being recolonised by broom (Cytisus scoparius ssp. scoparius) and birch with herbs, including common centaury (Centaurium erythraea) and heath speedwell. Ruderals cover much of the area. A small area adjacent to the northeast boundary has recently been planted with native broadleaves, and nearby woodland and scrub has regenerated over a small area which had previously been occupied by buildings. A small eutrophic pond occurs near the western boundary. It is overgrown by grey willow (Salix cinerea) and supports Cyperus sedge (Carex pseudocyperus) and gypsywort (Lycopus europaeus)

1469

Mousehold Heath & Valley Drive

This is a large and complex site of former heathland, now mostly covered by recent woodland. Some patches of acid grassland and heath remain. The boundary of the site also includes a number of sports pitches where the grass has been improved. Broadleaved semi-natural woodland dominates most of the site and is of varying ages, the youngest including abundant small clearings with tall acid scrub present. Mature and semi-mature oak (Quercus robur) and silver birch (Betula pendula) dominate naturally regenerated areas in a fairly low canopy. Towards the south and east along main roads and tracks much older trees are present, many clearly having been planted. These include large beech (Fagus sylvatica) and lime (Tilia x vulgaris) as well as older specimens of the previous species. The ground flora and shrub layer are generally both poorly developed and much bare ground is present. Shrubs present include scattered hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) and elder (Sambucus nigra). Sheep's-fescue (Festuca ovina) is common in recently wooded areas. There are areas of tall acid scrub present throughout the site, including some patches which are particularly large. In these areas gorse dominates with broom (Cytisus scoparius) and other more neutral species such as hawthorn. Abundant silver birch and oak are nearly always present, and in places wild cherry (Prunus avium). The heathland areas are situated within the woodland towards the north of the site. They comprise predominately acid grassland with a small proportion covered by heather (Calluna vulgaris) and gorse (Ulex europaeus). There is often abundant small seedlings of heather present in the mown/rabbit grazed turf. Sheep's fescue is the dominant grass with hair-grass (Deschampsia flexuosa) on the barest ground growing with mosses and common sorrel (Rumex acetosa). Rosebay willowherb (Chamerion angustifolium) is present in areas cleared of trees. There are two small seasonally dry ponds present in this part of the site which contain reed (Phragmites australis) and soft-rush (Juncus effusus). The extreme southern end of the site also comprises acid grassland but lacks heather and often has richer areas with cock's-foot (Dactylis glomerata) and other species

1468

Fiddle

A small broad leaved plantation woodland with some young and very

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

CWS number

Name Wood & Night Plantation

Description old coppice situated on light sandy neutral soil with urban surroundings. The wood is also situated on an incline from west to east which incorporates a variety of ridges, humps and hollows which assist drainage causing the ground to be fairly dry. The woodland has an even aged canopy composed mainly of abundant sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) and frequent ash (Fraxinus excelsior). Also present are occasional hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) and locally frequent sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa). There is one particular old coppiced example of the taller of these species in the middle of the wood. The understorey is of mixed age and constitutes both coppiced and regenerated small-leaved elm (Ulmus minor), especially in the north eastern corner. Other understorey species include frequent hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) and elder (Sambucus nigra) as well as occasional sycamore and lime (Tilia x vulgaris). The ground flora is fairly typical of such habitat displaying an abundance of ivy (Hedera helix) as well as areas of bramble (Rubus fruticosus) and common nettle (Urtica dioica). Wood avens (Geum urbanum) and dog's mercury (Mercurialis perennis) are also to be found in local abundance as well as herb robert (Geranium robertianum) and enchanter's-nightshade (Circaea lutetiana)

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

Important Notice: This section contains details of legislation and planning policy applicable in Britain only (i.e. not including the Isle of Man, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland or the Channel Islands) and is provided for general guidance only. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, this section should not be relied upon as a definitive statement of the law. NATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LEGISLATION AFFORDED TO HABITATS Statutory Designations: National Nationally important areas of special scientific interest, by reason of their flora, fauna, or geological or physiographical features, are notified by the countryside agencies as statutory Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 and latterly the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). As well as underpinning other national designations (such as National Nature Reserves which are declared by the countryside agencies under the same legislation), the system also provides statutory protection for terrestrial and coastal sites which are important within a European context (Natura 2000 network) and globally (such as Wetlands of International Importance). See subsequent sections for details of these designations. Improved provisions for the protection and management of SSSIs have been introduced by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (in England and Wales) and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004. The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) also provides for the making of Limestone Pavement Orders, which prohibit the disturbance and removal of limestone from such designated areas, and the designation of Marine Nature Reserves, for which byelaws must be made to protect them. Statutory Designations: International Special Protection Areas (SPAs), together with Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) form the Natura 2000 network. The Government is obliged to identify and classify SPAs under the EC Birds Directive (Council Directive 2009/147/EC (formerly 79/409/EEC)) on the Conservation of Wild Birds). SPAs are areas of the most important habitat for rare (listed on Annex I of the Directive) and migratory birds within the European Union. Protection afforded SPAs in terrestrial areas and territorial marine waters out to 12 nautical miles (nm) is given by The Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010. The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended) provide a mechanism for the designation and protection of SPAs in UK offshore waters (from 12â&#x20AC;&#x2018;200 nm). The Government is obliged to identify and designate SACs under the EC Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora). These are areas which have been identified as best representing the range and variety of habitats and (non-bird) species listed on Annexes I and II to the Directive within The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

the European Union. SACs in terrestrial areas and territorial marine waters out to 12 nautical miles are protected under The Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010. The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended) provide a mechanism for the designation and protection of SACs in UK offshore waters (from 12â&#x20AC;&#x2018;200 nm). Ramsar sites are designated under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, agreed in Ramsar, Iran, in 1971. The Convention covers all aspects of wetland conservation and wise use, in particular recognizing wetlands as ecosystems that are globally important for biodiversity conservation. Wetlands can include areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water and may be natural or artificial, permanent or temporary. Wetlands may also incorporate riparian and coastal zones adjacent to the wetlands. Ramsar sites are underpinned through prior notification as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and as such receive statutory protection under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) with further protection provided by the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000. Policy statements have been issued by the Government in England and Wales highlighting the special status of Ramsar sites. This effectively extends the level of protection to that afforded to sites which have been designated under the EC Birds and Habitats Directives as part of the Natura 2000 network (e.g. SACs & SPAs). Statutory Designations: Local Under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) may be declared by local authorities after consultation with the relevant countryside agency. LNRs are declared for sites holding special wildlife or geological interest at a local level and are managed for nature conservation, and provide opportunities for research and education and enjoyment of nature. Non-Statutory Designations Areas considered to be of local conservation interest may be designated by local authorities as a Wildlife Site, under a variety of names such as County Wildlife Sites (CWS), Listed Wildlife Sites (LWS), Local Nature Conservation-sites (LNCS), Sites of Biological Importance (SBIs), Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs), or Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCIs). The criteria for designation may vary between counties. Together with the statutory designations, these are defined in local and structure plans under the Town and Country Planning system and are a material consideration when planning applications are being determined. The level of protection afforded to these sites through local planning policies and development frameworks may vary between counties. The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 are intended to protect ‘important’ countryside hedgerows from destruction or damage. A hedgerow is considered important if (a) has existed for 30 years or more; and (b) satisfies at least one of the criteria listed in Part II of Schedule 1 of the Regulations. Under the Regulations, it is against the law to remove or destroy certain hedgerows without permission from the local planning authority. Hedgerows on or adjacent to common land, village greens, SSSIs (including all terrestrial SACs, NNRs and SPAs), LNRs, land used for agriculture or forestry and land used for the keeping or breeding of horses, ponies or donkeys are covered by these regulations. Hedgerows 'within or marking the boundary of the curtilage of a dwelling-house' are not. NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The National Planning Policy Framework replaced PPS9 in April 2012 and emphasises the need for sustainable development. The Framework specifies the need for protection of designated sites and priority habitats and priority species. An emphasis is also made for the need for ecological networks via preservation, restoration and re-creation. The protection and recovery of priority species – that is those listed as UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species – is also listed as a requirement of planning policy. In determining planning application, planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by ensuring that: designated sites are protected from adverse harm; there is appropriate mitigation or compensation where significant harm cannot be avoided; opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments are encouraged; planning permission is refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats including aged or veteran trees and also ancient woodland.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Designated Sites / Beyond Green

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Phase 1 Habitats, Hedgerows and Botany Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey and Botanical Survey Report for Beyond Green

Author Job No.

Jit Thacker BSc. (Hons) PhD & Alex Prendergast BSc(Hons) MSc MIEEM 100368 Reviewed by

Approved by

Date

Initial

Graham Hopkins

5th May 2011

Revision

Graham Hopkins

Sam Phillips Rachel Saunders

20th September 2012

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Phase 1 Habitats, Hedgerows and Botany Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

Background

Site Context and Status

METHODOLOGY

Surveyors

Desktop Study

Field Surveys

Habitat and Species Designations

Constraints

RESULTS

Desktop Study

Phase 1 Habitats

Botanical Surveys

DISCUSSION

Species of Conservation Concern

Veteran Trees

Invasive Species

UK BAP Priority Species and Habitats

Nature Conservation Value

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: MAPS

APPENDIX 2: SPECIES INVENTORY

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION

LIABILITY The Ecology Consultancy has prepared this report for the sole use of the commissioning party in accordance with the agreement under which our services were performed. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the advice in this report or any other service provided by us. This report may not be relied upon by any other party without the prior written permissi on of The Ecology Consultancy. The content of this report is, at least in part, based upon information provided by others a nd on the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested. Information obtained from any third party has not been independently verified by The Ecology Consultancy, unless otherwise stated in the report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned by Beyond Green to carry out a Phase 1 and botany survey of an area of proposed development land to the north-east of Norwich, Norfolk. The work comprised a data search for records of noteworthy habitats and species and field surveys including a Phase 1 survey, a formal hedgerow survey, and a detailed botanical survey. The desktop survey returned no records of veteran trees from the site but the site boundary does overlap a block of ancient woodland and there are other blocks of ancient woodland nearby. The field surveys were undertaken over the course of the spring, summer and autumn of 2010 and spring 2011. No notable plants were recorded during the botanical surveys. Plant communities in the main habitats consist of common and widespread species. Invasive non-native species are present in some areas, principally Japanese knotweed which is listed on schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). It is an offence to cause it to grow in the wild. The majority of the site to be arable cropland (154ha) interspersed with hedgerows. The other Phase 1 habitats are: woodland (semi-natural broad-leaved (16.4ha) and broad-leaved plantation (2.4ha)); improved grassland (7.7ha); amenity grassland (0.7ha), parkland and scattered trees (12.4ha); hedgerows (11.05km); and three small ponds. Twenty-four of the site’s existing hedgerows were considered to meet the criteria to qualify as BAP priority habitats. Fourteen hedgerows or sections of hedgerow were evaluated as qualifying as ‘Important Hedgerows’ as defined by the Hedgerow Regulations 1997. The total length of mapped hedgerows is 10.2km, with small limited sections elsewhere to give a total of 11.05km It is considered that the site contains four UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) priority habitats, namely: parkland and wood-pasture, lowland mixed deciduous woodland, hedgerow and one pond.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1

1.2

This report present the results of the Phase 1 habitat survey, additional botany surveys and hedgerow surveys. Site Context and Status

1.3

The development covers approximately 200ha, as an arc along the north-east of Norwich, from approximately the boundary of Norwich International Airport to the Wroxham Road, south of Spixworth and north of Old Catton and Sprowston. To provide a wider landscape context for the work, a larger area was included within the scope of the ecological work (a total of approximately 350ha) and this is referred to as the survey area.

1.4

The survey and development areas largely comprise arable farmland with fields separated by hedgerows and areas of other habitats including broadleaved woodland and parkland. As described by Chris Blandford Associates (2008) the site is within the Central North Norfolk Joint Character Area (National Character Area number 78; English Nature, 1999). Its district character is â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;wooded estatelandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, straddling the Spixworth wooded estateland and the Rackheath and Salhouse wooded estateland. The semi-natural vegetation cover is heath with, secondarily, woodland. The suface geology is predominantly loam with some sand and gravel, with an altitude range of approximately 20-40m.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

2 METHODOLOGY SURVEYORS 2.1

The surveys were carried out by Alex Prendergast BSc (Hons), MSc (The Ecology Consultancy, Ecologist) and Dr Jit Thacker. Both are experienced field botanists and Alex holds a level-5 Field Identification Skills Certificate from the Botanical Society of the British Isles.

2.2

DESKTOP STUDY Information regarding the present and historical botanical interest of the site and within a further 2 km radius was requested from the Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service (NBIS). The data provided by NBIS include: Noteworthy species, including protected species, those of conservation concern and species listed on the UK Biodiversity Action Plan and veteran trees. The absence of a speciesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; record does not necessarily denote absence, rather it could be due to a lack of recorder effort locally. Ancient woodland habitats. FIELD SURVEYS Walkover

2.3

Early in the spring of 2010 a walkover of the whole site was undertaken to gain familiarity with the site and to identify key habitat areas for more detailed surveys. Phase 1 Survey

2.4

The Phase 1 survey was carried out in accordance with JNCC methodology (JNCC 2010). Survey work was undertaken across the season to generate species inventories for the principal habitat areas, and the formal Phase 1 mapping on various dates in September 2010. Hedgerows

2.5

The hedgerow survey was carried out following the hedgerow survey guidelines (Defra, 1997) including counting woody species along an approximate 30m section. Long hedgerows were surveyed at two or more sections, as were hedgerows that changed in character over their length.

2.6

The surveys took place between the 4th and 16th September 2010 and supplemented in May 2011. A total of 89 hedgerows or hedgerow sections were surveyed in this area.

2.7

The hedgerows were assessed for importance based on the Hedgerow Regulations 1997. Hedgerow importance is based on a variety of criteria including age, the

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

number of woody species, presence of bank or ditch and connectivity to other habitat such as ponds or broadleaved woodland. 2.8

The presence of standard trees, and whether these were veterans, was recorded. HABITAT AND SPECIES DESIGNATIONS Phase 1 and UK Biodiversity Action Plan Habitats

2.9

The principal Phase 1 and UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) priority habitats present are briefly defined below (Table 1; following JNCC (2010) and Maddock (2011), respectively). All of the UK BAP priority habitats also correspond to a Norfolk BAP priority habitat. The UK BAP priority habitats are defined as Habitats of Principal Importance under the NERC (2006) Act. Table 1. Summary of Phase 1 and UK and Norfolk BAP priority habitats definitions. Classification Phase 1 Phase 1

Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 1

Phase 1

Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 1

Habitat name ( or Norfolk BAP name)

Definition

Woodland: broadleaved, seminatural woodland Woodland: broadleaved plantation Woodland: mixed plantation Woodland: coniferous plantation Woodland: parkland and scattered trees Semi-improved neutral grassland

Broad-leaved woodland that does not obviously originate from planting

Improved grassland Ponds

Intact hedge, species-rich Phase 1 Intact hedge, species-poor Phase 1 Defunct hedge, species rich Phase 1 Defunct hedge, species poor Phase 1 Hedge and trees, native species-rich Phase 1 Hedge and trees, native speciespoor Phase 1 Tall ruderal Phase 1 Amenity grassland Phase 1 Arable BAP priority habitats UK BAP Lowland meadow Norfolk BAP (lowland meadows

Obviously planted woodland with 90% of broad-leaved trees Obviously planted woodland with 10-90% of either broad-leaved or conifer Obviously planted woodland with >90% of conifers

Tree cover of <30%

Grassland that has been modified with fertilizer, grazing, drainage etc with a less diverse composition that unimproved grassland Meadows and pastures heavily modified by fertilization, grazing, etc. Open water lying beyond the limits of swamp or emergent vegetation Entire and more-or-less stock proof, a diversity of native woody species and good hedgerow bottom flora Entire and more-or-less tock proof, a low diversity of native woody species and poor hedgerow bottom flora With gaps and not stock proof, a diversity of native woody species and good hedgerow bottom flora With gaps and not stock proof, a low diversity of native woody species and poor hedgerow bottom flora With trees, diversity of native flora With trees, but a low diversity of native flora

Stands of tall biennial or perennial dicotyledons Intensively managed and regularly mown grasslands Arable cropland Most forms of unimproved neutral grassland in lowland areas

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Classification

UK BAP Norfolk BAP UK BAP Norfolk BAP

Habitat name ( or Norfolk BAP name) and pastures) Lowland mixed deciduous woodland Ponds

UK BAP Norfolk BAP

Hedgerows

UK BAP Norfolk BAP

Arable field margins (Norfolk: cereal field margins) Wood-pastures and parkland (Lowland woodpasture and parkland)

UK BAP Norfolk BAP

Definition

Most semi-natural woodland in eastern England

Permanent and seasonal standing water bodies and with species of high conservation importance such as great crested newts, a rich fauna of noteworthy invertebrates or plants or otherwise of high ecological quality Any boundary line of trees or shrubs over 20m long and less than 5m wide with gaps less that 20m wide and consisting predominantly (i.e. 80% or more cover) of native woody species Herbaceous strips or blocks around arable fields that are managed specifically to provide benefits for wildlife, such as cultivated low-input margins or those sown to provide seed for birds Areas of scattered trees with a long-established tradition of management and where the site is in good condition

Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Species 2.10 UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) priority species are those listed in the UK BAP and are also Species of Principal Importance under the NERC Act (2006). Species of Conservation Concern 2.11 Plants may be listed as threatened at different scales, with the relevant texts listing speciesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; statuses being Cheffings & Farrell (2005) and Stace (2010). Norfolk scarcity is an informal category based on assessments in Beckett & Bull (1999). CONSTRAINTS 2.12 There were no constraints to the surveys, although it should be noted that some areas around the buildings around Red Hall and Beeston Hall were not surveyed as they are clearly residential. This exclusion applies to several ponds.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

3 RESULTS DESKTOP STUDY 3.1

Habitats Three blocks of ancient woodland are present within 2km of the site (Appendix 1: Figure 1a and 1b); none are within the site except for parts of Ladies Wood, Church Carr and Springs. Table 2. Ancient woodland blocks within 2km. Site name (if known)

Ladies Wood, Church Carr & Springs Tollshill Wood

County Wildlife Site number (if designated) 1393 2021

Sprowston Wood Ortolanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wood Bulmer Coppice

Location and distance

Part within north-east corner of site boundary 20m, on opposite side of the Wroxham Road c. 50m of east boundary, largely planted to conifer 1.6km to north east, headwater of Dobbâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Beck 1.8km to south-east, adjacent to the Rackheath Road

3.2

No veteran trees were identified on site by the data search.

3.3

Protected or noteworthy vascular plants No records of any plant species formally listed as being of conservation concern were returned, although several records of basil thyme Clinopodium acinos were returned from the vicinity of east Spixworth. Basil thyme is scarce in Norfolk, largely restricted to the Breckland area (Beckett & Bull, 1999).

3.4

PHASE 1 HABITATS The development area supports eight main Phase 1 habitats (Table 3). The principal habitat is arable cropland which is separated by frequent hedgerows, with the other habitats forming minor components. Table 3. Summary of Phase 1 habitats. Habitat Extent Occurrence (ha) Arable fields 154 Throughout Amenity grassland 0.7 Rugby club in centre of site; school playing fields to the south of this Woodland, broad- 16.4 Present mainly to the east and north in small parcels, leaved semi-natural mostly parts of Beeston Park. Parkland and 12.4 Present in two main areas, Beeston Park and south of scattered trees Red Hall stables Improved grassland 7.7 Mainly grazing to the north of Red Hall stables and Park Farm Broad-leaved 2.4 A few small areas including some new planting at the plantation woodland extreme south of the site. Hedgerows 11.05km Throughout The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Habitat Line of trees Ponds

3.5

Extent (ha) 880m <1ha

Occurrence Throughout Traditional ponds near Beeston Hall (5) and near southwest boundary although some are outside of the site boundary

Plantation woodland of all types together represents 3% of the survey area, and semi-improved neutral grassland and tall ruderal both cover less than 1ha.

3.6

Arable The majority of the development land is arable. Arable plants associated with this habitat on the site include common species such as field pansy Viola arvensis, common chickweed Stellaria media, common cudweed Filago vulgaris, cleavers

Galium aparine, field poppy Papaver rhoeas, petty spurge Euphorbia peplus, white campion Silene latifolia, common field speedwell Veronica persica and fat hen

Chenopodium album. The only arable species of note was green field speedwell Veronica agrestis which is listed as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Least Concernâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; (Cheffings & Farrell, 2005) but is decreasing nationally. Green field speedwell Veronica agrestis was recorded as several plants on a single small section of arable margin close to North Walsham Road. 3.7

All arable fields on the site were assessed for their bryophyte floras. Attention was focused on field corners and margins, and which are known to be of greater value to bryophytes. Much of the site was species-poor for bryophytes with only three very common taxa (Brachythecium rutabulum, Kindbergia praelonga and Bryum rubens) recorded from most fields. Other species recorded in low numbers across the site include Pohlia melanodon, Funaria hygrometrica and Ceratodon purpureus. All are common species.

3.8

Species associated with tracks and field entrances include Bryum argenteum and

Bryum dichotomum (the latter particularly around TG251137, near Beeston Lane). 3.9

A headland of overwintered cereal stubble along Quaker Lane (TG235142) was found to support a richer arable bryophyte community than elsewhere on the site including

Bryum argenteum, Bryum dichotomum, Bryum rubens, Didymodon insulanus, Ceratodon purpureus, Pohlia melanodon, Barbula convoluta , and Phascum cuspidatum. Although bryophytes are present here in greater quantities than anywhere else on the site these are all common species. 3.10 Overwintered stubble is a valuable habitat for bryophytes as they complete much of their life cycle over the winter months while conditions are moister and while there is less competition from other plants. It is now an increasingly rare habitat as winter

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

wheat and other autumn-sown crops become more popular. Overwintered stubble is also a valuable habitat for certain arable weeds, arable invertebrates and birds. 3.11 This headland of overwintered stubble coincides with an area of soil which is significantly sandier than much of the site. Much of the survey area is occupied by heavy clay-rich soils, with the lighter sandier soils present on the higher ground. Substrate is a significant factor in determining a site’s biodiversity, particularly regarding bryophytes. Lighter soils retain fewer nutrients; therefore crops and weeds are less competitive allowing the shorter bryophytes, and other specialist plants growing alongside them, to thrive. 3.12 Associated with many of the arable fields are fallow field margins and hedgerows containing mature trees. Amenity grassland 3.13 Two large areas – the rugby club in the centre of the site and school playing fields to its immediate south - consist of amenity grassland, totalling 22ha in area. These are of minimal botanical interest being dominated by a sown mix of hard-wearing grasses, mainly perennial rye-grass Lolium perenne and occasional established weeds such as ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata and daisy Bellis perennis. Both areas include some buildings, and the school site has an area of Astroturf. The school site has a number of tree-lined avenues, but neither of the sites is fringed by Important Hedgerows as defined under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997... Semi-natural broadleaved woodland 3.14 Semi-natural broadleaved woodland is scattered across the site, particularly in the east, making up a total of 17ha. Some of this shows evidence of being of some age, with ancient oaks and areas of former hazel coppice which are remnants of a former woodland management. Most of the woodland on the site is plantation. The ground flora is typically species-poor, probably due to heavy replanting in much of the woodland, and in many sections sycamore is present at high frequency. 3.15 No assessment was made of the site’s value to locally important bramble species (e.g. the near locally endemic Rubus iceniensis) which are known to be present nearby; however, habitats within woodlands, particularly on their edges, are suitable for notable bramble species. All brambles were recorded as an aggregate. Totalling 6.6 ha, there is an arc of woodland south of Park Farm (centred on TG25571329; ‘Foxburrow Plantation’). It is likely that this is derived from ancient woodland but has been replanted, possibly several times. There are large numbers of ancient pedunculate oaks Quercus robur in these blocks, particularly area 11. Other trees include sweet chestnut Castanea sativum, The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

hornbeam Carpinus betulus, and ash Fraxinus excelsior, and (in area 13) a few conifers. Understoreys consist of elder Sambucus nigra, holly Ilex

aquifolium, hazel in parts of area 11 formerly coppiced), field maple Acer campestre and Wych elm Ulmus glabra, with the invasive non-native rhododendron Rhododendron ponticum present in area 10. Ground flora is sparse but dominated by bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. with red campion

Silene dioica, bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta, sanicle Sanicula europaea, star-of-Bethlehem Ornithogalum angustifolium , dogâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mercury Mercurialis

perennis, wood meadow-grass Poa nemoralis, lily-of-the-valley Convallaria majalis, broad buckler-fern Dryopteris dilatata and ivy Hedera helix. (These areas include Foxburrow and Spanish Plantations, and are all part of Beeston Park). It is considered that the lily-of the valley is likely to be a garden escape or otherwise introduced in this instance. The invasive garden form of yellow archangel Lamiastrum galeobdolon ssp argentatum is present close to the cottage adjoining the wood. A block of woodland to the west of Park Farm (Shrubbery Plantation of Beeston Park), totalling 2.6ha (TG24591399). Area 8 is open broadleaved woodland. The northern end includes mature pedunculate oaks, among them standing dying specimens. Sweet chestnut (several ancient specimens included) and hazel also occur, and undergrowth is choked with nettle Urtica

dioica, bramble, and bracken Pteridium aquilinum, with foxgloves Digitalis purpurea occasional where there is more light. Towards the south (area 9) the woodland becomes younger and more dense, and is mainly hazel and elder, although there are still ancient pedunculate oak and sweet chestnuts. Rhododendron occurs, and there are a few fir ( Abies sp) trees. Sprowston Plantation is semi-natural broadleaved woodland totalling 1.7ha. The northern section is former hazel coppice with oak standards and occasional ash, holly and elder. A central belt is dominated by dense sycamore c. 20 years old, as a result there is little ground flora although dogâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mercury and three-nerved sandwort Moehringia trinervia are present. The southern section is more hazel coppice and is quite dense, although oak standards are still present (TG26001306). Lawn Plantation, south of Red Hall. 1.1ha (TG24731366). The southern section has some ancient oak and sweet chestnuts. Understorey of ash, hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, sycamore and elder. Ground flora consists of little more than dense bramble. The northern half also has beech Fagus

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

sylvatica and occasional Scots pine Pinus silvestris and fir. There is some dead wood, including some standing and some dying trees. Parts of Coopersholes Plantation (TG26211335), particularly the southern section of this area are of semi-natural broadleaved woodland, which totals 1.1 ha. It is quite open, with silver birch Betula pendula, holly, yew Taxus

baccata, hazel and field maple and some mature oaks. Ground flora includes abundant

bluebell

and

occasional

hybrid

bluebell

Hyacinthoides

Ă&#x2014;massartiana, wood avens Geum urbanum, bramble, ground ivy Glechoma

hederacea, red campion and bracken. The northern section (TG25941368) is separated from area 18 by an area of obvious mixed plantation. Area 15 is about 1.1 ha in area and mainly consists of young sycamore with occasional mature oaks. Nettle and bramble dominate the very dense ground flora. Some hazel and planted cypresses are also present. A small area at TG25791441 is former hazel coppice, long unmanaged. This is one of the better fragments of ancient woodland on the site. It includes ancient oaks with ash, field maple, hazel and hawthorn also present, especially at the edges of the block. Ramsons Allium ursinum, bluebells, wood false-brome Brachypodium sylvaticum , remote sedge Carex remota, ground ivy and red campion are present in the ground flora. There is small area of mature woodland with closed canopy at TG25311413. Includes some large pedunculate oaks, and Wych elm and sweet chestnut. Northern edge has a planted row of cypresses and a water-filled ditch (poor quality with no aquatic plants, water turbid). Eastern end of the block is more open with sycamore and some limited ground flora (ground ivy, red campion, nettle). A small area at TG24951427 includes a few mature oaks and lots of sweet chestnut, both mature and younger. Ground flora is poor, bramble and nettle only seen. Edge of feature has elm, including some dead specimens, hawthorn and holly. A small section at TG25041375 is dominated by mature oaks with some younger sycamore.

Understorey consists of

holly,

elder,

sycamore,

rhododendron and Wych elm. Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus, bramble and ivy are present in ground flora.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Parkland and scattered trees 3.16 Several areas of improved grazing with scattered ancient trees exist in the survey area. Based on apparent age, these are likely to meet UK BAP priority habitat criteria (Maddock, 2011): Immediately south of Red Hall at about TG24841372, where horse-grazed fields contain veteran oaks and sweet chestnuts, including some dying. Beeston Park, at TG25701376, where sheep grazing contains scattered veteran pedunculate oak and beech. The grassland is an example of semiimproved

mesotrophic

grassland

allied

the

National

Vegetation

Classification (NVC) community MG1 (Arrhenatherum elatius grassland -

Urtica dioica sub-community). The sward is dominated by tall/rank/coarse grasses dominated by false oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius, cock's-foot

Dactylis glomerata and Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus. Herbs are few, with the main species being nettle and broad-leaved dock Rumex obtusifolius. Rarer species include meadow fox-tail Alopecurus pratensis, cat's-ear Hypochaeris

radicata, lesser trefoil Trifolium dubium and germander speedwell Veronica chamaedrys. A distinct more disturbed community including frequent greater plantain Plantago major, daisy, perennial ryegrass, and white clover Trifolium

repens is present along the road verge. A further smaller section (TG26091330), with pedunculate oak and beech veterans. Improved grassland 3.17 Improved grazing is scattered throughout the site. The main areas are associated with Red Hall, and are present to its immediate north, (centred around TG25051409, totalling 7.7 ha) with a further small section to its southwest (0.8 ha). Further areas are to be found immediately north of Park Farm (totalling 3.5 ha). These areas are dominated by perennial rye grass and have no ecological interest. Plantation woodland - broadleaved 3.18 Several small sections of broadleaved plantation fringe the site: A small (0.7ha) young holly plantation at TG25421413. 2ha of c. 15 years old plantation. Includes hazel, pedunculate oak, bird cherry Prunus padus, guelder-rose Viburnum opulus, silver birch, hawthorn, bramble and grey willow Salix cinerea, with a large patch of amenity grassland in the middle. TG24791262.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Aspen Populus tremula plantation, c.0.25ha at TG24171357. Ponds 3.19 The Phase 1 survey found no significant ponds within the wider arable landscape, except for two hedgerow ponds to the west and south-west of the site. A single pond was present at the very north-east corner of Beeston Park, surrounded by trees and shrubs and without aquatic vegetation. Hedgerows 3.20 Twenty-six hedgerows or hedgerow lengths were mapped, with a total length of 10.2km, with small limited sections elsewhere to give a total of 11.05km. 3.21 The majority are generally intact and many contain oak trees, some of which are likely to be ancient. The ground flora associated with the hedgerows was species-poor. The woody species found most frequently is hawthorn, followed by blackthorn

Prunus spinosa, field maple, hazel and holly. The dominant climbing species are bramble and ivy but hedge bindweed Calystegia sepium, honeysuckle Lonicera

periclymenum and hops Humulus lupulus were also recorded. 3.22 Twenty-four of the site’s existing hedgerows were considered to meet the criteria to qualify as BAP habitats (Appendix 1: Figure 3). 3.23 Fourteen hedgerows or sections of hedgerow were evaluated as qualifying as ‘Important Hedgerows’ as defined by the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 (Appendix 1: Figure 4). BOTANICAL SURVEYS 3.24 The arable weed flora was generally poor and consisted of common and widespread species. The most diverse area for arable weeds was area 71 (TG25311429), where plants included green field-speedwell, wall speedwell Veronica. arvensis, common field speedwell V. persica, smooth tare Vicia tetrasperma, field pansy, black-grass

Alopecurus myosuroides, common fiddleneck Amsinckia micrantha and scarlet pimpernel Anagallis arvensis. These are mostly very widespread and common species, although green field-speedwell is generally uncommon at a county scale (Beckett & Bull, 1999). 3.25 Woodland floras were generally poor, with no clear indicators of ancient woodland present. The arc of woodland south of Park Farm contained the most diverse woodland community on the site (TG25571329; areas 10-13), and included veteran oaks and sweet chestnuts, and ground flora such as broad buckler fern, dog’s mercury and lily-of-the-valley. In this area of woodland and elsewhere, invasive non-

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

native species were present, including rhododendron and snowberry. Sycamore is widespread in the woodland blocks. 3.26 The flora of arable margins was generally poor and consisted of common and widespread species with high nutrient requirements like false oat-grass and cockâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s foot. Des Etangs' St John's-wort Hypericum x desetangsii was found in the margin of an arable field at TG25261362, and common yellow sedge Carex viridula ssp

oedocarpa in the margin adjacent to the arable field at TG24911337. Both these taxa are relatively uncommon in Norfolk. In general the margins of fields adjacent to the disused road Church Lane are the most interesting botanically.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

4 DISCUSSION 4.1

SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN The site is of lower botanical diversity than would be expected for such an extensive area, much of which is probably attributable to current and historic agricultural practices.

4.2

No species of conservation concern were recorded during the habitat and botanical survey.

4.3

VETERAN TREES Mature and veteran trees are widespread through the study area, both along hedgerows and within blocks of parkland. The National Planning Policy Framework

(DfCLG, 2012; paragraph 118,) states: â&#x20AC;&#x161;Planning permission should be refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats, including ancient woodland and the loss of aged or veteran trees found outside ancient woodland, unless the need for, and benefits of, the development in that location clearly outweigh the loss.â&#x20AC;&#x203A;

4.4

INVASIVE SPECIES Invasive non-native species were found in several areas, principally in woodland areas. These include rhododendron, sycamore and snowberry.

4.5

UK BAP PRIORITY SPECIES AND HABITATS Against the criteria for identifying BAP habitats it is considered that four habitats qualify as UK BAP priority habitats, namely: Wood-pastures and parkland. There are three blocks of this habitat, one associated with Red Hall, one with Park Farm, and one further east at Beeston Hall. Lowland mixed deciduous woodland. The block of semi-natural broadleaved woodland forming an arc to the south of Park Farm (Foxburrow and Spanish Plantations) and the block immediately to the west of Park Farm (Shrubbery Plantation) are the principal important areas of woodland. Hedgerow. The majority of intact hedgerows qualify as UK and Norfolk BAP priority habitat.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Pond. One pond, Pond 6, supported common toad Bufo bufo which is a UK BAP priority species and therefore this pond qualifies as a UK BAP pond (Maddock 2011). 4.6

The areas of other Phase 1 habitats potentially corresponding to a BAP habitat fail on one or more criteria. Thus it is considered that the site does not contain the following BAP habitats: Lowland meadow. Most grassland on the site is heavily modified and classed as improved. One area is semi-improved only, but is not close to unimproved. Ponds. The other ponds do not qualify, lacking vegetation or species of note. Arable field margins. These do not appear to be specifically managed for wildlife and lack the features of value to associated flora and fauna of value.

4.7

Further, it should be noted that not all units of any particular Phase 1 habitat necessarily qualify as BAP.

4.8

NATURE CONSERVATION VALUE The principal habitats and plants within the site are summarised below (Table 4). Table 4. Summary of the ecological value of habitats and botanical features. Feature Habitats: Wood pasture and parkland

Status

Occurrence and additional comment

UK and Norfolk BAP priority habitat

Lowland mixed deciduous woodland

UK and Norfolk BAP priority habitat

Hedgerow

Important Hedgerows BAP priority habitat hedgerows Identified as important in the National Planning Policy Framework UK BAP priority habitat

Three areas, including two large blocks, totalling 14 ha. Veteran oak, beech and sweet chestnut. 17 ha of mixed quality woodland. Some blocks show evidence of modification, including nonnative species. Many veteran native trees present, and evidence of former coppice management. Occur throughout the site.

Mature trees

Ponds

Widespread in hedgerows

One pond qualifies as a UK BAP habitat on the basis it supports a UK BAP priority species (common toad)

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

REFERENCES Beckett, G. & Bull, A. (1999) A Flora of Norfolk. Gillian Beckett, Norfolk. Cheffings, C.M. & Farrell, L. (2005) Species Status No. 7: The Vascular Plant Red Data List

for Great Britain. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Chris Blandford Associates (2008) Broadland District Landscape Assessment. Available from: http://www.broadland.gov.uk/housing_and_planning/618.aspa DfCLG (2012) National Planning Policy Framework . Department for Communities and Local Government, London. Defra (2007) Hedgerow Survey Handbook. Defra, London. English Nature (1999) JCA 78: Central North Norfolk. Available from: webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/...org.../JCA078_evidence.pdf JNCC (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey . Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Maddock, A. (2011) UK Biodiversity Action Plan; Priority Habitat Descriptions . Available from: http://www.ukbap.org.uk/library/UKBAPPriorityHabitatDescriptionsfinalAllhabitats2008102 2.pdf Stace, C.A. (2010) New Flora of the British Isles (3rd edition), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 1: MAPS

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Figure 1a. Desktop search map (north).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Figure 1b. Desktop search map (south).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Figure 2. Phase 1 habitat map.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Figure 3. Hedgerows qualifying as UK BAP priority hedgerows.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Figure 4. Hedgerows classes as ‘Important Hedgerows’ (Hedgerow Regulations 1997).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 2: SPECIES INVENTORY

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Table 5. Inventory of plant species and abundances. Scientific Name Acer campestre Acer platanoides Acer pseudoplatanus Achillea millefolium Agrostis capillaris Alliaria petiolata Allium ursinum Alopecurus myosuroides Amsinkia micrantha Anagallis arvensis Anisantha sterilis Anthiscus caucaulis Anthriscus sylvestris Aphanes arvensis agg. Arabidopsis thalliana Arctium minus Arrhenatherum elatius Artemisia vulgaris Arum maculatum Bellis perennis Betula pendula Betula pubescens Brachypodium sylvaticum Brassica nigra Bromus commutatus Bromus hordeaceus Bryonia dioica Buddleja davidii Calystegia sepium Capsella bursa-pastoris Cardamine hirsuta Carex pendula Carex remota Carex viridula subsp. oedocarpa Carpinus betulus Castanea sativa Centaurea nigra Cerastium fontanum Cerastium glomeratum Cerastium tomentosum Chamaecyparis lawsoniana Chamerion angustifolium Chelidonium majus Chenopodium album Cirsium arvense Cirsium vulgare Claytonia perfoliata Convallaria majalis Convolvulus arvensis Coronopus didymus Corylus avellana Crataegus monogyna

Common Name Field Maple Norway Maple Sycamore Yarrow Common Bent Garlic Mustard Ramsons Black-grass Common fiddleneck Scarlet Pimpernell Barren Brome Bur chervil Cow Parsley Parsley-piert Thale Cress Lesser Burdock False Oat-grass Mugwort Lords-and-Ladies Daisy Silver Birch Downy Birch Wood False-brome Black Mustard Meadow Brome Soft-brome White Bryony Butterfly-bush Hedge Bindweed Shepherd's-purse Hairy Bitter-cress Pendulous Sedge Remote Sedge Common Yellow-sedge Hornbeam Sweet Chestnut Common Knapweed Common Mouse-ear Sticky Mouse-ear Snow-in-summer Lawson's Cypress Rosebay Williowherb Greater Celandine Fat-hen Creeping Thistle Spear Thistle Springbeauty Lily-of-the-valley Field Bindweed Lesser Swine-cress Hazel Hawthorn

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Scientific Name Crocosmia pottsii x aurea = C. x crocosmiiflora Dactylis glomerata Digitalis purpurea Dryopteris dilatata Dryopteris filix-mas Epilobium hirsutum Euphorbia peplus Fagus sylvatica Fallopia japonica Festuca rubra Filago vulgaris Galium aparine Geranium molle Geranium robertianum Geum urbanum Glechoma hederacea Hedera helix Heracleum sphondylium Hieracium agg. Holcus lanatus Hordeum murinum Hyacinthoides non-scripta Hyacinthoides non-scripta x hispanica = H. x massartiana Hypericum perforatum Hypericum perforatum x maculatum = H. x desetangsii Hypochaeris radicata Ilex aquifolium Juncus bufonius Lactuca virosa Lamiastrum galeobdolon subsp. argentatum Lamium album Lamium purpureum Lapsana communis Leucanthemum vulgare Ligustrum vulgare Lonicera periclymenum Lotus pedunculatus Luzula campestris Lycopus europaeus Malus domestica Matricaria discoidea Matricaria recutita Medicago lupulina Mercurialis perennis Moehringia trinervia Myosotis arvensis Myosotis sylvatica Narcissus agg. Ornithogalum angustifolium Oxalis articulata Papaver rhoeas Petasites fragrans Phleum pratense Plantago lanceolata Plantago major

Common Name Montbretia Cock's-foot Foxglove Broad Buckler-fern Male-fern Great Willowherb Petty Spurge Beech Japanese Knotweed Red Fescue Common Cudweed Cleavers Dove's-foot Crane's-bill Herb-Robert Wood Avens Ground-ivy Common Ivy Hogweed Hawkweed Yorkshire-fog Wall Barley Bluebell Hybrid Bluebell Perforate St John's-wort Des Etangs' St John's-wort Cat's-ear Holly Toad Rush Great Lettuce Yellow Archangel White Dead-nettle Red Dead-nettle Nipplewort Oxeye Daisy Wild Privet Honeysuckle Greater Bird's-foot-trefoil Field Wood-rush Gypsywort Apple Pineappleweed Scented Mayweed Black Medick Dog's Mercury Three-nerved Sandwort Field Forget-me-not Wood Forget-me-not Narcissus Star-of-Bethlehem Pink Sorrel Common Poppy Winter Heliotrope Timothy Ribwort Plantain Greater Plantain

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Scientific Name Poa annua Poa nemoralis Poa pratensis Poa pratensis agg. Poa trivialis Polygonum aviculare Populus tremula Potentilla sterilis Prunus avium Prunus cerasifera Prunus laurocerasus Prunus padus Prunus spinosa Pteridium aquilinum Quercus robur Ranunculus acris Ranunculus ficaria Ranunculus repens Rhododendron ponticum Ribes rubrum Ribes uva-crispa Rosa arvensis Rosa canina Rubus fruticosus agg. Rumex acetosa Rumex crispus Rumex obtusifolius Rumex sanguineus Salix caprea Salix cinerea Salix fragilis Sambucus nigra Sanicula europaea Scrophularia nodosa Senecio jacobaea Senecio vulgaris Silene dioica Silene latifolia Sisymbrium officinale Sonchus asper Sonchus oleraceus Sorbus aucuparia Stachys sylvatica Stellaria holostea Stellaria media Symphoricarpos albus Tamus communis Taraxacum agg. Taxus baccata Tilia platyphyllos x cordata = T. x europaea Trifolium pratense Trifolium repens Tripleurospermum inodorum Triticum aestivum Ulmus glabra

Common Name Annual Meadow-grass Wood Meadow-grass Smooth Meadow-grass Meadow-grass Rough Meadow-grass Knotgrass Aspen Barren Strawberry Wild Cherry Cherry Plum Cherry Laurel Bird Cherry Blackthorn Bracken Pedunculate Oak Meadow Buttercup Lesser Celandine Creeping Buttercup Rhododendron Red Currant Gooseberry Field-rose Dog Rose Bramble Sorrel Curled Dock Broad-leaved Dock Wood Dock Goat Willow Grey Willow Crack-willow Elder Sanicle Common Figwort Common Ragwort Groundsel Red Campion White Campion Hedge Mustard Prickly Sow-thistle Smooth Sow-thistle Rowan Hedge Woundwort Greater Stitchwort Common Chickweed Snowberry Black Bryony Dandelion Yew Lime Red Clover White Clover Scentless Mayweed Bread Wheat Wych Elm

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

Scientific Name Ulmus minor Ulmus procera x minor Urtica dioica Urtica urens Veronica agrestis Veronica arvensis Veronica chamaedrys Veronica persica Viburnum opulus Vicia sativa Vicia tetrasperma Vinca minor Viola arvensis Viola riviniana

Common Name Small-leaved Elm Hybrid Elm Common Nettle Small Nettle Green Field-speedwell Wall Speedwell Germander Speedwell Common Field-speedwell Guelder-rose Common Vetch Smooth Tare Lesser Periwinkle Field Pansy Common Dog-violet

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

NATIONAL LEGISLATION AFFORDED TO SPECIES

Plants With certain exceptions, all wild plants are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). This makes it an offence for an â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;unauthorisedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; person to intentionally (or recklessly in Scotland) uproot wild plants. An authorised person can be the owner of the land on which the action is taken, or anybody authorised by them.

Certain rare species of plant, for example some species of orchid, are also fully protected under Schedule 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). This prohibits

any person: Intentionally (or recklessly in Scotland) picking, uprooting or destruction of any wild Schedule 8 species (or seed or spore attached to any such wild plant in Scotland only) Selling, offering or exposing for sale, or possessing or transporting for the purpose of sale, any wild live or dead Schedule 8 plant species or part thereof

In addition to the UK legislation outlined above, several plant species are fully protected under Schedule 5 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). These are species of European importance. Regulation 45 makes it an offence to:

Deliberately pick, collect, cut, uproot or destroy a wild Schedule 5 species Be in possession of, or control, transport, sell or exchange, or offer for sale or exchange any wild live or dead Schedule 5 species or anything derived from such a plant.

How is the legislation pertaining to protected plants liable to affect development works?

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

A European Protected Species (EPS) Licence issued by the relevant countryside agency (e.g. Natural England) will be required for works liable to affect species of plant listed under The Conservation of Habitat and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). The licence is to allow derogation from the relevant legislation but also to enable appropriate mitigation measures to be put in place and their efficacy to be monitored.

Invasive Plant Species Certain species of plant, including Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica, giant hogweed

Heracleum mantegazzianum and Himalayan balsam Impatiens glandulifera are listed on Part II of Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in respect to Section 14(2). Such species are generally non-natives whose establishment or spread in the wild may be detrimental to native wildlife. Inclusion on Part II of Schedule 9 therefore makes it an offence to plant or otherwise cause these species to grow in the wild.

How is the legislation pertaining to invasive plants liable to affect development works? Although it is not an offence to have these plants on your land per se, it is an offence to

cause these species to grow in the wild. Therefore, if they are present on site and development activities (for example movement of spoil, disposal of cut waste or vehicular movements) have the potential to cause the further spread of these species to new areas, it will be necessary to ensure appropriate measures are in place to prevent this happening prior to the commencement of works.

NATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LEGISLATION AFFORDED TO HABITATS

Non-Statutory Designations Areas considered to be of local conservation interest may be designated by local authorities as a Wildlife Site, under a variety of names such as County Wildlife Sites (CWS), Listed Wildlife Sites (LWS), Local Nature Conservation Sites (LNCS), Sites of Biological Importance (SBIs), Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs), or Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCIs). The criteria for designation may vary between counties.

Together with the statutory designations, these are defined in local and structure plans under the Town and Country Planning system and are a material consideration when planning applications are being determined. The level of protection afforded to these sites through local planning policies and development frameworks may vary between counties.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 are intended to protect ‘important’ countryside hedgerows from destruction or damage. A hedgerow is considered important if (a) has existed for 30 years or more; and (b) satisfies at least one of the criteria listed in Part II of Schedule 1 of the Regulations.

Under the Regulations, it is against the law to remove or destroy certain hedgerows without permission from the local planning authority. Hedgerows on or adjacent to common land, village greens, SSSIs (including all terrestrial SACs, NNRs and SPAs), LNRs, land used for agriculture or forestry and land used for the keeping or breeding of horses, ponies or donkeys are covered by these regulations. Hedgerows 'within or marking the

boundary of the curtilage of a dwelling-house' are not.

UK BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN In 1994 the UK Government published its response to the Convention on Biological Diversity that it signed along with over 150 other nations at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Biodiversity – the UK Action Plan (HM Government 1994) and subsequent publications (e.g. UK Steering Group 1995) set out a programme for the national Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), including the development of targets for biodiversity, and the techniques and actions necessary to achieve them. The national BAP includes lists of species that are of conservation concern, either because they are rare in an international or national context or have undergone serious declines in their populations in recent years. Species Action Plans have been prepared or are in preparation for a many of these species, whilst Habitat Action Plans are being produced for important or characteristic habitats identified in the plan.

LOCAL BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN The UK plan also encourages the production of local Biodiversity Action Plans at the County or District level. Specific Habitat Action Plans HAPs and Species Action Plans SAPs listed in the Norfolk LBAP which are of potential relevance to this site include: Ancient/or species rich hedgerows Cereal field margins Lowland wood pasture and parkland Ponds

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The National Planning Policy Framework replaced PPS9 in April 2012 and emphasises the need for sustainable development. The Framework specifies the need for protection of designated sites and priority habitats and priority species. An emphasis is also made for the need for ecological networks via preservation, restoration and re-creation. The protection and recovery of priority species â&#x20AC;&#x201C; that is those listed as UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is also listed as a requirement of planning policy. In determining planning application, planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by ensuring that: designated sites are protected from adverse harm; there is appropriate mitigation or compensation where significant harm cannot be avoided; opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments are encouraged; planning permission is refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats including aged or veteran trees and also ancient woodland.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Hedgerow Survey & Botanical Survey / Beyond Green

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice and Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

Badger,

Brown

Hare,

Hedgehog

Harvest Mice Surveys Report for Beyond Green

Author

Tracy Simpson BSc (Hons) MSc MIEEM

Job No.

100368 Reviewed by

Approved by

Date

Initial

Graham Hopkins

Sam Phillips

5 May 2011

Revision

Jit Thacker

Graham Hopkins

22nd September 2012

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House, 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich, NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

and

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice and Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

Background

Site Context and Status

Legislation and Planning Policy

METHODS

Survey Overview and Personnel

Badgers

Brown Hare

Harvest Mouse

RESULTS

Desktop Results

Field Surveys

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overview

Evaluation

Mitigation and Enhancement

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: MAPS

APPENDIX 2: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice and Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned to carry out a suite of ecology surveys for the proposed North Sprowston and Old Catton project. The work is to contribute to the Environmental Statement and Environmental Impact Assessment process. This report presents the evidence for the use of the site by badger, brown hare and, harvest mouse and hedgehog. These species are either legally protected or UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species. The data search returned a single record of badger from within 2km some 1km to the north. Records of brown hare were sporadic, from nearby farmland, and hedgehog records were from the areas of residential housing to the south. No records of harvest mice were returned. Systematic surveys for badger failed to find any evidence. A systematic survey for brown hare recorded only two individuals, from outside of the development boundary, but incidental records were made of three individuals from fields east of the Wroxham Road. Searches for harvest mice concentrated on the areas considered to be of greatest potential, but no nests were found. Hedgehogs were not observed during any visits. It is concluded that the site is of local importance only for brown hare and hedgehog, with the populations being small. It is considered that harvest mouse and badger are not present.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1

1.2

This report presents the methodologies and results of surveys for noteworthy terrestrial mammals (excluding bats) wihin the site, namely: badger Meles meles, hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus, brown hare Lepus europaeus and harvest mouse

Micromys minutus. SITE CONTEXT AND STATUS 1.3

1.4

The survey and development areas largely comprises arable farmland with fields separated by hedgerows and areas of other habitats including broadleaved woodland and parkland. The composition of the survey area comprised: arable (78%) with other habitats as minor components: amenity grassland (6%), semi-natural broadleaved woodland (5%), parkland and scattered trees (4%) and improved grassland (4%). Planted woodland of all types together represents 3% of the survey area, and semi-improved neutral grassland and tall ruderal both cover less than 1 ha. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING POLICY

1.5

Badgers are protected under the Protection of Badgers Act and harvest mouse, brown hare and hedgehog are all UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species, and consequently, Species of Principal Importance under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act.

1.6

Appendix 2 contains details of legislation and planning policy and is provided for general guidance only. The Appendix includes: 

Details of national legislation afforded to species



National Planning Policy



UK Biodiversity Action Plans

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

2 METHODS SURVEY OVERVIEW AND PERSONNEL 2.1

Systematic surveys were undertaken for badger, brown hare and harvest mice but only incidental recording attempted for hedgehog. However, any observations made by surveyors at other times were also recorded and are reported here. The systematic surveys were undertaken in the autumn of 2010 and the incidental recording during March 2010-September 2012, although most visits were in the period March 2010-April 2011.

2.2

The personnel for systematic species surveys were: Dr Jit Thacker (badgers) and Dr Graham Hopkins (brown hare and harvest mouse). BADGERS

2.3

The survey for badgers was undertaken over several days in October 2010. In autumn, badger activity is generally high but the vegetation has died-back enough for a thorough search of an area. The habitat within the development boundary and a wider survey area was searched systematically for evidence of badger activity in the form of setts, droppings, pathways, snuffle holes, hair and footprints. Methods follow Harris et al. (1992).

2.4

Particular attention was paid to areas where the vegetation and/or the topography offered suitable sett sites. Areas with dense ground cover (hedgerows, scrub, woodland etc.) were examined closely. If the vegetation precluded a thorough examination of an area, the perimeter of the area was examined in order to detect paths or other signs suggestive of a sett concealed within the vegetation. BROWN HARE

2.5

A systematic survey for brown hares was undertaken on 21st September 2010. This comprised a walkover of the site along field boundaries and scanning fields for individuals. HARVEST MOUSE

2.6

The areas of habitat most likely to support harvest mouse were searched systematically on 12th October 2010, for a total of five hours. These areas were selected on the basis of experience gained over earlier surveys and were predominantly areas of rough, tall herbage in close association with undisturbed areas of scrub, woodland or large hedgerows. The principal search areas were the edges of the woodland south Beeston Park and along the field margins adjacent to Church Lane.

2.7

The search comprised a careful examination of tussocks for signs of nests (cf Mammal Society undated).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

3 RESULTS DESKTOP RESULTS Badger 3.1

A single record of badger was returned by the data search, from a location more than 1km north of the development boundary. Brown Hare, Harvest Mouse and Hedgehog

3.2

A small number of records of brown hare were returned from disparate locations across the arable areas within the search radius. Records of hedgehog were returned from the urban fringe of Norwich (see Table 1 and Appendix 1: Figure 1). No records of harvest mouse were returned. Table 1. Records of terrestrial mammals (excluding bats) development site. Common name Scientific name Grid reference Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG235113 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG2511 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG242119 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG253117 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG2316 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG235113 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG281129 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG2312 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG2313 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG232125 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG256107 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG254153 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG227117 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG229122 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG2516 Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus TG254153 Badger Meles meles Confidential Brown Hare Lepus europaeus TG2414 Brown Hare Lepus europaeus TG281129 Brown Hare Lepus europaeus TG2114 Brown Hare Brown Hare Brown Hare Brown Hare Brown Hare Brown Hare

Lepus europaeus Lepus europaeus Lepus europaeus Lepus europaeus Lepus europaeus Lepus europaeus

TG2416 TG2415 TG215126 TG2314 TG258125 TG2416

recorded within 2km of the Location Sprowston Sprowston Churchyard Colindeep Lane sprowston Sprowston Frettenham Sprowston Rackheath Old Catton Old Catton Old Catton Bewit Road, Sprowston B1150 Spixworth Old Catton Old Catton Crostwick Spixworth Near Spixworth Spixworth Rackheath Horsham St Faith and Newton St Faith Beck Farm Frettenham Spixworth Hellesdon Spixworth Sprowston Beck Farm Frettenham

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

FIELD SURVEYS Badger 3.3

No evidence of badgers was found during either the systematic survey or during incidental recording. Brown Hare, Harvest Mouse & Hedgehog

3.4

No evidence of harvest mice was found and no records of hedgehog were made.

3.5

Brown hare were recorded from fields along the north of the survey area (but outside of the development boundary) only during the systematic survey, with two individuals in cereal stubble east of the Buxton Road. Incidental records of hare were made within the development boundary as follows: singleton east of the North Walsham Road (13th May 2010); singleton north of the Wroxham Road (11 th October 2011). and a singleton in Beeston Park (13th April 2012);

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS OVERVIEW 4.1

The only species of noteworthy mammal recorded during the field surveys was brown hare. Realistically it is likely that hedgehog is also present, given the proximity of the desktop records and the presence of suitable habitat.

4.2

No evidence of badgers was found on the site, thus they are not believed to be present. The paucity of desk top records further suggests that they are absent locally.

4.3

It is likely that harvest mouse is absent, based on the absence of any evidence during the field survey. Harvest mice are elusive; however, the limited extent of suitable habitat together with the absence of desk top records does suggest that they are unlikely to be present. EVALUATION

4.4

Only low numbers of brown hare were recorded and it is considered likely that the local population is small. It is considered that the population is of local significance only. Hedgehogs are likely to be present but only in numbers of local significance. Both species are widespread and common in suitable habitat (NNNS, 2011).

4.5

It is considered that the site is of negligible significance for harvest mouse and badger. MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT

4.6

With respect to brown hares there is little on-site enhancement or mitigation that is feasible. Brown hare is a species of open grassland and is unlikely to continue to reside locally. If off-site mitigation is considered appropriate then this would comprise the provision of grass leys in association with arable fields. The restoration of Beeston Park may provide some suitable habitat, although disturbance from visitors will probably reduce its value for brown hare.

4.7

It is not considered that any mitigation is required for badger or harvest mouse, but re-survey for badger would be prudent before the development of individual land parcels.

4.8

It is likely that hedgehog could continue to reside locally and within the completed development if provided with suitable cover, foraging habitat and access to seminatural areas.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

REFERENCES Harris, S., Cresswell, P. & Jefferies, D. (1989) Surveying Badgers. Occasional

Publication of the Mammal Society No 9. The Mammal Society, London. Mammal Society (undated) Harvest Mouse Follow-Up Survey. Instructions for

Surveyors. Mammal Society, London. NNNS (2011) Bird and Mammal Report 2010. Norfolk and Norwich Naturalistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Society, Norwich.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 1: MAPS

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

Figure 1. Local records of badger, brown hare and hedgehog (desktop records and survey work for the project 2010-2012).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 2: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

NATIONAL LEGISLATION AFFORDED TO SPECIES

The objective of the EC Habitats Directive 1 is to conserve the various species of plant and animal which are considered rare across Europe. The Directive is transposed into UK law by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (formerly The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended)) and The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended).

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) is a key piece of national legislation which implements the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention) and implements the species protection obligations of Council Directive 2009/147/EC (formerly 79/409/EEC) on the Conservation of Wild Birds (EC Birds Directive) in Great Britain.

Since the passing of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, various amendments have been made, details of which can be found on www.opsi.gov.uk. Key amendments have been made through the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act (2000) and Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004.

Other legislative Acts affording protection to wildlife and their habitats include:

Deer Act 1991 Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 Natural Environment & Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 Protection of Badgers Act 1992 Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996

Species and species groups that are protected or otherwise regulated under the aforementioned domestic and European legislation, and that are most likely to be affected

Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

by development activities, include herpetofauna (amphibians and reptiles), badger, bats, birds, dormouse, invasive plant species, otter, plants, red squirrel, water vole and white clawed crayfish.

Badger Badgers Meles meles receive protection under The Protection of Badgers Act 1992 which consolidates the previous Badger Acts of 1973 and 1991. The Act makes it an offence to: Wilfully kill, injure, take, or attempt to kill, injure or take a badger Cruelly ill-treat a badger, including use of tongs and digging Possess or control a dead badger or any part thereof Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to a badger sett2 or any part thereof Intentionally or recklessly disturb3 a badger when it is occupying a badger sett Intentionally or recklessly cause a dog to enter a badger sett Sell or offers for sale, possesses or has under his control, a live badger

How is the legislation pertaining to badgers liable to affect development works? A Development Licence4 will be required from the relevant countryside agency (e.g. Natural England) for any development works liable to affect an active badger sett, or to disturb badgers whilst in the sett. Depending on the nature of the works and the specifics of the sett and its environs, badgers could be disturbed by work near the sett even if there is no direct interference or damage to the sett itself. The countryside agencies have issued guidelines on what constitutes a licensable activity. N.B. there is no provision in law for the

A badger sett is defined in the legislation as "any structure or place which displays signs indicating current

use by a badger". This includes seasonally used setts. Natural England (2009) have issued guidance on what is likely to constitute current use of a badger sett: www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/WMLG17_tcm6-11815.pdf 3

For guidance on what constitutes disturbance and other licensing queries, see Natural England (2007)

Badgers & Development: A Guide to Best Practice and Licensing. www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/badgersdev-guidance_tcm6-4057.pdf, Natural England (2009) Interpretation of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Disturbanceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in relation to badgers occupying a sett www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/WMLG16_tcm6-11814.pdf, Scottish Natural Heritage (2002)

Badgers

Development.

www.snh.org.uk/publications/online/wildlife/badgersanddevelopment/default.asp and Countryside Council for Wales (undated) Badgers: A Guide for Developers. www.ccw.gov.uk. 4

Natural England will only consider issuing a licence where detailed planning permission (if applicable to

operation) has already been granted

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

capture of badgers for development purposes and therefore it is not possible to obtain a licence to translocate badgers from one area to another.

Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996

All wild mammals are protected against intentional acts of cruelty under the above legislation. This makes it an offence to:

Mutilate, kick, beat, nail or otherwise impale, stab, burn, stone, crush, drown, drag or asphyxiate any wild mammal with intent to inflict unnecessary suffering.

To avoid possible contravention, due care and attention should be taken when carrying out works (for example operations near burrows or nests) with the potential to affect any wild mammal in this way, regardless of whether they are legally protected through other conservation legislation or not.

THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND RURAL COMMUNITIES ACT 2006 AND THE BIODIVERSITY DUTY The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act came into force on 1st October 2006. Section 40 of the Act requires all public bodies to have regard to biodiversity conservation when carrying out their functions. This is commonly referred to as the ‘biodiversity duty’. Section 41 of the Act (Section 42 in Wales) requires the Secretary of State to publish a list of habitats and species which are of ‘principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity.’ This list is intended to assist decision makers such as public bodies in implementing their duty under Section 40 of the Act. Under the Act these habitats and species are regarded as a material consideration in determining planning applications. A developer must show that their protection has been adequately addressed within a development proposal. UK BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN In 1994 the UK Government published its response to the Convention on Biological Diversity that it signed along with over 150 other nations at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Biodiversity – the UK Action Plan (HM Government 1994) and subsequent publications (e.g. UK Steering Group 1995) set out a programme for the national Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), including the development of targets for biodiversity, and the techniques and actions necessary to achieve them. The national BAP includes lists of species that are of conservation concern, either because they are rare in an international or national context or

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

have undergone serious declines in their populations in recent years. Species Action Plans have been prepared or are in preparation for a many of these species, whilst Habitat Action Plans are being produced for important or characteristic habitats identified in the plan. LOCAL BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN The UK plan also encourages the production of local Biodiversity Action Plans at the County or District level. Specific Habitat Action Plans HAPs and Species Action Plans SAPs listed in the Norfolk LBAP which are of potential relevance to this site include: Brown hare Lepus europaeus Great crested newt Triturus cristatus Linnet Carduelis cannabina Barn owl Tyto alba Turtle dove Streptopelia turtur Song thrush Turdus philomelos Grey Partridge Perdix perdix Ancient/or species rich hedgerows NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The National Planning Policy Framework replaced PPS9 in April 2012 and emphasises the need for sustainable development. The Framework specifies the need for protection of designated sites and priority habitats and priority species. An emphasis is also made for the need for ecological networks via preservation, restoration and re-creation. The protection and recovery of priority species â&#x20AC;&#x201C; that is those listed as UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is also listed as a requirement of planning policy. In determining planning application, planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by ensuring that: designated sites are protected from adverse harm; there is appropriate mitigation or compensation where significant harm cannot be avoided; opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments are encouraged; planning permission is refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats including aged or veteran trees and also ancient woodland.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Badger, Brown Hare, Hedgehog & Harvest Mice / Beyond Green

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Bird Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

Bird Surveys Report for Beyond Green

Author

Jerry Kinsley BSc (Hons)

Job No.

100368 Reviewed by

Approved by

Date

Initial

Graham Hopkins

Sam Phillips

5th May 2011

Revision

Alex Prendergast

Graham Hopkins

20th September 2012

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House, 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Bird Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

Background

Site Context and Status

Legislation and Planning Policy

METHODS

Personnel

Desktop Search

Breeding Bird Surveys

Wintering Bird Surveys

Conservation Statuses

Evaluation

RESULTS

Data Search

Breeding Birds

Wintering Birds

EVALUATION

Breeding Birds

Wintering Birds

DISCUSSION

OvervIew

Off-Site Mitigation

On-Site Mitigation

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

APPENDIX 2: DATA SEARCH RESULTS

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Bird Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned to carry out a suite of ecology surveys for the proposed North-east Norwich urban extension. The work is to contribute to the Environmental Statement and Environmental Impact Assessment process. This report summarises the results of bird surveys undertaken during 2010-11: breeding birds from April to June 2010 and wintering birds from November 2010March 2011.The surveys included the entire development area and then a broader survey area (of approximately 200ha and 350ha respectively). The birds of conservation concern included species with UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species status (UK BAP) and species on either the Red list or Amber list. The breeding bird survey reported 37 species as present but not necessarily breeding. Species of conservation concern breeding in the wider survey area but not in the development area were: linnet (Red list) and probably cuckoo (with two calling birds). Species recorded but probably not breeding (across the wider survey area but not necessarily in the development area) were: starling (Red list); green woodpecker (Amber list); lesser-spotted woodpecker (Red list); mistle thrush (Amber list); stock dove (Amber list); and willow warbler (Amber list). Breeding within the development area were: dunnock (1 pair; UK BAP, Amber list); skylark (6 pairs; UK BAP, Red list); song thrush (2 pairs; UK BAP, Red list); whitethroat (7 pairs; Amber list); yellowhammer (1 pair; UK BAP, Red list); and house sparrow (UK BAP, Red list) were nesting in nearby houses but foraging on the site. During the wintering bird survey a total of 39 species were recorded across the whole survey area, of which 19 have either Red or Amber listing and 6 also having UK BAP priority species status. The occurrence of wintering farmland birds was sporadic with areas of regular activity principally along field margins in the western part of the Proposed Development. No substantial flocks were noted. When compared against published densities of birds on farmland of various types the densities of the breeding species are low. Likewise the site has low numbers of wintering birds, with few flocks of note and a low diversity. It is not considered that individual areas are of disproportionate importance for birds, with potentially suitable vacant habitat for most species being widespread through the site.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

It is considered that the development area is of Low significance for its birds, in terms of the individual breeding and over-wintering species and for the whole assemblage of breeding and over-wintering species. Off-site mitigation is appropriate for the farmland species, including new hedgerow planting and implementation of measures to create new see-rich arable margins and skylark nesting plots in established crops. The restoration of Beeston Park will also create new areas of habitat for birds of woodland edge and hedgerow habitats.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1

1.2

This report presents the results for a suite of breeding and wintering bird surveys undertaken across the development area and a broader survey area. SITE CONTEXT AND STATUS

1.3

1.4

1.5

Appendix 2 contains details of legislation, planning policy and Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) relating to reptiles, and is provided for general guidance only. The Appendix includes: Details of national legislation afforded to birds National Planning Policy UK and Local Biodiversity Action Plans

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

2 METHODS PERSONNEL 2.1. The breeding bird survey was undertaken by Jon Clifton (Anglian Lepidopterists Supplies: Jon is a respected naturalist, based in North Norfolk, who regularly undertakes professional bird surveys across the UK. 2.2. The wintering bird survey was by Jerry Kinsley (Ecologist, The Ecology Consultancy): Jerry has over twenty years experience of bird study in Norfolk and is the senior field ornithologist for The Ecology Consultancy. DESKTOP SEARCH 2.3. Information on birds from the site and within a 2km search radius from the site boundary was obtained from the Norfolk Biological Information Service (NBIS), BREEDING BIRD SURVEYS 2.4. Protocols for breeding bird surveys are based on an adaptation of standard transect surveys techniques such as breeding bird survey and common bird census (Marchant, 1983). Six visits were made at intervals between 29th April and 17th June 2010. 2.5. A transect route was walked over the sites, visiting all areas of habitat potentially used by nesting birds. In practice this route followed hedgerows and woodland edges and was determined during an initial survey, and was maintained in subsequent surveys order to provide consistency. The direction in which the survey route was walked was alternated between visits to ensure coverage of survey sections over different time periods. The transect route encompassed all habitat types present on site. 2.6. The site was divided into two transect routes separated by the North Walsham Road: east and west survey sections (Appendix 1, Figure 1). Both the east and west survey sections were visited six times each over the survey period. 2.7. Every effort was made to avoid duplication of records therefore all sightings/counts should be viewed as minimums. 2.8. Notes were made of any additional signs of breeding or territorial behaviour, for example presence of familial groups, juveniles, food carrying or feeding attempts, calling/singing or territorial mobbing behaviour. WINTERING BIRD SURVEYS 2.9. A transect route was walked over the sites, visiting all areas of habitat potentially used by wintering birds. In practice this route followed hedgerows and woodland edges and was determined during an initial survey, and was maintained in

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

subsequent surveys order to provide consistency. The direction in which the survey route was walked was alternated between visits to ensure coverage of survey sections over different time periods. 2.10. The site was divided into two transect routes divided by the North Walsham Road: east and west survey sections (Appendix 1, Figure 1). Both the east and west survey sections were visited six times each over the survey period. 2.11. Every effort was made to avoid duplication of records therefore all sightings/counts should be viewed as minimums. CONSERVATION STATUSES 2.12. Two categories of conservation status are used: UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) priority species status is taken from the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP, 2009) and Norfolk BAP status is taken from Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership (2012). Red/Amber listing is taken from the list of Birds of Conservation Concern (Eaton et al., 2009) and is assigned according to the level of threat experienced by species, using criteria such as the magnitude of recent declines in population size and overall population size and distribution. Red list species are of greater conservation concern than amber species. This is not a formal consideration within planning policy but it does denote the conservation value of species and is used for assigning site value. EVALUATION 2.13. The evaluation of the significance of bird species and assemblages is adapted from (Percival, 2007) (Table 1). Table 1. Value of bird species and assemblages. Value Criteria Very high Qualifying species of an SPA or notified interest of a SSSI Species present in internationally important numbers (>1% biogeography/flyway population) High Species that contribute to the integrity of an SPA or SSSI but which are not cited as species for which the site is designated (SPAs) or notified (SSSIs). Ecologically sensitive species such as rare birds (<300 breeding pairs in the UK) and the following birds of prey: golden eagle, white-tailed eagle, red kite, honey buzzard, osprey, marsh harrier and hen harrier Species present in nationally important numbers (>1% UK population) Species listed in Annex 1 of the EC Birds Directive or Schedule 1 of the Wildlife And Countryside Act (Regularly-occurring relevant migratory species which are either rare or vulnerable, or warrant species consideration on account of the proximity of migration routes, or breeding, moulting, wintering or staging areas in relation to the proposed wind farm) Medium Species present in regionally important numbers (>1% regional population) Species occurring within SPAs and SSSIs but not crucial to integrity of sites Low, Any other species of conservation interest, e.g. species listed in Birds of equivalent to Conservation Concern (see Eaton et al. 2007) not covered above, both UK Lower and local Biodiversity Action Plan species The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

3 RESULTS DATA SEARCH 3.1. The data search carried out included an extensive list of species of conservation concern. Many of the species are unlikely to be present as resident populations or regular visitors to the site, being variously rare vagrants, passage migrants or wetland species recorded incidentally and resident elsewhere within Norfolk. Table 2 lists the farmland birds and those of the wider countryside that are of conservation concern and potentially present as breeding species. Table 2. Records of noteworthy birds recorded within 2km of the site and potentially breeding (farmland, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;wider countrysideâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and woodland species). Common name Scientific name UK BAP priority Red/Amber status species Kestrel Falco tinnunculus Amber Stock Pigeon Columba oenas Amber European Turtle Dove

Streptopelia turtur

Cuckoo

Cuculus canorus

Barn Owl Short-eared Owl Green Woodpecker

Tyto alba Asio flammeus Picus viridis Dendrocopos minor

Lesser Spotted Woodpecker Skylark Barn Swallow House Martin Grey Wagtail Nightingale Whinchat Song Thrush

Alauda arvensis Hirundo rustica Delichon urbicum Motacilla cinerea Luscinia megarhynchos Saxicola rubetra Turdus philomelos

Spotted Flycatcher

Turdus viscivorus Phylloscopus trochilus Muscicapa striata

Starling

Sturnus vulgaris

House Sparrow

Passer domesticus

Common Linnet

Carduelis cannabina

Bullfinch

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Mistle Thrush Willow Warbler

UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species

Red Red Red Amber Amber

UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species

Red Red Amber Amber Amber Amber Amber

UK BAP priority species

Red Amber Amber

UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species

Red Red Red Red Amber

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

BREEDING BIRDS 3.2. Across the whole survey area a total of 37 species were recorded, of which nine are BAP priority species and 15 have either Red or Amber listing (Table 3). As breeding species with territories within the development area, there are five species of conservation concern of which four are UK BAP priority species. 3.3. Breeding in the wider survey area but not in development area were: Linnet (Red list) and probably cuckoo (with two calling birds). 3.4. Species recorded but probably not breeding (across the wider survey area but not necessarily in the development area) were: Starling

(Red

list);

green

woodpecker

(Amber

list);

lesser-spotted

woodpecker (Red list); mistle thrush (Amber list); stock dove Columba oenas (Amber list); and willow warbler (Amber list). 3.5. Locations of the territories for the birds of conservation concern species are presented as Appendix 1: Figures 1a & b. Table 3. UK BAP and Red/Amber listed species recorded during the breeding bird surveys (where no numbers are shown then the species is probably not breeding). Common name Territories BAP status Red/Amber list status Dunnock Prunella modularis House Sparrow

1 1 colony

Skylark

Song Thrush

Whitethroat Sylvia communis Yellowhammer Emberiza

7 1

citronella

UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species Norfolk BAP species UK BAP priority species Norfolk BAP species UK BAP priority species

Amber Red Red

Red

Amber Red

WINTERING BIRDS 3.6. During the wintering bird survey a total of 39 species were recorded across the whole survey area, of which 19 have either Red or Amber listing and 6 also having UK BAP priority species status (Table 4). The occurrence of wintering farmland birds was sporadic with areas of regular activity principally along field margins in the western part of the development area. No substantial flocks were noted with, for example, the largest flock of passerines comprised eight skylarks.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Table 4. UK BAP and Red/Amber listed species recorded during the wintering bird surveys. Common name Development BAP status Red/Amber area status Black-headed gull

102

Amber

Kestrel Starling

4 2 20

Amber Amber Red

Dunnock

Amber

Fieldfare Turdus pilaris Green woodpecker Herring gull Larus argentatus

9 4 30

Red Amber Red

House sparrow

Lapwing Vanellus vanellus

Amber

Lesser black-backed gull Larus

Amber

Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Meadow pipit Anthus pratensis Mistle thrush Redwing Turdus iliacus

1 2 1 9

Amber Amber Amber Red

Skylark

Song thrush

Woodcock Scolopax rusticola Yellowhammer

1 2

Chroicocephalus ridibundus Common gull Larus canus

UK BAP priority species

UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species

Red

fuscus

UK BAP priority species Norfolk BAP species UK BAP priority species Norfolk BAP species UK BAP priority species

Red

Amber Red

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

4 EVALUATION BREEDING BIRDS 4.1

In developing an evaluation of the site for birds, as a breeding assemblage and for individual species, reference is made to their national conservation status, occurrence as breeding species in the survey area and national and local population status. All of the species are considered to be at least fairly common in Norfolk, although with substantial declines in population sizes at a national level.

4.2

Comparable data on the densities of species in different habitats are taken from Newson et al. (2005). The densities of all the important breeding species are summarised below (Table 5) and in all cases the densities in suitable habitat are very low. Table 5. Densities of breeding birds of conservation concern and published densities (from Newson et al., 2005). Common Territories in National Status in Observed Densities in name development population Norfolk densities mixed area size (Bailie et (NNNS per km2 grass/tilled al., 2012) 2011) farmland & tilled farmland farmland per km2 House 1 colony 11.9-14.8 Common Not 60.6 & 26.2 Sparrow million resident calculated territories 1994-2000 Dunnock 1 2.1 million Common 0.5 23.7 & 16.6 territories resident 1994-2000 Skylark 6 1.7 million Common 3 9.7 & 18.9 territories in resident 2000 Song thrush 2 1.4 million Common 1 7.2 & 2.8 territories in resident 2000 Whitethroat 7 931 Common 3.5 14.4 & 15.3 thousand summer territories in visitor 2000 Yellowhammer 1 792 Common 0.5 24.4 & 24.8 thousand resident territories in 200

4.3

For each species the site is considered to be of only Low significance (following Percival 2007). The entire assemblage is likewise considered to be of Low significance.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

WINTERING BIRDS 4.4

The total numbers of overwintering birds was considered to be relatively low and without particularly significant species. For example, the peak counts recorded from the survey area are presented in Table 6 with comparable data for peak counts recorded elsewhere in Norfolk. Table 6. Comparison of wintering bird numbers with literature examples (from NNNS, 2011) Common name Maximum Example counts reported elsewhere count Black-headed gull 158 3500 birds at an overnight roost at Wroxham Broad

4.5

Common gull Kestrel

6 4

3500 birds at an overnight roost at Wroxham Broad Typically present as singletons at individual sites

Starling

Dunnock

Fieldfare Green Woodpecker

11 7

Herring gull House Sparrow Lapwing

46 4 42

Lesser blackbacked gull Mallard

1328 birds reported in a flock near Norwich and flocks of 10000 birds regularly reported Flocks infrequent with maximum count comprising singleton birds Flocks of 500 birds reported from inland sites No counts of wintering birds, but no major numbers are likely anywhere 300 birds at an inland roost in Cranwich Flocks of 20+ birds reported at several sites Counts of over 27000 birds reported at overnight roosts in The Broads Inland flocks of 500+ birds regularly reported

Meadow pipit

Mistle thrush Redwing

1 13

Skylark

Song Thrush Whitethroat

4 7

Woodcock

Yellowhammer

Counts of 100+ at numerous roost sites in The Broads Largest flocks at coastal areas, but with 150+ birds regularly reported Flocks of over 20birds in inland areas Largest inland flock of 1441 birds, with regular flocks of 100+ birds Present as flocks with significant inland numbers being 150 and 250 In coastal areas flocks of up to 150 birds Unlikely to overwinter, present as small migrating flocks in autumn Widespread in low numbers with flocks of 10+ birds being noteworthy Flocks of 30+ birds reported from inland areas

None of the species are considered to be present in significant numbers and the entire assemblage of birds is relatively species poor. The assemblage is considered to be of Low value.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

5 DISCUSSION OVERVIEW 5.1

Overall the site is considered to be of Low significance for its birds, with the numbers of both breeding and overwintering species being low.

5.2

It is not thought that any individual areas are of particular significance for these species, and that apparently suitable areas of unoccupied potential habitat are present across the site.

5.3

Two factors are proposed as reasons for its relatively low value: First, the agricultural habitat lacks many of the features for which farmland birds are associated, such as wide weed-rich arable margins and overwintering stubbles. Second, at least towards the southern boundary the site appears to be disturbed by dog walkers and probably predation by cats from nearby housing.

5.4

Although the site does support species of conservation concern it is emphasised that the numbers are low and of low significance in a district or wider context. Although the presence of UK BAP priority species is a material planning consideration it is proposed that enhancement measures are implemented, both within the completed development and as of-site measures. OFF-SITE MITIGATION

5.5

Off-site mitigation is probably the only viable option for several of the species recorded as breeding and as overwintering species, principally: skylark and yellowhammer (Winspear & Davies, 2005).

5.6

The Farmland Bird Package of the RSPB (2009) provides a range of measures to enhance bird habitats on farmland and to reverse the decline of key species including skylark and yellowhammer. These are: Providing skylark plots in winter cereals, with 20 per 100ha as a standard density, equivalent to 18 plots to be created; and the Creation of a network of insect-rich habitats across the farm using one or more of the unfertilised conservation headlands on 1% of farmland, equivalent to the creation of 2ha.

5.7

Further measures include additional hedgerow planting to replace lengths lost to the development. New hedgerows should have a composition of species similar to examples of species-rich hedgerows locally and include standard oak Quercus robur and other trees at intervals. As far as possible new hedgerows should aim to increase

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

landscape connectivity by linking existing areas of semi-natural habitat that are currently isolated. 5.8

The restoration of Beeston Park will also provide significant new habitat for birds of woodland edge and open areas. Although parts may be subject to too much recreational disturbance to be of value to skylarks, it is realistic to consider this a significant enhancement for yellowhammer, linnet and whitethroat. ON-SITE MITIGATION

5.9

A number of the species recorded are regularly found in urban habitats and along the urban fringe interface, such as house sparrow, dunnock and mistle and song thrushes. Potentially, a net increase in the local numbers of these species could be achieved via the provision of suitable greenspace, sensitive inclusion of woodland edge and hedgerow areas, as well as appropriate soft landscaping in association with houses. Among the key measures are the use of appropriate plants in planting schemes, primarily native species and others of recognised wildlife value; a key feature of these plants should be that they are used as host plants by insects of value to fledgling birds, such as aphids and moth caterpillars. Options for such enhancements including green roofs and green walls are provided by Gunnell et al. (2012).

5.10 Specific measure for birds also include bird boxes. It is recommended that swift boxes would be particularly suitable here, in response to the recent Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plan for swifts (RSPB, 2012). Generic guidance on the design and erection of such boxes is available from Swift Conservation (2012).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

REFERENCES Baillie, S.R., Marchant, J.H., Leech, D.I., Renwick, A.R., Eglington, S.M., Joys, A.C., Noble, D.G., Barimore, C., Conway, G.J., Downie, I.S., Risely, K. & Robinson, R.A. (2012). BirdTrends 2011. BTO Research Report No. 609. BTO, Thetford. Eaton, M.A., Brown, A.F., Noble, D.G., Musgrove, A.J., Hearn, R., Aebischer, N.J., Gibbons, D.W., Evans, A. & Gregory, R.D. (2009). Birds of Conservation Concern 3: the population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. British Birds 102, 296-341. Gunnell, K., Grant, G. & Williams, C. (2012) Landscape and Urban Design for Bats

and Biodiversity. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Marchant, J.H. (1983) Common Birds Census Instructions. BTO, Tring. Newson, S.E., Woodburn, R.J.W., Noble, D.G., Bailie, S.R. & Gregory, R.D. (2005) Evaluating the Breeding Bird Survey for producing national population size and density estimates. Bird Study 52, 42-54. NNNS (2011) Norfolk Bird and Mammal Report 2010. Norfolk and Norwich Naturalistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Society, Norwich. Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership (2012) Species Action Plans. Available at: http://www.norfolkbiodiversitypartnership.org.uk Percival, S.M. (2007) Predicting the effects of wind farms on birds in the UK: the development of an objective assessment method. In: de Lucas, M., Janss, G.F.E. and M. Ferrer (eds.) Birds and Wind Farms. Madrid: Quercus, pp. 137-152. RSPB (2009) Farmland Bird Package. Available at: http://www.rspb.org.uk/ourwork/farming/advice/conservation/package/index.aspx RSPB

(2012)

Swifts

(Apus

apus)

â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

Species

Action

Plan.

Available

at:

http://www.norfolkbiodiversity.org/actionplans/speciesactionplans/swift.aspx Swift Conservation (2012) Swift Bricks: Cheap and Easy!. Available at: http://swiftconservation.org/swift_bricks.htm

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

BAP

(2009)

The

Biodiversity

Action

Plan.

Available

at:

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5155 Winspear, R. & Davies, G. (2005) A Management Guide to Birds of Lowland

Farmland. RPSB, Sandy.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Figure 1a & b. Territories of birds of conservation concern: UK BAP species and Red / Amber list species.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Figure 2 a & b. Wintering birds of conservation concern: UK BAP species and Red / Amber list species.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 2: DATA SEARCH RESULTS

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Table 7. Data Search Results from NBIS (February 2011). Scientific name

Common name

Alopochen aegyptiacus

Egyptian Goose

Grid reference TG2415

Bubo bubo

Eurasian Eagle Owl

TG2410

Cygnus columbianus

Tundra Swan

Cygnus columbianus Cygnus columbianus subsp. bewickii Cygnus columbianus subsp. bewickii Cygnus cygnus

Location

Date

Spixworth

01/06/2006 01/04/2002

TG2415

Norwich Mousehold Heath Spixworth

Tundra Swan

TG2211

Old Catton

08/02/2003

Cygnus columbianus subsp. bewickii Cygnus columbianus subsp. bewickii Whooper Swan

TG2211

Old Catton

11/12/2007

TG2415

Spixworth

07/02/2008

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

13/04/2008

Anser brachyrhynchus

Pink-footed Goose

TG2211

Old Catton

12/12/2005

Anser brachyrhynchus

Pink-footed Goose

TG2415

Spixworth

19/11/2008

Anser brachyrhynchus

Pink-footed Goose

TG2415

Spixworth

14/11/2003

Anser brachyrhynchus

Pink-footed Goose

TG2415

Spixworth

18/10/2008

Anser brachyrhynchus

Pink-footed Goose

TG2113

Norwich Airport

02/11/2007

Anser brachyrhynchus

Pink-footed Goose

TG2415

Spixworth

28/11/2007

Tadorna ferruginea

Ruddy Shelduck

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

31/08/2002

Anas strepera

Gadwall

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

05/11/2002

Anas strepera

Gadwall

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

22/12/2008

Anas platyrhynchos

Mallard

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

22/08/2002

Anas platyrhynchos

Mallard

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

05/09/2002

Anas querquedula

Garganey

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

16/08/2002

Alectoris rufa

Red-legged Partridge

TG2516

Crostwick Common

14/01/2003

Alectoris rufa

Red-legged Partridge

TG2415

Spixworth

08/02/2005

Phalacrocorax carbo

Great Cormorant

TG2415

Spixworth

23/10/2002

Phalacrocorax carbo

Great Cormorant

TG2415

Spixworth

26/09/2004

Botaurus stellaris

Great Bittern

TG2114

Horsham St Faiths

15/02/2007

Botaurus stellaris

Great Bittern

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/02/2003

Milvus migrans

Black Kite

TG2114

Horsham St Faiths

17/06/2003

Milvus milvus

Red Kite

TG2713

Rackheath

05/07/2006

Milvus milvus

Red Kite

TG2713

Rackheath

20/02/2006

Circus aeruginosus

Eurasian Marsh Harrier

TG2113

Norwich Airport

25/11/2006

Circus aeruginosus

Eurasian Marsh Harrier

TG2415

Spixworth

26/08/2004

Circus cyaneus

Hen Harrier

TG2410

28/10/2005

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Norwich Mousehold Heath Old Catton

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

01/09/2004

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2415

Spixworth

13/12/2003

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2003

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

16/03/2002

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

05/08/2004

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

01/05/2008

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

01/04/2002

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2002

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

18/12/2003

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2006

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2410

01/08/2004

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Norwich Mousehold Heath Old Catton

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

01/11/2003

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2211

Old Catton

16/08/2006

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG2415

Spixworth

01/04/2002

Accipiter nisus

Eurasian Sparrowhawk

TG235113

Sprowston, over garden

04/09/2007

24/11/2004

10/04/2005

22/03/2004

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Scientific name

Common name

Buteo buteo

Common Buzzard

Grid reference TG2516

Location

Date

Crostwick Common

17/10/2008

Buteo buteo

Common Buzzard

TG2713

Rackheath

21/08/2008

Buteo buteo

Common Buzzard

TG2516

Crostwick Common

12/10/2006

Buteo buteo

Common Buzzard

TG2516

Crostwick Common

14/01/2007

Buteo buteo

Common Buzzard

TG2516

Crostwick Common

31/03/2008

Buteo buteo

Common Buzzard

TG2211

Old Catton

09/03/2004

Pandion haliaetus

Osprey

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

30/05/2004

Pandion haliaetus

Osprey

TG2113

Norwich Airport

15/07/2002

Pandion haliaetus

Osprey

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/06/2004

Pandion haliaetus

Osprey

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

28/09/2008

Pandion haliaetus

Osprey

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/10/2008

Falco tinnunculus

Common Kestrel

TG2211

Old Catton

01/07/2002

Falco columbarius

Merlin

TG2113

Norwich Airport

27/01/2002

Falco columbarius

Merlin

TG2113

Norwich Airport

21/09/2005

Falco subbuteo

Eurasian Hobby

TG2211

Old Catton

03/09/2006

Falco subbuteo

Eurasian Hobby

TG2113

Norwich Airport

18/05/2005

Falco subbuteo

Eurasian Hobby

TG2415

Spixworth

05/09/2007

Falco peregrinus

Peregrine Falcon

TG2211

Old Catton

17/09/2005

Rallus aquaticus

Water Rail

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

22/10/2008

Rallus aquaticus

Water Rail

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

24/02/2003

Grus grus

Common Crane

TG2113

Norwich Airport

18/11/2008

Vanellus vanellus

Northern Lapwing

TG2516

Crostwick Common

01/05/2005

Vanellus vanellus

Northern Lapwing

TG2113

Norwich Airport

07/01/2005

Vanellus vanellus

Northern Lapwing

TG2516

Crostwick Common

01/05/2004

Vanellus vanellus

Northern Lapwing

TG2415

Spixworth

19/01/2006

Lymnocryptes minimus

Jack Snipe

TG2412

Sprowston

02/11/2008

Scolopax rusticola

Eurasian Woodcock

TG2410

Norwich Barrack Street

14/11/2007

Scolopax rusticola

Eurasian Woodcock

TG2713

Rackheath

07/12/2008

Scolopax rusticola

Eurasian Woodcock

TG2211

Old Catton

23/11/2008

Numenius phaeopus

Whimbrel

TG2113

Norwich Airport

20/08/2007

Actitis hypoleucos

Common Sandpiper

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

06/08/2003

Actitis hypoleucos

Common Sandpiper

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

25/08/2003

Larus fuscus

Lesser Black-backed Gull

TG2713

Rackheath

28/08/2003

Larus fuscus subsp. graellsii

TG2113

Norwich Airport

01/06/2008

Columba oenas

Stock Pigeon

TG2415

Spixworth

23/02/2005

Columba oenas

Stock Pigeon

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2008

Columba palumbus

Common Wood Pigeon

TG2114

Horsham St Faiths

29/10/2002

Streptopelia decaocto

Eurasian Collared Dove

TG235113

Sprowston

10/01/2009

Streptopelia decaocto

Eurasian Collared Dove

TG2415

Spixworth

20/11/2002

Streptopelia decaocto

Eurasian Collared Dove

TG2415

Spixworth

04/11/2003

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

20/05/2002

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

06/05/2004

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

11/06/2005

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

05/05/2003

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

03/06/2005

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

10/05/2006

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

30/05/2004

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

02/05/2005

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

03/06/2002

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2516

Crostwick Common

09/05/2002

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2415

Spixworth

09/06/2003

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2410

01/07/2005

Streptopelia turtur

European Turtle Dove

TG2114

Norwich Mousehold Heath Horsham St Faiths

13/05/2004

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Scientific name

Common name

Cuculus canorus

Cuckoo

Grid reference TG2312

Location

Date

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2114

Horsham St Faiths

01/11/2004

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2114

Horsham St Faiths

01/01/2005

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2516

Crostwick Common

01/01/2008

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2415

Spixworth

01/02/2004

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2415

Spixworth

01/01/2008

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/01/2005

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2114

Horsham St Faiths

01/01/2004

Tyto alba

Barn Owl

TG2713

Rackheath

01/01/2008

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2003

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2312

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

12/07/2002

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2412

Sprowston

01/01/2008

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2713

Rackheath

05/11/2005

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2005

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

04/06/2002

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2415

Spixworth

01/01/2008

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2113

Norwich Airport

27/05/2002

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2113

Norwich Airport

05/07/2003

Athene noctua

Little Owl

TG2713

Rackheath

01/01/2005

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2516

Crostwick Common

01/01/2007

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2007

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

01/08/2007

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

01/05/2005

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2005

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2410

01/01/2006

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2410

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2211

Norwich Mousehold Heath Norwich Mousehold Heath Old Catton

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2312

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2410

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

Strix aluco

20/05/2003

May 2003

03/09/2002 02/11/2004 May 2003 01/03/2004

TG2415

Norwich Mousehold Heath Spixworth

TG2211

Old Catton

31/12/2003

Tawny Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2006

Strix aluco

Tawny Owl

TG2211

Old Catton

07/11/2007

Asio flammeus

Short-eared Owl

TG2113

Norwich Airport

07/01/2002

Asio flammeus

Short-eared Owl

TG2114

Horsham St Faiths

21/02/2002

Asio flammeus

Short-eared Owl

TG2113

Norwich Airport

19/01/2002

Asio flammeus

Short-eared Owl

TG2113

Norwich Airport

15/01/2002

Alcedo atthis

Common Kingfisher

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/01/2003

Alcedo atthis

Common Kingfisher

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

14/11/2004

Alcedo atthis

Common Kingfisher

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/01/2008

Alcedo atthis

Common Kingfisher

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/06/2004

Jynx torquilla

Eurasian Wryneck

TG2415

Spixworth

02/05/2008

Jynx torquilla

Wryneck

TG2211

Deer Park

08/05/2001

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2412

Sprowston

01/01/2008

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2412

Sprowston

01/01/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2003

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/02/2003

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/01/2006

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2008

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

19/03/2002

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/03/2004

01/01/2004

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Scientific name

Common name

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

Grid reference TG2211

Location

Date

Old Catton

12/02/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2713

Rackheath

01/09/2002

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/07/2002

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/11/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/11/2003

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/02/2002

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/04/2002

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2002

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2412

Sprowston

01/07/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2002

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/03/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

09/02/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/02/2003

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/01/2008

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

01/01/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

17/12/2003

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/07/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2415

Spixworth

09/02/2004

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2007

Picus viridis

Green Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/08/2004

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2410

01/08/2004

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Norwich Mousehold Heath Old Catton

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2412

Sprowston

05/04/2003

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

20/12/2004

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2410

01/07/2003

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Norwich Mousehold Heath Old Catton

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/02/2002

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2002

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/03/2004

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2003

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/02/2003

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

22/03/2002

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

13/02/2004

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

04/02/2005

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/08/2004

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2008

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

16/01/2007

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2005

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/11/2004

Dendrocopos major

Great Spotted Woodpecker

TG2211

Old Catton

01/01/2003

Dendrocopos minor

Lesser Spotted Woodpecker

TG2511

Golf Course

2000

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG2415

Spixworth

21/02/2005

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG2415

Spixworth

21/02/2002

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG2412

Sprowston

10/01/2006

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG269118

12/07/2008

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG268121

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG268121

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG268121

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG2412

White House Farm, Sprowson White House Farm, Sprowson White House Farm, Sprowson White House Farm, Sprowson Sprowston

01/07/2002

01/07/2004

18/07/2007 16/07/2007 09/08/2006 26/01/2005

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Scientific name

Common name

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

Grid reference TG2412

Location

Date

Sprowston

07/02/2005

Alauda arvensis

Skylark

TG2113

Norwich Airport

01/03/2002

Riparia riparia

Sand Martin

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2003

Hirundo rustica

Barn Swallow

TG2713

Rackheath

07/04/2007

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2003

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

01/07/2004

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

01/07/2007

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

23/09/2002

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

01/08/2003

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2412

Sprowston

01/06/2003

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2006

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

16/08/2006

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2005

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2003

Delichon urbicum

House Martin

TG2211

Old Catton

01/09/2005

Motacilla cinerea

Grey Wagtail

TG2412

Sprowston

24/02/2007

Motacilla cinerea

Grey Wagtail

TG2211

Old Catton

23/11/2008

Motacilla cinerea

Grey Wagtail

TG2412

Sprowston

01/08/2004

Motacilla alba

Pied Wagtail

TG2113

Norwich Airport

08/01/2005

Motacilla alba

Pied Wagtail

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

28/03/2005

Motacilla alba

Pied Wagtail

TG2415

Spixworth

19/01/2003

Bombycilla garrulus

Bohemian Waxwing

TG2412

Sprowston

13/01/2003

Bombycilla garrulus

Bohemian Waxwing

TG2412

Sprowston

04/01/2005

Bombycilla garrulus

Bohemian Waxwing

TG2412

Sprowston

06/12/2008

Bombycilla garrulus

Bohemian Waxwing

TG2412

Sprowston

30/11/2008

Bombycilla garrulus

Bohemian Waxwing

TG2211

Old Catton

12/11/2008

Bombycilla garrulus

Bohemian Waxwing

TG2713

Rackheath

15/01/2006

Troglodytes troglodytes

Winter Wren

TG2412

Sprowston

05/04/2003

Luscinia megarhynchos

Common Nightingale

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2008

Luscinia megarhynchos

Common Nightingale

TG2211

Old Catton

05/05/2008

Luscinia megarhynchos

Common Nightingale

TG2211

Old Catton

25/04/2008

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat

TG2415

Spixworth

01/10/2003

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

03/09/2005

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

13/09/2002

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat

TG2415

Spixworth

02/10/2002

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

31/08/2002

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

20/09/2002

Saxicola rubetra

Whinchat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

10/09/2002

Saxicola torquata

Stonechat

TG2415

Spixworth

04/10/2002

Saxicola torquata

Stonechat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

24/10/2006

Saxicola torquata

Stonechat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

25/09/2004

Saxicola torquata

Stonechat

TG2113

Norwich Airport

19/10/2007

Oenanthe oenanthe

Northern Wheatear

TG2113

Norwich Airport

18/05/2005

Oenanthe oenanthe

Northern Wheatear

TG2113

Norwich Airport

28/03/2004

Oenanthe oenanthe

Northern Wheatear

TG2113

Norwich Airport

21/09/2002

Oenanthe oenanthe

Northern Wheatear

TG2113

Norwich Airport

20/09/2002

Oenanthe oenanthe

Northern Wheatear

TG2415

Spixworth

06/09/2002

Oenanthe oenanthe

Northern Wheatear

TG2211

Old Catton

18/09/2002

Turdus torquatus

Ring Ouzel

TG2211

Old Catton

08/05/2007

Turdus pilaris

Fieldfare

TG2211

Old Catton

06/11/2008

Turdus pilaris

Fieldfare

TG2412

Sprowston

12/01/2005

Turdus pilaris

Fieldfare

TG2415

Spixworth

02/01/2006

Turdus pilaris

Fieldfare

TG2415

Spixworth

16/01/2002

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Scientific name

Common name

Turdus pilaris

Fieldfare

Grid reference TG2415

Location

Date

Turdus pilaris

Fieldfare

TG2410

Turdus philomelos

Song Thrush

TG2312

Turdus philomelos

Song Thrush

TG2312

Turdus philomelos

Song Thrush

TG2211

Turdus philomelos

Song Thrush

TG2312

Turdus iliacus

Redwing

TG2211

Old Catton

18/01/2002

Turdus iliacus

Redwing

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

26/03/2002

Turdus iliacus

Redwing

TG2415

Spixworth

18/03/2004

Turdus viscivorus

Mistle Thrush

TG2211

Old Catton

25/11/2005

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

01/04/2003

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

13/04/2008

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

11/06/2005

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

15/11/2004

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

16/10/2004

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

26/04/2004

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

31/08/2002

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

16/10/2008

Cettia cetti

Cetti's Warbler

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

04/06/2004

Phylloscopus trochilus

Willow Warbler

TG2211

Old Catton

18/09/2005

Muscicapa striata

Spotted Flycatcher

TG2410

30/05/2007

Sitta europaea

Wood Nuthatch

TG2211

Norwich Mousehold Heath Old Catton

Sitta europaea

Wood Nuthatch

TG2211

Old Catton

19/03/2002

Garrulus glandarius

Eurasian Jay

TG2211

Old Catton

29/03/2002

Pica pica

Black-billed Magpie

TG235113

Sprowston

11/01/2009

Pica pica

Black-billed Magpie

TG235113

Sprowston

10/01/2009

Pica pica

Black-billed Magpie

TG235113

05/09/2007

Corvus monedula

Eurasian Jackdaw

TG235113

Sprowston, on gatepost Sprowston, in garden

Corvus frugilegus

Rook

TG2211

Old Catton

01/04/2002

Corvus frugilegus

Rook

TG2415

Spixworth

21/02/2005

Corvus frugilegus

Rook

TG2211

Old Catton

01/06/2007

Corvus frugilegus

Rook

TG2211

Old Catton

01/05/2003

Corvus frugilegus

Rook

TG2211

Old Catton

01/04/2005

Corvus frugilegus

Rook

TG2415

Spixworth

13/07/2004

Sturnus vulgaris

Common Starling

TG2412

Sprowston

10/01/2006

Passer domesticus

House Sparrow

TG2211

Old Catton

01/07/2002

Passer domesticus

House Sparrow

TG2113

Norwich Airport

26/07/2004

Fringilla montifringilla

Brambling

TG2713

Rackheath

28/03/2004

Fringilla montifringilla

Brambling

TG2211

Old Catton

18/11/2008

Carduelis chloris

European Greenfinch

TG235113

Sprowston

28/06/2008

Carduelis chloris

European Greenfinch

TG235113

sprowston

22/02/2009

Carduelis chloris

European Greenfinch

TG235113

Sprowston, in garden

03/09/2007

Carduelis spinus

Eurasian Siskin

TG2215

East Ruston Mown Fen

29/12/2006

Carduelis spinus

Eurasian Siskin

TG2516

Crostwick Common

31/12/2007

Carduelis cannabina

Linnet

TG2312

March 2002

Carduelis cannabina

Linnet

TG2113

Carduelis cannabina

Common Linnet

TG2415

Spixworth

September 1997 01/01/2002

Carduelis cannabina

Common Linnet

TG2211

Old Catton

01/03/2002

Carduelis cannabina

Linnet

TG2314

Carduelis cannabina

Common Linnet

TG2415

Spixworth

22/01/2005

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Common Bullfinch

TG2516

Crostwick Common

16/06/2002

Spixworth

08/04/2005

Norwich Mousehold Heath

02/11/2006 07/02/2000 2001

Old Catton

01/06/2002 May 2000

01/02/2002

16/08/2008

January 2002

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Scientific name

Common name

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Common Bullfinch

Grid reference TG2516

Location

Date

Crostwick Common

27/06/2005

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Common Bullfinch

TG2516

Crostwick Common

27/04/2006

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Common Bullfinch

TG2516

Crostwick Common

11/06/2006

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Common Bullfinch

TG2410

01/01/2005

Pyrrhula pyrrhula

Common Bullfinch

TG2516

Norwich Mousehold Heath Crostwick Common

Coccothraustes coccothraustes Coccothraustes coccothraustes Plectrophenax nivalis

Hawfinch

TG2410

12/10/2005

Hawfinch

TG2412

Norwich Mousehold Heath Sprowston

Snow Bunting

TG2211

Old Catton

29/12/2005

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2314

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2412

Sprowston

26/01/2005

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2412

Sprowston

01/07/2004

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2314

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2515

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2211

Old Catton

26/12/2008

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2006

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2511

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2113

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2005

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2415

Spixworth

01/05/2004

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2211

Old Catton

18/03/2002

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2415

Spixworth

09/06/2008

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2007

Emberiza citrinella

Yellowhammer

TG2415

Spixworth

01/06/2003

07/04/2007

06/11/2004

1997

1999 1997

1996 1998

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

NATIONAL LEGISLATION AFFORDED TO SPECIES

The objective of the EC Habitats Directive 1 is to conserve the various species of plant and animal which are considered rare across Europe. The Directive is transposed into UK law by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (formerly The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c. ) Regulations 1994 (as amended)) and The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended).

Species and species groups that are protected or otherwise regulated under the aforementioned domestic and European legislation, and that are most likely to be affected by development activities, include herpetofauna (amphibians and reptiles), badger, bats, birds, dormouse, invasive plant species, otter, plants, red squirrel, water vole and white clawed crayfish.

Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Explanatory notes relating to species protected under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (which includes smooth snake, sand lizard, great crested newt and natterjack toad), all bat species, otter, and some plant species) are given below. These should be read in conjunction with the relevant species sections that follow.

In the Directive, the term ‘deliberate’ is interpreted as being somewhat wider than intentional and may be thought of as including an element of recklessness. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 does not define the act of ‘migration’ and therefore, as a precaution, it is recommended that short distance movement of animals for e.g. foraging, breeding or dispersal purposes are also considered. In order to obtain a European Protected Species Mitigation (EPSM) licence, the application must demonstrate that it meets all of the following three ‘tests’: i) the action(s) are necessary for the purpose of preserving public health or safety or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequence of primary importance for the environment; ii) that there is no satisfactory alternative and iii) that the action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range. Birds With certain exceptions, all birds, their nests and eggs are protected under Sections 1-8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Among other things, this makes it an offence to:

Intentionally (or recklessly in Scotland) kill, injure or take any wild bird Intentionally (or recklessly in Scotland) take, damage or destroy (or, in Scotland, otherwise interfere with) the nest of any wild bird while it is in use or being built Intentionally take or destroy an egg of any wild bird Sell, offer or expose for sale, have in his possession or transport for the purpose of sale any wild bird (dead or alive) or bird egg or part thereof. In Scotland only, intentionally or recklessly obstruct or prevent any wild bird from using its nest

Certain species of bird, for example the barn owl, black redstart, hobby, bittern and kingfisher receive additional special protection under Schedule 1 of the Act and Annex 1 of the European Community Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (2009/147/EC). This affords them protection against: The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

Intentional or reckless disturbance while it is building a nest or is in, on or near a nest containing eggs or young Intentional or reckless disturbance of dependent young of such a bird In Scotland only, intentional or reckless disturbance whilst lekking In Scotland only, intentional or reckless harassment

How is the legislation pertaining to birds liable to affect development works? To avoid contravention of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), works should be planned to avoid the possibility of killing or injuring any wild bird, or damaging or destroying their nests. The most effective way to reduce the likelihood of nest destruction in particular is to undertake work outside the main bird nesting season which typically runs from March to August2. Where this is not feasible, it will be necessary to have any areas of suitable habitat thoroughly checked for nests prior to vegetation clearance.

Those species of bird listed on Schedule 1 are additionally protected against disturbance during the nesting season. Thus, it will be necessary to ensure that no potentially disturbing works are undertaken in the vicinity of the nest. The most effective way to avoid disturbance is to postpone works until the young have fledged. If this is not feasible, it may be possible to maintain an appropriate buffer zone or standoff around the nest.

UK BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN In 1994 the UK Government published its response to the Convention on Biological Diversity that it signed along with over 150 other nations at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Biodiversity â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the UK Action Plan (HM Government 1994) and subsequent publications (e.g. UK Steering Group 1995) set out a programme for the national Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), including the development of targets for biodiversity, and the techniques and actions necessary to achieve them. The national BAP includes lists of species that are of conservation concern, either because they are rare in an international or national context or have undergone serious declines in their populations in recent years. Species Action Plans

It should be noted that this is the main breeding period. Breeding activity may occur outwith this period

(depending on the particular species and geographical location of the site) and thus due care and attention should be given when undertaking potentially disturbing works at any time of year.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

have been prepared or are in preparation for a many of these species, whilst Habitat Action Plans are being produced for important or characteristic habitats identified in the plan. LOCAL BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN The UK plan also encourages the production of local Biodiversity Action Plans at the County or District level. The Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plan contains 21 Habitat Action Plans (HAPs) and 58 Species Action Plans (SAPs). Reptile and amphibian SAPs listed in the Norfolk LBAP are:

Grass snake Natrix natrix Slow worm Anguis fragilis Adder Vipera berus Common lizard Zootoca vivipara Common toad Bufo bufo Great crested newt Triturus cristatus Natterjack toad Bufo calamita NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The National Planning Policy Framework replaced PPS9 in April 2012 and emphasises the need for sustainable development. The Framework specifies the need for protection of designated sites and priority habitats and priority species. An emphasis is also made for the need for ecological networks via preservation, restoration and re-creation. The protection and recovery of priority species â&#x20AC;&#x201C; that is those listed as UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is also listed as a requirement of planning policy. In determining planning application, planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by ensuring that: designated sites are protected from adverse harm; there is appropriate mitigation or compensation where significant harm cannot be avoided; opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments are encouraged; planning permission is refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats including aged or veteran trees and also ancient woodland.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Birds / Beyond Green

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Bat Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

Bat Surveys Beyond Green

Author

Catherine Greenhough BSc (Hons) MSC MIEEM & Graham Hopkins BSc (Hons) PhD PGCE CEnv MIEEM FRES

Job No.

100368 Reviewed by

Approved by

Date

Initial

Graham Hopkins

Sam Phillips

5th May 2011

Revision

Alex Prendergast

Graham Hopkins

20th September 2012

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House, 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich, NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Bat Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION Background

Site Context and Status

Legislation and Planning Policy

2 METHODOLOGY Desk Top Study

Field Surveys

Evaluation

3 RESULTS Data Search

Static Bat Activity Surveys

Walked Transects

Tree Surveys

4 EVALUATION Overview

Common Pipistrelle

Soprano Pipistrelle

Nattererâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

Noctule

Barbastelle

Brown Long-eared

Serotine

Nathusius' Pipistrelle

5 DISCUSSION Overview

Assessment of Impacts

Masterplanning

Urban Realm

Off-site Mitigation

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

APPENDIX 2: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ON METHODS

APPENDIX 3: SUMMARY DATA

APPENDIX 4: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An intensive series of bat surveys were undertaken between April and October 2010 at the site of the proposed north-east Norwich urban extension. The surveys used a combination of automated detectors and walked transects. Across a wide survey area static detectors were deployed for at least one night per months, with up to 10 deployed on any single night; this survey effort equated to 71 nights of static survey. Within the development boundary 37 nights of static survey were undertaken. Eight species were recorded with high certainty: common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, Nathusius’ pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii, barbastelle Barbastella barbastellus, brown long-eared and Natterer’s and noctule; serotine Eptesicus serotinus was probably present also, but the confidence in this identification is lower. Across the survey area a total of 12,253 registrations were recorded by the static detectors and 861 by the walked transects. For each species the following numbers of registrations were made across the survey area: common pipistrelle, 8860; soprano pipistrelle, 2590; Nathusius’ pipistrelle, 1; barbastelle, 126; brown long-eared, 40; Natterer’s and Common and soprano pipistrelles were the commonest species, found throughout the site. Nathusius’ pipistrelle was recorded from a single registration. Barbastelles were recorded frequently, but in very low numbers and across the site without any association with woodland, although there is a suggestion that there may be greater levels of activity near the Beeston Park woodlands. Brown long-eared was found throughout the site by the automated detectors but the walked transects found concentrations around Beeston Hall. Natterer’s and Myotis species were principally around the Beeston Hall woodlands, but they were present along hedgerows elsewhere. Noctule and ‘big bats’ were found throughout the site but with possibly some concentration of activity near the Beeston Hall woodlands. Trees of moderate or high potential for roosting bats were found throughout the site, in woodland and hedgerow situations. Across the development area a total of 30 trees or groups of trees, including woodland blocks such as Foxburrow Plantation itself or the line of trees linking Foxburrow Plantation to Wroxham Road, were of high potential value for bats and 63 were of moderate potential. The principal areas of bat activity were along the North Walsham Road and then in The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

association with woodland blocks, especially Beeston Park. As general guidance for masterplanning, stong linear corridors should be maintained across the landscape to facilitate movement of bats; such corridors should be relatively dark, vegetated and possibly using public open space as stepping stones. Within the urban area green space may be promoted as bat foraging habitat by appropriate landscaping including green roofs. The restoration of Beeston Park will provide a significant area of new foraging habitat for bats, with off-site hedgerow planting providing additional areas of new habitat.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1

1.2

This report presents the results for a suite of bat surveys undertaken across the development area and a broader survey area. SITE CONTEXT AND STATUS

1.3

The development covers approximately 200ha, as an arc along the north-east of Norwich, from approximately the boundary of Norwich International Airport to the Wroxham Road, south of Spixworth and north of Old Catton and Sprowston. The broader survey area extends for approximately 350ha and the results provide a wider context for the surveys.

1.4

1.5

Appendix 3 contains details of legislation and planning policy and is provided for general guidance only. The Appendix includes: Statutory and non-statutory designated sites National Planning Policy

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

2 METHODOLOGY DESK TOP STUDY 2.1

A data search for bat records within a 10km radius of the site was commissioned from the Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service (NBIS). FIELD SURVEYS

2.2

A full account of the surveys is provided in Appendix 2: Supplementary Information on Methods, with only an overview provided here.

2.3

The surveys comprised a combination of: Static surveys using Anabat automated detectors; Manual transects; Tree assessments (Cowan, 2006) supplemented by tree climbing; and a A single three-hour driven transect.

2.4

The principal source of data reported here are the activity surveys with little additional information gained from the manual and driven transect surveys. Up to ten automated detectors were deployed on any single night, although on most nights only five were used, between April and October 2010. Within the development boundary a total of 37 stations were used for static surveys, with more in the survey area. The number of nightsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; static survey across the survey area per month was: April, five nights; May, ten nights; June, ten nights; July, 20 nights; August, ten nights; September, ten nights; and October, three nights.

2.5

Walked transects were run monthly April-October 2010, with three transect routes across the Survey Area and all three run simultaneously. The single three-hour driven transect was undertaken in July 2010. EVALUATION

2.6

For bats the scheme presented by Wray et al. (2010) is used, which considers the rarity, numbers of individuals roosting potential of a locality and the landscape character.

2.7

Briefly, rarity is scored as 2, 5 or 20 (for common, rare and rarest species); number of bats as 5, 10 or 20 (individuals, small numbers or large numbers); roosting potential as 1, 3, 4, 5 or 20 (none, low potential, moderate, large number of roosts or close to a Special Conservation Area for the species); and landscape value of 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 (limited habitat, large fields with poor hedges; moderate field sizes and gappy hedgerows of isolated tall hedgerows, small fields with many hedgerows and a high value landscape with small fields, streams and many hedgerows). For each criterion The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

a score is assigned and the sum of scores is used as the value score thus: 1-10, zone of influence only; 11-20, Local; 21-30, County; 31-40, Regional; 41+, National or International.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

RESULTS DATA SEARCH

3.1.

Four species of bat (common and soprano pipistrelle, brown long-eared and Daubenton’s bat) have been recorded within a 2km radius of the site boundary on 13 occasions between 1999 and 2007. It is not clear from the records whether these relate to roosts or field observations. Of these records, two are located within the site boundary. A Daubenton’s and soprano pipistrelle have been recorded at TG 255 141 in June 2007.

3.2.

Within a 10km radius of the site there are a total of 368 bat records for eight bat species/species groups. A number of these records relate to roosts within dwellings and hibernation roosts at Whitlingham (lime kilns A and B), Trowse Tunnel, Carey’s Meadow Tunnel and at Eaton Chalk pit SSSI.

3.3.

A summary of the bat records within a 2km and 10km radius of the site is provided in Table 1. Table 1. Bat records within a 10km radius of the site. Scientific name Common name Myotis Unidentified Myotis Myotis daubentonii Daubenton's bat Myotis mystacinus Whiskered bat Myotis nattereri Natterer's bat Nyctalus noctula Noctule bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus Common pipistrelle* Pipistrellus pygmaeus Soprano pipistrelle* Plecotus auritus Brown long-eared bat

3.4.

Number of records 1 44 (2) 1 28 41 156 (7) 67 (2) 30 (2)

Eaton Chalk Pit SSSI, approximately 4km from the development area, was first notified in 1968 for its populations of hibernating Daubenton’s, Natterer’s

and

brown long-eared bats. The site is considered to be in a ‘favourable’ status; however it has not knowingly been monitored for a number of years (I. Levett 2010 pers comm.). STATIC BAT ACTIVITY SURVEYS 3.5.

Eight species were recorded with high certainty: common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, Nathusius’ pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii, barbastelle Barbastella

barbastellus, brown long-eared and Natterer’s and noctule; serotine Eptesicus serotinus was probably present also, but the confidence in this identification is lower. The number of registrations for each species are summarised below (Table 2), and is a semi-quantitative indication of species’ relative abundances. Across the survey area a total of 12,253 registrations were recorded by the static detectors and 861 by the walked transects. The occurrence of species and an indication of the number of registrations as each station are shown in Appendix 1: Figures 1a-g.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Table 2. Summary of registrations from all static detectors within the survey area. Species Registrations Common pipistrelle. 8860 Soprano pipistrelle. 2959 Nathusiusâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; pipistrelle. 1 Barbastelle. 126 Brown long-eared. 40 Nattererâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and other Myotis 100 species. Noctule and serotine. 49 Serotine 11 Unidentified or indistinct. 107

Common Pipistrelle 3.6.

The commonest species, it was recorded across the Survey Area with one automated detector recording 1771 registrations in a single evening and an average of 134. Of the 37 stations for static surveys within the development boundary, registrations were made at 36. There were some particularly notable concentrations of activity (Table 3): Along the woodland edges of the plantations south of Beeston Hall including the woodland edges along Wroxham Road; Woodland near Red Hall Farm including the pine belt; A hedgerow along the North Walsham Road; and A hedgerow along the Buxton Road. Table 3. Summary of key areas and 100-99 calls per night. Number Detector reference >1000 BG BS 100 to E 999 AS AI BP AP D AT R J H I AQ K

3.7.

as determined by Anabat registrations >1000 calls per night Location Beeston park woodland edge (west of Hall) North of Red Hall Buxton Road

Date 14/09/10 11/10/10 29/04/10

North pine belt Beyond east boundary Beeston park woodland edge (south of Hall) Beeston park woodland edge (west of Hall) Wroxham Road woodland Beeston park woodland edge (west of Hall) South of Red Hall Wroxham Road woodland North Walsham Road Park and Ride Wroxham Road woodland Beeston park woodland edge (east of Hall)

22/07/10 13/07/10 11/10/10 22/07/10 29/04/10 22/07/10 14/06/10 19/05/10 19/05/10 19/05/10 22/07/10 28/05/10

When the times of the first and final registrations are considered there is relatively low activity around sunset with the majority of first registration more than 30 The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

minutes after sunset; on only one occasion were calls before this time. In the vast majority of instances the high levels of bat activity are throughout the night and without clear peaks of activity at dusk and sunrise. Soprano Pipistrelle 3.8.

Soprano pipistrelle is the second commonest species, again occurring throughout the site. The key areas of greatest activity were: along the woodland edges of the woodlands of Beeston Hall including the woodland edges along Wroxham Road; woodland near Red Hall Farm including the pine belt to its north; and along the North Walsham road where detectors consistently recorded between 10 and 99 registrations per night. Of the 37 stations static surveys within the development area, registrations were made at 36.

3.9.

Again there were few evident peaks of activity near to dusk and dawn, rather the activity was throughout the night. The key areas of greatest activity (Table4) were: Along the woodland edges of the plantations south of Beeston Hall including the woodland edges along Wroxham Road; and Woodland near Red Hall Farm including the pine belt. Table 4. Summary of key areas and 100-99 calls per night. Number Detector reference 100 to J 999 R K BC AP BS BG

as determined by Anabat registrations >1000 calls per night Location Wroxham Road woodland

Date 29/04/10

South of Red Hall Beeston park woodland edge (east of Hall) On eastern boundary Beeston park woodland edge (west of Hall) North of Red Hall

22/07/10 13/07/10 11/10/10 22/07/10 29/04/10

Beeston park woodland edge (west of Hall)

22/07/10

Nathusius’ Pipistrelle 3.10. A single Nathusius’ pipistrelle registration was made from the woodland edge immediately west of Beeston Hall in September 2010. 3.11. However, during the survey period and at scattered locations a further 84 low pipistrelle bat registrations were detected (i.e. with a frequency of maximum energy between 40 and 42kHz) and these calls may be of Nathusius’ or of common pipistrelle. Barbastelle 3.12. Barbastelle bats were recorded over the whole survey period but with very few registrations on any occasion, always fewer than 12 registrations. The species was recorded across the Survey Area but with greater activity around the Beeston Park woodlands and Red Hall Farm. Of the 37 stations for static surveys within the The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Proposed Development boundary, registrations were made on 18 stations. 3.13.

None of the calls were close to sunset or dawn. For example, automated detector D, adjacent to Sprowston Plantation on the Wroxham Road recorded eight registrations of which four were between 21.08 and 21.14, almost an hour after sunset (which was at 20.17). Brown Long-eared

3.14.

Long-eared bats were recorded between April and October, but with few registrations on any one occasion (the peak being six). Records are from a scatter of locations, with necessarily a strong association with woodland. Of the 37 stations for static surveys within the development boundary, registrations were made at 10. The highest number of bat registrations overnight was 6, recorded by Anabat L, on the 28th-29th May 2010.

3.15. None of the calls were close to sunset or dawn. Natterer’s and other Myotis species 3.16. Natterer’s and undetermined Myotis calls were recorded over the survey period, from April to October. Few calls were recorded on most occasions when detected but on one occasions 26 registrations were made between midnight and 02.51 on 29th May 2010, from the Beeston Park woodlands. Of the 37 stations for static surveys within the development boundary, registrations were made at 18. 3.17. The majority of activity was from woodland areas but registrations were also made along hedgerows at scattered locations across the site. 3.18. None of the detectors recorded peaks of activity in association with dusk or dawn. Noctule and ‘Large’ Bats including Serotine 3.19.

The majority of noctule activity and other registrations from undetermined large bats are associated with woodland parcels around Beeston Hall, but with registrations from disparate locations across the site. None of the automated detectors recorded peaks of activity around dusk or dawn.

3.20. The highest number of noctule bat registrations was seven, over one evening in early August, with first two bat registrations some 40 minutes after sunset with occasional passes recorded throughout the night. Of the 37 stations for static surveys within the Proposed Development boundary, registrations were made of noctule at 17. 3.21. Registrations consistent with serotine, were identified at 3 stations in the development area and across the whole survey area on 12 occasions, on eight of the static detectors. The number of bat registrations per detector varied between 1 The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

and 3. The highest number of serotine bat registrations (3), were detected overnight from the 22nd to 23rd July 2010. WALKED TRANSECTS 3.22. The principal merit of the walked transects is that they include survey areas not covered by the static stations, particularly to the south-west of the site where detectors could not be deployed for fear of theft. 3.23. The pattern of species distributions are similar to those determined from the Anabats: Common pipistrelle is ubiquitous, recorded throughout the site. These are the principal species recorded from the south-west of the site. Soprano pipistrelle is the next commonest species, again widespread and with records from the south-west of the site. Barbastelle are widespread but infrequent. A single record was from the south-west of the site near to the estate housing that is adjacent to the site. Brown long-eared was infrequent, principally from the woodland adjacent to Beeston Hall but with a single record from along a hedgerow. Natterer’s and Myotis species are infrequent and principally near to the Beeston Hall and Red Hall Farm woodlands. Noctule and other ‘large bats’ (serotine) are widespread but infrequently recorded. TREE SURVEYS 3.24.

Across the development area a total of 30 trees or groups of trees, including woodland blocks such as Foxburrow Plantation itself or the line of trees linking Foxburrow Plantation to Wroxham Road, were of high potential value for bats – with a score of 3 on the Cowan (2006) scale – and 63 were of moderate potential – with a score of 2 on the Cowan scale (Appendix 1: Figure 2).

3.25. These data show that potentially roosts are located across the site, in both the key woodland blocks and along hedgerows in mature trees. Direct climbing inspections of 19 trees failed to find evidence of roosting bats.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

EVALUATION OVERVIEW

4.1.

In determining the value of the site for bats the key factors to consider are the numbers of each species, their use of the site and the time of year present. Of particular value is the presence of roosts which have both legal protection and substantial biodiversity value. The site may also be of disproportionate value at key times of year, such as the maternity period from June to July or hibernation from November to March.

4.2.

As described in the methods, the scheme of Wray et al. (2010) is used for assigning value to the bats. Within the Survey Area there are three common bats (common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, and brown long-eared), four ‘rarer’ bats (Natterer’s, noctule, Nathusius’ pipistrelle, and serotine) and one rarest bat (barbastelle). COMMON PIPISTRELLE

4.3.

The UK common pipistrelle population is estimated to be 2 million (Harris et al., 1995) and data from the National Bat Monitoring Programme suggests a statistically significant upward trend from baseline levels (Bat Conservation Trust, 2010). It is widespread in Norfolk and numerous roosts are known (NNNS, 2011).

4.4.

The common pipistrelle bat is found throughout urban and rural habitats, but does not show any particular habitat preference. Like the soprano pipistrelle, this species tends to avoid open areas tending to fly alongside hedgerows and woodland edges, although they can cross open areas if required (Nicholls & Racey, 2006). The home range of 14 bats from a colony of around 100 common pipistrelles in Scotland was 15.26km2 (Nicholls & Racey, 2006).

4.5.

Within

the

Proposed

Development,

common

pipistrelles

were

commonly

encountered throughout. Given the high level of activity and ubiquitous occurrence and home range of around 15km 2, the development site is likely to form part of the home range of at least one colony (although foraging ranges of colonies may overlap). 4.6.

The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively high and suggestive of a roost nearby. Following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘2’ (common); Numbers scores ‘20’ (large numbers); Roosts scores ‘4’ (moderate); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes). The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

4.7.

The total score for common pipistrelle is ‘29’ equating to District significance. However, based on the available data of the known distribution of the common pipistrelle in Norfolk and the sizes of other roosts in the District it is considered on the basis of professional judgement that this is an over-estimate therefore a revised value of Local-District significance is assigned. SOPRANO PIPISTRELLE

4.8.

The soprano pipistrelle is the second most abundant British bat. Maternity roosts in Britain can contain up to 800 adults and are most frequently found close to a number of large water bodies. The soprano pipistrelle is common throughout the UK, and the UK population is estimated to be around 1,300,000 bats, but there has not been a significant change in numbers recently (Bat Conservation Trust, 2010). In Norfolk it is widely distributed (Greenhough, 2009a).

4.9.

Soprano pipistrelles travel an average distance of 2km from a maternity colony to their foraging grounds (Racey & Swift, 1985) and the home range of 12 bats tagged from a colony of around 250 soprano pipistrelle bats in Scotland measured 4.87 km2 (Nicholls & Racey, 2006).

4.10. The level of activity in the Development is relatively low and not suggestive of a roost within the area. Following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘2’ (common); Numbers scores ‘20’ (large numbers);, Roosts scores ‘3’ (small number); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes). 4.11. The total score for soprano pipistrelle is ‘28’ equating to District. However, based on the available data of the known distribution of the common pipistrelle in Norfolk and the sizes of other roosts in the District it is considered on the basis of professional judgement that this is an over-estimate therefore a revised value of Local-District significance is assigned. NATTERER’S 4.12. It is assumed that the Myotis records refer to Natterer’s. Myotis species are difficult to distinguish by call and the presence of other Myotis species cannot be discounted, and indeed a single record of Daubenton’s was identified with confidence. However, on balance it is unlikely that Daubenton’s are present in significant numbers as the species is typically associated with open water areas. The other Myotis in Norfolk, Brandt’s M. brandtii and whiskered are rarely recorded, known from very few sites and are probably genuinely rare (NNNS, 2011). On balance it is therefore considered reasonable to assume all Myotis registrations are The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

attributable to Natterer’s. 4.13.

Natterer’s bats are common and widespread throughout much of the UK (Bat Conservation Trust, 2007), with a UK population estimated to be 148,000 (Harris et

al. 1995). In Norfolk they are widespread (NNNS, 2011). 4.14.

They are typically associated with semi-natural broadleaved woodland and open water (sheltered by trees); arable and dense conifer plantations are avoided (Smith & Racey, 2000). Natterer’s bats roost in tree cavities and within older buildings and a summer colony can use in the region of 25 separate roosting locations (Smith & Racey, 2000).

4.15. Given that few registrations of Myotis were detected professional judgement would indicate that they are not roosting on site and the records refer to transient individuals or occasional foraging from elsewhere. The home range of a breeding colony of 35 Natterer’s is around 12km 2, with a core area of between 1.5 and 2km2 (Smith & Racey, 2000), thus it is likely to be the case that the Proposed Development is peripheral to a breeding colony elsewhere. 4.16. The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low but the regularity of contacts and the abundance of potential roosts near Beeston Hall indicates a roost within the area; also the habitat here is considered to be better is nevertheless scored as a ‘3’. Following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘5’ (rarer); Numbers scores ‘10’ (small numbers); Roosts scores ‘4’ (moderate/not known); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes). 4.17. The total score for Natterer’s is ‘22’ equating to District significance. NOCTULE 4.18. The estimated noctule population in Great Britain is 50,000. Results from the National Bat Monitoring Programme suggest that there is a statistically significant increase in noctule populations (above the baseline) (Bat Conservation Trust, 2010). The noctule is a UK and Norfolk BAP species and is widespread in the District (Greenhough, 2009a). 4.19.

Noctules almost exclusively roost in trees, using woodpecker holes and rot holes. They are a fast-flying species, foraging high over habitats including broadleaved woodland, pasture and arable and moorland (Mackie & Racey, 2007). They can travel up to 26km from the roost (Dietz et al., 2009) and one study in the UK found that the home range of a colony of 20 noctules was 62.8km2, with the mean area of The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

8.2km2 per bat, travelling a mean of 4.23km from the roost to foraging grounds (Mackie & Racey, 2007). 4.20. The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low but the regularity of contacts and the abundance of potential roosts near Beeston Hall would indicate a roost within the area; also the habitat here is considered to be better but is nevertheless scored as a ‘3’. 4.21. The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low and does not indicate a roost within the area. Following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘5’ (rarer); Numbers scores ‘5’ (individual bats); Roosts scores ‘1’ (none); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes). 4.22. The total score for noctule is ‘14’ equating to Local significance. BARBASTELLE 4.23.

The barbastelle bat is identified as being rare in the UK, with population strongholds in East Anglia. The estimated pre-breeding population in 1995 was 5000 (4500 in Britain) (Harris et al., 1995). In Norfolk there are scattered records across much of the District but concentrated in the north-east (Greenhough, 2009b).

4.24.

Data from radio tracking studies undertaken in the UK suggests that that the foraging range of barbastelles varies, in one study in Wales barbastelles fed within 4-7km of the roost (Billington, 2002) compared to for example, 7.7km for lactating bats in Sussex (Greenway, 2008). The foraging area for lactating barbastelles in Sussex ranged between 2.6km 2 to 26.8km2 with a core area of 0.61km 2 to 11.52km2 (Greenway, 2008).

4.25. The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low but the regularity of contacts and the abundance of potential roosts near Beeston Hall would indicate a roost within the area; also the habitat here is considered to be better but is nevertheless scored as a ‘3’. 4.26. The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low and does not a roost within the area. Following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘20’ (rarer); Numbers scores ‘10’ (small numbers); Roosts scores ‘4’ (moderate/not known); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes). The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

4.27. The total score for barbastelle is ‘37’ equating to ‘Regional’. Based on the current understanding of the barbastelle in Norfolk (Greenhough, 2009b) – and particularly the appreciation that foraging individuals occur widely - it is considered that this over-estimates the value of the site in both a Norfolk and local context. The species is consequently assigned a value of District significance. BROWN LONG-EARED 4.28. The UK population is estimated to be 245,000 in England (Harris et al., 1995). Brown long-eared bats are common and widespread throughout the UK, and widespread in Norfolk (Greenhough, 2009b). 4.29.

Maternity roosts are made up of 10-50 adult bats and are typically found in older buildings and trees in association with woodland, foraging and commuting taking place along hedges and/or tree lines, as well as overgrown banks, fences, or streams with vegetation (Swift, 1998). Bats travel between 1.1km and 3km from roost to foraging areas, spending most of their time within 0.5km of the roost; in 1991 a study in Scotland the estimated population density of brown long-eared bats in the study area was one bat per 10 hectares (or 0.1km 2) (Swift, 1998).

4.30.

The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low but the regularity of contacts and the abundance of potential roosts near Beeston Hall would indicate a roost within the area; also the habitat here is considered to be better and is scored as a ‘4’.

4.31.

Thus, following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘2’ (common); Numbers scores ‘10’ (small numbers); Roosts scores ‘3’ (small number); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes).

4.32.

The total score for brown long-eared is ‘18’ equating to District significance. SEROTINE

4.33.

Serotine was recorded as occasional registrations. In Norfolk, serotine bats are rarely recorded and are at the edge of their national range (NNNS, 2011).

4.34.

They will travel up to 12km from the roost to foraging areas, usually via linear features, such as hedgerows, roads or woodland edges (Dietz et al., 2009). The home range of maternity colonies of bats (containing less than 20 adult bats) in a study carried out in south Cambridgeshire varied between 24-77km2, with the majority of activity concentrated within a core area of 13-33km2 (Robinson & Stebbings, 1997). The range of individual bats varied from 0.16km 2 to 47.6km2 The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

(mean 7.46km2). The home range of three of the four colonies studied overlapped. On six nights individual bats flew distances of over 20km. 4.35.

The few records of the species are consistent with occasional individuals foraging on the site but roosting elsewhere.

4.36.

The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low and does not indicate a roost within the area. Following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘5’ (rarer); Numbers scores ‘5’ (individual bats); Roosts scores ‘1’ (none); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes).

4.37.

The total score for serotine is ‘14’ equating to Local significance. NATHUSIUS' PIPISTRELLE

4.38.

Nathusius’ pipistrelle is a seasonal long-distance migrant that has been recorded, from ringing studies, as travelling up to 1905km in some parts of Europe (Dietz et

al., 2009). Nathusius’ pipistrelles usually fly 3–20m and foraging areas can be up to 6.5km from the roost (Dietz et al., 2009). 4.39.

A maternity roost is also known to be present in Norfolk (NNNS, 2011), thought to be near the east coast. The data are would indicate a single transient individual within the Proposed Development only.

4.40.

The level of activity in the Proposed Development is relatively low and not suggestive of a roost within the area. Following Wray et al. (2010): Species scores ‘5’ (rarer); Numbers scores ‘5’ (individual bats); Roosts scores ‘1’ (none); and Foraging habitat scores ‘3’ (moderate field sizes).

4.41.

The total score for Nathusius’ pipistrelle is ‘14’ equating to Local significance.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

DISCUSSION OVERVIEW

5.1.

The principal areas of bat activity are considered to be along the North Walsham Road and associated with woodland areas including Beeston Park and Red Hall Farm. As envisaged, bats use the woodland areas and Beeston Park as the principal roosting areas and for foraging, with the edges of the woodland also used as important commuting routes. Across the wider site, commuting is probably evident along North Walsham Road, presumably from residential estates to the south to the wider countryside. It is considered likely that the northern edges of the residential housing are also important for commuting including areas such as the Millennium Woodland, St Maryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Churchyard cemetery and the allotments near the south end of Church Lane. Across the wider site the hedgerows are the principal foraging habitat. No roosts were found during the surveys but it is likely ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

5.2.

The impacts of the project are considered to be direct habitat loss as foraging habitat and severing of commuting routes. Although some bats will utilise urban areas several are sensitive to lights (Bat Conservation Trust, 2008) and are unlikely to forage in urban areas or traverse them, including barbastelle, brown long-eared and Myotis species. The impacts will consequently be substantial on these lightsensitive species while the light tolerant species (pipistrelles, notcule and serotine) may continue to use the sites depending on the extent of available foraging habitat. MASTERPLANNING

5.3.

In terms of overall masterplaning the key principle is to include strong linear routes or corridors across the site within which bats will be able to travel. These areas should be along existing routes as far as possible or otherwise be designed to link key areas, primarily foraging habitat and the known or likely roosting areas.

5.4.

The design of such corridors may include the use of linking features such as tree networks and stepping stones such as public green spaces, gardens and SuDS (Gunnell et al., 2012). In designing these areas features such as gardens should not be treated as individual units but rather as potential patches of connected habitat. In urban parks, trees and shrubs provide foraging habitat and facilitate movements by providing features for bats to navigate along and offer screening of lights. Where such routes cross roads then lighting should be as low and as limited as possible and ideally tree canopies may be close, such as to offer a continuous linear corridor at height. URBAN REALM

5.5.

Key principles in the urban realm are to minimise lighting (Stone et al., 2009), The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

especially near areas of open space and other potential foraging habitat and also near to the green corridors for commuting bats. 5.6.

Guidance on outdoor lighting (Gunnell et al., 2012) includes: The minimisation of lighting as far as possible with only the minimum needed for safety; UV light should be avoided to limit insect attraction, with either low UV bulbs or the use of glass covers to filter UV; and The height of lights stands should be minimised and baffles and directional lighting used to limit light spill.

5.7.

Additional measures in the urban realm to increase value for bats is the use of native species or plants otherwise of value for invertebrates in the soft landscaping designs. Examples of small street trees of value include silver birch Betula pendula and rowan Sorbus aucuparia, but see Gunnell et al. (2012) for additional examples.

5.8.

Other measures to increase the availability of flying insects include the creation of extensive green roofs (Buglife, 2012) and SuDS networks with marginal planting of emergent and wetland vegetation. OFF-SITE MITIGATION

5.9.

To mitigate for the loss of hedgerows – the principal foraging habitat across the majority of the site – it is recommended that off-site hedgerow planting is undertaken. The composition of the hedgerows should be based on local speciesrich hedgerows and with standard trees where possible.

5.10. The restoration of Beeston Park – an integral part of the project rather than an offsite measure - will also create an extensive area of new grassland habitat, with parkland being recognised as an important bat foraging habitat (Glendell et al., 1997). Key features within parkland are the areas of grassland, waterbodies and the woodland areas. If possible, grazing should be encouraged across the restored parkland by variously sheep, horses and/or cattle.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

REFERENCES Bat Conservation Trust (2007) Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Bat Conservation Trust (2008) Ba ts and Lighting in the UK: Bats and the Built

Environment Series. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Bat Conservation Trust (2010) The National Bat Monitoring Program: Annual Report

2009. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Billington, G. (2002) Report on Further Research of Barbastelle Bats Associated with

Pengelli Forest Special Area of Conservation. CCW Contract Science Report no. 591. CCW, Bangor. Buglife (2012) Creating Green Roofs for Invertebrates: A Best Practice Guide. Buglife, Peterborough. Cowan, A. (2006) Trees and Bats. Guidance Notes 1. Arboricultural Association, Cheltenham. Dietz, C. von Helverson, O. & Dietmar, N. (2009) Ba ts of Britain, Europe and

Northwest Africa. A & C Black, London. Glendell, M. & Vaughan, N. (2002) Foraging activity of bats in historic landscape parks in relation to habitat composition and park management. Animal Conservation 5, 309-316. Greenhough, C. (2009a) Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plan. Grouped Plan for Bats. Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership, Norwich. Greenhough (2009b) Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plans. Barbastelle. Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership, Norwich. Greenway, F. (2008) Barbastelles in the Sussex West Weald 1997-2008. Available at: http://www.westweald.org.uk/pdf/Barbastelle%20Bats%20in%20the%20Sussex%2 0West%20Weald%201997-2008.pdf Gunnell, K., Grant, G. & Williams, C. (2012) Landscape and Urban Design for Bats

and Biodiversity. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Harris, S., Morris, P., Wray, S. and Yalden, D. (1995) A Review of British Mammals. JNCC, Peterborough. Nicholls, B. & Racey, P.A. (2006) Contrasting home-range size and spatial partitioning in cryptic and sympatric pipistrelle bats, Behavioural Ecology and Social Biology 61, The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

131-142. NNNS (2011) Norfolk Bird and Mammal Report 2010 . Norfolk and Norwich Naturalistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Society Racey, P.A. & Swift, S. M. (1985) Feeding ecology of Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) during pregnancy and lactation. 1. Foraging Behaviour,

Journal of Animal Ecology 54, 205-215. Smith, P.G. & Racey, P.A. (2000) Habitat Management for Nattererâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Bat Myotis nattereri. Available from: http://www.ptes.org/files/1339_nattererbook.pdf Stone, E.L. Jones, G. & Harris, S. (2009) Street Lighting Disturbs Commuting Bats.

Current Biology 19, 1123-1127. Swift, S.M. (1998) Long-eared Bats. Poyser, London. Wray, S., Wells, D., Long, E. & Mitchell-Jones, T. (2010) Valuing bats in ecological impact assessment. In Practice 70, 23-25.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Figure 1 a-g. Registrations for each species (or group) for each static detector: common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, Nathusius’ pipistrelle, barbastelle, brown long-eared, Myotis (Natterer’s) and ‘big bats’ primarily noctule and serotine.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Figure 2. Tree assessments: trees of high potential value trees have a Cowan score of 3; trees of moderate potential value trees have a Cowan score of 2.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 2: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION METHODS

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

SURVEY EFFORT A total of 92 surveys were undertaken to assess levels of bat activity within the development site. This comprised 75 nights of static bat activity surveys, 17 walked transects, and a driven transect. The latter was undertaken to assess bat activity along roads within the development site and wider area. Omitting the driven transect, this level of effort equates to one surveyor per 0.05ha, and one static detector per 4ha, or 4.2 surveys per ha (static surveys and walked transects). This is in line with the guidelines produced by the Bat Conservation Trust. The level of survey effort carried out during 2010 is considered appropriate for the size of the development site. Static Surveys Automated activity logging systems (Anabats SD-1 & SD-2) were deployed throughout the development site and grid references taken using a GPS. The devices were set to record from before sunset until after dawn the following morning and were set to record at a division ratio of 8 (data), and the sensitivity adjusted to the optimal setting for each detector. DESK TOP STUDY A data search for bat records within a 10km radius of the site boundary was commissioned from Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service (NBIS). A search of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) designated for their bat interest was undertaken within a 10km radius of the approximate centre of the development site (TG 249 134). FIELD SURVEYS Survey Rationale The rationale for the bat surveys at North East Norwich Growth Point is based on The

Bat Workers Manual (Mitchell-Jones & McLeish 2004) and the Bat Surveys â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Best Practice Guidelines (Bat Conservation Trust 2007). Overall the emphasis of the survey was to identify foraging bats and levels of activity from the site and from this to then infer likely roost locations. Five survey techniques have been used to provide baseline data set to inform an assessment of the likely impacts of the proposals upon bats, their roosts and habitat: Automated (Anabat) surveys Walked transects

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Ground level survey of trees for bat roost potential, and External building inspections.

Walked Transects In accordance with the good practice guidelines (BCT 2007), each walked transect followed a different route, with different parts of the transect walked in different directions (clockwise and anti-clockwise). Due to parking constraints, transects tended to start at the same location although different routes were walked each night. During each walked transect 10 static listening points were identified. Depending on the route the surveyor took and activity levels on the night between 7 to 12 static listening stations were utilised. On one occasions only 2 listening stations were used. The location of the static listening stations varied between surveys in order to cover as many linear features as possible. Each transect was walked by a single surveyor at a steady pace, with 3-minute stops made at each listening station. All bat activity along the transect route and at each 3minute listening station was recorded using Bat Box Duet Frequency Division connected to an Edirol digital recorder or on an Anabat SD1/SD2 bat detector. Bat echolocation recordings were analysed using BatSound Analysis Software (ÂŠ Pettersson Elektronik AB) or Analook. Dusk transects started between 15-30 minutes before sunset and lasted for 3 hours. Survey data were recorded in the field onto standard datasheets. Variables recorded during each survey are listed below: Time of bat contact Species (where possible) and number of bats where possible Behaviour such as foraging (indicated by feeding buzzes or continual activity by the same bat(s)) or commuting (indicated by quick passes) Any other comments (e.g. direction of flight and occurrence of social calls) Location of each contact (marked on the site plan), and Weather conditions.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Automated Bat Activity Surveys On most nights ten remote detectors - Anabats SD-1 or SD-2 - were deployed. The devices were set to record from approximately 20 minutes before sunset until after dawn the following morning and were set to record at a division ratio of 8 (data), and the sensitivity adjusted to the optimal setting for each detector. The locations of the Anabats varied between nights, using a randomisation procedure stratified to different survey areas to ensure a broad spatial coverage of the site on each survey night. The survey locations were hedgerows and woodland edge locations rather than open fields.

Table 5. Static detector stations across the whole survey area. Date Detector Grid Habitat Description referenc Reference e 29-30 April A TG2544 1343 Western edge of Foxburrow Plantation 2010 29-30 April B TG 2403 143 Eastern end of Quaker Lane (nr Spixworth) 2010 29-30 April C TG2454 1421 Eastern side of hedgerow south of Spixworth 2010 Plantation 29-30 April D TG2585 1298 Northern edge of Sprowston Plantation (nr 2010 A1151) 29-30 April E TG2386 1348 Western side of hedgerow, adjacent to 2010 industrial buildings on the Norwich to Spixworth Road. 19-20 May F TG2403 1384 Between two dwellings on the corner of 2010 Beeston Lane and the Norwich-Spixworth road 19-20 May G TG2469 1382 Western side of Lawn Plantation (close to 2010 Beeston Lane) 19-20 May H TG2470 1317 on eastern side of hedgerow along the 2010 B1150, opposite the Playing Field 19-20 May I TG2570 1279 North eastern corner of the Park and Ride 2010 (close to the A1151) 19-20 May J TG26041317 At the north end of Sprowston Plantation, on 2010 the western side of the plantation 28-29 May K TG2576 1404 Corner of field adjacent to Garden Plantation 2010 (Beeston Park) 28-29 May L TG2550 1422 Corner of field at northern end of Shrubbery 2010 Plantation (Beeston Park) 28-29 May M TG25901377 Northern end of Coopersholes Plantation 2010 (Beeston Park) 28-29 May N TG26221404 Concrete pad along farm track, to the west of 2010 Lady's Carr 28-29 May O TG25421377 Southern end of Shrubbery Plantation, 2010 western side of plantation, at field coner 14-15 June P TG23931399 Western side of houses located opposite 2010 western end of Beeston Lane. 14-15 June Q TG24021407 Eastern side of hedgerow on the western side 2010 of the Spixworth-Norwich Road (almost The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Date

Detector referenc e

Grid Reference

Habitat Description

opposite Anabat P) 14-15 June 2010 14-15 June 2010 14-15 June 2010 24-25 June 2010 24-25 June 2010 24-25 June 2010 24-25 June 2010 24-25 June 2010 24-25 June 2010 4-5 July 2010

TG24701361

Southern end of Lawn Plantation, on the western side of the plantation Hedgerow wo the west of Foxburrow Plantation Corner of woodland to the north-west of the Rugby Ground Eastern side of road in field, opposite Cemetary Western side of hedgerow on western side of the Spixworth-Norwich Road East of the Rugby Club building on the B1150

TG25061346

TG24331369

TG23181359

TG23771316

TG24831355

TG24741320

TG24891283

TG25531259

TG24531403

4-5 July 2010

TG24421299

4-5 July 2010

TG24571287

Southern side of hedgewow to the west of Church Lane Western side of hedgerow adjacent to Church Lane. Corner of dwellings to the south of the Park and Ride Hedgerow south of Spixworth Plantation (west of Red Hall) Southern edge of Playing Field (Northern boundary of Norwich) North of Oak Lodge (east of the B1150)

4-5 July 2010

TG24941399

Along hedgerow to the north of Red Hall

4-5 July 2010

TG25581400

To the north of Park Farm along fence line

4-5 July 2010

TG2517 1409

4-5 July 2010

TG2626 1394

Field corner to the north west of Shrubbery Plantation Field edge near Lady's Carr

4-5 July 2010

TG2593 1332

13-14 July 2010 13-14 July 2010 13-14 July 2010 13-14 July 2010 13-14 July 2010 13-14 July 2010 13-14 July 2010 22-23 July 2010 22-23 July 2010 22-23 July 2010 22-23 July 2010 22-23 July

TG 6621386

TG24731384

TG24051415

TG 2507 1368

TG 2486 1256

TG25211400

TG24841355

TG25491344

TG25771305

TG23851339

TG24581420

Treeline between Sprowston Plantation and Foxburrow Plantation Western side of hedgerow to the west of the Spixworth-Norwich Road Southern tip of Spixworth Plantation

TG25441327

Hedgerow to the north of Park and Ride

Southern side of Spanish Plantation in field corner Northern side of hedgerow between Coopersholes Plantation and Lady's Carr Northern end og Lawn plantation, edge of trees cut into road Western end of Spixworth Plantation close to the Spixworth-Norwich road Eastern side of hedgerow at northern end of Church Lane West of Church Lane,, and to the north of the Cemetary on the northen edge of Norwich South western corner of Tithe Plantation, adjacent to B1150 South eastern corner of Lawn Plantation, adjacent to B1150 Woodland edge, Foxburrow Plantation

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Date

Detector referenc e

Grid Reference

Habitat Description

5-6 Aug 2010

TG25171410

5-6 Aug 2010

TG24631383

5-6 Aug 2010

TG24151387

5-6 Aug 2010

TG26511424

5-6 Aug 2010

TG25991391

31 Aug - 1 Sep 2010 31 Aug - 1 Sep 2010 31 Aug - 1 Sep 2010 31 Aug - 1 Sep 2010 31 Aug - 1 Sep 2010 14-15 Sep 2010 14-15 Sep 2010 14-15 Sep 2010 14-15 Sep 2010 21-22 Sep 2010 21-22 Sep 2010 21-22 Sep 2010 21-22 Sep 2010 21-22 Sep 2010 21-22 Sep 2010 11-12 Oct 2010

TG23331336

TG24411387

Field corner to the north west of Shrubbery Plantation Northern side of hedgerow, north of Beeston Lane Southern side of hedgerow (near field entrance), western end of Beeston Lane Western corner of woodland, near Lady's Carr Corner of a small plantation, opposite a couple of houses to the east of Garden Plantation Northern side of field at the norhern limit of Norwich Northern side of Beeston Lane

TG23771425

TG26341386

TG26201430

TG25111393

TG24771396

TG25481353

TG25121355

TG25001327

TG25001335

TG25231309

TG25441316

TG25441392

TG25261375

TG25471409

11-12 Oct 2010

TG25721319

11-12 Oct 2010

TG26001406

11-12 Oct 2010

TG25721310

11-12 Oct 2010

TG24961418

2010

Eastern side of hedgerow running north-south off Quaker Lane Corner of field adjacent to hedgerows. Southeast of Lady's Carr On track with double hedgerows Just north of crossroads with Beeston Lane and B1150, on eastern side of hedgerow North of Red Hill on northern edge of woodland strip Western side of Foxburrow Plantation Northern side of hedgerow between Foxburrow Plantation and Church L ane Eastern side of hedgerow off Church Lane (just south of BJ) Western side of hedgerow off Church Lane (just north of BI) Hederow between Church Lane and Foxburrow Plantation Hedgerow between park and ride and Foxburrow Plantation Western side of plantation west of Park Farm. Southern side of Beeston Lane (between the B1150 and Beeston Park) Western side of woodland at north end of Shrubbery Plantion Treeline between Sprowston Plantation and Foxburrow Plantation Hedgerow to north of houses (to east of Garden Plantation) Southern side of Coppersholes Plantation Southern-most tip of Spixworth Plantation, adjacent to hedgerow

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Table 6. Weather Conditions and timings for Anabat Surveys Date Sunset/ Weather Sunrise Temperature Wind Rain o ( C) (Beaufort) (% in last hour) 29-30 April 20:1812 2-3* 0* 2010 05:25 19-20 May 20:49/04:53 13 0 0 2010 14-15 June 20:19/04:31 12 1-2 0 2010 24-25 June 21:23/04:32 18.5 1 0 2010 4-5 July 2010 21:20/04:39 22 2 0

Cloud (%)

Rain overnight

Yes - heavy

No?

Yes

13-14 July 2010 5-6 Aug 2010

21:14/04:48

20:40/05:22

Light drizzle 0

31 Aug - 1 Sep 2010

19:47/06:03

14-15 Sep 2010

19:13/06:29

Drizzle occasionally overnight No

21-22 Sep 2010

18:55/06:40

11-12 Oct 2010

18:11/07:15

Assessment of Trees for Bat Roost Potential A tree assessment for signs of use by bats was undertaken on the 25 th February, 1st March 2011. Tree assessments were undertaken following the scheme presented by Cowan (2006). An initial walkover to appraise the site for its trees was undertaken in March 2010 and then detailed individual assessments were made between November and February 2011. The assessment was undertaken from the ground level using close focusing binoculars and bright torches where necessary. Methods followed guidelines provided by the Bat Conservation Trust (2007) and Cowan (2006). The aims of this survey was to identify trees/groups of trees with low to high bat roost potential that will require further detailed surveys, such as climb-andâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;inspect surveys and or dusk emergence/dawn re-entry surveys. Trees with no or low value to roosting bats (i.e. trees that had no features that could be used by bats for roosting) were omitted. Features which are potentially suitable for roosting bats, such as cracks, crevices, fissures, splits in limbs, woodpecker holes, areas of rot, knotholes, and flaking bark, were examined using binoculars for signs of use, including droppings, urine staining

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

and grease marks. Trees were assessed using the following criteria (adapted from Cowan 2006): Low Value: One or two minor opportunities offered to individual bats (feeding or night-time roosts). Sparse ivy cover, minor branch splits, small sections of loose or flaking bark. Features which have been available for less than 10 years. Moderate Value: Features which provide a more secure form of roost for small groups of bats. Dense ivy, significant branch splits, small cavities. Features which have been available for more than 10 years but less than 30. High Value: Features suitable for high priority roosts such as maternity roosts. Features that is uncommon or rare in the local area. Large cavities, extensive branch or trunk splits, multiple features. Features which have been available for more than 30 years. Confirmed Roost: Droppings found at the base of the tree or below a cavity. Bats heard ‘chattering’ inside a feature on a warm day or at dusk. Bat(s) observed flying from a feature. Any droppings found during the surveys were sampled. Tree climbing was undertaken in September 2011 by Sam Phillips (Senior Ecologist, The Ecology Consultancy), with 19 trees climbed along the souterhn edge of the Beeston Park woodlands. Building Inspection An external assessment of buildings in close proximity to the site was carried out during the spring of 2010 and then in winter 2011. The assessment aimed to establish the potential of buildings in the locality to support bat roosts. SOUND ANALYSIS Search-phase echolocation calls were analysed using either BatSound Standard Version 3.31 or Analook (Version 3.7.20). Spectrograms in BatSound were constructed of calls using a 512 point fast fourier transform with a Hanning window. Where necessary calls were identified with assistance of Russ (2000, 2004, undated) and Sowler (undated). A call reference library was also utilized. Due to the difficulties separating out Myotis spp. calls (see Ahlén and Baagøe 1999, Vaughan et al. 1997, and Russ and Montgomery 2002) all Myotis bat calls were grouped under the genus unless the start frequency of the call suggested the presence of Natterer’s bat M. nattereri (Natterer’s bat echolocation calls can start at 145 kHz, ~ 14 kHz above other Myotis sp. calls).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

On occasion, the frequency of maximum energy (Fmax) of common pipistrelle P.

pipistrellus and soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus can overlap, thus bats producing echolocation calls of Fmax 49kHz or less were assigned to the P.

pipistrellus, and those producing calls of 51kHz to P. pygmaeus (Jones and van Parijs 1993). Echolocation calls between 49 and 50kHz were categorised as

Pipistrellus spp. Call parameters for the echolocation of Nathusius’ pipistrelle P. nathusii, like other bat species, differ between publications. For example the Fmax for Nathusius’ pipistrelle is reported as between 36-41 kHz (Russ 2004, undated), and 35-42 (Sowler undated). Consequently there is some overlap between the Fmax of Nathusius’ pipistrelle and the common pipistrelle. A precautionary approach has been adopted. Pipistrelle bat calls with Fmax of between 40 and 42kHz have been identified as ‘low pips’ and as Nathusius’ pipistrelle where the Fmax is between 35 and 39kHz. QUANTIFYING BAT ACTIVITY AND ABUNDANCE The number of bat passes has been the traditional unit to measure bat activity and Thomas (1988) defined a bat pass as a single sequence of two or more recorded echolocation calls. To provide an accurate site-specific estimate of the magnitude of activity from the number of bat passes it is necessary to try to determine if bats are commuting between foraging and/or roost locations, or whether bats are foraging in a given location. In practice, this is difficult to determine as surveyors can only speculate on behaviour on the basis of the number of passes and whether or not feeding buzzes are registered (however some species of bat, for example brown long-eared, do not necessarily produce feeding buzzes). With the recent increased use of Anabat detectors, the number of files has been used synonymously with the number of passes. Each Anabat file represents up to 15 seconds of bat activity and consecutive files at 15 second intervals indicate regular activity, such as foraging and or bats emerging from a roost. In this report, to avoid any confusion number of bat passes per Anabat file is referred to as registrations. Estimating the number of individuals and assessing population sizes of each species is problematic due to the difficulties associated with estimating numbers from bat passes and the potential for erroneous estimates as a result of double counting. Nevertheless, tentative estimates of population sizes of the bat species on site have been attempted for rarer species such as the barbastelle bat, by looking at activity patterns across the site. Given the locality of the site any Plecotus species recorded has been assumed to be brown long-eared bat Plecotus auritus. Species codes used throughout this report The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

are provided in Table 3. This list follows the classification used by Yalden and Harris (2008). Table 7. Species codes. Code Scientific name Species (common name) Myotis Myotis sp. Myotid species Mnatt Myotis nattereri Natterer’s Nlei Nyctalus leisleri Leisler’s Nnoc Nyctalus noctula Noctule Ppip Pipistrellus pipistrellus Common pipistrelle Ppyg Pipistrellus pygmaeus Soprano pipistrelle Pnat Pipistrellus nathusii Nathusius pipistrelle Pip Pipistrellus sp. Pipistrelle species Lowpip Pipsitrelles with a Fmax between 40-42 kHz Eser Eptesicus serotinus Serotine Posese Possible serotine bat Largebat Call either noctule, leislers or serotine but insufficient information to determine Plecotus Plecotus auritus Brown long-eared bat Possple Possible brown long-eared bat Bbar Barbastella barbastellus Barbastelle Unident Unidentified

SURVEYORS Lead Surveyors The bat surveys were managed by Ecologist Catherine Greenhough BSc (Hons) MSc MIEEM who holds a Natural England bat licence holder (licence number 20103645) and the overall project manager was Dr Graham Hopkins BSc (Hons) PhD MIEEM (Natural England bat licence holder number 20103306). Catherine has been involved with bat work for six years and has worked on projected including several wind farm projects, large road schemes and small developments. Graham has worked professionally with bats for ten years and has studied them as an amateur for over 25 years. Catherine’s bat related experience also includes attendance of courses such as ‚Bat Sound Analysis Using Anabats‛ in 2009 (Envisage Wildcare) and ‚Difficult and Social calls‛ in 2010 (Anabat analysis) with Sandie Sowler. Catherine has also run training courses for the local bat group in sound analysis (alone and in conjunction with Katherine Boughie) and is co-ordinating the Norfolk Bat and Roadside Mammal Survey, which aims to map the distribution of bats in Norfolk using time expansion bat detectors. Field Surveyors The surveyors were: Catherine Greenhough Dr Graham Hopkins

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Dr Katherine Boughie BSc (Hons) (Natural England Licence number 20093421) Michelle Fielden BSc (Hons), Christine Hipperson BSc (Hons) Rachel Hobbs BSc (Hons) Etienne Schwartz Compt (Hons) F Deg Sc. All field assistants have experience undertaking bat activity transects as well as dusk emergence and dawn re-entry surveys and are familiar with the use of frequency division detectors and remote recording devices. All Anabat calls were analysed by Christine Hipperson and verified by Catherine Greenhough. All calls recorded using a Duet were analysed by Catherine Greenhough and Victoria Forder. Echolocation calls were analysed by Christine Hipperson and checked by Victoria Forder (Batsound) and Catherine Greenhough (Batsound and Analook). Victoria Forder has over two years experience undertaking bat call analysis using both BatScan and BatSound. She has worked closely with bat specialists for several years and has attended a BatScan and BatSound Sound Analysis Course' run by Echoes Ecology Ltd '. Victoria has used BatSound to undertake sound analysis for a number of large scale projects, including the new A5 Western Transport Corridor in Northern Ireland, one of the largest road scheme in Europe. SURVEY CONSTRAINTS With the exception of certain species (e.g. noctule Nyctalus noctula), the majority of bats commuting or foraging more than c. 25 m away from an observer will not be picked up on bat detectors. Furthermore, some species of bat, such as long-eared, echolocate quietly, and sometimes not at all. This makes it difficult to detect this bat using bat detectors, even at very close range. It is possible that a number of individual bats of this genus may have gone undetected. Bats regularly move between roost sites both between and within years. Thus, any survey can only provide a snapshot of activity within a site at the time the survey was undertaken. Patterns of use may differ at other times of year. It was not feasible for surveyors to walk through arable fields or within fields containing sheep or horses and thus survey were restricted to linear features such as field margins, woodland edges and roads. Such features are, however, the principal habitats likely to be of interest to the majority of the UKs bats (e.g. Myotis sp., Pipistrelles, brown long-eared and barbastelle Barbastella barbastellus). Large bats such as noctules typically fly in the The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

open and do not follow linear features to the same degree. These bats have strong echolocation calls that travel further and are likely to be readily detected using a bat detector over longer distances that smaller bats. It is therefore considered that the results give a reasonably comprehensive overview of the bat activity in the area. Anabat bat detectors were located adjacent to liner features. The Anabats were not routinely placed in the middle of arable fields so as to prevent crop damage, within sheep fields/horse paddocks, or within close proximity to public rights of way or permissive footpaths (see Appendix 1, Figure 4) to prevent vandalism or theft of the detectors. ASSESSMENT OF TREES FOR BAT ROOST POTENTIAL Surveying trees presents particular problems at any time of the year, particularly when trees are in leaf, as bats will use a wide variety of roost sites that include cavities, splits, cracks and under loose bark, many of which are not easily detected from the ground and/or are inaccessible to the surveyor. Whilst trees are in leaf the canopy may obscure potential features of bat interest. Additionally, bat droppings quickly degrade in damp conditions and are unlikely to remain for long in a tree roost site. Droppings can also easily be removed by wind and rain. Thus, lack of signs cannot be interpreted as a lack of bat roost sites.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 3: SUMMARY DATA

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Table 8. Summary data for each statid detector stations: species, timing of first and last registration and number of contacts for each Anabat. Anabat code A A A A A B B B B B C C C D D D D D D D E E E E E E E F F F F G G G G G H H H H H I

Species Ppip

Myotis Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Plecotus Ppip Ppyg Bbar

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Pip Lowpip Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Plecotus Pip Nyctalus

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Plecotus

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Pip

Myotis

Date

Dusk

29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 29/04/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010

20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:17 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52

Earliest record 21:06 21:29 21:46 21:01 21:04 21:10 00:14 21:10 21:07 22:00 21:34 23:30 21:27 22:02 20:45 21:12 21:08 20:05 20:58 22:20 20:17 20:53 21:14 21:08 23:03 22:39 22:05 23:59 23:59 23:59 23:59 21:40 21:32 23:32 22:44 23:12 04:49 21:45 22:06 00:34 00:32 23:37

Latest record

Dawn

03:30 21:29 02:14 21:01 21:04 03:05 00:14 01:53 22:09 22:29 04:09 02:39 02:22 22:02 04:57 23:46 23:10 21:52 23:43 22:02 01:21 21:03 21:41 02:39 23:03 22:39 22:05 23:59 23:59 23:59 23:59 04:35 04:01 04:44 22:44 23:12 01:42 04:25 03:51 03:09 03:21 00:29

05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:42 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07

Number of contacts 24 1 8 1 1 24 1 7 3 4 88 24 8 1 256 30 8 3 13 1 102 4 2 6 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 87 17 3 1 1 1 411 47 3 4 2

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Anabat code I I I I I I I J J J J J J J J K K K K K K K K K L L L L L L L M M M M M M M M N N N O O O

Species

Date

Dusk

Ppip Ppyg Nnoc Plecotus Pip Nyctalus Largebat

19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 19/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010

20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 20:52 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04 21:04

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Nnoc Pip Nyctalus

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Nnoc Pip Lowpip Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Plecotus Pip Lowpip Nyctalus

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Nnoc Plecotus Nyctalus Ppip Ppyg Nnoc

Myotis Ppip Ppyg

Earliest record 21:24 21:50 22:00 22:44 22:26 22:40 23:21 22:23 21:18 21:12 00:34 21:44 22:32 23:12 21:17 23:25 21:16 21:25 22:05 22:13 21:21 00:35 22:01 00:43 21:54 21:48 21:41 22:14 22:04 22:06 21:45 22:30 21:35 22:09 23:55 22:00 21:25 22:01 02:10 21:48 21:46 04:28 00:55 21:35 21:29

Latest record

Dawn

04:34 01:45 22:23 22:44 03:05 22:04 23:21 22:23 04:21 04:29 00:34 21:46 22:32 02:23 21:17 02:50 04:08 04:24 22:05 00:57 21:21 01:32 04:09 03:59 03:52 01:29 23:00 01:59 22:04 22:06 21:45 03:06 04:15 03:53 03:07 22:00 21:25 02:55 02:01 03:51 03:47 04:29 00:55 03:50 03:55

05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 05:07 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55 04:55

Number of contacts 375 7 4 1 51 1 1 1 365 116 1 2 1 2 1 3 492 123 1 3 1 3 1 3 35 3 3 6 1 1 1 38 38 22 9 1 1 2 1 82 75 2 1 75 26

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Anabat code O O O P P R R R R R R S S S S T T U U U U U U U V V V V V W W W W X X X X Y Y Y Y Z Z Z Z

Species

Date

Dusk

Bbar Pip Nyctalus Ppip Ppyg Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Pip Lowpip Ppip Ppyg Bbar Plecotus Ppip Unident Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Nnoc Pip Posple Ppip Ppyg Nnoc Lowpip Eserpos Ppip Ppyg Nnoc Pip Ppip Ppyg Unident Pip Ppip Ppyg Unident Pip

28/05/2010 28/05/2010 28/05/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 14/06/2010 15/06/2010 15/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010

21:04 21:04 21:04 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:18 21:19 21:19 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20 21:20

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Nnoc

Earliest record 23:24 01:06 22:51 00:08 22:20 22:08 22:07 01:29 22:01 21:55 22:35 23:48 22:31 02:08 23:30 00:13 02:40 22:09 22:16 22:50 23:05 21:36 00:31 02:39 22:17 23:10 03:32 22:45 02:32 22:54 21:33 21:50 22:56 22:04 22:00 00:22 22:46 22:04 22:00 00:22 22:46 00:11 22:19 22:27 21:33

Latest record

Dawn

02:31 01:06 22:51 00:08 22:02 03:40 03:49 01:29 22:01 01:34 23:22 23:48 22:31 03:13 00:11 03:32 02:40 03:40 22:50 03:06 23:05 03:36 04:39 02:39 03:46 04:39 03:32 00:05 02:32 03:45 04:18 21:50 22.56 03:46 03:04 00:22 03:36 03:46 03:40 00:22 03:36 00:11 03:36 01:44 22:46

04:55 04:55 04:55 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:41 04:40 04:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40 03:40

Number of contacts 5 1 1 1 1 338 122 1 1 24 2 1 1 2 3 2 1 24 3 2 1 2 5 1 47 5 1 3 1 72 38 1 1 80 30 1 27 80 30 1 27 1 14 2 2

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Anabat code Z Z Z AA AA AA AA AB AB AB AB AB AC AC AC AC AD AD AD AD AD AE AE AE AE AE AF AF AF AF AF AF AF AG AG AG AG AG AG AH AH AI AI AI AI

Species

Date

Dusk

Plecotus Pip Lowpip Ppip Ppyg Pip Lowpip Ppip Ppyg Nnoc Pip Lowpip Ppip Ppyg Pip Lowpip

24/06/2010 24/06/2010 24/06/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 04/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010

21:20 21:20 21:20 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:16 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Nnoc Lowpip Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Nyctalus Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Nnoc Pip Nyctalus

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Unident Ppip Ppyg Lowpip Nyctalus Ppip Ppyg Unident Nnoc

Earliest record 00:33 22:03 01:07 22:29 03:52 22:52 02:03 22:12 22:16 23:58 23:03 22:20 22:18 22:26 01:55 01:25 23:38 22:53 01:45 21:54 23:31 22:43 02:37 03:07 23:04 23:05 22:25 22:41 02:42 02:22 21:55 01:55 23:03 23:29 22:13 23:06 22:52 22:13 22:33 23:48 02:56 21:38 21:38 02:42 22:03

Latest record

Dawn

00:33 03:10 02:35 02:59 03:52 22:52 03:11 03:59 00:32 23:58 23:03 03:40 03:51 02:46 03:44 02:54 23:38 03:43 02:07 00:37 23:31 03:44 03:37 03:07 03:00 23:05 03:04 03:04 02:42 02:22 01:10 01:55 23:03 00:25 00:57 00:23 22:52 03:54 03:31 02:55 02:56 04:06 04:15 02:42 22:03

03:40 03:40 03:40 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:43 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51

Number of contacts 2 4 2 18 1 1 2 96 2 1 1 16 46 11 12 2 1 30 2 4 1 13 3 1 2 1 16 10 1 1 3 1 1 2 17 3 1 81 8 10 1 152 60 1 1

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Anabat code AI AI AI AJ AJ AJ AJ AJ AJ AJ AK AK AK AK AK AK AL AL AL AL AL AM AM AM AM AN AN AN AN AN AN AN AN AN AO AO AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AQ

Species

Date

Dusk

Pip Lowpip Nyctalus Ppip Ppyg Bbar Lowpip Eser Pip Eser Ppip Ppyg Nnoc Pip Lowpip Eser Ppip Ppyg Nnoc Plecotus Pip Ppip Ppyg Plecotus Pip

13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 13/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010

21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 21:08 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Pip Lowpip Largebat Eser Ppip Ppyg Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Ppip Pip Lowpip Eser Ppip

Earliest record 22:19 23:37 22:33 22:02 21:31 00:52 23:10 22:31 00:19 03:14 21:59 22:00 00:31 00:35 03:35 23:10 21:40 21:51 22:00 00:07 21:58 21:39 21:50 0.06 21:57 01:29 22:22 22:32 00:09 21:51 01:13 22:29 22:37 22:57 21:50 21:32 21:32 21:16 03:49 22:05 22:36 22:36 22:51 23:56 21:45

Latest record

Dawn

01:10 23.37 22:33 00:51 04:28 00:52 23:57 22:31 02:18 03:14 03:05 03:52 02:49 03:29 03:35 23:10 00:48 00:55 04:14 00:07 21:58 00:47 00:54 00:06 21:57 02:03 03:50 02:24 03:24 22:36 01:35 03:28 22:37 22:57 01:04 01:34 04:29 04:28 03:57 22:05 22:36 22:36 03:14 05:02 04:37

04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 04:51 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02

Number of contacts 1 1 1 6 18 1 2 1 4 1 62 40 3 3 1 2 69 14 3 1 1 70 14 1 1 2 94 7 4 2 2 17 1 1 5 6 193 164 6 1 1 1 3 3 444

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Anabat code AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AR AR AR AS AS AS AS AS AS AT AT AT AT AT AT AU AU AU AV AV AV AV AW AW AX AX AX AX AX AX AX AY AY AY AY AY AY AY

Species

Date

Dusk

Ppyg Unident Nnoc Pip Lowpip Nyctalus Ppip Ppyg Unident Pip Ppip Ppyg Bbar Pip Lowpip Posple Ppip Ppyg Unident Pip Lowpip Nyctalus Ppip Ppyg Pip Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Ppip Ppyg

22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 22/07/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010 05/08/2010

20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:57 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35 20:35

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Unident Plecotus Pip Lowpip

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Lowpip Nyctalus

Earliest record 22:01 03:13 02:29 21:57 22:53 03:58 22:08 22:17 02:31 22:17 21:53 22:06 22:49 21:04 22:08 00:04 21:41 21:31 00:01 21:56 22:24 02:18 21:06 21:14 21:08 21:38 21:32 03:48 21:32 21:36 21:58 22:35 21:41 21:21 23:09 22:49 23:51 22:42 23:11 21:27 21:02 03:51 21:19 21:58 23:29

Latest record

Dawn

03:37 03:13 02:29 03:33 22:53 03:58 04:14 00:48 02:31 22:32 04:24 04:16 22:49 04:10 22:31 00:04 04:05 04:06 00:01 03:59 00:10 02:18 03:58 04:43 02:27 04:16 04:01 03:48 21:32 00:34 22:19 01:23 01:26 05:01 23:09 02:19 02:24 22:42 23:22 01:17 04:51 04:05 04:58 21:58 23:29

05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:02 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24 05:24

Number of contacts 38 1 1 25 1 1 32 9 1 3 116 52 1 4 8 1 324 53 1 26 5 1 95 4 6 26 15 1 2 5 2 3 22 57 1 4 3 1 2 24 78 2 7 1 1

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Anabat code AY AY AZ AZ AZ AZ AZ AZ BA BB BB BB BC BC BC BC BC BC BC BD BD BD BD BE BE BF BF BF BF BG BG BG BG BG BH BH BH BI BJ BJ BJ BJ BK BK BK

Species

Date

Dusk

Largebat Eser

05/08/2010 05/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 31/08/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 14/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010

20:35 20:35 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:44 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Nnoc Plecotus Ppip Ppip Ppyg Bbar

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Plecotus Pip Eser Ppip Ppyg Bbar Plecotus Ppip Eser? Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Pip Ppip Ppyg Eser Ppyg

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar

Myotis Ppip Ppyg

Earliest record 23:42 02:49 21:18 20:42 20:35 21:20 20:22 22:08 20:46 20:23 20:19 21:53 23:50 20:06 20:06 21:15 21:36 21:37 21:05 21:53 20:56 03:32 22:02 20:17 22:32 20:19 20:01 20:37 20:27 19:45 19:45 19:57 02:14 20:27 20:25 19:51 03:40 20:04 23:52 19:47 19:38 10:04 00:59 20:02 19.3

Latest record

Dawn

23:42 02:49 21:18 22:10 23:32 01:37 20:27 23:52 21:42 23:23 00:19 01:41 00:48 22:57 05:23 02:50 01:14 01:52 22:43 21:53 02:58 03:32 00:19 20:17 22:32 00:34 00:21 20:41 20:32 05:15 05:15 03:40 02:14 22:42 21:50 19:51 03:40 20:04 23:52 22:35 20:55 06:43 00:59 04:43 06:10

05:24 05:24 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:15 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:44 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59

Number of contacts 1 1 1 4 7 6 2 3 3 7 6 8 2 9 138 10 2 1 2 1 6 1 2 1 1 96 10 2 2 1771 982 4 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 7 6 3 1 12 28

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Anabat code BK BL BL BL BL BL BL BM BM BM BM BM BM BN BN BN BP BP BP BP BP BP BP BP BQ BQ BQ BS BS BS BS BS BS

Species

Date

Dusk

Unident

21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 21/09/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010 11/10/2010

19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 19:00 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17 18:17

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Unident Nnoc Plecotus

Myotis Ppyg Unident Bbar Plecotus Pnat Ppip Ppyg Plecotus

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Unident Bbar Plecotus Pip Mnat

Myotis Ppip Ppyg

Myotis Ppip Ppyg Bbar Plecotus Pip

Earliest record 20:47 22:11 20:18 19:11 03:50 21:38 21:49 22:25 22:38 19:39 19:43 02:53 20:28 19:54 19:40 21:32 20:15 18:50 18:57 06:10 18:51 20:47 21:35 19:34 19:04 21:28 18:47 19:29 18:35 18:41 18:35 19:58 18:36

Latest record

Dawn

20:47 00:21 05:42 07:40 03:50 21:38 02:04 03:29 00:16 19:39 23:02 02:53 20:28 19:54 21:51 21:32 06:03 01:22 06:44 06:10 06:02 20:47 06:50 04:23 19:04 21:28 06:51 06:19 06:20 06:47 06:20 19:58 18:36

06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 06:59 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42 07:42

Number of contacts 1 2 6 26 1 1 3 2 11 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 13 163 71 1 7 1 3 2 1 1 35 9 1607 200 12 1 2

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 4: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

NATIONAL LEGISLATION AFFORDED TO SPECIES

The objective of the EC Habitats Directive1 is to conserve the various species of plant and animal which are considered rare across Europe. The Directive is transposed into UK law by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (formerly The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended)) and The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended).

Other legislative Acts affording protection to wildlife and their habitats include:

Deer Act 1991 Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 Natural Environment & Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 Protection of Badgers Act 1992 Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996

Species and species groups that are protected or otherwise regulated under the aforementioned domestic and European legislation, and that are most likely to be affected 1

Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

by development activities, include herpetofauna (amphibians and reptiles), badger, bats, birds, dormouse, invasive plant species, otter, plants, red squirrel, water vole and white clawed crayfish.

Explanatory notes relating to species protected under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (which includes smooth snake, sand lizard, great crested newt and natterjack toad), all bat species, otter, dormouse and some plant species) are given below. These should be read in conjunction with the relevant species sections that follow.

Bats All species of bat are fully protected under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 through their inclusion on Schedule 2. Regulation 41 prohibits:

Deliberate killing, injuring or capturing of Schedule 2 species (e.g. all bats) Deliberate disturbance of bat species as: o

a) to impair their ability: 

(i) to survive, breed, or reproduce, or to rear or nurture young;



(ii) to hibernate or migrate3

b) to affect significantly the local distribution or abundance of the species

Damage or destruction of a breeding site or resting place The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

Keeping, transporting, selling, exchanging or offering for sale whether live or dead or of any part thereof.

Bats are also currently protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) through their inclusion on Schedule 5. Under this Act, they are additionally protected from:

1. Intentional or reckless disturbance (at any level) 2. Intentional or reckless obstruction of access to any place of shelter or protection 3. Selling, offering or exposing for sale, possession or transporting for purpose of sale.

How is the legislation pertaining to bats liable to affect development works? A European Protected Species (EPS) Licence issued by the relevant countryside agency (e.g. Natural England) will be required for works liable to affect a bat roost or for operations likely to result in a level of disturbance which might impair their ability to undertake those activities mentioned above (e.g. survive, breed, rear young and hibernate). The licence is to allow derogation from the relevant legislation but also to enable appropriate mitigation measures to be put in place and their efficacy to be monitored.

Though there is no case law to date, the legislation may also be interpreted such that, in certain circumstances, important foraging areas and/or commuting routes can be regarded as being afforded de facto protection, for example, where it can be proven that the continued usage of such areas is crucial to maintaining the integrity and long-term viability of a bat roost2.

Section 41 of the Act (Section 42 in Wales) requires the Secretary of State to publish a list 2

Garland & Markham (2008) Is important bat foraging and commuting habitat legally protected? Mammal

News, No. 150. The Mammal Society, Southampton.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

of habitats and species which are of ‘principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity.’ This list is intended to assist decision makers such as public bodies in implementing their duty under Section 40 of the Act. Under the Act these habitats and species are regarded as a material consideration in determining planning applications. A developer must show that their protection has been adequately addressed within a development proposal.

LOCAL BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN The UK plan also encourages the production of local Biodiversity Action Plans at the County or District level. The Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plan includes the following bats: barbastelle, soprano pipistrelle, brown long-eared and noctule.

NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The National Planning Policy Framework replaced PPS9 in April 2012 and emphasises the need for sustainable development. The Framework specifies the need for protection of designated sites and priority habitats and priority species. An emphasis is also made for the need for ecological networks via preservation, restoration and re-creation. The protection and recovery of priority species – that is those listed as UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species – is also listed as a requirement of planning policy. In determining planning application, planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by ensuring that: designated sites are protected from adverse harm; there is appropriate mitigation or compensation where significant harm cannot be avoided; opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments are encouraged; planning permission is refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

including aged or veteran trees and also ancient woodland.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Bats / Beyond Green

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Invertebrate Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

Invertebrate Surveys Beyond Green

Author

Jit Thacker BSc (Hons ) PhD & Graham Hopkins BSc (Hons) PhD PGCE CEnv MIEEM FRES

Job No.

100368 Reviewed by

Approved by

Date

Initial

Graham Hopkins

Sam Phillips

15th May 2011

Revision

Alex Prendergast

Graham Hopkins

21st September 2012

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House, 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich, NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Invertebrate Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION Background

1 1

Site context and status

Legislation and Planning Policy

2 METHODS Desk top study

Survey Visits and Effort

Survey Coverage: Target Taxa

Personnel

Designation of Noteworthy Species

3 RESULTS Data Search

Field Surveys

EVALUATION

5 DISCUSSION Enhancement Vision and Strategic Context

Grassland Creation

Parkland and woodland enhancement

Urban enhancement

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

APPENDIX 2: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ON METHODS

APPENDIX 3: SUMMARY DATA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned by Beyond Green to undertake an invertebrate survey to inform the proposals for North Sprowston and Old Catton Project. The surveys took place between May and August 2010, and consisted of a variety of direct searching methods, pitfall trapping, water trapping and pod survey. The work was led by an experienced field entomologist and supported by another experienced entomologists. The most important invertebrate habitat on the site is considered to be the parkland and seminatural woodlands associated with Beeston Park. These were appraised to be of ‘good’ value for both the volume and continuity of deadwood, with the presence of veteran trees adding significantly to these scorings. The veteran trees within the parkland areas were considered to be of moderate-high potential value for invertebrates, on the basis of their age and standing deadwood resource and the parklands are likewise considered to be ‘good’ in terms of volume and continuity. A full suite of deadwood sampling methods were not deployed, specifically to limit habitat damage, but it is considered very likely that rare and scarce species are present. The hedgerows and arable margins were surveyed and considered to be of moderate potential value for invertebrates, but no particularly significant species were recorded. A Nationally Scarce species of hoverfly and UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species of moth were recorded (Volucella zonaria and Tyria jacobaeae respectively), but both are considered to be widespread and common locally. Against standard criteria but with an element of expert opinion, the majority of the site is considered to be of Local importance for invertebrates but the woodland and parkland areas are considered to be of District importance. Details are provided for enhancement and mitigation measures: grassland creation within Beeston Park; parkland and woodland enhancement; enhancement of urban areas for invertebrates. The vision for enhancement is placed in the local context of: the historical habitats on the site, the wider ecological enhancement plans for Norfolk and the proximity of Mousehold Heath as an important site for invertebrates.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Invertebrates / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1

1.2

This report presents the results for a suite of invertebrate surveys undertaken across the development area and a broader survey area. SITE CONTEXT AND STATUS

1.3

The development covers approximately 200ha, as an arc along the north-east of Norwich, from approximately the boundary of Norwich International Airport to the Wroxham Road, south of Spixworth and north of Old Catton and Sprowston. The broader survey area extends for approximately 350ha and the results provide a wider context for the surveys.

1.4

1.5

Many invertebrates are listed as UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) priority species and as species of principal importance (section 41) of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. Although such species do not receive protection under criminal law their presence is a material planning consideration, consequently: Regional Planning Bodies and Local Planning Authorities will use the Section 41 list to identify the species and habitats that should be afforded priority when applying the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DfCLG, 2012) to promote the â&#x20AC;&#x161; protection and recovery of priority

species populationsâ&#x20AC;&#x203A;. Local Planning Authorities will use it to identify the species and habitats that require specific consideration in dealing with planning and development control, recognising that under NPPF the aim of planning decisions should be to avoid minimise impacts to biodiversity. The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

2 METHODS DESK TOP STUDY 2.1. Information regarding the invertebrate interest of the site and within a further 2 kilometre (km) radius was requested from the Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service (NBIS). 2.2. A walkover of the site was undertaken in April 2010, to provide a preliminary appraisal of the site and likely survey effort required. This initial appraisal was followed by detailed surveys of the most important habitats on site. 2.3. Each habitat unit was appraised for its potential value to noteworthy invertebrates and assigned to one of five categories according to the extent and quality of the microhabitats present. The criteria for assigning the quality categories (Hopkins and Thacker in prep.) are listed in Table 1. Table 1. Criteria used to appraise the likely quality of semi-natural habitats for important invertebrates. Category Definition Negligible

Semi-natural habitat missing or very small in extent and key micro-habitats absent

Low

Semi-natural habitats present but the micro-habitats specifically associated with important invertebrates missing or limited in extent

Medium

Semi-natural habitats present with at least some of the micro-habitats associated with important invertebrates in that habitat present

High

Semi-natural habitats with most of the key micro-habitats associated with important invertebrates in that habitat present

Excellent

Semi-natural habitat with extensive areas of key micro-habitats with a range of variation within these micro-habitats

2.4. For deadwood areas, the assessment methods of Hubble and Hurst (2006) were used (see Appendix 2) SURVEY VISITS AND EFFORT 2.5. Given the on-site habitats and the size of the site, it was considered that an appropriate level of survey effort comprised three sessions each of pitfall trapping, water trapping and of hand searching and a single evening of light trapping. That is, it is considered that the surveys are sufficient to satisfy the requirements of current guidance on invertebrate surveys for conservation and development (cf Drake et al., 2007). 2.6. At each of the five sampling stations and on each occasion an array of six 8cm diameter pitfall traps, with four yellow pan traps (total area of 0.48m2) were deployed for five days. Hand searching was undertaken for 40-minutes equivalent. Sampling The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

was undertaken in early May, early June and late July 2010. A specific visit for whiteletter hairstreak Satyrium w-album was undertaken on 8th July 2012, comprising a three-hour walkover of areas within and surrounding Beeston Park. 2.7. The pond in Beeston Park (part of station 6) was surveyed on 12th August 2012 using methods consistent with those proposed by the Pond Conservation Trust (2002), although in practice a greater sampling effort was deployed. SURVEY COVERAGE: TARGET TAXA 2.8. The surveys concentrated on a suite of target taxa, which both contain numerous rare or scarce species and also a number of more widespread species with specific habitat requirements and whose presence is also therefore indicative of site conditions. These taxa were sampled intensively and all species encountered were identified. These taxa are summarised in Table 2. Further conspicuous species from other taxa were also recorded, with targeted searches for Biodiversity Action Plan species that may be present, but such taxa may not have been sampled as comprehensively. The survey groups are consistent with those proposed by Drake et

al. (2002), although the deadwood species were not surveyed comprehensively due to the risk of damaging the veteran trees. Table 2. Target taxa. Target Group Taxa Spiders and Araneae including allies linyphiids Terrestrial Heteroptera bugs Bees and Wasps: Hymenoptera: Bees Apidae

Wasps

All families, particularly Sphecidae

Beetles: Coleoptera: Ground Carabidae beetles Rove beetles Leaf beetles

Staphylinidae excluding Aleocharinae Chrysomelidae

Weevils

Curculionidae

Ecology and habitat requirements Predators with species indicative of many habitat types. Diverse range of feeding styles and habitat requirements. Ground-nesting species require bare soil. May prefer warm microclimates. Often associated with particular flower families. Ground-nesting species require bare soil. May prefer warm microclimates. Require habitat mosaics for prey. Mostly predators including habitat specialists in dry habitats, some specialist seed feeders in arable margins Predators with species indicative of many habitat types. Plant feeders with foodplant and microhabitat specialisation. Plant feeders with foodplant and microhabitat specialisation.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

PERSONNEL 2.9. The lead surveyor was Dr J.I.Thacker (JIT) with additional survey and identification work by Dr GW Hopkins GWH). DESIGNATION OF NOTEWORTHY SPECIES 2.10. The conservation status of individual species are either taken from: the insect or invertebrate Red Data Books (Bratton 1987) the standard reviews published by English Nature (now Natural England) and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, published atlases with associated conservation assessment or other reference text by a respected author and where the procedure for assigning status is described and largely based on quantitative distribution data. 2.11. Full definitions of species statuses are provided in Drake et al. (2007), but briefly they are: Red Data Book Statuses 1-3 and K. Species considered to occur in 15 or fewer 10 x 10 km squares in Britain considered to be â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;insufficiently knownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; but likely to qualify for red list status, as listed in Shirt (1987) or Bratton (1991). Nationally Scarce A - occurring in 16 to 30 10 x 10 km squares in Britain. Nationally Scarce B - occurring in 31 to 100 10 x 10 km squares in Britain. Nationally Scarce - occurring in fewer than 100 10x10km squares, but with insufficient resolution to assign A or B status. BAP UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species (2007 list). 2.12. The ecological specificities of species are taken from standard field guides for the majority of groups. 2.13. Assessment of site significance followed the criteria proposed by Colin Plant Associates (2006) to define significance of invertebrate habitats (Table 3).

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Table 3. The criteria used to define significance of invertebrate habitats. Significance Description Minimum qualifying criteria National UK important site Achieving SSSI invertebrate criteria (NCC, 1989) or containing RDB2 (Vulnerable) or containing viable populations of RDB 3 (Rare) species or containing viable populations of any species protected under UK legislation or containing habitats that are threatened or rare nationally (Great Britain). Regional Site with populations of Habitat that is scarce or threatened in invertebrates or invertebrate the region or which has, or is reasonably habitats considered scarce or expected to have, the presence of an rare or threatened in south-east assemblage of invertebrates including at England least ten Nationally Notable species or at least ten species listed as Regionally Notable for the English Nature region in question in the Recorder database or elsewhere or a combination of these categories amounting to ten species in total. County Site with populations of Habitat that is scarce or threatened in invertebrates or invertebrate the county and/or which contains or is habitats considered scarce or reasonably expected to contain an rare or threatened in the county assemblage of invertebrates that in question includes viable populations of at least five Nationally Notable species or viable populations of at least five species regarded as Regionally Scarce by the county records centres and/or field club. District Site with populations of A rather vague definition of habitats invertebrates or invertebrate falling below county significance level, habitats considered scarce or but which may be of greater significance rare or threatened in the than merely Local. They include sites for administrative District which Nationally Notable species in the range from 1 to 4 examples are reasonably expected but not yet necessarily recorded and where this omission is considered likely to be partly due to under-recording. Local Site with populations of Habitats or species unique or of some invertebrates or invertebrate other significance within the local area. habitats considered scarce or rare or threatened in the affected and neighbouring Parishes (except Scotland, where the local area may best be defined as being within a radius of 5 kilometres Low _ Although almost no area is completely Significance without significance these are the areas with nothing more than expected â&#x20AC;&#x161;backgroundâ&#x20AC;&#x203A; populations of common species and the occasional Nationally Local species.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

RESULTS DATA SEARCH

3.1

The data search for invertebrates returned records for 17 species of butterfly and moth with UK BAP status and likely to be present as local populations. All of these species are relatively common and widespread and afforded UK BAP status to reflect recent population declines rather than actual rarity (Butterfly Conservation 2007), thus they are likely to be present within the survey area in field margin and hedgerow habitats. Examples of such species are the buff ermine Spilosoma

luteum and the mottled rustic Caradrina morpheus which both feed on a range of common plants, including herbs such as nettle Urtica dioica and dandelion Taraxacum officinale agg. Some species are more habitat specific both nevertheless widespread, such as the wall Lasiommata megera and small heath Coenonympha pamphilus butterflies, both associated with open sward, nutrient poor grassland. The white-letter hairstreak butterfly Satyrium w-album, a UK BAP priority species, is also known locally, with the Norwich area among its Norfolk stronghold (Watts & McIlwrath, 2000). The sawyer beetle Prionus coriarius (Nationally Scarce B) is the only deadwood invertebrate known locally, recorded from Crostwick Marsh SSSI, although this is known elsewhere from the north Norwich area, including gardens (G.W.Hopkins, pers. obs.). 3.2

Within the wider area a key local site is Mousehold Heath, which supports a rich invertebrate fauna including rare and scarce bees and wasps (Norwich City Council, 2002, 2008). FIELD SURVEYS Woodland, parkland and woodland edge areas

3.3

Overall the key microhabitats within the site for invertebrates were considered to be: semi-natural woodland and parkland, hedgerows and the wide arable margins associated with some arable fields. The woodland stations were 4, 5 and 6 (Appendix 1: Figure 1).

3.4

The semi-natural woodland associated with Beeston Park was appraised to be of ‘good’ value for both the volume and continuity of deadwood, with the presence of veteran trees adding significantly to these scorings. The veteran trees within the parkland areas were considered to be of high potential value for invertebrates, on the basis of their age and standing deadwood resource (cf Alexander 1999); and against the Hubble and Hurst (2006) criteria the parklands are likewise considered to be ‘good’ in terms of volume and continuity. The close association of the semiThe Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

natural woodlands and parkland increases their shared value, as does the presence of ancient and semi-natural woodland outside of but close to the development area. As such the woodland and parkland appear to be of moderate potential for noteworthy invertebrates. 3.5

A small number of dead wood species were recorded, such as the mould beetle

Leiodes calcarata (Coleoptera; Latriiidae) and species associated with fungus, such as Cis boleti (Coleoptera: Ciidae). Species more typically associated with woodland edge areas rather than being saproxylic included flies such as the robber flies

Dicotria atricapilla and D. rufipes. The grassland within the parkland is of lower interest, being semi-improved and the species associated with it are widespread and common, such as the grasshopper Chorthipus parallelus and the bug Philaenus

spumarius. 3.6

In summary, although no rare or scarce species were recorded the woodland microhabitats include some features of restricted occurrence and consequently it is considered that the woodlands are of moderate potential value. Hedgerows and arable verges

3.7

The assemblages of the hedgerows were principally widespread and common species. No species of note were recorded with the hedgerow trees, with the principal value of these being the presence of relatively narrow dead branches on living trees of use to some deadwood beetles; no particularly significant microhabitat features were recorded, such as wet rot holes or red heartwood. As such the hedgerows appear to be of moderate potential for noteworthy invertebrates. The hedgerow stations were 1, 2 and 3 (Appendix 1: Figure 1).

3.8

Some arable margins were relatively wide (>5m) and with a transition between permanent hedgerow ground flora to more open and ruderal assemblages. As such the margins appear to be of moderate potential for noteworthy invertebrates. The species recorded were generally widespread and common, although a few species restricted of open and disturbed grassland including arable margins were recorded.

3.9

Two noteworthy species were recorded, neither of which is particularly rare locally or nationally. The cinnabar moth Tyria jacobaeae (UK BAP) was ubiquitous wherever its foodplant, ragwort occurs, in unmanaged field margins and other open areas; it is common locally. The hoverfly Volucella zonaria (Nationally Scarce B) was recorded south of Beeston Park; this species is widespread locally including urban areas of north Norwich (G.W.Hopkins pers. obs.).

3.10

Other species associated with the hedgerows and margins are typical of open disturbed areas such as the ground beetles Amara aenea. A diverse assemblage of The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

species were associated with the more flower rich margins including uncommon flies such as conopid flies Myopa bucata and Sicus ferrugineus. Ponds 3.11

The single pond sampled was located at the north-east corner of Beeston Park (station 6, part). It was heavily shaded and surrounded by trees with a deep layer of tree litter and anoxic sediment, although the water appeared clean. Visually this was of low potential value for most groups, although it is recognised that some noteworthy invertebrates are associated with such areas.

3.12

The fauna was species poor but a moderate number of beetles were recorded, as well as ubiquitous species such as hoglouse Asellus aquatics.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

4 4.1.

EVALUATION Two species of note were recorded during the surveys, a single UK BAP priority species â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the cinnabar moth Tyria jacobaeae - a single scarce species Volucella

zonaria (Nationally Notable B). Both species are relatively common in the Norwich area: the cinnabar moth of conservation concern due to population declines rather than actually current occurrence (Butterfly Conservation, 2007); V. zonaria has undergone range expansion recently and is commoner that its status suggests (Buglife, 2012a). 4.2.

Against the formal criteria of Colin Plant Associates (2006; Table 3) the site would be evaluated as being of District importance on account of the presence of a single scarce species. However, as discussed above this would probably over state its importance. Conversely, the woodland and parkland areas are nevertheless evaluated as being of District significance, on account of the visual appraisal and the presence of veteran trees and significant deadwood resources.

4.3.

Thus the majority of the site is probably of Local importance for invertebrates but the woodland and parkland areas are considered to be of District importance.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

DISCUSSION ENHANCEMENT VISION AND STRATEGIC CONTEXT

5.1.

The enhancement vision for the site are three-fold: Grassland creation within Beeston Park; Parkland and woodland enhancement; and Urban enhancement. GRASSLAND CREATION

5.2.

In historic times, the natural vegetation of the area would have been heathland and nutrient-poor grassland with acidic components, and these are the key habitats which should be targeted within the area in terms of broader ecological enhancement (Land, 2007). The creation of such grassland would complement existing measures to improve Mousehold Heath (GNDP, undated).

5.3.

For invertebrates, grassland should display a gradient from relatively sparse swards including areas with bare substrate maintained by disturbance, through flower rich areas including both tall and short swards, and finally to longer ranker vegetation that may provide overwintering areas. Where possible the grasses should be fineleaved species such as Agrostis and Festuca species.

5.4.

In addition to appropriate management (as described below, following Kirby, 1992; Falk, 2007) any variations in topography are of great merit, particularly the creation of south-facing slopes. Such slopes will retain a short sward over long periods without substantial management. As generic guidance the key to creating flowerrich areas is to use nutrient-poor substrates and to use appropriate cutting regimes to limit the accumulation of litter and organic matter.

5.5.

In disturbed areas and areas of open, short swards the key species of importance for invertebrates include: Composites, including coltsfoot Tussilago farfara, dandelions Taraxacum spp, catâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ear Hypochaeris spp and hawkweeds Pilosella spp and mayweed

Tripleurospermum; Legumes, especially birdâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s-foot trefoils Lotus spp., clovers Trifolium spp and vetches Vicia spp; The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Labiates, especially ground-ivy Glechoma hederacea; Mignonettes Reseda spp and mulleins Verbascum spp; Viperâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s bugloss Echium vulgare; and Red bartsia Odontites verna. 5.6.

Where the grass sward is taller and with few if any bare or open areas then key species include: Composites, such as oxeye daisy Leucanthemem vulgare, thistles Cirsium spp, ragwort Senecio jacobaea, knapweeds Centaurea spp., field scabious

Knautia arvensis and yarrow Achillea millefolium; and Legumes, especially vetches Vicia spp and vetchlings Lathyrus spp. 5.7.

Grassland management for invertebrates should be undertaken on a rotational basis to both maintain sward structure and composition and also to provide unmanaged areas for overwintering. Key requirements are: Disturbance. Some areas should be subject to regular disturbance to maintain bare soil and areas of sparse sward, which may be facilitated by trampling from pedestrians and cyclists. Cutting of longer grass swards should aim to retain some areas uncut in any single year, if feasible and without encouraging rank swards. Arisings should be removed. Associations with other habitat areas should create gradual gradients and transitions rather than sharp boundaries.

5.8.

If grazing can be introduced then this would be highly desirable, to create a mosaic of sward conditions and also to provide dung as an additional resource. PARKLAND AND WOODLAND ENHANCEMENT

5.9.

As part of parkland restoration, trees should be planted in locations where they may develop open canopies and develop standing deadwood resources over coming centuries. The requirements for invertebrates are entirely compatible with those of a historic landscape. The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

5.10.

Within existing woodland areas veteran trees at risk of being ‘swamped’ by the canopies of adjacent trees should be subject to haloing, where the canopies of other trees are reduced. Such work has been shown to significantly improve the conditions of veteran trees (Alexander et al., 2011).

5.11.

Along woodland edges and where lower scrub is appropriate in the parkland then suitable shrubs include those which flower early in the season and will provide additional nectar resources otherwise in short supply at present. Suitable species include: Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, blackthorn Prunus spinosa and scrubby willows Salix species. Other species of value include: wild cherry Prunus

avium, common gorse Ulex europaeus, roses Rosa spp, broom Sarothamnus scoparius, crab apples Malus spp, wayfaring tree Viburnum sp. and field maple Acer campestre. 5.12.

Rough margins along woodland edges bases can provide key forage plants and also provide overwintering sites, such as rough grass tussocks and overwintering stems and seed-heads. Key forage plants include species of longer grass swards and competitive herbs, additionally including: Umbellifers, such as cow parsley hedge parsley Torilis japonica, hogweed

Heracleum sphondylium , cow parsley Torilis japonica, parsnip Pastinaca sativa, willowherb Chamerion and Epilobium species; and Labiates, particularly black horehound and white dead-nettle Lamium album. URBAN ENHANCEMENT 5.13.

Two measures are proposed within urban areas: general soft landscaping and green roofs.

5.14.

For soft landscaping (following Edwards and Jenner (2005)) the following plants are among those that could be planted to provide a sequence of flowers throughout the season in a built-up area area: March-April: flowering currant Ribes spp, lungwort Pulmonaria, dead-nettle

Lamium, bugle Ajuga and rosemary Rosmarinus; May-June: borage Borago spp, crab apple Malus spp, lamb’s-tongue

Stachys spp. and bladder senna Colutea arborescens; and

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

July-August: lavender Lavandula, scabious Scabiosa, and sea holly

Eryngium spp. Many large-flowered daisies and goldenrods are also of value for insects in late summer. 5.15.

Proposals for green roofs are of significant potential value in complementing the restoration of Beeston Park by providing additional but slightly different conditions suibale for heathland species. Again, such proposals complement the plans for enhancing Mousehold Heath. Green roofs for invertebrates should be â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;extensiveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, with deep but varying substrate depths, sparsely vegetated with heathland species and with additional microhabitats such as logs for shelter and to provide additional nesting habitat (Buglife, 2012b).

5.16.

Artificial lights may attract or even repulse night-flying insects, with detrimental impacts on local populations (Bruce-White & Shardlow, 2011). Thus, within urban areas lighting should be minimised, with either lights having a low UV component used or for suitable covers to absorb UV light used.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

REFERENCES Alexander, K., Stickler, D. & Green, T. (2011) Rescuing veteran trees from canopy competition. Conservation Land Management 9, 12-16. Buglife

(2012a)

Bug

the

Month:

Hornet

Robberfly.

Available

at:

http://www.buglife.org.uk/discoverbugs/bugofthemonth/Hornet+Hoverfly Buglife (2012b) Creating Green Roofs for Invertebrates: A Best Practice Guide . Buglife, Peterborough. Bratton, J.H. (1991) British Red Data Books 3. Invertebrates Other Than Insects. JNCC, Peterborough. Bruce-White, C. & Shardlow, M. (2011) A Review Of The Impact Of Artificial Light On

Invertebrates. Buglife, Peterborough. Butterfly Conservation (2007) The UK Biodiversity Action Plan â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Moths. Available from: http://www.butterflyconservation.org/uploads/The%20UK%20Biodiversity%20Action%20Plan%20%20BC%20website%20draft%2020071.pdf Colin Plant Associates (2006) EcIA Guideline Comments. Unpublished Report to the Institute

Ecology

and

Environmental

Management.

Available

from:

www.ieem.org.uk DfCLG (2012) National Planning Policy Framework. Department for Communities and Local Government, London. Drake C.M., Lott, D.A., Alexander, K.N.A. & Webb, J. (2007). Surveying Terrestrial and

Freshwater Invertebrates for Conservation Evaluation . Natural England, Sheffield. Edwards, M. & Jenner, M. (2009) Field Guide To The Bumblebees of Great Britain

And Ireland. Ocelli Ltd, East Sussex. Falk, S.J. (2007) Bees and wasps in the diversified coniferous woodland settings of British Centerparcs. British Journal of Entomology and Natural History 20, 21-45. GNDP

(undated)

Mousehold

Heath

Extension.

Available

at:

http://www.gndp.org.uk/environment/mousehold-heath-extension/ Hubble, D. & Hurst, D. (2007) Rapid dead wood assessment. In Practice June 2007, 4-6. The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Kirby P. (1992) Habitat Management For Invertebrates: A Practical Handbook . RSPB, Sandy. Land, R. (2007) Development of an Ecological Network and Green Infrastructure in

the Greater Norwich Growth Point Area. Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership, Norwich. Shirt, D.B. (1987) British Red Data Books: 2. Insects. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Figure 1. Invertebrate sampling stations.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

APPENDIX 2: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION METHODS

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

DEADWOOD ASSESSMENT METHOD The assessment of the dead wood habitats follows the methods proposed by Hubble and Hurst to assess diversity, abundance and continuity of dead wood microhabitats. Sixteen types of dead wood microhabitat are recognised by this scheme along with the tree species present, with particular attention paid to the presence of long-lived key species such as oak Quercus spp and beech Fagus sylvatica: Sun-baked wood Fungus-infected bark Fine branches and twigs (on the ground, below 5 cm diameter) Bracket fungi Birds’ nest holes Stumps Hollow trees (can be whole trunks or single branches) Burnt wood Large fallen timber (above 5 cm diameter)

Dead outer branches (still attached to the tree) Rot-holes Standing dead trunks Roots showing signs of decay Well-rotted timber Wet fallen wood in long-term water features Rotten heartwood

Three measures of dead wood resource are used: Diversity, which is measured as the number of dead wood types present, with a score of 0 - 8 indicating a ‘poor’ dead wood diversity, 9 - 11 ‘medium’ and 12 - 16 ‘good’. Dead wood volume, as a summed frequency of all the dead wood types, with each type assigned a score of 0-4, where ‘4’ = ‘abundant’, ‘3’ = ‘frequent’, ‘2’ = ‘occasional’, ‘1’ = ‘rare’ and ‘0’ is ‘absent’. A summed score of 0 - 19 indicates a ‘poor’ dead wood volume, 20 - 25 ‘medium’ and 26 or more ‘good’. Continuity, as a measure of the dead wood stages present. Woodlands with ‘poor’ continuity have few species of dead wood, especially of key species, with gaps in the range of decay stages and dead wood types; woodlands with ‘medium’ continuity have the key tree species and most decay stages; woodlands with ‘good continuity have the key species, with each having a range of decay stages and dead wood types present. Reference: Hubble, D. And Hurst, D. (2007) Rapid dead wood assessment. In Practice June 2007, 4-6.

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

APPENDIX 3: SUMMARY DATA

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Table 4. Site inventory. Higher taxon Arachnids: Opiliones Arachnids: Opiliones Arachnids: Opiliones Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Araneae Centi & Millipedes Centi & Millipedes Centi & Millipedes Coleoptera: Cantharidae Coleoptera: Cantharidae Coleoptera: Cantharidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae

Species

Dicranopalpus ramosus Nemastoma bimaculatum Phalangium opilio Agelena labyrinthica Alopecosa pulverulenta Alopecosa pulverulenta Araneus marmoreus var. pyramidata Araneus sturmi Dictyna arundinacea Drassylus pusillus Dysdera crocata Enoplognatha ovata Erigone atra Erigone dentipalpis Larinioides cornutus Lepthyphantes cristatus Lepthyphantes flavipes Micaria pulicaria Neottiura bimaculata Oedothorax apicatus Oedothorax fuscus Oedothorax gibbosus Oedothorax retusus Ozyptila atomaria Pachygnatha clercki Pachygnatha degeeri Pardosa amentata Pardosa prativaga Pardosa pullata Phrurolithus festivus Theridion sisyphium Theridion varians Tibellus oblongus Trochosa ruricola Xysticus audax Cryptops hortensis Dolcihopus poularis Polydesmus angustus Cantharis fulvicollis Cantharis rustica Rhagonycha fulva Amara aenea Amara tibialis Bembidion lampros Bembidion lunulatum Bembidion tetracolum Calathus fuscipes Calathus melanocephalus Calathus rotundicollis Calodromiius spilotus Carabus violeaceus The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Higher taxon Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Carabidae Coleoptera: Cerambycidae Coleoptera: Cerambycidae Coleoptera: Chrysomeldiae Coleoptera: Chrysomeldiae Coleoptera: Chrysomeldiae Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinelidae Coleoptera: Coccinellidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae

Species

Harpalus affinis Harpalus rubripes Harpalus rufipes Loricera pilicornis Microlestes minutulus Notiophilus bigutattus Ophonus rufibarbis Paradromius lineatus Paranchus albipes Poecilus cupreus Pterostichus madidus Pterostichus melanarius Pterostichus niger Pterostichus nigrita Pterostichus vernalis Trechus quadristriatus Clytus arietis Strangalia maculata Altica palustris Otiorhynchus sulcatus Sitona lineatus Altica lythri Aphthona euphorbiae Cassida sanguinolenta Oulema rufocyanea Phaedon cochleariae Phyllotreta undulata Adalia 10-punctata Adalia decempunctata Coccinella 11-punctata Coccinella 7-punctata Coccinella septempunctata Harmonia axyridis Propylea 14-punctata Propylea quattuordecimpunctata Rhyzobius litura Thea 22-punctata Tytthaspis sedecimpunctata Hippodamia variegata Apion carduorum Apion frumentarium Apion pomonae Barypeithes pellucidus Ceutorhynchus obstrictus Cionus tuberculosus Curculiio nucuum Curculio glandium Liophloeus tessulatus Microplontus rugulosus The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Higher taxon

Species

Coleoptera: Staphylinidae

Nedyus quadrimaculatus Phylobius pomaceus Sitona lepidus Sitona lineatus Sitona puncticollis Anacaena globulus Catops fuscus Catops nigricans Malachius aeneus Oedemera nobilis Aphodius obliteratus Anotylus rugosus Bolitochara bella

Coleoptera: Staphylinidae

Dinaraea linearis*

Coleoptera: Staphylinidae

Gabrius splendidulus * Lathrobium brunnipes Leptusa fumida * Omalium italicum Oxytelus laqueatus Philonthus decorus Quedius fuliginosus Tachinus rufipes Tachyporus solutus Lagria hirta Agabus bipustulatus Anacaena lutescens Cercyon sp Helophorus aequalis Helophorus brevipalpis Helophorus grandis Hydrobius fuscipes Hydroporus memnonius Hygrotus impressopunctatus Laccobius bipunctatus Forficula auricularia Conops quadrifasciata Myopa bucata Sicus ferrugineus Empis livida Dicotria atricapilla Dicotria rufipes Dioctria baumhaueri Chrysopilus asiliformis Beris chalybata

Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Curculionidae Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae Coleoptera: Leiodidae Coleoptera: Leiodidae Coleoptera: Malachiidae Coleoptera: Oedemeridae Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae

Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Staphylinidae Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Coleoptera: Water beetles Dermaptera Diptera: Conopidae Diptera: Conopidae Diptera: Conopidae Diptera: Empidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Asilidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Asilidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Asilidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Rhagionidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Stratiomyidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Stratiomyidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Stratiomyidae Diptera: Larger Brachycera: Therevidae

Pachygaster atra Rhagio scolopaceus Thereva nobilitata The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Higher taxon

Species

Diptera: Stratiomyidae

Pachygaster leachii

Diptera: Stratiomyidae

Diptera: Syrphidae

Sargus bipunctatus Cheilosia albitarsis Cheliosia illustrata Chrysotoxum bicinctum Chrysotoxum festivum Episyrphus balteatus Episyrphus balteatus

Diptera: Syrphidae

Eristalinus sepulchralis

Diptera: Syrphidae

Eristalis arbustorum

Diptera: Syrphidae

Eristalis nemorum Eristalis pertinax Eristalis pertinax Eristalis tenax Helophilus pendulus Helophilus pendulus

Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae

Heteroptera: terrestrial

Melanostoma mellinum Merodon equestris Metasyrphus corollae Neoscia podagrica Platycheirus angustatus Platycheirus clypeatus Platycheirus scutatus Platycheirus scutatus s.l. Platycherius albimanus Sphaerophoria scripta Sphaerophoria sp. Syritta pipens Syritta pipiens Syrphus ribesii Syrphus vitripennis Xylota segnis Corixa punctata Velia caprae Acanthosoma haemorhoidale Aelia acuminata Anthocoris confusus

Heteroptera: terrestrial

Anthocoris nemoralis

Heteroptera: terrestrial

Anthocoris nemorum Anthocoris nemorum Anthocoris nemorum Berytinus minor Blepharidopterus angulatus

Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Diptera: Syrphidae Heteroptera: aquatic: Heteroptera: aquatic: Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial

Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial

Campyloneura virgula Capsus ater Cardiastethus fasciiventris Coriomeris denticulatus The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Higher taxon

Species

Heteroptera: terrestrial

Deraeocoris lutescens Dolycoris baccacrum Elasmucha grisea Heterogaster urticae Himacerus apterus Himacerus mirmicoides Kleidocerys resedae Leptoterna ferrugata Lygocoris pabulinus Lygocoris pabulinus Lygus pratensis Myrmus miriformis Nabis limbatus Nabis rugosus Notostira elongata Orius sp Palomena prasina Palomena prasina Pentatoma rufipes Phylus melanocephalus Pilophorus clavatus

Heteroptera: terrestrial

Pilophorus perplexus

Heteroptera: terrestrial

Homoptera

Pinalitus cervinus Pithanus maerkeli Plagiognathus arbustorum Psallus lepidus Stenodema laevigatum Temnostethus pusillus Zicrona caerulea Allygus mixtus

Homoptera

Aphrodes makarovi

Homoptera

Eupteryx aurata

Homoptera

Eupteryx vittata

Homoptera

Iassus lanio

Homoptera

Neophilaenus lineatus

Homoptera

Philaenus spumarius Anthidium manicatum Apis mellifera Apis mellifera Bombus hortorum Bombus lapidaries Bombus lucorum Bombus pascuorum Bombus pascuorum Bombus pratorum Bombus terrestris

Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial

Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial Heteroptera: terrestrial

Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Higher taxon Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Hymenoptera Isopoda Isopoda Isopoda Isopoda Isopoda Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Lepidoptera Mollsucs: aquatic Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Mollusca: Terrestrial Odonata Odonata Orthoptera Orthoptera Orthoptera

Species

Colletes succinctus Ectemnius continuus Ectemnius lapidarius Hylaeus pectoralis Lasius flavus Lasius niger Malthinus flaveolus Megachile centuncularis Mellinus arvensis Myrmica rubra Trypoxylon figulus Vespula vulgaris Armadellidium vulgare Asellus aquaticus Oniscus asellus Philoscia muscorum Porcellio scaber Aglais polychloros Aglais urticae Celastrina argiolus Inachis io Lycaena phlaeas Manioloa jurtina Ochlodes faunus Pararge aegeria Pieris brassicae Pieris rapae Pyronia tithonus Thymelicus lineola Thymelicus sylvestris Tyria jacobaeae Aplexa hypnoorum Aegopinella ntidula Cepea hortensis Cepea nemoralis Clausilia bidentata Cochlicopa lubricella Columella edentula Discus rotundatus Helix aspersa Monacha cantiana Vitra crystallina Anax imperator Coenagrion puella Chorthippus brunneus Meconema thalassinum Leptophyes punctatissima

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

Table 5. Data search results from NBIS . Common Name

Latin Name

Sawyer Beetle

Prionus coriarius

Swallowtail Swallowtail

Papilio machaon Papilio machaon subsp. gorganus Satyrium w-album

White Letter Hairstreak Wall

Taxon Group

Designation

insect - beetle (Coleoptera) insect - butterfly insect - butterfly

Nationally Notable A

insect - butterfly

UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species UK BAP priority species

Lasiommata megera

insect - butterfly

Small Heath

Coenonympha pamphilus

insect - butterfly

Blood-Vein

Timandra comae

insect - moth

Dusky Thorn

Ennomos fuscantaria

insect - moth

Buff Ermine

Spilosoma luteum

insect - moth

Cinnabar

Tyria jacobaeae

insect - moth

Dot Moth

Melanchra persicariae

insect - moth

Hedge Rustic

Tholera cespitis

insect - moth

Green-brindled Crescent Beaded Chestnut Dusky-lemon Sallow Grey Dagger

Allophyes oxyacanthae

insect - moth

Agrochola lychnidis

insect - moth

Xanthia gilvago

insect - moth

Acronicta psi

insect - moth

Knot Grass

Acronicta rumicis

insect - moth

Ear Moth

Amphipoea oculea

insect - moth

Rosy Rustic

Hydraecia micacea

insect - moth

Rustic

Hoplodrina blanda

insect - moth

Mottled Rustic

Caradrina morpheus

insect - moth

Fully protected Fully protected

The Ecology Consultancy NRP South / Invertebrates / Bullen Developments Ltd

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Reptile and Amphibian Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

Reptile and Amphibian Surveys Report for Beyond Green

Author

Ben Jervis BSc. & Tracy Simpson BSc. MSc. AIEEM

Job No.

100368 Reviewed by

Approved by

Date

Initial

Graham Hopkins

5 May 2011

Revision

Graham Hopkins

Sam Phillips Rachel Saunders

20th September 2012

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Reptile and Amphibian Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

Background

Site Context and Status

Legislation and planning policy

METHODS

Personnel

Desktop Search

Pond Identification and HSI Assessment

Great Crested Newt Pond Survey

Constraints to Newt surveys

Reptile Surveys

constraints to reptile surveys

RESULTS

Data Search

Pond Descriptions

Great Crested Newt Pond Surveys

Reptile Surveys

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Great Crested Newts

Reptiles

Mitigation: Great Crested Newts

Mitigation: Reptiles

Enhancement

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

APPENDIX 2: SITE AND SURVEY DATA

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Reptile and Amphibian Surveys / Report for Beyond Green

CONTENTS

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1

1.2

This report present the results of desktop searches and field surveys for reptiles and great crested newts Triturus cristatus undertaken in 2010. The reptile survey covered the entire development area, while the great crested newt survey area includes the development site and surrounding areas in line with current guidelines (English Nature 2001), which recommends that ponds up to 500 m from proposed development sites should be surveyed for great crested newts â&#x20AC;&#x161;if it is thought likely that great crested newts centred on these ponds would be affected by changes to the plotâ&#x20AC;&#x203A;. SITE CONTEXT AND STATUS

1.3

1.4

1.5

Appendix 3 contains details of legislation, planning policy and Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) relating to reptiles, and is provided for general guidance only. The Appendix includes: Details of national legislation afforded to herptiles (reptiles and amphibians) National Planning Policy UK and Local Biodiversity Action Plans

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

2 METHODS PERSONNEL 2.1. The reptile survey was undertaken by Ben Jervis between the 13 th September and the 8th October 2010. Ben is an experienced reptile ecologist with several hundred hours of reptile survey experience following work in the Thames Gateway 2009-10. 2.2. The great crested newt surveys were undertaken by Jerry Kinsley and Catherine Greenhough (Ecologists, The Ecology Consultancy) acting as accredited agents under the licence of Dr. Rachel Saunders (licence number 20102758) between the 8th May and the 8th June 2010. Both are experienced surveyors and are authorised with their accreditation to survey for great crested newts, including the use of bottle traps. DESKTOP SEARCH 2.3. Information regarding the present and historical ecological interest of the site and within a further 2km radius was requested from the Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service or NBIS (formerly the Norfolk Biological Records Centre). In addition, a search was completed for statutory designated sites within a 1km radius of the site using the Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) on-line mapping service (www.magic.gov.uk). 2.4. The status of species is taken directly from the relevant legislation or the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP 2009). POND IDENTIFICATION AND HSI ASSESSMENT 2.5

Ponds for the great crested newt survey were identified from Ordnance Survey maps and aerial photographs. A total of 25 potential ponds were identified.

2.6

The ponds were evaluated using the Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) methodology (Oldham et al. 2000). The HSI of a pond is determined by calculating a geometric mean of 10 variables that are known to have an influence on its suitability as a breeding location for great crested newts (see Table 1), thus: HSI = (SI1 x SI2 x SI3 x SI4 x SI5 x SI6 x SI7 x SI8 x SI9 x SI10)1/10

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

2.7

Once calculated, the HSI score for a waterbody can be categorised as follows (NARRS, undated): Excellent (>0.8) Good (0.7 – 0.79) Average (0.6 – 0.69) Below Average (0.5 – 0.59) Poor (<0.5) Table 1. HSI Indices Index Name SI1 Geographic Location SI2 Pond area SI3 Permanence SI4 Water quality SI5 Shade SI6 Fowl SI7 Fish SI8 Pond count SI9 Terrestrial habitat SI10 Macrophytes

Description Lowland England or upland England, Scotland and Wales To the nearest 50m² Number of years pond dry out of ten Measured by invertebrate diversity Percentage shading of pond edge at least 1m from shore Level of waterfowl use Level of fish population Number of ponds within 1km² Quality of surrounding terrestrial habitat Percentage extent of macrophyte cover on pond surface

GREAT CRESTED NEWT POND SURVEY 2.8

Where possible survey methods followed English Nature (2001) guidelines. Up to four visits were made to each pond during suitable weather conditions (night temperature ≥ 5°C, with little or no wind or rain). Three survey techniques (see below) were used on each survey visit and data from torching and bottle trapping were used to calculate peak counts and estimate population size class. Details of the weather conditions and survey techniques used are provided in Appendix 2. Torch survey – the pond was searched with a powerful (500,000 candlepower) torch after dark. The surveyors directed the beam into the pond and walked slowly around the banks recording any newts seen; Egg search - a search was made for newt eggs on all suitable vegetation present along the water margins; Bottle trapping – During the evening visit bottle traps were placed in suitable locations around the edge of the ponds or wherever water depth allowed. An air bubble was present in each bottle. These bottle traps were checked and collected early the following morning and any newts or other aquatic organisms captured were released back into the pond

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Net survey - a dip net with a 4mm mesh was used to sample the ponds. A sweeping motion was used and ponds were netted for a minimum of 15 minutes per 50 m of shoreline. Refuge search – any suitable terrestrial refugia (e. g. bricks, rubble and logs) in the vicinity of the pond were carefully searched for the presence of newts. 2.9

Survey methods and conditions are presented in Appendix 2: Site and Survey Data.

2.10 Records were also made of other amphibians, namely common frog Rana

temporaria, smooth newt Lissotriton vulgaris and common toad Bufo bufo. CONSTRAINTS TO NEWT SURVEYS 2.11 Due to very low night-time temperatures in May 2010 a number of visits were delayed until suitable survey conditions returned (cf English Nature 2001). These slight postponements caused some ponds to not be surveyed twice during the mid-April to mid-May period. The results are not significantly affected. 2.12 Of the 25 features identified as ponds from the desktop search a number were subsequently found to be absent or dry, access could not be obtained or they were considered unsuitable for great crested newts: Missing ponds or dry – numbers 2, 12, 9, 20, 22, 23 and 24. Unsuitable – 1 (recent garden pond with large fish, lined), 25 (irrigations reservoir); 21 (large ornamental pond with fish and wildfowl; access not obtained). Access revoked – 11 (one survey only due to presence of horses and risk of night-time disturbance). 2.13 Conditions at several ponds, e.g. deep sediment, gradual desiccation, lack of aquatic vegetation and the presence of pond liner, meant that it was not always possible to employ three survey methods with rigour, although three were always attempted. Many of these survey restrictions also represent a reduction in suitability for great crested newts and as such it is not considered likely that this constraint would have significantly altered the results of the survey.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

REPTILE SURVEYS 2.14 The survey protocol followed accepted standards for reptile surveys (Froglife, 1999) and involved a combination of visually searching for reptiles (direct observation) and the use of artificial refugia comprising individual pieces of heavy grade roofing felt approximately 1m2 in area. Any refuges already present were also checked on an ad hoc basis. 2.15 The survey locations were determined from the scoping survey and experience from other surveys over the summer period. Suitable reptile habitat within the survey area consisted of tall ruderal habitat, grassland and scrub edges. The vast majority of the site area was unsuitable for reptiles, comprising open arable fields. 2.16 A total of 99 refugia were used equating to an approximate density of 0.29ha -1 across the site as a whole, assuming a site area of 338h. However, a large proportion of the site comprises arable fields and therefore the density of reptile felts in suitable areas far exceeded the recommended density of 5-10ha-1. A total of ten survey visits were made between 13th September and 8th October 2010 during appropriate weather conditions wherever possible: temperatures between 9Ë&#x161;C and 18Ë&#x161;C, with little rain or wind (Froglife 1999). 2.17 Weather conditions and timings of survey visits are presented below (Table 2) and a map showing the distribution of felts and other refugia (e.g. corrugated sheet and sacking) across the site is presented in Appendix 1: Figure 2. Table 2. Weather conditions and timing of reptile survey visits. Visit Date Survey duration Temp (0C) Cloud cover 1 13.09.10 09.50-11.50 15 100% 2 15.09.10 09.50-12.10 13 0% 3 17.09.10 10.20-12.20 10.5 50% 4 20.09.10 09.50-11.50 17 70% 5 22.09.10 12.50-14.50 20.5 60% 6 24.09.10 11.30-13.30 12.5 100% 7 01.10.10 10.10-12.10 14.5 100% 8 03.10.10 12.10-14.10 17.5 100% 9 06.10.10 09.45-11.45 15 100% 10 08.10.10 10.45-12.45 15.5 100% * Measured on the Beaufort Scale

Rain Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Light rain Nil Nil Light rain Nil

Wind* 4 6 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 2

CONSTRAINTS TO REPTILE SURVEYS 2.18 Due to the time of season the surveys were carried out, the wind conditions would be considered sub-optimal on most visits according to the recommended guidelines (Froglife 1999) of little or no wind. Windy conditions could potentially result in fewer animals basking on artificial refugia. To reduce the impact of this constraint three additional visits to the site were made. It is deemed unlikely that such conditions would have caused any reptile species to have been wholly overlooked and as such the overall results of the survey are considered to have been unaffected.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

3 RESULTS DATA SEARCH 3.1

The data search carried out for the site identified the presence of four reptile species; slow-worm Anguis fragilis, common lizard Zootoca vivipara, grass snake Natrix natrix and adder Vipera berus, within the 2km search area (Table 3). Table 3. Records for reptile species within 2km of the site. Scientific Name Common Grid Location Name Reference Anguis fragilis Slow-worm TG2310 Mousehold Heath Anguis fragilis Slow-worm TG257120 NNDR 15/9

Date

Number

25/04/2007 15/09/2005

1 count of Female 2 count

Anguis fragilis

Slow-worm

TG232130

Old Catton

22/04/2008

N/A

Zootoca vivipara Zootoca vivipara Natrix natrix

Viviparous lizard Viviparous lizard Grass snake

TG2410

2007

TG275128

Mousehold Heath Mousehold Heath NNDR 10/25

01/09/2004

Present count 1 count of present 2 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG273123

NNDR 15/5

08/09/2004

1 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG275128

NNDR 10/25

17/09/2004

1 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG275128

NNDR 10/25

15/09/2004

1 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG2511

Sprowston

24/06/1999

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG2511

Sprowston

04/08/2004

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG257120

NNDR 15/9

30/08/2004

1 Count of present 1 Count of present 1 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG257120

NNDR 15/9

15/09/2005

1 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG257120

NNDR 15/9

01/09/2004

1 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG267118

NNDR 15/12

30/08/2004

3 Count

Natrix natrix

Grass snake

TG257120

NNDR 15/9

02/09/2004

1 Count

Vipera berus

Adder

TG257120

NNDR 15/9

30/08/2004

1 count of female

TG2410

30/03/2003

(from NBIS 2010); NNDR refers to records collected as part of the surveys along the proposed route of the proposed Norwich Northern Distributor Road

3.2

For amphibians, the data search returned 10 records of great crested newt, the closest of which was to the north west of the site c. 50m outside the 500m survey area (Table 4). Anecdotally, great crested newts are known to occur as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;moderateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; populations in Horsham St Faith, immediately north of the airport, and at Rackheath Park, east of the Wroxham Road and >1km from the site boundary (GW Hopkins and JI Thacker pers. obs. 2004).

3.3

Two records of smooth newt were also returned, one of which was within the survey area some 280m north of the site boundary close to pond number 24.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Table 4. Desk top records of great crested newt from within 2km. Grid reference Location Date TG275128 TG275128 TG267121 TG275128 TG214143 TG276128 TG222153 TG232144 TG223153 TG267120

Rackheath NNDR* 10/25 Sprowston NNDR 10/25 Horsham St Faith Thorpe End Horsham St Faith Spixworth Horsham St Faith Sprowston

01/09/2004 01/09/2004 2006 01/09/2004 2006 2006 2006 2006 28/04/2004 2006

POND DESCRIPTIONS 3.4

Pond 1 and 3 are located to the east of Buxton Road. Pond 1 is a newly created fish pond stocked with Koi carp. Only one visit was made to this pond and the presence of artificial pond liner meant that no bottle trapping could be carried out. Pond 3 is a natural pond heavily shaded by trees.

3.5

Pond 4 is located within the yard of Red Hall, formerly used for watering horses. It was found to contain a large amount of debris and fallen leaves and became increasingly shallow over the course of the survey period.

3.6

Ponds 5-8 are located within the grounds of Park Farm and Beeston Park. Pond 6 is shallow and heavily shaded with deep sediment. Ponds 5, 7 and 8 are all ornamental with planting such as white water-lilies Nymphaea sp. Fish and water fowl are present and one of the ponds, Pond 8, contains terrapins.

3.7

Ponds 10 and 14 are attenuation ponds created to take surface run off from the nearby Park and Ride. They are steep sided, with little or no vegetation. Egyptian geese Alopochen aegyptiacus were recorded on several occasions and both ponds dried out during the course of the survey.

3.8

Ponds 11 and 13 are within the grounds of Oak Lodge, off North Walsham Road. Pond 11 was only surveyed once as owners were worried about further surveys disturbing the horses. It is fairly shaded and, at the time of survey, was found to contain debris and general rubbish. Pond 13, located within an area of hardstanding, is heavily stocked with goldfish and domestic ducks, geese and mallards Anas

platyrhynchos were recorded on all visits.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

3.9

Ponds 15-19 are all located within the golf course of Marriott Sprowston Manor hotel, outside of the proposed development area. Abundant fish and wildfowl including Egyptian geese, grey heron Ardea cinerea, mallards and moorhen Gallinula chloropus were recorded throughout.

3.10 HSI scores range from ‘poor’ to ‘average’ suitability for great crested newts. A summary of the HSI results for each pond are shown below in Table 5. GREAT CRESTED NEWT POND SURVEYS 3.11 Sixteen ponds were surveyed for great crested newts, nine within the development area and the remainder outside (Appendix 1. Figure 1). 3.12 Results of the pond surveys are summarised below (Table 5). No great crested newts were found in any of the ponds surveyed. 3.13 Smooth newts were recorded from three of the ponds, numbers 7, 8 and 13; peak counts (i.e. maximum count on any one survey visit) of seven adult females and six adult males were recorded in Pond 7, three adult females and two adult males in Pond 8 and a single adult female was recorded in Pond 13. Common toads and common frogs were both recorded from a total of five ponds. Table 5. Habitat Suitability Indices (HSI) and presence-absence results (nb great crested newts were not recorded; blank cells denote absence). The on-site ponds refer to those within potential development areas, with some ponds within the wider boundary within private gardens and outside the developable area. Pond number On-site / offHSI Category Smooth Common Common site newt toad frog 1 Off-site Poor 3

On-site

Average

Off-site

Poor

Off-site

Average

On-site

Average

Off-site

Average

Present

Off-site

Average

Present

Off-site

Average

Off-site

Average

Off-site

Average

Off-site

Average

Off-site

Below average

Present

Off-site

Average

Present

Off-site

Average

Off-site

Average

Off-site

Average

Present Present Present Present

Present

Present Present Present

Present

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

REPTILE SURVEYS 3.14 No reptiles were recorded within the site boundary. 3.15 The only reptile recorded by the programme of ecology surveys undertaken in 2010 was of a single grass snake approximately 135m outside the site boundary within the grounds of the nearby golf course (approximate grid reference TG256125). This was an incidental recorded of a single individual beside a pond being surveyed for great crested newts Triturus cristatus.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS GREAT CRESTED NEWTS 4.1

Within the site and 500m around it, there are 13 ponds of ‘average’ suitability for great crested newt with three of ‘below average’ or ‘low’ suitability. The factors reducing the quality of ponds are generally the presence of fish and wildfowl along with shading, desiccation and a lack of vegetation. There are 10 known nearby records of great crested newt as indicated by the data search; however, none are within 500 m of the site and all except one are over 1 km away from the proposed site boundary.

4.2

It is considered that great crested newts are absent from the survey area and it is therefore very unlikely that the proposed development will have any impact upon populations of great crested newts or individuals.

4.3

The presence of common toads within five of the ponds is of note, as this species is a priority UK Biodiversity Action Plan species and a Species of Principal Importance under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.

4.4

Small populations of smooth newts were recorded from Ponds 7, 8 and 13 with peak counts of 13, 5 and 1 individual(s) respectively. Common frogs were also found in three ponds. Neither common frogs nor smooth newts are of conservation concern in England. REPTILES

4.5

On the basis of the results it can be reasonably concluded that significant numbers of reptiles are not currently using the site and that the significance of the proposed development area for this species group is likely to be low. That is, even if present, the densities of individuals are likely to be very low.

4.6

Grass snakes, which typically utilise damper habitats, are highly mobile and can range over distances of 100m a day with ranges tens of hectares in size (Gent & Gibson, 2003). Therefore, given the presence of grass snakes utilising off-site habitats, particularly within the nearby golf course, the possibility of transient individuals occurring on site cannot be entirely ruled out. That said, the presence of unsuitable habitats (e.g. road and car parks) which separate the site and golf course greatly reduces the connectivity between the site and known populations of this species. MITIGATION: GREAT CRESTED NEWTS

4.7

Owing to the negligible risk of great crested newts being present on site, it is not considered necessary to undertake any specific mitigation in relation to this species. If during vegetation clearance great crested newts are found, all works must stop

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

immediately and advice sought from a suitably experienced ecologist on how to proceed. 4.8

A European Protected Species Mitigation licence is not required for the development, although re-surveys may be required prior to detailed planning applications if the start of development is delayed by more than 3 years from the current surveys, i.e. 2014 onwards. MITIGATION: REPTILES

4.9

On the basis of the data collected, it is considered that the current proposals are unlikely to have a significant impact on the conservation status of local populations of any reptile species. However, the possibility of transient individuals, particularly grass snakes, cannot be entirely ruled out and as such there is some, albeit low, possibility of killing and injuring of low numbers of reptiles through construction activities.

4.10 All reptiles are afforded protection under the Schedule 5, Section 9.1 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) which protects them from killing and injury. They are also all priority UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) species and Species of Principal Importance under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 on account of their recent decline in numbers across the UK. Efforts should be made to conserve, maintain and enhance populations of such species wherever possible: see Appendix 3 for summary of the relevant legislation. 4.11 It is therefore recommended that a precautionary approach to the clearance of suitable reptile habitat is taken. Given the low numbers of individuals likely to be present and the availability of similarly suitable, alternative habitat adjacent to the site it is considered that displacement of reptiles through habitat manipulation would be sufficient to avoid killing or injuring and that the level of risk is sufficiently low to not warrant more detailed surveys or translocation measures. 4.12 Exact proposals for the site are not yet confirmed and as such the level of vegetation clearance required is currently unknown; however, should it be necessary to clear areas of suitable habitat, it is likely that the following measures would be appropriate: Where suitable habitat (scrub, grassland and any tall ruderal habitat) requires removal, this should be done in two phases. The first should comprise a strim/cut to c. 150mm above ground level using a hand strimmer or, if necessary, a tractor-mounted height-adjustable flail or mower. Arisings should be collected by hand and removed from site or piled in discrete areas well away from the construction footprint. This process should take place between March and October during which time reptiles are active. N.B. the timing of such operations will be further constrained where the habitat to be cleared is also suitable bird nesting habitat (e.g. scrub). In these cases, vegetation clearance should only take place between September and The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

October unless it can first be ascertained that no active bird nests are present. Any reptiles encountered should be allowed to move to a place of safety (e.g. off site or away from the construction footprint). Piles of debris and other potential refugia should also be cleared by hand. The second phase of the habitat manipulation should take place at least two days after the first phase; this is to give any reptiles present the opportunity to move out of the cleared area. All vegetation within the cleared area(s) should then be cut down from 150mm to ground level. As before, all arisings should be removed from site or piled in discrete areas well away from the construction footprint. These measures will also serve to protect any populations of common amphibians at the site. 4.13 In the unlikely event that significant numbers of reptiles are found during these works, operations should cease and a suitably experienced ecologist contacted for advice on how to proceed. Given the transient nature of reptiles and the availability of suitable habitat both within the survey area and adjacent, the possibility of greater numbers of reptiles being present in the future cannot be discounted and surveys should be repeated should a significant time elapse between the date of the survey and works commencing (i.e. over three years). ENHANCEMENT 4.14 The biodiversity value of the site for amphibians and reptiles could be enhanced post-construction in line with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Appropriate means by which this could be achieved include: The provision of refugia and egg laying sites in the form of log piles, compost heaps and brash piles. The log piles should be stacked adjacent to retained areas of cover such as scrub, tall ruderal vegetation or grassland, and be approximately 1 m in height. Some log piles should be connected or adjacent to one or other of the waterbodies. Compost heaps will be of most benefit placed in a sunny position and close to cover and, as a rule, the larger the heap, the better. Material will need to be replenished annually as the vegetation rots down. The creation of new ponds and damp habitats. These should be located near to semi-natural vegetation and include areas of shallow water and submerged and marginal vegetation. The maintenance of suitable basking habitat such as open, ideally southfacing, banks, bunds or slopes in close proximity to areas of cover. These areas will require monitoring and appropriate management to prevent them becoming too vegetated and shady.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

REFERENCES ARG (2010) ARG UK Advice Note 5. Available at: http://www.arguk.org/advice-andguidance/view-category English Nature (2001) Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines . English Nature, Peterborough. Froglife (1999) Froglife Advice Sheet 10. Reptile Survey . Froglife, Halesworth. Gent, T. and Gibson, S. (1998) Herpetofauna Workersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Manual. JNCC, Peterborough. Oldham, R.S., Keeble, J., Swan, M.J.S. & Jeffcoate, M. (2000) Evaluating the suitability of habitat for the great crested newt ( Triturus cristatus). Herpetological Journal 10, 143-155.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 1: FIGURES

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Figure 1. Location of ponds.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Figure 2. Location of artificial refugia.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 2: SITE AND SURVEY DATA

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Table 6. Survey conditions. Pond Visit Date number 1

09/05/10

Air temp (0C) 7

Water temp (Ë&#x161;C) 8

Rain

Turbidity*

Wind disturbing water? Minor

Surface vegetation cover* 1

9-10/05/10

7-6

2-3

Minor

15-16/05/10

10-12

None

29-30/05/09

1013.5 14-13

None

07/06/10

1212.5 15.5

Major

8-9/05/10

7.5-7

8-7.5

Minor

15-16/05/10

9.5-13

10.5

None

29-30/05/10

None

4 1

04/06/10 8-9/05/10

10.512 15 9

4 5

13.512 13 8.5

0 2

None Minor

5 4

4 2

29-30/05/09

11-14

3-2

Minor

04/06/10

12.5

None

07/06/10

14.5

Minor

8-9/05/10

Minor

15-16/05/10

None

29/05/10

9.512.5 14

N/A

04/06/10

12.5

N/A

8-9/05/10

Pond dry Pond dry 8.5

Minor

15-16/05/10

9-12

None

29-30/05/09

None

04/06/10

14.514 15.5

1412.5 12.5

None

8-9/05/10

Minor

15-16/05/10

9-12

None

29-30/05/10

14/14.5

Minor

04/06/2010

1412.5 12.5

None

15/05/10

None

19/05/10

None

26/05/10

8.5

None

04/06/10

17.5

None

8-9/05/10

9.5

7/8.5

None

8-9/05/10

9.5

Minor

15-16/05/10

8/13.5

None

2-3

29-30/05/10

14/12.5

12.5/14

3-2

Minor

04/06/10

None

15/05/10

None

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Pond number

Visit

Date

Water temp (Ë&#x161;C) 15

Rain

19/05/10

Air temp (0C) 11.5

Turbidity*

Wind disturbing water? None

Surface vegetation cover* 0

26/05/10

None

04/06/10

None

15/05/10

None

19/05/10

None

26/05/10

None

04/06/10

None

15/05/10

None

19/05/10

None

26/05/10

None

04/06/10

None

15/05/10

11.5

None

19/05/10

None

26/05/10

None

04/06/10

None

15/05/10

10.5

None

26/05/10

None

04/06/10

None

07/06/10

14.5

Major

15/05/10

None

26/05/10

None

04/06/10

None

07/06/10

14.5

15.5

Major

* Measured on a scale of 0-5

Table 7. Pond survey results for each visit. Pond Visit Amphibian Species Recorded # # 1 1 None 3

Other species

Methods used*

Koi carp

T, N, R, E

None

3 4

None None

BT (8), T, N, R, E BT (5), T, N, R, E BT (10), T, N, E T, N, R, E

1 adult common frog (torch)

BT (4), T, N, E

2 3

2 common frog tadpoles (bottle trap) 1 adult common frog (torch) 2 adult common frogs (torch)

BT (5), T, N, E BT (5), T, R, E

2 adult common frogs (torch)

T, R, E

1 2

None 1 adult common frog (torch)

Large goldfish Large goldfish

BT (5), T, E BT (5), T, N, E

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Pond #

Visit # 3 4 1

Amphibian Species Recorded

Other species

Methods used*

2 adult common frogs (torch) None None

Goldlfish & rudd Goldlfish & rudd

T, N, R, E T, N, R, E BT (4), T, R, E

1 adult common toad (refuge check) 1 adult common toad (refuge check) N/A

3 4 7

T, R, E Moorhen

BT (9), T, N, E

Mallard

BT (14), T, N, E

Mallard

BT (15), T, N, E

T, N, E

4 1 2

None

T, N, R, E

3 4

None 1 common toad tadpole (torch)

T, N, R, E T, N, R, E

1 1

None None

1 adult female smooth newt (bottle trap)

11 13

T, R, E

7 adult female smooth newts (torch) 1 adult common frog (torch) 2 adult male smooth newts (bottle trap) 3 adult female smooth newts (bottle trap) 1 common frog tadpole (bottle trap) Abundant common toad tadpoles (bottle trap) 1 smooth newt larva (netting) Occasional common toad tadpoles (netting) 17 common frog tadpoles (bottle trap and netting) Abundant common toad tadpoles (bottle trap and netting) Abundant common frog tadpoles None

1 adult male smooth newt (bottle trap) Abundant common toad tadpoles (bottle trap and netting) 4 adult male smooth newts (bottle trap and torch) 6 adult female smooth newts (bottle trap and torch) Abundant common frog tadpoles (torch and netting) 4 adult male smooth newts (bottle trap and torch) 6 adult female smooth newts (bottle trap and torch) 4 adult common frogs (torch) 6 adult male smooth newts (torch)

BT (3), T, R, E

Fish & terrapins

BT (9), T, N, E

Fish & terrapins

BT (14), T, N, E

Fish & terrapins

BT (15), T, N, E

Fish & terrapins Egyptian geese

T, N, R, E T, N, R, E

Egyptian geese Fish, domestic ducks, geese, mallard, moorhen Fish, domestic ducks, geese, mallard, moorhen

BT (3), T, N, R BT (8), T, N, R, E BT (10), T, N, R, E

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Pond #

Visit # 3

Other species

Methods used*

None

Fish, domestic ducks, geese, mallard, moorhen Fish, domestic ducks, geese, mallard, moorhen Egyptian geese

BT (12), T, N, R

None

3 4 1

Abundant common frog tadpoles (torch) 1 adult common frog adjacent to pond 1 juvenile common frog adjacent to pond Some common frog tadpoles (torch) None None None

1 juvenile common toad (torch)

3 4

None None

Amphibian Species Recorded

T, N, R

T T

Grey heron, egyptian geese, sticklebacks, goldfish Geese, moorhen, fish

T, N T T

T, N, E T, N T, N

1 adult common toad (torch)

Geese, fish Geese, fish, grass snake Egyptian geese

None

Mallards

BT, T, N

None

T, N

None

Egyptian geese, mallards Fish

1 2 3

None None None

Mallard Fish

T, R T, N T, N

4 1 2

None None None

Egyptian geese, fish Egyptian geese, fish Egyptian geese, fish

T, R T, R T, N, R

3 4

None None

Egyptian geese, fish Egyptian geese, fish

T, R T, N, R, E

1 adult common frog (torch)

None

3 4

None None

T, N

T, R

T, N, E Mallard

T, N, E T, N, E T, N, E

* BT = bottle trap (and number), T = torch, N = net, R = refuge check, E = egg search

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 3: LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

NATIONAL LEGISLATION AFFORDED TO SPECIES

The objective of the EC Habitats Directive 1 is to conserve the various species of plant and animal which are considered rare across Europe. The Directive is transposed into UK law by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) (formerly The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended)) and The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended).

Explanatory notes relating to species protected under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) (which includes smooth snake, sand lizard, great

Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

crested newt and natterjack toad), all bat species, otter, and some plant species) are given below. These should be read in conjunction with the relevant species sections that follow.

In the Directive, the term ‘deliberate’ is interpreted as being somewhat wider than intentional and may be thought of as including an element of recklessness. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) does not define the act of ‘migration’ and therefore, as a precaution, it is recommended that short distance movement of animals for e.g. foraging, breeding or dispersal purposes are also considered. In order to obtain a European Protected Species Mitigation (EPSM) licence, the application must demonstrate that it meets all of the following three ‘tests’: i) the action(s) are necessary for the purpose of preserving public health or safety or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequence of primary importance for the environment; ii) that there is no satisfactory alternative and iii) that the action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range.

Herpetofauna (Amphibians and Reptiles) The sand lizard Lacerta agilis, smooth snake Coronella austriaca, natterjack toad Epidalea

calamita and great crested newt Triturus cristatus receive full protection under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) through their inclusion on Schedule 2. The pool frog Pelophylax lessonae is also afforded full protection under the same legislation. Regulation 41 prohibits:

Deliberate killing, injuring or capturing of species listed on Schedule 2 Deliberate disturbance of any Schedule 2 species as: o

a) to impair their ability: 

(i) to survive, breed, or reproduce, or to rear or nurture young;



(ii) in the case of animals of a hibernating or migratory species, to hibernate or migrate

b) to affect significantly the local distribution or abundance of the species

Deliberate taking or destroying of the eggs of a Schedule 2 species Damage or destruction of a breeding site or resting place Keeping, transporting, selling, exchanging or offering for sale whether live or dead or of any part thereof.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

With the exception of the pool frog, these species are also currently listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Under this Act, they are additionally protected from:

Intentional or reckless disturbance (at any level) Intentional or reckless obstruction of access to any place of shelter or protection Selling, offering or exposing for sale, possession or transporting for purpose of sale.

Other native species of herpetofauna are protected solely under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Species such as the adder Vipera berus, grass snake Natrix natrix, common lizard Zootoca vivipara and slow-worm Anguis fragilis are listed in respect to Section 9(1) & (5). For these species, it is prohibited to:

Intentionally (or recklessly in Scotland) kill or injure these species Sell, offer or expose for sale, possess or transport for purpose of sale these species, or any part thereof.

Common frog Rana temporaria, common toad Bufo bufo, smooth newt Lissotriton vulgaris and palmate newt L. helveticus are listed in respect to Section 9(5) only which affords them protection against sale, offering or exposing for sale, possession or transport for the purpose of sale.

How is the legislation pertaining to herpetofauna liable to affect development works? A European Protected Species (EPS) Licence issued by the relevant countryside agency (e.g. Natural England) will be required for works liable to affect the breeding sites or resting places of those amphibian and reptile species protected under The Conservation Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). A licence will also be required for operations liable to result in a level of disturbance which might impair their ability to undertake those activities mentioned above (e.g. survive, breed, rear young and hibernate). The licences are to allow derogation from the relevant legislation but also to enable appropriate mitigation measures to be put in place and their efficacy to be monitored.

Although not licensable, appropriate mitigation measures may also be required to prevent the intentional killing or injury of adder, grass snake, common lizard and slow worm, thus avoiding contravention of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

LOCAL BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN The UK plan also encourages the production of local Biodiversity Action Plans at the County or District level. The Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plan contains 21 Habitat Action Plans (HAPs) and 58 Species Action Plans (SAPs). Reptile and amphibian SAPs listed in the Norfolk LBAP are:

Grass snake Natrix natrix Slow worm Anguis fragilis Adder Vipera berus Common lizard Zootoca vivipara Common toad Bufo bufo Great crested newt Triturus cristatus Natterjack toad Bufo calamita NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK The National Planning Policy Framework replaced PPS9 in April 2012 and emphasises the need for sustainable development. The Framework specifies the need for protection of designated sites and priority habitats and priority species. An emphasis is also made for the need for ecological networks via preservation, restoration and re-creation. The protection and recovery of priority species – that is those listed as UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species – is also listed as a requirement of planning policy. In determining planning application, planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by ensuring that: designated sites are protected from adverse harm; there is appropriate mitigation or compensation where significant harm cannot be avoided; opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments are encouraged; planning permission is refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats including aged or veteran trees and also ancient woodland. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Amphibians and Reptiles / Beyond Green

Beyond Green Developments North Sprowston & Old Catton

Appendix 5.2: Information to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment

ES Volume 2: Technical Appendices

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Information to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Beyond Green Green

Information to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment Beyond Green

Author

Graham Hopkins BSc (Hons) PhD PGCE FRES CEnv MIEEM

Job No.

100368

The Ecology Consultancy Thorpe House, 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich, NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. graham@ecologyconsultancy.co.uk W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk

North Sprowston & Old Catton / Information to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Beyond Green

North Sprowston and Old Catton

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION Overview

Legislation & Planning Policy

2 THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS & METHODOLOGY Process

Evidence Gathering

Site Integriy

Mitigation versus Compensatory Measures

Consultation

3 HRAS OF OTHER PLANS Overview

Greater Norwich Development Area

Broads Authority Area

Great Yarmouth Borough Council

4 CHARACTERISING POTENTIAL IMPACTS Introduction

Groundwater Flows

Disturbance

5 CHARACTERISING CURRENT AND FUTURE VISITOR NUMBERS The Broads

Understanding of Seasonal Patterns of Use

Understanding the Significance of Beeston Park as Mitigation

Current and Future Numbers of visitors to the North Norfolk Coast

Summary of Visitor Projections

6 SCOPING OF SITES SItes Within 40km

Scoping-out of International Sites

7 DESIGNATED FEATURES OF SCOPED-IN SITES Overview OF Sites

River Wensum SAC

The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, Broadland SPA

BREYDON Water SPA and Ramsar Site

Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC

North Norfolk Coast SPA, SAC and Ramsar Site

8 STAGE 1: TESTS OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Overview

Groundwater Flows

Disturbance

9 STAGE 2: APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Broadland SPA

Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site

Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC

The North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site

Summary of Stage 2: Appropriate Assessment

10 COMPENSATORY MEASURES Overview

Disturbance

Practical Management

Summary of Case Studies

Implementation

Synthesis and Summary

11 STAGE 3: REPEAT OF THE APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT

REFERENCES

APPENDIX 1: COMPONENT SITES OF THE BROADS

APPENDIX 2: FIGURE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As required by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (hereafter Habitats Regulations), before deciding to give consent or permission for a project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) the competent authority is required to make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives. European sites are Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and also include Ramsar Sites. This report examines the plans for the North-east Norwich Growth Triangle and the North Sprowston and Old Catton project to assess the implications of these projects in the context of the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. The potential impacts of these projects are primarily related to water abstraction and disposal, changes to local groundwater flows and increased recreational disturbance resulting from a larger local population. Water abstraction and disposal are not considered further here, as it is being assessed at the Greater Norwich Development Partnership level. An initial scoping exercise reduced the number of sites considered to be potentially affected by changes in groundwater and recreational disturbance to: The Broads SAC; Broadland SPA; The Broads Ramsar Site; River Wensum SAC; Breydon Water SPA; Breydon Water Ramsar Site; Winterton – Horsey Dunes SAC; The North Norfolk Coast SAC; The North Norfolk Coast SPA; and the North Norfolk Coast Ramsar Site Tests of likely significant affects conclude that negative impacts cannot be concluded for recreational impacts on: the suite of sites in The Broads; Breydon Water and its two sites; Winterton-Horsey Dunes; and the suite of sites on the North Norfolk Coast. Changes to groundwater flows are considered to be unlikely to impact sites and increased recreational disturbance is considered unlikely to be an impact on the River Wensum SAC Projections for visitor numbers were made from visitor survey data collected in 2011 by Broadland District Council. A context for these results is also provided by an extensive review of available data to characterise visitor activity in the vicinity. Using realistic values, the greatest numbers of additional visitors are likely to be experienced by the more popular natural sites receiving currently 30,000 visitors where the additional numbers of visitors will be 1,714. An integral part of the NS&OC project is the restoration of Beeston Park as a recreation facility. This is likely to be attractive to key users of The Broads, such as dog walkers and visitors ‘going for a walk’. The travel time to many sites in The Broads is likely to be over

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

30-minutes, with only sites on the urban fringe of Norwich being closer than 15-minutes drive. It is likely therefore that Beeston Park will be effective in reducing the numbers of visitors to designated sites by providing a more convenient recreation area. Following the Appropriate Assessment methodology however it is considered that there is not sufficient confidence in the assessment for negative impacts on site integrity to be concluded for The Broadsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; sites and the North Norfolk Coastâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sites. The principal designated features vulnerable to disturbance are birds, principally wildfowl but also hen and marsh harrier in The Broads. For the other sites it is considered that increases in number of visitors are unlikely (due, for example, to poor access) and / or the likely low impact of increased numbers of visitors on the designated features. A review of potential compensatory measures is presented to explore the options available for reducing impacts. Measures such as zoning of users, access design and the provision of interpretive materials are considered to be effective tools elsewhere and are among the options available. It is realistically considered that compensatory measures could reduce the impacts of recreational disturbance such that the integrity of sites are not affected. A repeat of the Appropriate Assessment concludes that with compensatory measures there will not be an impact on site integrity.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

1 INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW 1.1

As required by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (hereafter Habitats Regulations), before deciding to give consent or permission for a project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) the competent authority is required to make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives. The competent authority must consult the appropriate nature conservation body and have regard to any representations made by that body.

1.2

This document provides information towards a Habitats Regulations Assessment and Appropriate Assessment for development in the Old Catton, Sprowston, Rackheath and Thorpe St Andrew ‘North-east Norwich Growth Triangle’ of 7,000 homes by 2026, rising to 10,000 after 2031, to help meet rising demand for housing in Norwich and Norfolk as set out in the GNDP Joint Core Strategy. This information accompanies the planning application for development of up to 3,520 homes within the North-east Norwich Growth Area at North Sprowston and Old Catton (hereafter ‘NS&OC ’). This document is prepared by the applicant, Beyond Green, with the purpose of exploring the likely impacts, effects and mitigation associated with development in the North-east Norwich Growth Area that may be required within the formal context of the Habitats Regulations, and in advance of Broadland District Council commencing the preparation of an Area Action Plan (AAP) Development Plan Document for the Growth Triangle. LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY

1.3

The need for an appropriate assessment originally arose under the requirements of the EC Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and its implementation in the UK under the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 were published and consolidated the legislation, updated and incorporated the various amendments made to the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (the 1994 Regulations). No detailed review of the 1994 Regulations has taken place, and the 2010 Habitats Regulations make no substantive changes to existing policies or procedures.

1.4

Regulation 61(5) states that ‘ In the light of the conclusions of the assessment, and

subject to regulation 62 (considerations of overriding public interest), the competent The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

authority may agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the European site or the European offshore marine site (as the case may be)’. Regulation 61(6) also states ‘In considering whether a plan or project will adversely affect the integrity of the site, the authority must have regard to the manner in which it is proposed to be carried out or to any conditions or restrictions subject to which they propose that the consent, permission or other authorisation should be given.’ 1.5

The Habitats Regulations Assessment relates to Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Ramsar Sites. SPAs are sites classified in accordance with Article 4 of the EC Directive on the conservation of wild birds (79/409/EEC), more commonly known as the Birds Directive. They are classified for rare and vulnerable birds, listed in Annex I to the Birds Directive, and for regularly occurring migratory species.

1.6

SACs are classified in accordance with EC Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the Habitats Directive). Article 3 of this Directive requires the establishment of a European network of important high-quality conservation sites that will make a significant contribution to conserving the 189 habitat types and 788 species identified in Annexes I and II of the Directive.

1.7

These sites are known as the Natura 2000 network and are commonly referred to as European sites. Ramsar Sites are qualifying under the International Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramsar Convention, Iran 1971 and amended by the Paris Protocol 1992). Although Ramsar Sites are not protected in law by the Birds and Habitats Directives as a matter of policy, government – reiterated in the National Planning Policy Framework (DfCLG, 2012) has decreed that, unless otherwise specified, procedures relating to SPAs and SACs will also apply to Ramsar Sites. The term ‘international sites’ is used in this report to refer to all three of these qualifying sites.

1.8

An appropriate assessment is a decision by a 'competent authority', in this case Broadland District Council, as to whether the proposed plan or project can be determined as not having an adverse effect on the integrity of any European sites. An adverse effect on integrity is likely to be one that prevents the site from maintaining the same contribution to favourable status for the relevant feature(s), as it did when the site was qualifying. Only where a plan or project can be determined by the

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

competent authority as not having an adverse effect on site integrity can it be allowed to proceed. 1.9

The favourable conservation status of the site is defined through the site's conservation objectives and it is against these objectives that the effects of the plan or project must be assessed. Regulation 61(2) requires that a person applying for any such consent, permission or other authorisation must provide such information as the competent authority may reasonably require for the purposes of the assessment or to enable them to determine whether an appropriate assessment is required.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

2 THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS & METHODOLOGY PROCESS 2.1. The Appropriate Assessment process is outlined in Table 1, presented for illustrative purposes, outlining the steps required to be undertaken by the competent authority when considering projects that may impact on European sites. Table 1. The stages of the Appropriate Assessment. Task Requirements Evidence Collation of documentation relating to the project. Gathering Collecting information on relevant European sites, their conservation objectives and characteristics. Stage 1 The ‘test of likely significant effect’. Establishing whether a plan is ‘likely to have a significant effect’ on a European site, and therefore requiring the Appropriate Assessment. Stage 2 Assessment of whether there is an effect on site integrity. This is potentially a two-stage process, with a consideration of whether there are likely to be effects, followed if necessary by a detailed consideration of site-specific factors. Stage 3 If there is an effect on site integrity then the project should be reassessed with the inclusion of compensation and a repeat of stage 2.

2.2. An important part of this HRA is the significance of mitigation and compensation; these are defined below (Mitigation Versus Compensatory Measures). Following Tyldesley (2011) it is considered that compensatory measures may be proposed if the project is permitted under the provisions of regulations 49 and 53, but rather than forming part of the Appropriate Assessment they are included in Stage 3; in contrast, mitigation measures may form part of the Appropriate Assessment (i.e Stage 2). EVIDENCE GATHERING 2.3. Data on the project proposals are taken from the Environmental Statement, hereafter referred to as the ES, and other documentation relating to the North-east Norwich Growth Area as produced by and for the Greater Norwich Development Partnership. 2.4. The identification of European sites was undertaken utilising the online Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside database (hereafter referred to as MAGIC; www.magic.gov.uk). Data on the European sites, including qualifying features were taken from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee website (www.jncc.gov.uk); data on the component SSSIs, primarily the condition

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

assessment,

were

taken

from

the

Natural

England

website

(www.naturalengland.org.uk). 2.5. A scientific literature search was undertaken using both freely available search engines and academic databases to identify relevant research work on disturbance effects and examples of mitigation for disturbance. SITE INTEGRITY 2.6. Following English Nature (2004) and based on definitions within Article 1 of the Habitats Directive, site integrity is defined below. 2.7. For habitats: Their range and area must be stable or increasing; The species structure and functions necessary for long-term maintenance exist and are likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future; and The status of the typical species is considered to be favourable. 2.8. For species: The population dynamics data on the species indicate that it is maintaining itself on a long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats; and The natural range is stable and likely to continue to be, and there is and will probably continue to be a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its population on a long term basis. 2.9. English Nature (1999, 2004) proposes a checklist of questions as a pragmatic approach to identifying likely effects and to potential mechanisms that may affect site integrity. Where each answer is â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;yesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, then it can be concluded that there are no adverse effects. Thus, for the assessment to conclude that there are no adverse effects then it is required to show that: The area of Annex I habitats (or composite features) will not be reduced; There will be no direct effect on the population of the species for which the site was Qualifying or classified;

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

There will be no indirect effects on the populations of species for which the site was Qualifying or classified due to loss or degradation of their habitat (quantity/quality); There will be no changes to the composition of the habitats for which the site was Qualifying (e.g. reduction in species structure, abundance or diversity that comprises the habitat over time); and That there will be no interruption or degradation of the physical, chemical or biological processes that support habitats and species for which the site was Qualifying or classified. 2.10. If the answer is ‘no’ to any of these or if there is uncertainty, then it is necessary to consider further site-specific factors in order to reach a decision. 2.11. As presented by English Nature (2004), the key site-specific factors that need to be considered when forming judgments on site integrity are: Scale of impact, Long term effects and sustainability, Duration of impact and recovery/reversibility, Dynamic systems, Conflicting feature requirements, Off-site impacts, and Uncertainty in cause and effect relationships and a precautionary approach. MITIGATION VERSUS COMPENSATORY MEASURES 2.12. There are three types of counteracting measures to reduce impacts: avoidance and reduction (which are grouped together as mitigation) and then compensatory measures. ‚Mitigation (avoidance and reduction) measures (are) built into the project and form(ing) part of the project as proposed or applied for‛; compensatory measures are those which ‚do not already form part of the project but may be applied as additional conditions or restrictions (Tyldesley, 2011; pp13)

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

2.10 The European Commission (2007, p10) present the distinction as): Mitigation measures are those measures which aim to minimise, or even cancel, the negative impacts on a site that are likely to arise as a result of the implementation of a plan or project. These measures are an integral part of the specifications of a plan or project (see section 4.5 of the leaflet " Managing

Natura 2000 sites. The provisions of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive "), and Compensatory measures in the strict sense are independent of the project (including any associated mitigation measures). They are intended to offset the negative effects of the plan or project so that the overall ecological coherence of the Natura 2000 Network is maintained.â&#x20AC;&#x203A; 2.11 For the purposes of the NS&OC project and the Growth Triangle, compensatory measures for impacts on the development site can be undertaken within-site, but reducing for the effects of potential impacts on the European sites is likely to require: (i) measures taken within the site to provide some recreational resource there which is expected to lead to fewer people travelling to the European site; and (ii) a range of measures operating as compensation in the event that this on-site mitigation is deemed not to be sufficient for the purposes of avoiding impacts on the European site. CONSULTATION 2.13. Consultation with a number of organisations has been undertaken, formally and informally as summarised below (Table 2). Table 2. Summary of consultations. Organisation Date Summary Broadland Various A number of workshops with Broadland District Council District between officers including discussion of potential impact of NS&OC Council January 2011 on The Broads in the context of the Habitats Regulations and July 2012 Assessment. Natural Various A number of workshops and one-to-one meetings with England between Helen Ward including discussion of potential impact of January 2011 NS&OC on The Broads in the context of the Habitats and October Regulations Assessment. Further meetings were sought by 2011 Beyond Green from January 2012 but this has not been possible due to staffing changes at Natural England. Broads 15 July 2012 Meeting attended by three officers of the Broads Authority Authority and three representatives of Beyond Green. Issues covered including the potential impacts on The Broads specifically in the context of a Habitats Regulations Assessment

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

3 HRAS OF OTHER PLANS OVERVIEW 3.1

There are a number of plans prepared for neighbouring local authorities which may act in combination with the NS&OC and Growth Triangle proposals to result in impacts on the integrity of sites. As proposed by Tyldesley (2011; pp14-15):

â&#x20AC;&#x161;In checking for the need for an appropriate assessment it may be concluded that the project could affect the site in some way, but that alone these effects are unlikely to be significant. In such cases the competent authority should check whether significant effects would be likely if the project was combined with other plans or projects. An in-combination assessment is required in order to comply with the Habitats Regulations, and should include any other plans or projects that have been checked for the need for an appropriate assessment and where the following applies: a) It has been concluded that the other plan or project may affect the site, but the effects are not significant on their own. A number of plans or projects with effects that individually have been determined to be insignificant may still result in a significant effect on the site if all their effects on the site are combined. b) It has been concluded that the other plan or project may have a significant effect alone and where measures have consequently been included to reduce the effect to a level where it is no longer considered to be significant when the plan or project is considered alone, but where the measure applied will not remove the effect completely. Such residual effects could still contribute to a significant effect when considered in-combination with other effects.â&#x20AC;&#x203A; 3.2

Here, three groups of plans are reviewed with respect to their conclusions with respect o potential in-combination effects: those for the Greater Norwich Development Partnership, of which the Growth Triangle is a part; Great Yarmouth Borough Council; and The Broads Authority including local development plans and the Toursim Strategy (Broads Authority, 2011).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

GREATER NORWICH DEVELOPMENT AREA Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk (Mott Macdonald, 2010) 3.3

As described by Mott Macdonald, the 2009 Joint Core Strategy (JCS) consultation report was subject to a Stage 1 Test of Likely Significant Effects and the following JCS policies were identified as having the potential to have significant effects on European and Ramsar designated sites: Policy 3: Energy and Water (which underpins Policy 10 & 12); Policy 4: Housing (which underpins Policy 10 & 12); Policy 6: Access and transportation; Policy 10: Location for major new or expanding communities, and; Policy 12: The remainder of the Norwich urban area, including the fringe parishes.

3.4

The Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment considered that only Policy 6 was not likely to have a significant impact, on the basis that the relevant schemes would be considered at the project level and not directly related to JCS policies.

3.5

Hydrological issues relating to water supply and water disposal are considered as potentially significant in respect to policies 3, 4, 10 and 12. As discussed below (4: Characterising Potential Impacts), measures are underway ‚towards a resolution of the longer term water resource requirement‛ (Anglian Water, Environment Agency and Natural England, 2010).

3.6

Increased disturbance is assessed as a potentially significant impact of policy 4 (with any in-combination disturbance impacts from policy 12 covered under policy 4).

3.7

As described for policy 4, site integrity may be impacted from: ‚In-combination impacts associated with area-wide growth, resulting in increased visitor pressure on European designated sites in combination with growth in neighbouring local authority areas.‛ The identified sites are:

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Broads SAC; Broadland Ramsar & SPA; Breckland SPA & SAC; Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA; Winterton – Horsey Dunes SAC; and North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA & Ramsar. BROADS AUTHORITY AREA Core Strategy (Broads Authority, 2006) 3.8

The Habitats Regulations Assessment / Appropriate Assessment for the Core Strategy concluded that none of the policies presented a significant risk to site integrity: in general it concluded that ‚any risks will be prevented by the Holistic interpretation of Core Strategy policies, using Core Strategy Policy 2 for sites designated with European and National Importance‛.

3.9

Core Strategy Policy 2 states that: ‚policies will take into account National & European designated conservation sites‛. The most relevant Core Strategy Policies (CS) to which this applies are: CS 2 (protecting and enhancing new water space); CS 4 (creation of new

resources); CS 9 (sustainable tourism); CS 10 (tourist and

recreation development); CS 14 (additional moorings); CS 15 (safe navigation); CS 16 and CS 17 (accessing The Broads in a sustainable manner) CS 19 (sustainable locations for medium / larger visitor developments) 3.10 Two sites were identified as possibly at risk of impacts namely: Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site (CS 10); and The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site and the Broadland SPA (CS 10, CS 16 and CS 17). For both sites CS 2 is identified as the key policy for justifying site-by-site assessment of impacts. Development Management Policies (Wildfrontier Ecology, 2011) 3.11 The assessment of the development management policies was undertaken as an iterative process, with revisions to the wording and the subsequent strengthening of some policies resulting in the conclusion that impacts on site integrity are unlikely. However, if a proposal is considered in the context of a given policy to have an effect on an internationally designated site then it will need to be considered against the Habitats Directive and a project level Appropriate Assessment undertaken. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Site Specific Policies (Interim Draft HRA) (Wildfrontier Ecology, 2012) 3.12 An assessment of the ‘finer scale’ policies within the Broads Authority concluded that significant effects on site integrity were possible for The Broads SAC, Broadland SPA and Winterton – Horsey Dunes SAC and Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA. The draft policies of possible concern were those potentially resulting in disturbance and / or hydrological settlements at the named settlements of Cantley, Brundall, Geat Yarmouth marina, Horning and Oulton Broad. Non-settlement draft policies with potential impacts were those relating to management works at Horsey and St Benet’s Abbey. 3.13 In each case, minor revisions to the wording of individual draft policies resulted in a revised assessment where no impact on site integrity was concluded. Tourism Strategy (Broads Authority 2011) 3.14 As understood, the Tourism Strategy has not been subject to a HRA. The Tourism Strategy (hereafter ‘TS’) provides an assessment of the current position; a presentation of the strategic approach and objectives; and an identification of priorities for action. 3.15 By the year 2015 the vision of the TS (pp34) aspires that:

‚Visitor numbers, both land and water based, have increased, especially out of season and proportionally in the southern broads…. The richness of the biodiversity and overall environmental quality has further increased and there is tangible evidence of how this has been supported by tourism. Internationally Qualifying wildlife sites have been protected and enhanced. Most tourism enterprises are actively involved in environmental management and are providing their guests with good information to enhance their stay in the Broads.‛ 3.16 In terms of the possible interplay between the TS and the presence of a greater number of residents in north-east Norwich, the key policies and areas for action are considered below. Although no attempt is made here to provide a retrospective HRA of the TS, these key points illustrate the potential future behaviour and distribution of visitors in the context of natural assets. 3.17 The main product and market opportunities recognized by the TS with respect to natural assets are (pp25):

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Ecotourism, providing a wetland experience, with opportunities to observe and encounter wildlife, with specific products and promotion focused on particular times of year. Outdoor activity, for a whole range of activities including exceptional opportunities to enjoy a range of watersports accessible to users of all abilities and experience. Opportunities to walk and cycle through an unusual wilderness environment which can be explored with comparatively little effort or experience. 3.18 Areas for action within the TS (pp42) include: 1i: Raise local residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; awareness of Broads product. The continuing importance of the day visitor market has been highlighted in this strategy. Business can be generated not only from residents in and around the area but also from their visiting friends and relatives. It is believed that local awareness of Broads products and experiences is still quite patchy. 3e: Strengthen visitor awareness of opportunities in the peripheral parts of the Broads (to include): o Providing good information about what can be found at the end of each waterway and how it may differ from the busier, more congested parts. o Encourage further development of relevant product in the upper reaches, for example canoe. o Trails and guided walks and wildlife trips. o Taking care to manage the scale and distribution of new activity in sensitive areas, with appropriate advice from conservation managers.

4d: Clarify and present the full spectrum of opportunities to see and enjoy wildlife at all levels. The opportunity to see and enjoy wildlife in a wetland environment adds special value to a visit to the Broads for all kinds of people. Wetland habitat can be seen by some as a barrier to their access to water, so it is particularly important to introduce people to a positive first experience of this special environment while ensuring adequate protection is in place for qualifying locations. This should involve:

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Identifying a set of reserves which offer an excellent opportunity to get out into a range of wetland habitats, often including the possibility of gaining access to the waterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edge. Developing a hierarchy concept with certain centres playing a key role in providing a well-supported first experience of the landscape and of the privilege of seeing and understanding some of the wildlife that it supports. Signposting those who are ready to appreciate and enjoy the experience to wilder and more remote places, which may be rewarded by more spectacular or less usual wildlife sightings; supporting this step with introductory guided walks. Monitoring proposed improved or promoted access to ensure adequate protection is in place to safeguard Qualifying and important wildlife habitats and species. Strengthen the interpretation of the special wildlife and habitats of the Broads at places where people tend to congregate and linger, as well as at qualifying reserves. Recognising and rewarding the environmental credentials of individual guides through a Green Badge award. 4e: Further develop and promote opportunities for walking and cycling in the Broads. Land-based visitors should be encouraged to obtain a first hand experience of the Broads by exploring on foot or bike. â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Going for a short walkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; remains the most popular activity undertaken by visitors but, in the rather challenging conditions of the Broads environment, opportunities often need to be created and maintained. Broads Cycle Hire Centres offer easy access to bikes but, certainly in some parts of the Broads, there is demand for better opportunities to cycle away from traffic. 3.19 The requirements to encouraging more people to explore the Broads on foot and by bike will include (pp50): Co-coordinating information about existing walking and cycling opportunities that exist based on the Outdoor Norfolk website. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Introducing new provision for off-road cycling, especially demonstration projects linked to cycle hire centres in the northern Broads and taking opportunities as they may arise from flood defence and other major works. Highlighting short walks that provide an easy waterside experience, drawing attention to any special aspects such as stretches of boardwalk. Supporting development of the Three Rivers Way as a significant opportunity to encourage walking and cycling in this heavily trafficked area. 4i: Promote and develop opportunities for angling, in accordance with best practice in fisheries management and other biodiversity considerations. 3.20 A suite of policies relate to environmental sustainability (pp55), including: 6a: Protect landscapes, amenity and biodiversity from intrusive development. 6b: Monitor and maintain appropriate zoning and management of waterspace and wetlands for different forms of access and recreation. 6c: Ensure all visitors are provided with appropriate information on responsible access and activities. 6e: Promote higher environmental standards of boat design and operations. 6f: Establish an initiative for visitor support for conservation. GREAT YARMOUTH BOROUGH COUNCIL 3.21 Great Yarmouth is located at the very eastern end of The Broads and is major tourist destination. Located at the north end of the main â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;tourist beachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is the Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA, designated for little terns Sterna albifrons; the upper part of the River Yare estuary immediately above Great Yarmouth is designated as Breydon Water Ramsar Site and SPA. Waterfront Area Action Plan (Grant, 2010) and Core Strategy of the Great Yarmouth Local Development Framework 3.22 As reported by Grant (2010) in the HRA of the Waterfront Area Action Plan, the Core Strategy identified the following likely significant effects:

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Recreational pressures from increased numbers of visitors to WintertonHorsey Dunes SAC, Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA and Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar; Urban effects, such as litter and lighting, on Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC and Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA; and Surface run-off resulting in a deterioration of water quality in watercourses, which in turn could have an effect on the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA/Ramsar and Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar. 3.23 The HRA for the Waterfront Action Plan (Grant 2010) concluded possible impacts on site integrity as follows: Water quality and hydrology of the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA/Ramsar and Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar; Impact of recreation on dunes at Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC; Disturbance at Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar; and Disturbance to nesting little tern at Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

4 CHARACTERISING POTENTIAL IMPACTS INTRODUCTION 4.1. The main potential impacts identified in relation to development within the North-east Norwich Growth Area are on groundwater flows and levels of recreational disturbance. 4.2. Potential impacts of water abstraction and water disposal are not treated here explicitly as both are considered to have been assessed fully by the GNDP water cycle study (Scott Wilson, 2010) and covered by Mott Macdonald (2010) in their Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Joint Core Strategy. 4.3. Since the publication of the original Mott Macdonald (2010) HRA a number of planning and legal processes were undertaken, summarised by Anglian Water, Environment Agency and Natural England (2012) as follows:

‚In brief, (the Appropriate Assessment) concluded that it was highly unlikely that the (Joint Core Strategies) JCS policies would have a significant direct or indirect impact on European and Ramsar designated sites. However, the report highlighted some areas of uncertainty regarding potential in combination and cumulative effects associated with water resources, water quality, water efficiency, growth and tourism on such sites, because of the dependence on the effectiveness and implementation of mitigation measures and actions required to avoid adverse impact on site integrity. The mitigation measures suggested were: The implementation of green infrastructure developments The allocation of green space to protect specific natural assets and designated sites to be implemented through area action plans. Actions required to remove and/or avoid adverse effect were: The implementation of water infrastructure improvements (for water resources and waste water treatment) and water efficient measures as recommended in the water cycle study, enforced through Anglian Water’s Water Resource Management Plan in ensuring that sufficient water supplies can be made available to meet planned growth and as supported by the position statements issued by Anglian Water, Natural England and the Environment Agency.… The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

‚In the short term, Anglian Water has demonstrated that their existing licensed resources supplying the Greater Norwich area are sufficient to serve projected development beyond the current AMP which ends in 2015, while capping abstractions at Costessey below historic levels. This has been established through an addendum to the original HRA. While a solution to the longer term water resources issue has not been finalised, the process is progressing as agreed, and Anglian Water has submitted a document outlining a range of potential solutions. This is currently subject to discussions with the other bodies…. Under the circumstances, all parties agree that the conclusion of the Habitats Regulations Assessment dated February 2010 remains unchanged, subject to the progress noted above in working towards a resolution of the longer term water resource requirement.‛ 4.4. As such, potential impacts of water abstraction and water disposal are not considered in the information towards an Appropriate Assessment presented in this document. GROUNDWATER FLOWS 4.5. The first potential mechanism of impact is on groundwater flows, namely the potential changes in local groundwater flows, modified through the interception of rainfall, affecting Crostwick Marsh SSSI which is a component site of The Broads SAC and the Broadland SPA/ Ramsar. DISTURBANCE 4.6. Of principal importance to this assessment are: Trampling effects on vegetation and Disturbance of birds. 4.7. The most visible impact on most habitats is direct trampling effects, destroying vegetation, preventing re-growth and compressing soils. Related mechanisms include nutrient enrichment from dog fouling and even directly irresponsible behaviour such as fires and littering.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

4.8. The significance of disturbance is one of the 100 key policy questions for ecological research (Sutherland et al., 2006). A key question in disturbance research is how to scale individual impacts to the population level, which is required when establishing effects on site integrity. The interpretation of disturbance effects is potentially confounded by a range of factors including differences in behavioural responses among species, the impact on individual condition or â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;fitnessâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and consequent impacts on survival and reproduction. Effects are also dependant on the availability of alternative feeding areas and resource availability and weather (Goss-Custard et

al., 2006). 4.9. Among the factors that confound the interpretation of observational studies of disturbance is the potential difference among species in their responses. Thus, some species may fly away or leave an area when disturbed but others may remain but nevertheless feed at a lower rate, with impacts on individual fitness. Some studies may interpret such an absence of an obvious response as tolerance or habituation to disturbance, while the opposite may be true (Gill et al., 2001a). 4.10. Thus, in reviewing the impacts of disturbance on birds a precautionary approach should be applied, with an appreciation of the interplay of factors and difficulties in the scaling from behaviour to individual and population level effects. 4.11. Projecting increases in disturbance in relation to housing is difficult. Although some work has shown a correlation between housing and visitor numbers (e.g. Jones et al., 2003) the predictive models work well for the numbers of visitors arriving by foot but are much less able to show links between housing numbers and density and visitors arriving by car (Liley et al., 2006). A myriad of factors would be expected to determine the numbers of visitors, including general factors such as the weather and economic conditions, more regional factors such as road and rail accessibility, and local factors such as the proximity of toilets and other facilities.

The availability

and/or introduction of alternative facilities that may displace visitor numbers is also a key issue, particularly in ensuring that estimates of visitor impact are made on a consistent basis. 4.12. Even with an understanding of the actual and projected numbers of visitors, the disturbance experienced by individual birds will vary according to local conditions, possibly including proximity, sight lines and the feeding quality of habitats. Generally, however, disturbance which limits food accessibility at critical times of the

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

year, particularly for open-habitat dwelling bird species, as well as disturbances on the breeding grounds, are the most disturbing types of activity. 4.13. Generally, however, visitors to wetland reserves can be appropriately managed by the use of spatial and temporal zoning of activities, screening at sensitive locations and visitor management policies that reflect the site specific conditions and the species potentially affected. Details are provided in Kirby et al. (2004). The RSPB and Wildlife Trusts successfully integrate visitors and nature conservation across a broad range of sites in the UK. Further, the proximity of the disturbance source and its type, substantially affects a bird species response to that disturbance. Disturbance from vehicles along roads adjacent to sites of bird interest may be generally habituated for whereas people walking through an open area can cause significant disturbance to certain species that rely on open habitats with good sight-lines, but this type of disturbance is far less disturbing than someone using a shotgun, for example (see Hill

et al., 1997).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

5 CHARACTERISING CURRENT VISITOR NUMBERS

AND

FUTURE

5.1. To help inform an assessment of the potential scale of visitor increases and thus impacts as a result of the project, this section considers the issue of visitor numbers in further detail. A key resource and source of data are visitor surveys undertaken in 2011 to characterise the community of visitors to The Broads. THE BROADS Overview 5.2. The Broads is a large and very complex area, with numerous protected sites, honeypot tourist attractions including nature reserves, significant boating activity including 4746 private motor cruisers and a fleet of over 855 hire craft, and large and small mooring locations. Total boat movements are reported by the Broads Authority (2010), showing a clear and substantial decline among the hire fleet from 1986 to 2010 (a decline from 16501 movements to 8005) and a stable or possible slight decline over the same time by private craft to 3723 in 2010. 5.3. Estimates of tourist numbers to The Broads and its immediate environs (the area â&#x20AC;&#x161;under the influence of The Broadsâ&#x20AC;&#x203A;) are in the region of 6.9 million per annum of which 84% are day visitors (Broads Authority, 2011, p20). Numbers at specific sites in 2011 include (from Visit England, 2012): 168k at BeWILDerwood, an adventure park for children with a national profile; accessible by road only (www.bewilderwood.co.uk). 30k at Fairhaven Garden Trust, ornamental gardens and garden centre; accessible by road only (www.fairhavengadem.co.uk). 30k at Toad Hall, a small cottage museum run by the Broads Authority and located on How Hill National Nature Reserve. 28k at RPSB Strumpshaw, a flagship reserve accessible by car and rail. 4k at RSPB Berney Marshes, a reserve with difficult road and rail access.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

5.4. The nearest large conurbations to The Broads are: Great Yarmouth, which is characterised as having 94k residents and 41k households and is a major tourism destination with 1.3m staying visitors and 3.7m day-visitors annually (Great Yarmouth BC, 2009). Great Yarmouth is located on the coast at the eastern end of The Broads. Norwich, which is characterised as having 132,000 residents (Norwich City Council, 2011) and 430,000 staying tourists a year (Visit England, 2012). Projections of Future Visitor Numbers 5.5. Visitor survey data were collected from four sites (Hoveton Great Broad, Hickling, Ranworth; and RSPB Strumpshaw) in The Broads in 2011 and are explored more fully in Appendix 2. On average 48% of visitors are from the Norwich and Ipswich postcodes, a figure declining to 36% if the RSPB Strumpshaw reserve is removed from the data, on the basis that it may be more likely to attract more specialist birdwatchers rather than casual visitors. 5.6. More locally, there are few apparent patterns when the data are analysed for the Norwich postcodes of NR1-7 (Appendix 1: Figure 1). The percentage of visitors to each of the four sites ranges from 0% to 4% if RSPB Strumpshaw is excluded and up to 13% if included. The total percentage of visitors from the combined NR1-7 postcodes is on average 15% (range 8-26%). 5.7. These data can be used to create projections for increases in visitor numbers to protected sites, based on projected population growth attributable to development projects and by extrapolation from proportion of visitors from a postcode currently visiting a site. 5.8. For simplicity, it can be assumed that the proposals for the North-east Norwich Growth Area are equivalent to an additional postcode area, based on a figure of 10,000 new dwellings and each of the current Norwich postcodes estimated to comprise 11,000 to 16,000 dwellings. If the current Norwich postcodes contribute C% of visitors to a site (so the average percentage from any one of the seven postcode is [C/7]%), then for a site currently receiving V visitors in total then the increase in the numbers of visitors will be 1/7[C/100xV]. The actual numbers of visitors in future will consequently be V+1/7[C/100xV]. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

5.9. For example, a site with 1000 visitors a year in total, where 28% of visitors are from an NR1-7 postcode, will in future receive approximately 1000 + (1/7)*(28/100)*1000 visitors each year, or 1040 visitors as a consequence of a development equivalent to one new postcode. [To illustrate a range of potential increases, calculated estimates of future visitor numbers are given below (Table 3) according to the current percentage of visitors from Norwich, numbers of new houses and current total visitors (within the range of 1,000 to 30,000, with 30,000 being a value similar to currently experienced by Toad Hall (How Hill NNR) and RSPB Strumpshaw). The NS&OC project, incorporating up to 3,520 proposed dwellings, is most closely equivalent to the estimates for 4000 dwellings. Table 3. Future numbers of visitors based on various levels of current use and future population size. Current Numbers of new dwellings where 10k is equivalent to 1 postcode and each visitor lower value is a fraction of a postcode levels (000s) 1000 dwellings (1/10 of a new postcode)

2000 dwellings (2/10 of a new postcode) 28% of current visitors from NR1-7

4000 dwellings (4/10 of a new postcode)

5000 dwellings (5/10 of a new postcode)

10000 dwellings (1 new postcode)

1,000

1,004

1,008

1,016

1,020

1,040

4,000

4,016

4,032

4,064

4,080

4,160

10,000

10,040

10,080

10,160

10,200

10,400

15,000

15,060

15,120

15,240

15,300

15,600

20,000

20,080

20,160

20,320

20,400

20,800

30,000

30,120

30,240

30,480

30,600

31,200

35% of current visitors from NR1-7 1,000

1,005

1,010

1,020

1,025

1,050

4,000

4,020

4,040

4,080

4,100

4,200

10,000

10,050

10,100

10,200

10,250

10,500

15,000

15,075

15,150

15,300

15,375

15,750

20,000

20,100

20,200

20,400

20,500

21,000

30,000

30,150

30,300

30,600

30,750

31,500

40% of current visitors from NR1-7 1,000

1,006

1,011

1,023

1,029

1,057

4,000

4,023

4,046

4,091

4,114

4,229

10,000

10,057

10,114

10,229

10,286

10,571

15,000

15,086

15,171

15,343

15,429

15,857

20,000

20,114

20,229

20,457

20,571

21,143

30,000

30,171

30,343

30,686

30,857

31,714

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

5.10. In the context of NS&OC the projected values would be in the region of 4000 dwellings or 40% of the numbers for the whole north-east Norwich North-east Norwich Growth Area . A more detailed breakdown of the population numbers on completion of NS&OC is in the region of 7678 residents or fewer than 30% of the average numbers for an individual postcode area. That is, the estimated numbers of additional residents attributable to the NS&OC project are overestimates. 5.11. As an alternative method for exploring increases in visitor numbers, comparison could be made to the whole Norwich City Council population of 132,000 people. As shown by the visitor survey data, between 28 and 40% of visitors at a site come from the combined NR1-7 postcodes (although the figures are not directly comparable, as part of NR7 is within Broadland DC area, but the errors are considered minor). Thus, for a site receiving 30,000 visitors (such as RSPB Strumpshaw or Toad Cottage, How Hill) then between 8,400-12,000 visits are from a population of 132,000; in terms of the ‘Norwich’ population then these visitor numbers equate to 6.3-9% of the ‘Norwich’ population visiting a site. If the population of the growth triangle increases the population by 7k, from 132,000 to 139,000 and these percentages remain the same then the future numbers of visits equate to 8,757 (6.3% of 139,000) to 12,510 (9% of 139,000). 5.12. As an alternative method for exploring increases in visitor numbers, comparison could be made to the whole Norwich City Council population of 132,000 people. As shown by the visitor survey data, between 28 and 40% of visitors at a site come from the combined NR1-7 postcodes (although the figures are not directly comparable, as part of NR7 is within Broadland DC area, but the errors are considered minor). Thus, for a site receiving 30,000 visitors (such as RSPB Strumpshaw or Toad Cottage, How Hill) then between 8,400-12,000 visits are from a population of 132,000; in terms of the ‘Norwich’ population then these visitor numbers equate to 6.3-9% of the ‘Norwich’ population visiting a site. If the population of the growth triangle increases the population by 7k, from 132,000 to 139,000 and these percentages remain the same then the future numbers of visits equate to 8,757 (6.3% of 139,000) to 12,510 (9% of 139,000). 5.13. In the context of NS&OC the projected values would be fewer than 4000 dwellings or 40% of the numbers for the whole north-east Norwich North-east Norwich Growth Area . A more detailed breakdown of the population numbers on completion of NS&OC is in the region of 7678 residents or fewer than 30% of the average numbers The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

for an individual postcode area. That is, the estimated numbers of additional residents attributable to the NS&OC project are overestimates. UNDERSTANDING OF SEASONAL PATTERNS OF USE 5.14. There are no comparative data available on the numbers of visitors in spring versus summer, but almost certainly there are substantially fewer in winter. Evidence to support this supposition includes: 40% of Norfolk tourism businesses having up to 60% ‘spare capacity’ in winter versus 36% of businesses having 30% capacity or less in June (EDP, 2012). A substantially smaller range of motor craft for hire in winter compared to summer; for example Herbert Woods (2012) over 70 craft for hire in summer compared to a winter fleet of 11 and some hire companies do not offer any winter hire. The closure of several nature reserve visitor centres in winter, including both of the Norfolk Wildlife Trust’s centres (Ranworth and Hickling Broads) and all three of the Broads Authority’s visitor centres (How Hill/Toad Cottage, Wroxham/Hoveton and Whitlingham). In the Suffolk Sandlings, although visitor surveys did not report estimates of total numbers of visitors in each season it was clear there were more tourists in summer compared to winter (19% of all visitors in summer were tourists versus 6% in winter).This work also demonstrated that the relative contributions of different activities varied significantly, with dog walking comprising 60% of winter compared to 42% of summer activity, walking and cycling varied less from 24% to 20% and from 6% to 10% respectively (Cruickshanks et al., 2010).

UNDERSTANDING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BEESTON PARK AS MITIGATION 5.15. Proposals for development at NS&OC include the provision of a major new public park at Beeston Park, part of a wider network of 50 hectares of linked parks at NS&OC, involving restoring and conserving Beeston Park, a locally-designated historic parkland, as a country park to serve the wider north-east Norwich area, amongst a range of other green infrastructure provision. This will be available for existing and future residents of the North-east Norwich area and provide a significant The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

recreation resource in an area where there are few at present (and where access to the countryside via public rights of way is poor) and as alterative to The Broads for land-based activities. 5.16. It is likely that the provision of Beeston Park as mitigation will reduce the numbers of future residents – albeit to an undefined extent – from the North-east Norwich Growth Area and existing residents from north Norwich visiting The Broads. It is considered that the resources available in Beeston Park are most likely to be attractive to day visitors who would otherwise use The Broads for dog walking and shorter recreation walks. 5.17. In terms of understanding the likely use of Beeston Park by visitors – and in the context of providing faciltlies for visitors otherwise using The Broads reference is made to the activities listed in The Broads Visitor Survey compared to the activities listed by Handley et al. (2003) as being those used by urban park users (Table 4). There is clear overlap for most activities except those requiring water, beaches and sightseeing; the lack of picknicking as an activity in urban parks may be an artefact of the reviewing process by Handley et al. (2003). Thus, there is clear potential for Beeston Park to act as an alternative resource for the visitors ‘going for a walk’ which comprises one of the principal activities cited by visitors as the motivation for visiting, with 20-29% reporting this as their principal activity. 5.18. As a general resource for visitors, it is likely that Beeston Park will have many other attractive features for visitors, such as being a natural landscape, facilities and character such as spaciousness (Handley et al., 2003). The woodland areas have the potential to be of high value for local visitors in being sufficiently large to create an aesthetic woodland environment and with an open structure (Coles & Bussey, 2000). Beeston Park will be within easy access for residents of the NS&OC area, and this is likely to be a key factor promoting its popularity as supported by several studies which show that easy access on foot is a key driver of the popularity of urban greenspace (Schipperijn et al., 2010.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Table 4. Comparison between the activities of visitors in The Broads versus those indicated as important for users of urban parks (from Handley et al., 2003); ‘X’ denotes a popular ativity for urban parks. Visitor Survey Handley et al. (2003) Activities Strumpshaw Ranworth Hickling Hoveton Great Broad Going for a walk 21.5% 27.0% 28.6% 19.7% X Walking a dog 0.0% 3.1% 0.0% 0.0% X Recreational cycling 0.0% 4.0% 3.2% 0.0% X Bird/nature watching 66.7% 4.6% 44.4% 64.6% X Beach activities (e.g. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% swimming, paddling) Sailing, boating or 0.0% 18.3% 12.7% 1.6% power boating Visiting an attraction 2.1% 11.8% 0.0% 11.4% Sightseeing 6.3% 22.0% 3.2% 2.8% Picnicking 3.5% 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% Other (please specify 0.0% 4.8% 7.9% 0.0% below)

5.19. The GNDP Joint Core Strategy and GNDP Green Infrastructure Delivery Plan identify the need for a large scale green space in the North-east Norwich Growth Area such as a country park aiming, inter alia, to ‚ensure no adverse impacts on the Broads SAC‛. 5.20. In the context of the HRA process, the proposals for Beeston Park satisfy the criteria proposed by Tyldesley and Hoskins (2008) to be considered as mitigation and can be included within the Stage 2: Appropriate Assessment (see 2. The Assessment Process and Methodology: Process) 5.21. Beeston Park comprises 43.1 hectares of restored parkland and enhanced woodland and will provide a new recreational facility for local residents and visitors alike, as well as an area of high quality habitat for a number of species. The key features of the park are: 29.5 hectares of restored parkland north and south of Beeston Hall reverted from its current use as agricultural land to a mosaic of scattered trees and grassland. A range of new walking and fitness routes, areas for formal and informal play alongside space for picnicking, wildlife interest areas and other facilities such as a bandstand or performance space and café. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

13.6 hectares enhanced semi-natural woodland plus a new landscaped edge around the south and west of Beeston Park providing play space, walking routes, SuDS features and opportunities for a forest garden incorporating fruit and nut trees, herbs and vegetables. This buffered woodland fringe will also maintain the existing commuting route for bats and provide an enhanced foraging habitat on the outside of the woodland. Several water features including space to accommodate 13,300m3 water as part of NS&OCs Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS), as well as attenuation basins and swales incorporated into a new landscaped edge to the park. These will form an integral part of the NS&OC SuDS network, as well as providing focal points for wildlife and for education.

5.22. Beeston Park will be phased in accordance with the Green Infrastructure Statement and the Phasing Plan, submitted as part of the NS&OC planning application (Table 5). Table 5. Phasing plan for the restoration of Beeston Park and its provision as a recreation facility. Project Phase 0 (prePhase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 sub-area construction) Beeston Arable reversion, Beeston Park (south) Beeston Park Completion of Park & parkland and Red Hall Farm fully opened to Beeston Park Red Hall restoration and opened to public public access; and Red Hall Farm woodland access; development development of Farm enhancement of detailed park plan Beeston Park and according to commences at with local Red Hall Farm detailed park Beeston Park with stakeholders; according to plan six months growing completion of detailed park plan season prior to woodland construction. enhancement and landscaped buffer.

5.23. A core principle of the business model of Beyond Green, the promoter, is that the promoter stays involved over the long term as master developer, land and property owner, estate and asset manager and commercial operator at NS&OC. This means setting and maintaining standards over multiple development phases and market cycles and actively managing assets for best sustainability outcomes and value â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and as long term investments. As such, and because of the nature and multifunctionality of Beeston Park and other green spaces at NS&OC, long-term management of Beeston Park will be vital.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

5.24. Management will therefore: allow for the provision of core maintenance functions alongside community functions; ensure public use of spaces in perpetuity; provide spaces that are free for local residents at the point of consumption; be financially sustainable through a range of mechanisms including optimising opportunities for revenue generation on site; maintain flexibility to ensure high quality management of the full range of multifunctional green and blue spaces through a range of partners; accord with NS&OCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s green infrastructure principles and work towards the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability including those which require changes in behaviour and lifestyle; and link with management of the wider site.

5.25. While management responsibility is yet to be determined, it is anticipated that the involvement of a number of partners will be required including Sprowston Town Council, Broadland District Council, Norfolk County Council and potentially local businesses, service companies, social enterprises, entrepreneurs and more. CURRENT AND FUTURE NUMBERS OF VISITORS TO THE NORTH NORFOLK COAST 5.26. North Norfolk receives substantially greater numbers of visitors annually compared to The Broads. Annual estimates of visits are: 7.7m, day only and; 5.5m overnight (Rayment et al., 2000). The numbers of visitors to individual sites/attractions also substantially exceed the maximum numbers in The Broads (excluding the BeWiLDerwood adventure park).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

5.27. Several individual sites appear to be substantially more popular than the most popular in The Broads (data from Liley, 2008): Seven sites reported visitor numbers greater than 100k in 2005; The RSPB reserves of Titchwell reported 89,210 visitors (compared to 30k for RSPB Strumpshaw), Cley reported 100k, Lady Anneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Drive Holkham reported 110k and Sheringham Park 180k.

5.28. Projections of the increases in the actual number and proportion of visitors attributable to the North-east Norwich Growth Area and NS&OC are not available, but it is considered likely that they will be less than for The Broads. SUMMARY OF VISITOR PROJECTIONS 5.29. As projected from current visitor data, the actual numbers of additional visitors to sites in The Broads are likely to be relatively few, less than 4% at most for the most heavily visited sites with all 10k new dwellings completed. Further, the presence of Beeston Park as a local recreational resource will serve to reduce these numbers, both directly and by displacing some existing visits. 5.30. Although no data are available for North Norfolk, its greater popularity as a visitor area and greater distance from Norwich make it likely that the contribution of the North-east Norwich Growth Area to visitor pressure will be substantially less compared to The Broads. 5.31. No data are available to generate seasonal projections, especially with respect to sites away from the major centres, but in qualitative terms the numbers of visitors in winter will clearly be substantially fewer than in summer. However, in terms of developing an understanding of impacts and informing an Appropriate Assessment of impacts it is considered sufficient to base the assessment on an understanding that numbers of visitors will be greater, but not substantially greater. At present however it is not possible to consider that a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;not substantially greaterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; number of visitors will not result in significant impacts.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

6 SCOPING OF SITES SITES WITHIN 40KM 6.1. As a guide for the sites to be considered within the scoping exercise, reference is made to the HRA produced for the Joint Core Strategy (Mott Macdonald, 2010), which identified housing delivery and associated disturbance as being a potential impact for the following sites: The Broads SAC; Broadland SPA and The Broads Ramsar Site; Breckland SPA & SAC; Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA; Winterton â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Horsey Dunes SAC; North Norfolk Coast SPA, SAC and Ramsar Site. These sites all lie within a 40km but are only a sub-set of the designated sites within this radius. 6.2. As a screening exercise here a 40km radius is used to identify sites (Table 6), as an approximate mid-way distance from the large conurbations of Cambridge and Ipswich. This distance is twice the distance used as a buffer in the HRA of the Breckland Core Strategy (Liley et al., 2008; p 10), a distance determined from experience of visitor survey work in relation to designated sites in the New Forest. This distance is similar to the 50km cut-off as the distance travelled by day-visitors used by Liley (2008) in assessing housing impacts on the North Norfolk Coast, although he acknowledged that housing further away may be relevant. Although incombination effects with housing plans with other areas is possible, guidance is taken from Mott Macdonald (2010, p18) and consideration is predominantly given to neighbouring local authorities. Table 6. International sites within 40km of the project area. Site name Status Euclidian Summary of distance designated features (km) The Broads Ramsar 2.9 Wetland habitats, site plants birds, and other animals. The Broads SAC 2.9 Wetland vegetation, plants and other animals.

Broadland

SPA

2.9

Wetland birds.

River Wensum

SAC

Aquatic vegetation and animals.

Norfolk

SAC

Wetland

vegetation

Vulnerabilities (from Mott Macdonald, 2008) None cited, but probably as for SAC with disturbance likely to be a factor. Sea level rise, abstraction reducing flows in northern rivers, eutrophication from sewage and agricultural runoff None cited, but probably as for The Broads SAC with disturbance likely to be a factor also Development on flood plain, agricultural eutrophication and run-off, abstraction, non-native species Reduction in management

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Site name

Status

Euclidian distance (km)

Valley Fens

Summary of designated features

Vulnerabilities (from Mott Macdonald, 2008)

and plants; invertebrates Wetland and estuarine birds

and groundwater abstraction

Breydon Water

SPA

Breydon Water Great Yarmouth North Denes Winterton – Horsey Dunes

Ramsar site SPA

SAC

Dune habitats and great crested newts

Paston Barn

SAC

Barbastelle bat

Overstrand Cliffs The Wash and North Norfolk Coast (

SAC

Soft cliff vegetation

SAC

North Norfolk Coast

SAC

North Norfolk Coast North Norfolk Coast

SPA

Coastal and marine habitats and vegetation; common seal, grey seal and otter Coastal and marine habitats and vegetation; common seal, otter and great crested newt and petalwort Wetland and coastal birds

Ramsar Site

Breckland

SPA

Breckland

SAC

SPA

SAC

Benacre East Bavents Benacre East Bavents

Wetland and estuarine birds Breeding little terns

Coastal and marine habitats and vegetation; birds and other animals Heathland birds Heathland vegetation and habitats; Breckland meres and alluvial forest; great crested newt and barbastelle bat Wetland birds

Coastal habitat and forest

lagoon alluvial

Disturbance to a high tide roost of wading birds, drainage of wet grassland, ‘pressure’ from development of Great Yarmouth None cited, but probably as for the SPA Reduced accretion, predators and disturbance from people and dogs Cessation of erosion and accretion due to sea defences, beach feeding with inappropriate sand, water abstraction and visitors causing disturbance, erosion and fires Development of a visitor centre Coastal protection and artificial drainage Sea level rise, storm surges, erosion, abstraction and disturbance from tourism

Sea level rise, storm surges, erosion, abstraction and disturbance from tourism

Sea level rise, storm surges, erosion, abstraction and disturbance from tourism Sea level rise, storm surges, erosion, abstraction and disturbance from tourism Nitrogen deposition, egg collecting. Reduction in grazing and cutting, nitrogen deposition, recreation, groundwater abstraction

Sea level rise and erosion.

None cited, but probably as for the SPA

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Site name

Lagoon Redgrave to South Lopham Fens Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens

Status

Euclidian distance (km)

Summary of designated features

Vulnerabilities (from Mott Macdonald, 2008)

Ramsar site

Wetland habitat and a spider

None cited, but probably as for the Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens SAC

SAC

Wetland vegetation; Desmoulinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s whorl snail

Loss of management, abstraction drainage

traditional water and land

SCOPING-OUT OF INTERNATIONAL SITES 6.3. As justified in Section 5: Characterising Potential Impacts, the key likely potential impacts to be considered here are: recreational pressure and disturbance effects. Potential impacts of water abstraction and water disposal are not considered here, although potential impacts of changes to groundwater flows in the local vicinity are assessed. 6.4. As a scoping exercise to identify which sites are potentially at risk, the criterion for a site to be scoped-out is that it is: Likely to be unattractive to visitors from Norwich at least in relative terms. This may be via a combination of isolation by distance in absolute terms, the low relative increase in the numbers of visitors compared to those attributable to nearer conurbations or the absence of reasonable attractions for recreational users from Norwich. 6.5. An element of opinion is used in assigning this criterion, based on the available information on visitor activity. For example, the Breckland sites are scoped-out on the basis of work by Dolman et al. (2008) who undertook a survey of visitors actually using semi-natural areas as opposed to more formal tourist attractions in Breckland and determined that 43% of visitors were from within 5km and another 20% from 510km. Against the proposed 9000 housing allocation for the Breckland District Council, it is unlikely that visitors from Norwich will contribute significant numbers of visitors in relative or absolute terms. Other factors that make sites less attractive include limited car parking and the absence of toilets and cafes.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

6.6. Against these criteria the majority of the international sites are scoped-out (Table 7). Table 7. Summary of sites: scoped-in and scoped-out. Site name Status Euclidean Justification distance from north-east Norwich Scoped-Out Norfolk Valley SAC 11 Likely to be unattractive to visitors in the main, Fens lacking sophisticated facilities. Some sites privately owned. The closest site is Buxton Heath managed by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust where facilities for visitors are few, with limited parking. It is not promoted as a site to access. Great Yarmouth SPA 26 Additional numbers of residents minor relative to North Denes proposed housing allocations of 4000 in the Great Yarmouth Borough Council area. Further, in the context of Great Yarmouth as a major tourist resort additional visitor pressure is unlikely to contribute significantly. In 2008 1.3 million staying visitors and 3.7 million day visitors (GYBC 2009). The presence of the designated feature â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a colony of little terns â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is advertised by the local tourism website and is protected by RSPB volunteers (Enterprise GY, 2012) Paston Barn SAC 20 Distant from the project area and with little attraction to casual visitors. Overstrand SAC 26 Distant from the project area with designated Cliffs features of little attraction and inaccessible to casual visitors. The Wash and SAC 38 Largely to the west part of the North Norfolk North Norfolk coast, this site is scoped-out on the basis of Coast distance and that substantial parts are managed as nature reserves with subsequent controls on visitor access. Breckland SPA 36 Distant from the project area with available data showing some 63% of visitors from within 10km. Additional numbers of residents minor relative to proposed housing allocations in the Breckland DC area. Some parts include visitor facilities but majority of site remote from facilities. Breckland SAC 36 Distant from the project area with available data showing some 63% of visitors from within 10km. Additional numbers of residents minor relative to proposed housing allocations in the Breckland DC area. Some parts include visitor facilities but majority of site remote from facilities. Benacre to East SPA 38 Distant from the project area and with other Bavents schemes closer but not considered likely to cause impacts (Grant, 2010). Benacre to East SAC 38 Distant from the project area and with other Bavents Lagoon schemes closer by not considered likely to cause impacts (Grant, 2010). The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Site name

Status

Redgrave to South Lopham Fens Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens Scoped-In The Broads Broadland The Broads Ramsar Site River Wensum

Ramsar site

Breydon Water Breydon Water Ramsar Site Winterton â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Horsey Dunes The North Norfolk Coast The North Norfolk Coast The North Norfolk Coast

SAC

Euclidean distance from north-east Norwich 39

Justification

Distant from the project area with little attraction to casual visitors. Distant from the project area with little attraction to casual visitors.

SAC SPA Ramsar Site SAC

2.9km 2.9km 2.9km

Part of a major tourist area. Part of a major tourist area. Part of a major tourist area.

6km

SPA

21km

Ramsar Site SAC

21km

SAC

37km

Potentially used for recreation but facilities very limited. Part of a major tourist area but with very limited facilities. Part of a major tourist area but with very limited facilities. 22km distant, part of a major tourist area with some visitor facilities. A major tourist area.

SPA

37km

A major tourist area.

Ramsar Site

37km

A major tourist area.

22km

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

7 DESIGNATED FEATURES OF SCOPED-IN SITES OVERVIEW OF SITES 7.1. Ten sites are scoped-in for the HRA on the basis that they are close to north-east Norwich and potentially close enough and likely to attract visitors: The Broads complex, comprising The Broads SAC, The Broads Ramsar Site and the Broadland SPA;

The River Wensum SAC;

Breydon Water SPA and Breydon Water Ramsar Site;

Winterton â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Horsey Dunes SAC; and

The North Norfolk Coast SAC and Ramsar Site and the North Norfolk Coast SPA.

RIVER WENSUM SAC 7.2. The River Wensum SAC is designated from the headwaters near Fakenham downstream to Norwich, with the designated boundary in most parts restricted to the channel and banks but including adjacent marsh and fen in some parts of the valley. The limit of the designation is Costessey Mill. 7.3. Collectively the designated features cover vegetation, individual plant species, birds and other animals including invertebrates: Vegetation, both aquatic and bankside. Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae); calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae; and water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation. Animals. White-clawed (or Atlantic stream) crayfish Austropotamobius

pallipes; Desmoulin`s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana; brook lamprey Lampetra planeri; and bullhead Cottus gobio. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

THE BROADS SAC AND RAMSAR SITE, BROADLAND SPA Overview 7.4. The Broads’ international sites form an extensive network along river valleys in east Norfolk and north Suffolk. The Broads SAC is comprised of 27 component sites and the SPA from 26 component sites; as understood the Ramsar site is comprised of 28 component sites. 7.5. Collectively the designated features cover vegetation, individual plant species, birds and other animals including invertebrates: Aquatic vegetation. Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.; and natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition-type vegetation. Fen vegetation. Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae; alkaline fens; Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae); transition mires and quaking bogs; Woodland. Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (AlnoPadion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae) Plants. Fen orchid Liparis loeselii and other rare plants Animals. Otter, Desmoulin’s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana, Anisus

vorticulus, and other invertebrates Birds. Overwintering species (pink footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus, wigeon Anas penelope, shoveler Anas clypeata, gadwall Anas strepera, Bewick’s swan Cygnus columbianus, whooper swan Cygnus cygnus, hen harrier Circus cyaneus, great bittern Botaurus stellaris, ruff Philomachus

pugnax); overwintering assemblage; breeding birds (marsh harrier Circus aeruginosus).

Crostwick Marsh SSSI 7.6. The only component site in close proximity to the site is Crostwick Marsh SSSI, a component of The Broads SAC, The Broads Ramsar site and The Broadland SPA. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Crostwick Marsh is 2.9km north of the site boundary. Other component sites are not listed in detail here, but brief site descriptions are provided in Appendix 1. 7.7. As described by Doarkes (1995), the upper reaches of the Bure support soligenous sloping fens dominated by rush pasture and fen meadow communities. Crostwick Marsh itself is an area of unimproved meadow, species rich fen meadow and carr woodland, situated in a tributary valley of the Bure. In places the valley is quite steeply sloping, which has encouraged the development of a series of intergrading vegetation types, from dry calcicolous vegetation on the upper slopes, through damp grassland, species rich fen meadow and tall herb fen in the valley bottom. The valley bottom tall herb fen is a topogenous sump wetland, and the remainder are thought to be predominantly fed by calcium rich spring water seeping from the exposed Upper Chalk on the valley slopes. 7.8. The dominant community on Crostwick Marshes is B9 (which is equivalent to the NVC type M22 and consequently satisfies the criterion for the Annex I Alkaline Fen):

Juncus subnodulosus-Cirsium palustre fen meadow. This community is rare in Broadland, and Crostwick Marshes supports approximately half of the total area. Grasses, small sedges and abundant small herbs characterise the sward. Approximately one-third of the area is woodland or scrub, most of which has developed since 1946. 7.9. Visitor access is limited, with roadside parking for fewer than six cars and access from nearby conurbations on foot being difficult. A public footpath runs through the north part of the site. BREYDON WATER SPA AND RAMSAR SITE 7.10. Breydon Water is a stretch of sheltered estuary formed by the River Yare upstream of Great Yarmouth, some 5km long and more than 1.5km wide in places. 7.11. Public access is limited to footpaths running along either bank. The navigation channel is used by pleasure craft to access between the north and south Broads, but away from the channel there is very little boat traffic due to the shallow water overlying the mudflats. 7.12. The designated features are primarily birds but the Ramsar Site citation mentions rare and scarce plants:

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Birds. Breeding birds (common tern); wintering birds (avocet Recurvirostra

avosetta; Bewickâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s swan Cygnus columbianus bewickii; lapwing Vanellus vanellus; pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus; wigeon Anas penelope; shoveler Anas clypeata; golden plover Pluvialis apricaria; and black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa islandica); passage birds (ruff Philomachus pugnax); and the whole waterfowl overwintering assemblage.

Plants. Scarce plants of saltmarsh and wetland.

WINTERTON-HORSEY DUNES SAC 7.13. The SAC designation covers primarily sand dune vegetation of various types, with the great crested newt the only designated animal: Dune habitats and vegetation. Atlantic decalcified fixed dunes (CallunoUlicetea); humid dune slacks; embryonic shifting dunes; shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (`white dunes`). Animals. Great crested newt Triturus cristatus.

NORTH NORFOLK COAST SPA, SAC AND RAMSAR SITE 7.14. The international sites of the North Norfolk Coast extend along much of the coast with adjacent marine areas from Weybourne westwards. 7.15. Collectively the designated features cover vegetation, individual plant species, birds and other animals including invertebrates: Coastal habitats and vegetation. Coastal lagoons; perennial vegetation of stony banks; Mediterranean and thermo-Atlantic halophilous scrubs (Sarcocornetea fruticosi); embryonic shifting dunes; shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (`white dunes`); fixed dunes with herbaceous vegetation (`grey dunes`); humid dune slacks; and dunes with

Hippophae rhamnoides. Plants. Petalwort Petalophyllum ralfsii, other scarce plants and a lichen. Animals. Harbour seal Phoca vitulina; natterjack toad Bufo calamita, great crested newt; otter; and invertebrates. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Birds. Wintering (whole assemblage); passage (knot Calidris canutus islandica; ringed plover , Charadrius hiaticula; and bar-tailed godwit , Limosa

lapponica lapponica); breeding (sandwich tern Sterna (Thalasseus) sandvicensis sandvicensis; common tern Sterna hirundo hirundo; little tern , Sterna albifrons albifrons); wintering (pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus; dark-bellied brent goose Branta bernicla bernicla; wigeon Anas penelope and pintail Anas acuta).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

8 STAGE 1: TESTS OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OVERVIEW 8.1. This and later sections are arranged by the mechanism of impact, with each site (and designated feature) discussed in turn as identified by the scoping exercise (Table 8). Table 8. Requirement for a Stage 1: test of likely significant effect and the mechanism of potential impact. ‘Required’ denotes whether a site is considered against each potential mechanism of impact. International Site Potential Impact Groundwater flows Disturbance River Wensum SAC Required The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Required Required Broadland SPA Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site Required Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA Required Winterton – Horsey Dunes SAC Required North Norfolk Coast SAC Required North Norfolk Coast SPA Required

8.2. For the purposes of brevity and the reduction of repetition, the individual ecological features of significance are grouped within the broad classes as in ‘Section 4: Designated Features of Scoped-in Sites’, unless they can be adequately scoped-out here (at Stage 1). Detailed considerations of the designated features are provided in Stage 2, as required. GROUNDWATER FLOWS 8.3. The Stage 1: Test of Likely Significant Effect considers water disposal in relation to: Crostwick Marsh SSSI as a component site of The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, and the Broadland SPA 8.4. The hydrogeological map of the area (1:125,000, BGS 1978 Northern East Anglia) shows that the groundwater level in the Chalk aquifer at the site approximately coincides with the base of the Norwich Crag and top of the Chalk and is at approximately between 15m and 20m below ground level, which is equivalent to about between 8m and 15m above OD. The groundwater flow direction across the site indicated by the groundwater contours on the map is generally from the southwest to the northeast towards an unnamed tributary of the Crostwick Beck that is located approximately 1.0km to the east of the site. From there the unnamed

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

tributary flows in a generally northerly direction before its confluence with the Crostwick Beck some 4km to the northeast of the site, after which the beck flows to the east. The Crostwick Marsh SSSI is situated about 1km upstream (west) from the confluence and about 2.9km north of the site. 8.5. Based on the hydrogeology it is considered that the major component of groundwater flow from beneath the site area will travel north-east and any ground and surface water interaction will take place either towards the un-named tributary or further downstream in Crostwick Beck. The component of groundwater recharge (infiltration) from below the site reaching the Crostwick Beck near the SSSI or upstream of it will be very small indeed, if not negligible. 8.6. Besides this there is a thick unsaturated zone between the ground surface and the groundwater table consisting of fine grained granular soil deposits comprising Brickearth, Glacial Sand and Gravel and Norwich Crag that will provide major attenuation of any potential contaminants in the surface water run-off from the site as it moves through any infiltration based SuDS scheme. Much of the runoff will be from roofs and non-vehicular hard-standings such as paths etc, but even so additional safeguards will be provided where necessary such as sediment traps, settlement ponds and petrol / oil interceptors and reed beds in the basins. 8.7. It is considered that there will be no significant adverse impact on the groundwater quality and quantity with respect to the springs that feed the Crostwick Marsh SSSI, and therefore it is not necessary to undertake an appropriate assessment with respect to groundwater. That is, groundwater flows passes Stage 1: Test of Likely Significant Effects, and an Appropriate Assessment is not required and is not considered further. DISTURBANCE 8.8. The Stage 1: Test of Likely Significant Effect considers disturbance in relation to: The River Wensum SAC;

The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Broadland SPA;

Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site;

Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC; and The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site.

River Wensum SAC 8.9. There are few visitor or recreation facilities along the River Wensum. Much of the designated area is in private ownership, with restrictions on access, fishing and canoeing. Public access to water is limited to a few locations, such as an informal access point near The Swan public house in Ringland. Footpaths run along the banks for limited sections. 8.10. Further, the designated features are considered to be relatively insensitive to disturbance, requiring actual water-based recreation for impacts to occur. 8.11. Given these restrictions on public access and its low attraction to visitors, it is considered unlikely that there would be an impact on site integrity. That is, is it considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on the River Wensum SAC. The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Broadland SPA 8.12. The Broads is a major tourism area. Its international sites are variously comprised of 28 component sites, with a diverse array of wetland and aquatic habitats. Some areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; including component sites â&#x20AC;&#x201C; receive substantial numbers of visitors and are subject to both land- and water-based recreational activities. Substantial parts are, however, without public access or with access restricted to public footpaths and/or by impassable terrain. 8.13. The distribution of designated features is wide, with some restricted to fewer than three protected sites and others of wide occurrence within and outside of designated site boundaries. 8.14. Given the substantial numbers of visitors and the diversity of designated features both within and outside of protected sites it cannot be concluded that there will not be an effect on site integrity and an Appropriate Assessment is required for disturbance effects on The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Broadland SPA.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site 8.15. Breydon Water is the only crossing point between the north and south Broads and consequently has a busy navigation channel. Land access is limited to public footpaths along its edges, with very limited car access to the site. 8.16. However, given that wading birds (actually a range of waterfowl including wildfowl species) are potentially very sensitive to disturbance and it is known that there is a potentially vulnerable high tide roost for an aggregation of waders it cannot be concluded that there will not be a significant effect on site integrity and an Appropriate Assessment is required for disturbance effects on Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site. Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC 8.17. Recreation pressure has been documented as having a potentially deleterious effect on the dune vegetation (Boorman, 1977; Anderson, 1995). Although public access to the dune system is relatively limited with three or so car parks, the general area is popular. 8.18. As such it cannot be concluded that there will not be a significant effect on site integrity and an Appropriate Assessment is required for disturbance effects on Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC. North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site 8.19. The North Norfolk Coast is popular with visitors and tourists throughout the year, with the attraction spanning the autumn and winter bird migration period, the overwintering period, and the summer period to appreciate the beaches, dunes and wetlands. It comprises a diverse array of designated sites and designated features, including some which occur both within and outside of the designated boundaries. 8.20. As such it cannot be concluded that there will not be a significant effect on site integrity and an Appropriate Assessment is required for disturbance effects on the North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

SUMMARY OF STAGE 1: TESTS OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 8.21. A summary of the Stage 1: Tests of Likely Significant Effects is presented below (Table 9). The principal potential effects are: The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, Broadland SPA –disturbance.

Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site –disturbance.

Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC – disturbance.

North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site – disturbance. Table 9. Summary of the Stage 1: Tests of likely significant effects. ‘’indicates no significant effect and ‘X’ denotes a significant effect possible and consequently a requirement for an Appropriate Assessment. Feature Groundwater Flows Disturbance River Wensum SAC   All features The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, Broadland SPA  Fen vegetation types X  Aquatic vegetation X  Woodland X  Rare plants X  Fen orchid X  Rare invertebrates X  Otter X  Raptors X  Waders X  Wildfowl including X swans  Bittern X Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site  Rare plants X  Waders X  Wildfowl including X swans Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC  Dune vegetation X  Great crested newt X North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site  Coastal vegetation and X habitats  Plants X  Animals X  Birds X

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

STAGE 2: APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT

9.1.

The Appropriate Assessment follows the same structure as the Stage 1: Tests of Significant Effects, being arranged by mechanisms with each site then considered in turn as appropriate; here, the relevant designated features are considered in detail where required.

9.2.

Impacts relating to disturbance are considered for: The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Broadland SPA;

Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site;

Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC; and

North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site.

THE BROADS SAC AND RAMSAR SITE, THE BROADLAND SPA Fen Vegetation 9.3.

Four types of designated fen vegetation occur in The Broads. For the general visitor they are unlikely to be particularly attractive locations to visit, including very wet underfoot conditions, Cladium dominated areas are particularly unpleasant to traverse due to its serrated blades and many Molinia meadows can be very tussocky and wet; alkaline fens and mires are also very wet and difficult to cross. Also, many areas of these vegetation types are on protected sites and difficult to access, and although some places such as Burgh Common are accessible via public footpaths there are few attractions for the general visitor.

9.4.

In terms of the management of fen vegetation the key factors are considered to be management through grazing, cutting or other disturbance (Doarkes, 1995). Factors attributable to visitors â&#x20AC;&#x201C; such as trampling or eutrophication from dog fouling â&#x20AC;&#x201C; are not cited as being issues in fen management.

9.5.

As such it is considered unlikely that sites with these designated fen vegetation types will be exposed to substantial visitor pressure even if there were an increase in the numbers of general visitors overall to The Broads.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

9.6.

Thus this study concludes that recreational disturbance will not affect these designated fen vegetation types and consequently the integrity of The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site will not be affected (Table 10). Table 10. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on fen vegetation in The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site. Feature Distribution / Occurrence (from ELP, 2010) Impact of recreational disturbance Alkaline fens. Ant Valley: small number of samples from Catfield No impact on Fen, Broad Fen near Dilham and Smallburgh Fen. site integrity. Bure Valley, lower: scattered samples near Horning (north bank of Bure), Horning Marshes and Barton Broad including Hall Fen. Bure Valley, upper: scattered locations, Upton Broad, Woodbastwick Fen and Marshes and Catfield Fen. Thurney Valley: scattered samples in vicinity of Hickling Broad and Horsey Mere. Waveney Valley: single sample. Yare Valley: two samples, one on Langley Fen and one on Duncanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Marsh near Thurton Calcareous fens Ant Valley: clusters of samples, from Horning No impact on with Cladium Marshes, Reedham Marsh, Catfield Fen and nearby site integrity. mariscus and areas, Barton Broad, Sutton Fen, Barton Fen, and species of the Common Fen and Broad Fen near Dilham. Caricion Bure Valley: clusters of samples, at Burgh Common, davallianae. Decoy Carr, Upton Broad, Ward Marsh and Ranworth Marshes, Bure Marshes, Horning, Woodbastwick Fen and Marshes, and Reedham Marsh. Thurne Valley: Clusters of samples around Hickling Broad and its channels, Horsey Mere and Breydon Marshes, and Martham Broad. Waveney Valley: single sample, near Oulton Broad Yare valley: single sample on Langley Marsh, with concentrations at Rockland Marsh, Wheatfen, Strumpshaw Marsh, Surlingham Marsh and Surlingham Broad. Transition Mires Ant Valley: mostly scattered but with apparent No impact on and Quaking concentrations at Barton Broad and Catfield Fen; site integrity. Bogs. other locations are Reedham Marsh, Horning Marshes, Sutton Fen and East Ruston Allotment. Molinia meadows Ant Valley: scattered locations, near Woodbastwick No impact on on calcareous, Fen and Marshes, Catfield Fen and Barton Broad. site integrity. peaty or clayey- Bure valley: scattered locations, Burgh Common, silt-laden soils Upton Broad, Ranworth Broad and Repps Level (Molinion and Woodbastwick Fen and Marshes. caeruleae). Thurne Valley: Repps Level, Mrs Myhillâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Marsh and marshes east of Hickling Broad Waveney Valley: small number of samples at Barnby Marsh and Fritton Marshes. Yare Valley: small number of samples from Langley marshes, Buckenham marshes, Strumpshaw Common and Strumpshaw Fen.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Woodland 9.7.

For many visitors, alluvial woodland is probably an unattractive habitat to visit, and in terms of vulnerability to visitor disturbance, alluvial woodland is likely to be robust. It is not a particularly easy habitat to traverse, being variously wet and/or with a dense understorey of fallen branches and potentially nettles in drier situations. Extensive areas also occur in areas without public access, both within and probably outside of protected sites.

9.8.

Given the extent of the habitat and the low likelihood that the habitat is used for recreation it is considered that any increase in the numbers of visitors to The Broads will have a negligible impact on these habitats.

9.9.

As such, it is considered that recreational disturbance from increased numbers of visitors will not affect the designated woodland types, and consequently it is concluded that the integrity of The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site will not be adversely affected (Table 11). Table 11. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreational disturbance and pressure on alluvial forest vegetation in The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site. Feature Distribution / Occurrence (from JNCC, 2007) Impact of recreational disturbance Alluvial forests The complex of sites in the Broads of East Anglia No impact on with Alnus contains the largest blocks of alder Alnus glutinosa site integrity. glutinosa and wood in England. Within the complex complete Fraxinus successional sequences occur from open water excelsior (Alno- through reedswamp to alder woodland, which has Padion, Alnion developed on fen peat. incanae, Salicion albae).

Aquatic Vegetation 9.10. The two aquatic vegetation and habitat types are represented in both large water bodies – several broads – and also smaller ditches and other pools in the north Broads. Historically, many broads have been subjected to diffuse water pollution from agriculture and boat activity (George, 1992) but recent improvements have improved water quality and consequently the local conservation status of the vegetation. With respect to ‘oligo-mesotrophic water’ there are two issues considered relevant to their current management: reductions in salinity and ochre and diffuse agricultural pollution (Homan & White, 2008); and the cutting of aquatic vegetation to facilitate navigation at Hickling Broad (Ledoux et al., 2000).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

9.11. The pollution impacts listed by Homan and White (2008) are unrelated to visitor pressure. The cutting of aquatic vegetation is a management activity in response to current navigation demands and is under scrutiny by a number of stakeholders (Ledoux et al., 2000). It is considered unlikely that increasing the numbers of residents in the North-east Norwich Growth Area would readily influence these stakeholders and result in a new cutting regime. As such, it is considered that an increased population in north-east Norwich will not result in changes in management and an impact on site integrity (Table 12). Table 12. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on aquatic vegetation in The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site. Feature Distribution / Occurrence (from JNCC, 2007) Impact of recreational disturbance Hard oligo- The core of this interest is the Thurne Broads and No impact on mesotrophic waters particularly Hickling Broad. Within the Broads site integrity. with benthic examples of Chara vegetation are also found vegetation of Chara within fen pools (turf ponds) and fen and marsh spp. ditch systems. Natural eutrophic Many of the broads are examples of natural No impact on lakes with eutrophic lakes as are some ditch systems. site integrity. Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition-type vegetation.

Rare Plants 9.12. Many rare plants are associated with ditches and wet and difficult terrain where casual visitors are unlikely to encounter them. Many are found on nature reserves (Beckett & Bull, 1999) where disturbance is likely to be tightly controlled. With respect to privately owned sites, future management prescriptions are focussed on appropriate physical management rather than aspects of visitor management. For example, the Norfolk biodiversity action plan for Floodplain and Coastal Grazing Marsh – which contains many ditches in The Broads – is focussed towards providing landowner advice, control of water levels and work related to flood defence (Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership, 2008). Likewise, the key principles of fen management and restoration – including important features such as turf ponds – is based on active management of vegetation rather than aspects related to visitor pressure. 9.13.

As such, it is considered that recreational disturbance will not affect the abundance and distribution of rare plants and consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site will be unaffected (Table 13).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Table 13. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on rare plants in The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site. Feature Distribution in The Impact of recreational Broads disturbance Outstanding assemblage of Numerous sites No impact on site integrity. rare plants

Fen Orchid 9.14.

Fen orchid is a very small plant of limited appeal to casual visitors. The sites where it occurs are all managed as SSSIs and are not advertised widely. The terrain where it occurs is wet and unattractive to general visitors.

9.15. As such, it is considered that that recreational disturbance will not affect the abundance and distribution of fen orchid and consequently the integrity of The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site will be unchanged (Table 14). Table 14. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on fen orchid in The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site. Feature Distribution in The Broads Impact of recreational disturbance Fen orchid Liparis Three sites only No impact on site integrity.

loeselii

Rare Invertebrates 9.16. The Ramsar Citation lists the outstanding assemblage of rare invertebrates within The Broads. 9.17. The most charismatic species are the Norfolk hawker Aeshna isosceles and the swallowtail Papilio machoan and both are fully protected, thus there should be no general collecting pressure. The vast majority of other important species are â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;obscureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and consequently not appealing to general visitors. For the vast majority of species the key habitats are either aquatic, in small waterbodies, or wet and otherwise difficult terrain, where recreational pressure will be low. 9.18. As such, it is considered that recreational disturbance will not affect the invertebrate assemblage and consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site for this feature (Table 15). Table 15. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on the invertebrate assemblage of The Broads Ramsar Site. Feature Distribution in The Broads Impact of recreational disturbance Outstanding assemblage Important species likely to be No impact on site integrity. of rare invertebrates widespread.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Desmoulin’s Whorl Snail Vertigo moulinsiana 9.19.

Desmoulin’s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana is a small wetland snail, associated with standing and flowing water and ditch systems where it lives on marginal vegetation. It is uncharismatic and found in wet and difficult terrain, thus unlikely to be exposed to disturbance from the general visitor.

9.20. As such, it is considered that recreational disturbance will not affect Desmoulin’s Whorl Snail and consequently the integrity of The Broads SAC (Table 16). Table 16. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on Desmoulin’s whorl snail in The Broads SAC. Feature Distribution in The Broads Impact of recreational disturbance Desmoulin’s Ant, Thurne and Yare valleys No impact on site integrity. whorl snail

Ramshorn Whirpool Snail Anisus vorticulus 9.21. Anisus vorticulus is a small aquatic snail found in ditches. The majority of sites are protected as SSSIs. It is very unlikely to be encountered by the casual visitor or disturbed by casual visitors. The issues in the maintenance of the local conservation status are water quality and the rotational management of ditches. 9.22. As such, it is considered that Anisus vorticulus will not be affected by recreational disturbance and as such it is considered the integrity of The Broads SAC will be unaffected (Table 17). Table 17. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on Anisus vorticulus in The Broads SAC. Feature Distribution in The Broads Impact of recreational disturbance Anisus Bure and Waveney valleys No impact on site integrity.

vorticulus

Otter 9.23.

Although otters are sensitive to disturbance, particularly pregnant females, it is considered that provided sufficient quiet places are available to construct holts then the population impact of disturbance will be low (Jefferies, 1987).

9.24.

Provided sufficient locations for holt construction will persist then recreational impacts will be low; it is very likely that extensive areas of alluvial and bankside woodland, along with terrestrial woodland will remain undisturbed and provide

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

ample locations for the construction of breeding holts. As such, it is considered that recreational disturbance will not affect otters and consequently the integrity of The Broads SAC (Table 18). Table 18. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreational disturbance on otters in The Broads SAC. Feature Distribution in The Broads Impact of recreational disturbance Otters Probably widespread No impact on site integrity.

Marsh Harrier 9.25. Marsh harriers are now considered to be a fairly common resident, summer visitor and passage migrant and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;increasingly common throughoutâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Norfolk (NNNS, 2011), having increased significantly in recent years as a result of reduced persecution and improved habitat management. In recent years the breeding population has been at least stable (Hollin & RBBP, 2011). 9.26. The typical nesting habitat for marsh harriers are reedbeds and other tall fen vegetation, although increasingly there are records of birds nesting in arable crops. The relative success of birds nesting in arable versus semi-natural situations is not known. 9.27. There is some suggestion that disturbance from visitors may have been a driving factor in population declines in the 1960s in The Broads, but the data are equivocal and confused by factors such as pesticides and damage by coypu to reedbeds (George, 1992; Sharrock, 2010). Gamauf and Preleuthner (1996), working in Austria, showed that although marsh harriers tended to nest in areas with little disturbance, the foraging adults were vulnerable to disturbance and avoided busy footpaths and cycle ways to a distance of 120m either side; they attribute recreational disturbance as having an impact on the provision of food to nestlings. Fernandez and Azkona (1993), working in Spain, reported foraging birds were possibly disturbed at up to distances of 500m, and although fledgling success was not affected by disturbance the nutritional condition of young birds was less in disturbed sites. 9.28. Clearly there is a potential negative effect of recreational disturbance on nesting success of marsh harrier, through increases from general visitors in the wider landscape. Of probably greatest concern is not direct disturbance of nests, but rather the wider impacts on foraging birds.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

9.29.

As such, it is considered that that an increase in the numbers of visitors will result in increased recreational disturbance and impacts at the population level for marsh harrier, consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA may be adversely affected (Table 19). Table 19. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on marsh harrier in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Feature Key sites in The Broads in 2010 (from various sources) Impact of recreational disturbance Marsh The population is believed to have increased recently, and Negative impact harrier significantly so since the 1960s. More precise data are not on site integrity. available. Foraging birds are seen widely throughout The Broads and adjacent areas.

Hen Harrier 9.30.

During winter, hen harriers roost gregariously in rank ground vegetation, often inhabiting the same site year on year, using low platforms of vegetation in areas such as reedbeds and fen (Clarke & Watson, 1990). It is likely that roosts are very sensitive to disturbance, but hen harriers are mobile birds and will be foraging widely away from the roost site thus it would be expected that they would be capable of moving to new roost sites if necessary. That said, communal roosts are potentially likely to attract casual visitors and disturbance at key times, such as dusk on cold nights, could be very detrimental.

9.31.

In Norfolk, seven communal roosts are known, with at least two in the Broads (NNNS, 2011). It is understood that there are more communal roost sites in The Broads, however their locations are kept confidential. Hen harrier roosts include a site on private farmland near Hickling, with a viewing platform accessible from the Hickling Nature Reserve (NWT), and the RSPBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Strumpshaw Fen nature reserve. Thus, the two major roosts are protected from disturbance and it is suggested that if other roosts are disturbed then the birds may relocate. However, there are no data available to confirm that the population impact of disturbance will be negligible and consequently there is uncertainty over the significance of disturbance.

9.32.

As such, it is considered that an increase in the numbers of visitors could result in increased recreational disturbance and consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA may be adversely affected for this feature (Table 20).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Table 20. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on hen harrier in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Feature Key sites in The Broads in 2010 (from various Impact of recreational sources) disturbance Hen Two well-known roosts on private farmland or Negative impact on site harrier protected sites; other smaller roosts likely integrity.

Bittern 9.33.

Bitterns are a scarce resident and winter visitor. Over winter single birds occur widely, but the breeding sites are restricted to areas of relatively large wet reedbed with abundant fish. Although calling males were reported from 17 localities in The Broads, just six nests were reported from four localities (NNNS, 2011).

9.34.

It is unlikely that breeding occurs away from protected sites, with nests only in quiet reedbeds away from the main navigation channels and foraging taking place in sheltered reedbeds. Bittern appear very sensitive to disturbance and are more likely to be found in inaccessible areas and away from visitors. This inaccessibility should mitigate an increase in visitors since these visitors will not be able to gain access at these sites.

9.35.

As such, it is considered that an increase in the numbers of visitors will not result in increased recreational disturbance to bitterns and consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA will be unaffected (Table 19). Table 21. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on bittern in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Feature Occurence in The Broads in 2010 (from NNNS, Impact of recreational 2011) disturbance Bittern Six known pairs from four localities. No impact on site integrity.

Whooper Swan and Bewicks Swan 9.36.

In Norfolk, both Bewickâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and whooper swans are considered to be common winter visitors, but principally to the Ouse Washes where counts regularly exceed 1500 (NNNS, 2011). Both feed on wet meadows and shallow water. In The Broads and Breydon Water area counts for Bewickâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s swans average 164 individuals (range of 120-231) and for whooper they average 15 individuals (range from 10-35).

9.37.

Many of the reported flocks for both species are outside of protected sites, largely on agricultural pasture and grazing marsh. Whooper are sensitive to disturbance

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

(Rees et al., 2005) as probably are Bewick’s, from walkers and dogs in particular. However, as with pink-footed geese, it is considered that there are substantial areas of grassland away from public footpaths and roads where flocks can feed without disturbance even with an increase in the numbers of visitors; the footpaths of concern are probably likely to be unattractive to casual winter visitors. Additionally, the small size of the flocks and the overall wintering population in The Broads suggests that the fields in The Broads are unlikely to be at carrying capacity and therefore there is an even greater likelihood of flocks being able to find disturbance-free grassland. 9.38.

As such, it is considered that an increase in the numbers of visitors is considered unlikely to result in increased recreational disturbance and that consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA will be unaffected for this feature (Table 22). Table 22. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on Bewick’s and whooper swans in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Feature Key sites and high counts in The Broads in 2010 (from Impact of NNNS, 2011) recreational disturbance Bewick’s Ludham Bridge (153, Jan); Ludham (175); Catfield (150, Jan); No impact on Swans Ludham (180, Feb); Horning Upper Street (231, Feb); site integrity. Ludham Bridge (187, Feb); Catfield (150, Feb); Ranworth Flood / Ward Marshes (150, Feb); Ludham (183, Dec); Potter Heigham and Catfield (120, Dec); Ludham Airfield (125, Dec) Whooper Ludham Bridge (10); Hickling Stubb mill (11, Jan); Stow No impact on swans Bardolph (12, Jan); Ludham (14, Jan); Catfield and Sutton site integrity. (10, Jan); Ludham (16, Feb); Hickling Broad (12, Feb); Catfield (10, Feb); Whitlingham (35, Dec)

Wigeon, Gadwall and Shoveler 9.39.

Wigeon, gadwall and shoveler are all dabbling ducks, which feed in the shallow water of lakes and flooded areas, often upending to forage vegetable matter and invertebrates (Guillemain et al., 2002).

9.40.

The peak numbers of birds are in winter. All three are relatively common species, distributed widely with peak counts on open water sites although some sites such as Cantley / Buckenham are thought to be on open fields (Table 21).

9.41.

Notably, some of the sites used are known to be used regularly by water-based users (e.g. Whitlingham, Hickling and Filby), while others are free of water-based

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

recreation or with significant restrictions on winter use (e.g. Ranworth Broad and Horsey Mere). 9.42.

It is not thought that additional numbers of land-based visitors would impact these three species although they would be vulnerable to increased levels of winter boating. Such effects have shown some duck species to be displaced at weekends when recreation is greater (Evans & Warrington, 2007). These are considered the three wildfowl species most vulnerable to disturbance on the autumn and winter feeding grounds.

9.43.

It is conceivable that an increased local population may result in a greater demand for water-based recreation on The Broads, with knock-on effects on these species. As such, it is considered that there may be an increase in recreational disturbance which will affect the numbers of wigeon, gadwall and shoveler and consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA for this feature(s) (Table 23). Table 23. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance pressure on wigeon, gadwall and shoveler in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Feature Key sites and high counts in The Broads in 2010 (from NNNS, Impact of 2011) recreational disturbance Wigeon Principal localities: Ranworth Broad (1763, Jan); Cantley / Negative Buckenham (4000, Dec); Breydon / Berney (23770, Jan). impact on site Notable counts elsewhere: Mid-yare (5000, Jan); Hardley integrity. Flood (300, March). Gadwall Principal localities: Whitlingham (490, Jan). Negative Notable counts elsewhere: Geldeston (330, Feb); Hoveton impact on site Park (250, Feb); Breydon / Berney (112, March); Hoveton Park integrity. (100, March); Cockshoot Broad (69, Sept); Stumpshaw Fen (125, Sept); Cockshoot Broad (50, Oct); Ranworth Broad (70, Oct); Strumpshaw Fen (60, Oct); Hoveton Park (50, Nov); Ranworth Broad (70, Nov); Breydon / Berney (136, Dec); Horsey Mere (67, Dec); Hoveton Park (100, Dec); Ormesby Broad (100, Dec); Wroxham Broad (320, Dec). Shoveler Selected localities: Hickling Broad (67, Jan); Breydon / Berney Negative (568, Nov); Cantley (280, Oct); Strumpshaw Fen (280, Oct); impact on site Notable counts: Ranworth Broad (40, Jan); Mid-Yare (40, integrity. Jan); Filby Broad (257, Feb); Hardley Flood (50, Aug); Ranworth Broad (47, Oct); Filby Broad (130, Nov); Ranworth Broad (98, Nov); Filby Broad (200, Dec); Ormesby Little Broad (158, Dec).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Ruff 9.44.

A fairly common passage migrant and winter visitor, in wet fields and aquatic margins.

9.45.

The majority of the sites identified for the species are protected, with low numbers elsewhere. The low numbers of birds involved â&#x20AC;&#x201C; especially compared to some of the other wildfowl and waders â&#x20AC;&#x201C; partly reflects its transitory occurrence, to and from overwintering grounds in western Africa.

9.46.

It is thought unlikely that the numbers of individuals is restricted by the presence of suitable, undisturbed habitat or for recreational disturbance to be otherwise impacting the species.

9.47.

As such, it is considered that recreational disturbance is not currently affecting the species and that any increase is likewise unlikely to affect the species, consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA is unaffected for this feature (Table 24). Table 24. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on ruff in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Designated Key sites and high counts in The Broads in 2010 Impact of Feature (from NNNS, 2011) recreational disturbance Ruff Peak counts at main sites: Breydon / Berney (56, No impact on site Dec); Buckenham / Cantley (38, Sep); Hickling Broad integrity. (39, Aug) Also: Potter Heigham(6, Jan); Waxham (17, Nov); Wroxham Broad (1, Dec); Waxham (32, Oct); Strumpshaw Fen (2, Oct).

Pink Footed Goose 9.48.

Pink footed goose is a winter visitor with Norfolk supporting internationally important numbers. In Norfolk the species is concentrated in north-west of the county and in The Broads area including Breydon/Berney area with smaller numbers in the Yare Valley (Table 23; NNNS, 2011).

9.49.

Although the key roost locations are largely considered to be within protected sites (in coastal grazing marsh and saltmarsh) the major feedings flocks reported are on farmland outside of protected sites (Table 23).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

9.50. Over-wintering pink-footed geese feed largely on sugar beet tops â&#x20AC;&#x201C; which are the cut ends of sugar beet dumped in fields during the harvesting process (Gill et al., 1996). A key factor determining use of their feeding areas is the potential for disturbance: several studies have shown proximity to roads and the level of traffic on roads to determine field usage, and presumably they are likewise sensitive to pedestrian disturbance. Madsen (1985) showed that even where the levels of traffic were low (<20 cars a day) the presence of roads affected utilisation; birds show disturbance distances of 500m in autumn, and 300-400m in spring. Likewise, in north Norfolk the geese are sensitive to disturbance and show aversion to roads, with additional disturbance events having an impact including birdwatchers, aircraft, pheasant shoots and agricultural activities (Gill et al., 1996). 9.51. Increases in the numbers of winter visitors have the potential to be a disturbing factor to pink-footed geese, principally through an increase in the numbers of walkers and dogs using public footpaths running through farmland. Although there are no data on such disturbance there are clearly substantial areas of farmland near the coast without any public footpaths and which may be assumed to be free from visitor disturbance, at present and in the future. 9.52. On balance, it is considered unlikely that there will be any increase in the numbers of winter visitors to farmland attributable to the NS&OC project, due to the absence of any wider visitor facilities and very limited parking. As such, it is considered that the projected increase in the numbers of visitors will not result in increased recreational disturbance on pink-footed geese, thus the integrity of the Broadland SPA and The Broads Ramsar site will be unchanged for this feature (Table 25). Table 25. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on pink-footed geese in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Feature Key sites and high counts in The Broads in 2010 (from Impact of NNNS, 2011) recreational disturbance th Pink Roosts: Berney (5050, Jan 25 ); Horsey (5260, Oct 11th); No impact on site footed Berney (9000, Dec 6th); Berney (7500, Jan 5th); Berney integrity. geese (12000, Feb 21st); Berney (8400, March 1st). Feeding flocks: Breydon/Berney (2000, Jan); Haddiscoe (3000, Jan); Ludham Bridge (2250, Jan); Sea Palling (6000, Dec); East Ruston (2500, Dec).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Assemblage: Additionally Including Cormorant, Great Crested Grebe, Coot, Bean Goose, White-fronted goose, Teal, Pochard, Tufted Duck 9.53.

The overall assemblage of wetland birds is important in terms of the numbers of individuals, including high numbers of common species such as coot and teal. Of the species listed under this designated feature the rarest are bean goose and white-fronted goose: The Taiga bean goose Anser fabialis fabialis is found in the Yare valley, with a flock of 80-150 birds. White-fronted goose are principally at Hickling/Heigham Holmes (peak of 450 birds), Buckenham/Cantley (a peak of 164 birds) and Breydon/Berney (a peak of 17).

9.54.

The number of sites supporting wildfowl is diverse and variously includes openwater sites, grazing marsh / meadow and arable crops. To identify the key sites and other potentially important areas, Table 26 summarises the important species for key or main sites as listed within NNNS (2011), including the species named in the SPA and Ramsar Site designations and also all other waders and wildfowl. The majority are more than 30-minutes travel time with the closest being on urban fringe of Norwich such as Thorpe Marshes and Whiltingham County Park. Table 26. Summary of important sites in The Broads for wildfowl, with respect to the assemblage designation for The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA designation. Travel times are taken from the AA Routeplanner website). Site Species Habitat Travel time (mins) Barton Broad Greylag goose, gadwall, teal, mallard, Open water 23 garganey, pochard, tufted duck, goldeneye, cormorant and great crested grebe coot. Breydon / Mute swan, pink-footed goose, greylag goose, Grazing marsh / 32 Berney wigeon, gadwall, teal, mallard, pintail, garganey, meadow little egret and great crested grebe coot. Buckenham / Greylag goose, wigeon, teal, mallard, garganey, Grazing marsh / 30 Cantley shoveler, pochard and little egret. meadow Marshes Calthorpe Mallard Open water 30 Broad Catfield Bewickâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s swan and whooper swan. Grazing marsh / 30 meadow Chedgrave Mallard, little egret and heron. Grazing marsh / 28 meadow East Ruston Pink-footed goose. Arable 34 Filby Broad Goldeneye and great crested grebe. Open water 31 Haddiscoe Garganey Grazing marsh / 36 meadow The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Site

Species

Habitat

Halvergate Marshes Hardley Flood

Pink-footed goose.

Hickling (including the broad and adjacent areas) Horning

Whooper swan, pink-footed goose, greylag goose, teal, garganey and great crested grebe.

Horsey Mere and Marshes

Pink-footed goose, teal and mallard.

Hoveton Broads Hoveton Hall How Hill Ludham including Ludham Bridge and Ludham Airfield Martham Broad Ormesby Broads Potter Heigham Ranworth Broad and Flood

Gadwall, pochard and tufted duck.

Rockland Broad Rollesby Broad Sea Palling Strumpshaw Fen Thorpe Marshes Walcott Whitlingham

Wroxham Broad

Mallard.

Coot

Grazing marsh / meadow Open water and grazing marsh / meadow Open water and grazing marsh / meadow

Travel time (mins) 30 29

Grazing marsh / meadow Open water and grazing marsh / meadow Open water

Gadwall and moorhen. Mallard and shoveler. Bewick’s swan and whooper swan.

Open water Open water Grazing marsh / meadow

14 23 24

Goldeneye.

Open water

Teal, mallard, shoveler, great crested grebe and coot Bewick’s swan, whooper swan and greylag goose. Bewick’s swan, greylag goose, wigeon, gadwall, teal, mallard, garganey, shoveler, pochard, tufted duck, cormorant, great crested grebe and coot. Great crested grebe.

Open water

Grazing marsh / meadow Open water and grazing marsh / meadow

Open water

Shoveler.

Open water

Arable Grazing marsh / meadow Open water and grazing marsh / meadow Arable Open water

40 22

Open water

Pink-footed goose. Greylag goose, gadwall, teal, garganey, heron and coot. Bean goose, gadwall and mallard.

mallard,

Pink-footed goose. Whooper swan, greylag goose, gadwall, garganey, pochard, tufted duck, great crested grebe and coot. Gadwall, pochard and tufted duck.

37 12

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

9.55. Although earlier assessments have considered increased recreational disturbance to birds on private farmland to be unlikely, the possible increase in water basedrecreation and disturbance to birds was not discounted with respect to wigeon, gadwall and shoveler. At least six of the open water sites above are thought to have wintertime boating, but with Horsey Mere and Ranworth Broad having significant restrictions on winter boating and other sites such as Hardley Flood being free of boating at all times. Horsey Mere is closed for navigation from November to February inclusive (Thurnefisheries, 2011). 9.56. As such, it is considered that there is potential for increased recreational disturbance and for this to affect individual species and the assemblage of wildfowl species, consequently the integrity of The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA may be affected (Table 27). Table 27. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on the overall assemblage of wetland birds in The Broads Ramsar Site and Broadland SPA. Designated Summary of important wildfowl sites (from NNNS, Impact of Feature 2011) recreational disturbance Wildfowl At least 30 sites of some description considered to Negative impact on assemblage be key sites or otherwise supporting noteworthy site integrity. numbers of birds.

BREYDON WATER SPA AND RAMSAR SITE Plants 9.57. Scarce plants are listed on the Breydon Water Ramsar Site citation, associated with mudflats, saltmarsh, grazing marsh, brackish marsh and flood defence walls. 9.58. It is unlikely that any additional visitor pressure along the accessible paths will affect the scarce plants and as such the Appropriate Assessment concludes integrity of Breydon Ramsar Site and SPA will not be affected for this feature (Table 28). Table 28. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreation disturbance and pressure on scarce plants on Breydon Water Ramsar Site and SPA. Designated Summary of likely distribution Impact of recreational disturbance Feature Scarce Within saltmarsh and No impact on site integrity. plants marshland.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Birds, Including All Designated Species 9.59.

It is not proposed that each designated feature of Breydon Water Ramsar Site and SPA will be discussed in turn, rather they are grouped broadly into the species of grazing marsh habitats, principally wildfowl including ducks, geese and swans, and those of the open mud areas, principally waders. Impacts on a single species are likely to be apparent for all other species in that habitat group.

9.60. Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site comprises two main habitats: the open water and mud flats where the River Yare widens before Great Yarmouth to form a sheltered estuary; and The Berney Arms area of grazing marsh. 9.61. The site is managed almost in its entirety by the RSPB (as RSPB Berney Marshes and Breydon Water), with public access limited to public footpaths: one runs across the Berney Marsh Area, a second along the north defence wall of Breydon Water and a third along the south bank. Actual access to the area is difficult: on the north side there is no vehicle access thus walkers either access by parking in Great Yarmouth, by disembarking by train at Berney Arms or walking from Halvergate. As recommended to birdwatchers, access is by parking in the ASDA car park in Great Yarmouth and walking from there (with parking restricted to 3-hours) (Glenn, 2006). Few trains stop at Berney Arms: from Norwich there are two trains daily on weekdays and Saturdays and five on Sundays. The footpaths to the north and south of Breydon Water are part of the Weaver’s Way and Wherryman’s Way respectively. The recorded numbers of visitors at the RSPB Berney Marshes is 4k annually (Visit England, 2012), although it is likely that visitors parking at ASDA and walking to the high tide roost are under reported as are casual visitors of the public footpaths. 9.62. The main navigation channel is narrow, towards the centre of Breydon Water and boating is not permitted away from this due to shallow water conditions; the maximum width of the mudflats is over 1km at the very widest point and for much of the north side the mudflats are at least 400m wide. 9.63.

In addition to the key foraging areas – the open mud and grazing marsh – the key vulnerability of the site is the high-tide wader roost, understood to be located on saltmarsh at the north side nearest to Great Yarmouth, within 200m or so of the public footpath. The roost is located on inhospitable terrain, difficult to access and

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

unappealing to the general visitor, although it is potentially vulnerable to deliberate disturbance or irresponsible behaviour. 9.64.

In summary, the majority of the site is unlikely to experience increased recreation pressure given its management by the RSPB and restrictions to public access. Although the high tide roost is located at the Great Yarmouth end and potentially exposed to more visitors, the general site is unappealing to general visitors and any increase in recreational disturbance is unlikely to be related to the NS&OC development. The total numbers of visitors recorded for the site is 4000, which based on the calculations presented previously for sites on The Broads and assuming 5% of visitors would equate to an increase of fewer than 50 visitors.

9.65. As such, it is considered that increased recreational disturbance is unlikely and consequently the integrity of Breydon Water Ramsar Site and SPA will not be affected (Table 29). Table 29. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreational disturbance and pressure on birds at Breydon Water Ramsar Site and SPA. Designated Feature Distribution / Occurrence Impact of recreational disturbance Birds, including named Grazing marsh and mudflat. High No impact on site species and the whole tide roost on saltmarsh. integrity. assemblage

WINTERTON-HORSEY DUNES SAC Dune Vegetation 9.66. Within the Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC four types of dune vegetation are designated, from the frontal edge with its embryonic dunes, the shifting dunes, decalcified dunes and the humid dunes slacks. All are potentially vulnerable to trampling damage. 9.67. Access to the dunes is relatively limited with the dunes backing onto private farmland: there is a small car park at Horsey Gap with a capacity for fewer than thirty cars, at the north end, and at the Winterton Dunes National Nature Reserve there is a car park for maybe 100 cars; this entrance point is approximately 500m from the village of Winterton. The distance between the two car parks is over 5.3km and a public footpath runs between the two to the rear of the dunes, as well as the beach itself. Some 550m to the north of Horsey Gap, at the north end of the designated boundary, is a small holiday park with caravans and a camp site.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

9.68. Many of the visitors to Horsey Gap do so to visit the seal colony and the visitors to Winterton use its sandy beach for family activities. 9.69.

At a generic level, and following an analysis of the distribution of visitors at beach sites (Coombes & Jones, 2010; Coombes et al., 2009), the numbers of visitors and therefore recreation pressure is likely to be greatest near the car parks.

9.70. Trampling has been unequivocally shown to damage dune vegetation, but such pressure tends to be along the well-defined paths created by visitors and away from their vicinity the impact becomes rapidly less apparent (Boorman, 1977; Anderson, 1995). As viewed on Google Earth, paths can clearly be seen through the dune vegetation with a greater number in the vicinity of the car parks and the holiday park north of Horsey Gap; in addition to paths leading from the car park at Winterton there appear to be a significant number related to pedestrian traffic from the village. The extent and occurrence of paths at present on Winterton do not appear to differ significantly from those present in the 1970s, as compared visually to current Google Earth images and the line map in Boorman and Fuller (1977). 9.71. The car parks themselves are likely to cause local changes to the soil and vegetation through compression and dog fouling, with Shaw and Reeve (2008) showing such an effect for up to 50m from the car park. There are substantial areas of the dunes without any apparent footpaths. 9.72. Thus, although trampling effects are evident at Horsey-Winterton Dunes SAC, the limited car parking space especially at Horsey Gap limits the numbers of additional visitors that can be accommodated. Even with additional visitors, it is unlikely that impacts would increase proportionately as visitors will continue to use the established paths. 9.73.

As such, it is considered that recreational impacts on dune vegetation will be not be attributable to the NS&OC project and consequently the integrity of the HorseyWinterton Dunes SAC is unlikely to be affected (Table 30).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Table 30. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreational disturbance and pressure on dune vegetation at Horsey-Winterton Dunes SAC. Designated Feature Distribution / Impact of recreational Occurrence disturbance Embryonic shifting dunes 1.7ha (0.4%) No impact on site integrity. Shifting dunes along the shoreline with 14.3ha (3.3%) No impact on site Ammophila arenaria (`white dunes`). integrity. Atlantic decalcified fixed dunes (Calluno- 28ha (6.6%) No impact on site Ulicetea) integrity. Dunes with Hippophae rhamnoides 1.3ha (0.3%) No impact on site integrity. Humid dune slacks 0.85ha (0.2%) No impact on site integrity.

Great crested newt 9.74.

The only animal listed as a designated feature of the Horsey-Winterton Dunes SAC is the great crested newt, which breeds in the shallow ponds formed within the slacks.

9.75. These ponds are unlikely to be attractive to casual visitors or particularly vulnerable to disturbance, being in the dune slack at the rear of the dunes away from the beach. The key issues in maintaining the integrity of these ponds are likely to be management and maintaining the natural processes of dune formation and succession. 9.76. As such, it is considered that it is unlikely that any recreational impacts on great crested newts will be attributable to the NS&OC project and consequently the integrity of the Horsey-Winterton Dunes SAC will not be affected for this feature (Table 31). Table 31. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreational disturbance on great crested newt at Horsey-Winterton Dunes SAC. Designated Distribution / Occurrence Impact of recreational disturbance Feature Embryonic 1.7ha (0.4%) No impact on site integrity. shifting dunes

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

THE NORTH NORFOLK COAST SAC, SPA AND RAMSAR SITE 9.77. The North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site is a large and diverse protected area, adjacent to several villages and small towns with a number of key focus areas for tourists including major nature reserves. 9.78. An assessment of the potential significance of recreational impacts on the North Norfolk Coast was prepared by Liley (2008), who concluded that increased housing numbers in North Norfolk and possibly elsewhere were likely to result in an increase in the numbers of visitors with impacts on site integrity being possible. However, he acknowledged that the catchment area was wide and consequently ‚growth in housing at locations such as King's Lynn, Norwich, Thetford and potentially further afield are likely to result in changes in visitor numbers to the North Norfolk coast area‛. His data on visitor numbers was based on Klein and Bateman’s (1998) values, who surveyed visitors at the Cley nature reserve where the average travel distance was 96 miles (with a median travel distance of 80 miles), with 1/3 of visitors being day-trippers. That is, half of the visitors come from outside of East Anglia. It is considered likely that Cley and similar area along the coast is somewhat atypical in attracting ‘twitchers’ who may travel significant distances to see rare birds and that visitors to ‘family friendly’ locations such as Holkham Beach may travel less. 9.79.

Based on current understanding of recreation impacts he concludes that:

‚… there is already an issue on some parts of the North Norfolk coast, and that problems could arise due to changes in visitor patterns, whether as a consequence of tourism policies and projects, or built development even at some distance from the coast‛. 9.80. Consistent with the conclusions of Liley (2008) this Appropriate Assessment concludes that there will potentially be a significant impact of increased numbers of visitors to the North Norfolk Coast, although almost certainly this will be an incombination effect with a number of other projects to which NS&OC may contribute, As such, it is considered that there may be an impact on site integrity as summarised below (Table 32).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Table 32. Summary of the Appropriate Assessment for the impact of recreational disturbance and pressure on the North Norfolk Coast SAC, Ramsar Site and SPA. Designated Feature Distribution / Occurrence Impact of recreational disturbance Coastal habitats and vegetation. Coastal Widespread but Negative lagoons; perennial vegetation of stony banks; particularly important impact on site Mediterranean and thermo-Atlantic sites are Blakeney Point integrity. halophilous scrubs (Sarcocornetea fruticosi); and Holkham, with areas embryonic shifting dunes; shifting dunes of important upper along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria saltmarsh being (`white dunes`); fixed dunes with herbaceous widespread vegetation (`grey dunes`); humid dune slacks; and dunes with Hippophae rhamnoides. Plants. Petalwort Petalophyllum ralfsii and Dune slacks, saltmarsh Negative other scarce plants are grazing marsh of impact on site particular importance integrity. Animals. Harbour seal Phoca vitulina; Blakeney Point Negative natterjack toad Bufo calamita; great crested particularly important for impact on site newt; otter; and invertebrates. seals, with dune slacks a integrity. particularly important habitat Birds. Wintering (whole assemblage); passage Blakeney Point and Negative (knot Calidris canutus islandica; ringed plover saltmarsh areas in impact on site , Charadrius hiaticula; and bar-tailed godwit , particular; farmland integrity. Limosa lapponica lapponica); breeding important for pink-footed (sandwich tern Sterna (Thalasseus) geese in particular sandvicensis sandvicensis; common tern Sterna hirundo hirundo; little tern , Sterna albifrons albifrons); wintering (pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus; dark-bellied brent goose Branta bernicla bernicla; wigeon Anas penelope and pintail Anas acuta).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

SUMMARY OF STAGE 2: APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT 9.81. The Appropriate Assessment of impacts concludes potential impacts from disturbance on two groups of sites: The Broads’s sites and North Norfolk’s sites44; with disturbance from any potential increase in the numbers of visitors is not considered likely to impact site integrity of Breydonw ater Ramsar Site and SPA and the Winterton_Horsey Dunes SAC (Table 33). Table 33. Summary of the Stage 1: Tests of likely significant effects. ‘indicates no significant effect and ‘X’ denotes a significant effect possible and consequently a requirement for compensatory measures. Feature Groundwater Flows Disturbance   River Wensum SAC  The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, X Broadland SPA   Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site   Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC  North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and X Ramsar Site

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

10 COMPENSATORY MEASURES OVERVIEW 10.1. As discussed in Section 2: The Assessment Process and Methodology, compensatory measures are supplementary to a project and are not part of the application. This section provides and overview of potential measures that may be deployed within protected sites and other nearby areas, to establish whether there is a realistic possibility for reduction of impacts; it is not suggested necessarily that any or all will be required or the mechanism for their implementation. DISTURBANCE 10.2. Disturbance was identified as a potential impact on some designated features, and thus site integrity, at the following two sites: The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site and the Broadland SPA North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site 10.3. As outlined in Section 2: The Assessment Process and Methodology, the mitigation within the project â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Beeston Park â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is considered within the Appropriate Assessment as a mechanism for reducing the numbers of visitors to the site by diverting some new and displacing some existing trips to the Broads for some types of recreational activity; mainly day visits for dog-walking and shorter recreational walks. Additional measures proposed here are compensatory, in that they are not key parts of the project but proposed as mechanisms to reduce impacts. PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT 10.4. A suite of measures are potentially available to reduce recreational impacts on wildlife and protected sites, either as potential measures in response to studies of impacts or based on experimental studies. Broadly following De Long (2002) the potential management options are categorised into eight categories, often used in combination: Increase predictability of public use patterns to promote habituation to nonthreatening situations. Encourage slow moving and quiet activities;

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Minimize area influenced by human activities; Design facilities to conceal visitors; Design facilities to protect natural resources; Establish regulations; Establish wildlife sanctuaries; and Interpretation and education. 10.5. Given the seasonal occurrence and sensitivities of some species and features a seasonal component may be included in all of the above. Increase Predictability of Activities 10.6. At a strategic level the attempt to encourage the habituation to and tolerance of disturbance is probably an under-appreciated method to control disturbance impact, although in essence measures such as zoning of activities and the implementation of regulations serve to achieve such habituation indirectly. As a mechanism to reduce impacts of the North-east Norwich Growth Area this is probably of limited merit. 10.7. Exclusion of dogs may be included underneath this measure, given that barking may result in greater disturbance than that produced by quiet dogs (Randler, 2006) although dogs not on leads have been demonstrated to be a substantial of disturbance impacts at some sites (Stour Estuary: Ravenscroft et al., 2007). Encourage Slow Moving and Quiet Activities 10.8. To an extent the promotion of quiet activities is management at a strategic level through planning policy, the converse - controlling noisier activities - is certainly under the remit of the planning system through implementing policies that restrict impacting recreational activities at sensitive sites. 10.9. By and large, to operate as compensatory measures to reduce impacts of the Northeast Norwich Growth Area measures under this umbrella would be those covered by planning policies in the understanding of the potential greater increases in impacts where prior to development their significance may have been less. Within The Broads and North Norfolk the interpretation of policies have been subject to HRAs and as

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

such their implementation should be based on an understanding of likely changes in visitor pressure. 10.10. Smaller scale actions under this category include the use and ideally replacement of diesel watercraft with electric or sailing vessels. Minimize Area Influenced by Human Activities. 10.11. At a strategic level, reducing the area exposed to recreational pressure through the spatial management of visitor resources is of substantial value, and as considered by Leung and Marion (1999) measures comprise: Spatial segregation, to separate conflicts between visitors and sensitive features; Spatial containment, by encouraging or promoting visitors to limited areas where impacts can be managed or where there are few sensitive features; Spatial dispersal, whereby visitors are encouraged over a wider areas such that thresholds of impact or conflict are not reached; and Spatial configuration, whereby facilities are distributed such as to minimise impacts.

10.12. Again, these measures are strategic and may include measures such as the provision or removal of visitor facilities including car parking and toilets; these measures are at least partly under the control of planning policies or providers such as site managers. Other private initiatives under this banner include promoted walking routes in the wider countryside (e.g. Walking in Norfolk 2012) which are advertised with details of duration, facilities and difficulty; here collaboration may be possible to encourage walkers to use less sensitive areas or to avoid certain times of year. Design Facilities to Conceal Visitors 10.13. Many waders and wildfowl are sensitive to the sight of pedestrians such that the flight distances may be significantly less if the visitors are not seen. Such measures have been proposed for numerous situations including: Brent geese in relation to new cycleways, where vegetation or artificial screens have been advocated (Goss-Custard 2008); and

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Wildfowl on open water shared with watercraft, where floating screens of vegetation have been proposed (Batten, 1977).

10.14. A review of disturbance impacts on birds is provided in Hockin et al (1992) and expanded in Hill et al., (1997) in relation to environmental impact assessment considerations. Other options here may include re-aligning paths such that visitors are screened or not silhouetted against skylines. 10.15. As a compensatory measure it is likely that these could be implemented relatively rapidly and in response to small-scale requirements on individual sites. Design details plus a review of research on disturbance flight distances (ie the differential sensitivity to disturbance exhibited by different species) is given in Kirby et al (2004). Design Facilities to Protect Natural Resources 10.16. Examples of such measures include the provision of boardwalks across sensitive habitats such as dune and wetland. Anecdotally, such boardwalks are effective for controlling the routes used by visitors at sites such as Blakeney Point (dunes; North Norfolk) and Ranworth Broad (wetland; The Broads) (G.W. Hopkins pers. obs.). Other documented studies on dunes consider boardwalks to be effective in reducing trampling in European systems (Wood, 2001; Zwart, 2001), but within the wider context of allowing natural processes to operate on dunes there is a potential for limited disturbance to be a positive feature (Reimers, 2001). Other measures demonstrated as being effective include the fencing of sensitive areas and manipulating access points (USA; Carlson and Godfrey, 1989). 10.17. In addition to protecting from trampling effects even relatively subtle measures can result in significant reductions in reducing impacts. For example, Pearce-Higgins et

al. (2007) demonstrated a significant reduction in the disturbance of golden plover nests following the improvement works on an upland walking path, encouraging walkers away from a more diffuse network of paths across a wider area. 10.18. Within this category the design of facilities- rather than the more strategic location of facilities â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is of merit in terms of small-scale responses to immediate need. Establish Regulations 10.19. Although education is considered cost-effective in improving visitor behaviour it is considered that the behaviour of some visitors can only be managed by regulation The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

(Great Barrier Reef; Alder, 1996). Regulations may be introduced as bye-laws or voluntary codes of behaviour and then enforced by the use of rangers or wardens. 10.20. In The Broads there is a team of ten full-time rangers patrol, supplemented by six summer rangers and two winter rangers (weekends and bank holidays) (Broads Authority, 2012a), whose role is to assist visitors and enforce navigation. All enforcement is in accordance with the Navigation Enforcement Policy, as advised by the Navigation Committee and was last amended in 2009. 10.21. In terms of creating enforceable regulation of behavior, this would require strategic changes. For the introduction of voluntary measures the actions could be smaller scale and possibly introduced more rapidly (but see below for Implementation), with precedents for such successful schemes including restrictions on winter navigation and fishing in the upper Thurne to protect wintering wildfowl (see Thurnefisheries, 2011). 10.22. Many of the nature reserves are patrolled by wardens and site managers with a view to overseeing visitor behaviour. Establish Wildlife Sanctuaries 10.23. Two measures are categorised under this measure, namely the creation of clear-cut sanctuaries away from disturbance and then the creation of zones where sites are shared with other users. 10.24. Numerous instances are available of refuges as proposed or actual projects to protect wintering wildfowl from disturbance including hunting (Fox & Madsen, 1997;) and visitors (Bregnballe et al., 2009), with species differing in their design requirements of refuges with respect to habitat and proximity to disturbance (Evans & Day, 2002). Within The Broads Ranworth Broad is closed to watercraft all year â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a measure imposed by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust as its owners â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and seasonally on Horsey Mere as a voluntary agreement among stakeholders. 10.25. Within lakes, the sharing or zoning of areas is widely deployed and seemingly successful on various sites including gravel pits (Welsh Harp Management Committee, 2012), the Trinity Broads (Broads Authority, 2012b) and parts of Hickling Broad / Heigham Sound.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Interpretation and Education 10.26. The education of visitors, via the provision of interpretative materials is seen as an important aspect of visitor management to reduce impacts on natural assets (Orams, 1996). It is considered that such interpretative materials should lead to more responsible behaviour and include information on natural assets and also site management; indeed, the Wildlife Refuge Policy of the (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2001) states that â&#x20AC;&#x161;well-designed interpretive services can be our most effective and inexpensive resource management toolâ&#x20AC;&#x203A;. 10.27. Although there are few data from the UK to show a clear association between interpretive resources and recreational impacts. Relevant work from elsewhere does show that there is certainly a clear correlation between the level of understanding and attitudes towards nature conservation; the most effective methods of delivering interpretive material is via personal interaction and the availability of literature (Olson

et al.,1984). Further, for the majority of visitors provision of interpretive materials is an effective method to ensure compliance with management restrictions, although for a minority only enforcement is successful (Alder, 1996). 10.28. Within The Broads and North Norfolk, in addition to interpretive materials provided on sites (such as information boards), in both areas leaflets are freely in many locations to highlight the importance of nature conservation assets and their protection. The Broadcaster magazine produced by the Broads Authority is printed annually and includes information to visitors on facilities, management and responsible behaviour. SUMMARY OF CASE STUDIES 10.29. Examples of case studies where management actions have been deployed or proposed to control and reduce the impacts of various types of disturbance are presented below (Table 34). Table 34. Example case studies of actual and potential management actions to reduce visitor impacts. Compensato Species Habitat Country Source of Effectivene Reference ry Measures / Region Disturbance ss Buffer Wigeon Lowlan Denmar Walkers Proposed Bregnballe (exclusion) and other d lakes k measure et al. zones of wildfowl (2009) 250m to protect feeding The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Compensato ry Measures birds Disturbance -free refuges need to be large Buffer zones to either be proportional to group size or all groups beyond buffer zone for large groups. Deployment of voluntary wardens

Species

Habitat

Country / Region

Source of Disturbance

Effectivene ss

Reference

Seabirds

Cliffs

Scotlan d

Groups walkers

Proposed measure

Beale & Monaghan (2004)

Waders

Estuarin e

Education, keeping visitors in cars Introduce buffer (exclusion) zone Introduce buffer (exclusion) zones for walkers Realignment of footpath

Wildfowl

Lowlan d wetland

River Dee, North Wales Florida, USA

Walkers

Increase in numbers of birds

Kirby et al. (1993)

Walkers

Proposed measure

Klein et al. (1995)

Wildfowl and waterbirds

Lowlan d wetland

Florida, USA

Watercraft

Proposed measure

Rodgers & Schwikert (2002)

Coot

Lowlan d wetland

German y

Dog barking

Proposed measure

Randler (2006)

Golden plover

Upland

England

Walkers

PearceHiggins et al. (2007)

Reducing group sizes (number of walkers) Reducing group sizes (number of walkers) Screening

Currawon gs (crowlike birds)

Lowlan d forest

Australi a

Walkers

Reduction of disturbanc e to nesting by birds by controlling visitor movement s Proposed measure

Woodland birds

Scrub

Spain

Walkers (schoolchildr en)

Proposed measure

Remacha

Brent geese

Lowlan d marsh

Devon

Walkers and cyclists

Proposed measure

GossCustard (2008)

Screening

Wildfowl

Lowlan d lake

England

Boating

Proposed measure

Batten (1977)

Geist et al. (2005)

al.

(2011)

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Compensato ry Measures Voluntary restrictions over winter

Zoning of terrestrial areas Zoning of areas for watercraft

Species

Habitat

Wildfowl

Lowlan d lakes

Little tern

Sand dune

Wildfowl

Lowlan d lake

Country / Region The Broads

Source of Disturbance Watercraft and angling

Great Yarmout h England

Walkers

Watercraft

Effectivene ss Continued use by significant numbers of wildfowl Proposed measure Continued use by significant numbers of wildfowl

Reference Thurnefisheries (2012)

Liley (2008) Welsh Harp Joint Consultati ve Committe e (2012)

IMPLEMENTATION 10.30. It is recognised that the development of tourism within designated sites should be based on information and for management to be responsive to need and conditions, with the European Commission (2001) grouping the phases of a management strategy as: Strategy, policy and planning;

Offer, market and product;

Communication, promotion and awareness;

Assessing and Managing impacts, integrated quality management and cooperation; and

At present interpretive materials are available in the form of information boards at most sites managed by nature conservation organisations, with more extensive facilities associated with visitor centres.

10.31. At present it is unclear as to the optimal mechanism for implementing compensatory measures but this is a major requirement for ensuring delivery of compensatory measures required to remove negative impocts or even to generate positive impacts. for implementing a range of compensatory measures which have the aim of making the scheme either impact neutral or indeed environmentally positive.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

10.32. . In terms of the development of the North-east Norwich Growth Area and NSOC, the introduction of any compensatory measures may be phased as the project(s) develop, in response to any requirements as determined from monitoring and survey work or other evidence as provided by stakeholders, and in integration with such compensatory or enhancement measures as may be implemented in response to other plans and projects and as part of the ongoing enhancement of sites for both conservation and visitor experience through investment and improvement strategies, such as the Tourism Strategy. Clearly, the introduction of measures, including the specification of precise designs, will require the co-operation of stakeholders such as the Broads Authority,, yet vital to the implementation of some management practices (Brouwer et al., 2003; Turner et al., 2003). As perceived, successful decision-making among stakeholder groups should be adaptive, responding to need, with stakeholders allowed to learn as part of the decisionmaking process and results communicated clearly (Pouwels et al., 2011). 10.33. In terms of deploying the measures as identified above (Practical Management), the suggested role of stakeholders is provided in Table 35; this shows measures collectively for North Norfolk and The Broads although some measures may only be appropriate in one area. Table 35. Suggested role of stakeholders for the implementation measures. Category Specific actions Target species / feature Increase predictability Limited, although Birds, principally of public use patterns generally relevant to wildfowl and waders to promote other categories habituation to non- Exclusion of dogs threatening situations. Encourage slow Discourage noisy Birds, principally moving and quiet users wildfowl and waders activities. Electric boats Minimize area Discourage Breeding marsh influenced by human widespread use of harrier activities. currently quiet areas Wintering pinkfooted geese, whooper and Bewickâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s swans Design facilities to Screening of visitors Wildfowl and waders conceal visitors Design facilities to protect natural resources Establish regulations

Boardwalks Careful routing of paths Enforceable exclusion and behaviour Increased levels of

Vegetation Birds Birds, principally wildfowl and waders

of compensatory Principal stakeholders Local Planning Authority (LPA) Individual landowners (conservation) LPA Watercraft providers LPA Landowners providing facilities Organisations promoting walking. Individual landowners (conservation) Individual landowners (conservation) Local Authorities Broads Authority Fishing organisations

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Category

Specific actions

Target species / feature

wardening Establish sanctuaries

Interpretation education

wildlife

and

Refuges Zoning of users Buffer zones

Vegetation Wildfowl and waders

Interpretive and signs Leaflets Wardens

All features

boards

Principal stakeholders Watercraft organisations Individual landowners Anglers Watercraft users Nature conservation organisations

SYNTHESIS AND SUMMARY 10.34. As outlined above, for all of the designated features considered to be at risk of disturbance or increased disturbance from greater numbers of visitors there are potential measures to reduce impacts, from actions at individual sites and locations to more strategic measures. 10.35. In practice, a suite of measures is likely to be appropriate for some species particularly waders and wildfowl, where they occur widely and in substantial numbers. Conversely some actions are likely to be more limited, particularly where designated features are effectively limited to small areas of protected sites, such as some dune vegetation in North Norfolk. 10.36. It is consequently considered that there are potential compensatory measures available to reduce disturbance impacts on all species.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

11 STAGE 3: REPEAT OF THE APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT 11.1. As concluded in the review of potential compensatory measures, there are realistic measures available for the reduction of disturbance impacts for all species. Given that these are deployed to an appropriate extent then consequently it is considered that any negative impacts on site integrity from potential growth in visitation resulting from development in the North-east Norwich Growth Triangle can be removed. 11.2. Based on the available visitor data for The Broads, the projections for the increases in the numbers of future visitors resulting from an increased population in Northeast Norwich is considered low, less than 4% in the most cautious case. The contribution to the increase in numbers to North Norfolk is considered to be relatively less, based on the greater travel distance and the greater overall popularity of North Norfolk. 11.3. Thus, based on the availability of realistic compensatory measures it is considered that if such measures are implemented then impacts can be reduced sufficiently to remove negative impacts on site integrity. As such, it is concluded that neither the North-east Norwich Growth Area nor NS&OC will necessarily result in an impact on the integrity of: The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, Broadland SPA; and

North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA and Ramsar Site.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

REFERENCES Alder, J. (1996) Costs and effectiveness of education and enforcement, Cairns section of the great barrier reef marine park. Environmental Management 20, 541–551. Andersen, U.A. (1995). Resistance of Danish coastal vegetation types to human trampling.

Biological Conservation 71,223–230. Anglian Water, Environment Agency & Natural England (2012). Joint Core Strategy for

Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk – Habitats Regulations Assessment Supplementary Note. Cover letter to an amended version of Mott Macdonald (2010). Batten, L.A. (1977). Sailing on reservoirs and its effects on water birds. Biological

Conservation 11, 49–58. Beale, C.M. & Pat Monaghan, P. (2004) Human disturbance: people as predation-free predators? Journal of Applied Ecology 41, 335–343. Beckett, M. & Bull, A. (1999) Flora of Norfolk. Margaret Beckett, Norfolk. Boorman, L.A. & Fuller, R.M. (1977) Studies on the impact of paths on the dune vegetation at Winterton, Norfolk, England. Biological Conservation 12, 203–216. Bregnballe, T., Speich, C., Horsten, A. & Fox, A.D. (2009) An experimental study of numerical and behavioural responses of spring staging dabbling ducks to human pedestrian disturbance. Wildfowl Special Issue 2, 131–142. Broads Authority (2006) Appropriate Assessment of the Core Strategy - Submission

Report. Under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &C) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations

2006.

September

2006.

Available

from:

http://www.broads-

authority.gov.uk/authority/consultations/core-strategy/submission-core-strategy-dpdconsultation.html Broads Authority (2010) Broads Boat Census. Broads Authority, Norwich. Broads Authority (2011) A Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Tourism in the Broads

2011 – 2015. Broads Authority, Norwich. Broads

Authority

(2012a)

Patrol.

Available

from:

http://www.broads-

authority.gov.uk/boating/patrol.html Broads Authority (2012b) Trinity Broads Management Plan. 2012-2017. Broads Authority, Norwich. Brouwer, R., Turner, R.K., Georgiou, S., Powe, N., Batemand, I.J. & Langford, I.H. (2003) The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Social and deliberative approaches to support wetland management. In Managing

Wetlands, R.K. Turner, J.C.J.M. van den Bergh & R. Brouwer (eds), pp130-134. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Carlson, L.H. & Godfrey, P.J. (1989) Human impact management in a coastal recreation and natural area. Biological Conservation 49, 141–156. Clarke, R. & Watson, D. (1990) The hen harrier Circus cyaneus winter roost survey in Britain and Ireland. Bird Study 84, 100-107. Coles, R.W. & Bussey, S.C. (2000) Urban forest landscapes in the UK -progressing the social agenda. Landscape and Urban Planning, 52: 181-188. Coombes, E.G. & Jones, A.P. (2010) Assessing the impact of climate change on visitor behaviour and habitat use at the coast: A UK case study. Global Environmental Change 20, 303–313. Coombes, E., Jones, A., Bateman, I., Tratalos, J., Gill, J., Showler, D., Watkinson, A. & Sutherland, W. (2009) Spatial and temporal modelling of beach use: A case study of East Anglia, UK. Coastal Management 37, 94-115. Cruickshanks, K., Liley, D. & Hoskin, R. (2010) Suffolk Sandlings Visitor Survey Report. Footprint Ecology / Suffolk Wildlife Trust Evans, D.M. & Day, K.R. (2002) Hunting disturbance on a large shallow lake: the effectiveness of waterfowl refuges. Ibis 144, 2-8. DeLong, A. K. (2002) Managing visitor use and disturbance of waterbirds — a literature review of impacts and mitigation measures — prepared for Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge. Appendix L (114 pp.) in Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge Complex final

environmental impact statement for the comprehensive conservation plan and boundary revision (Vol. II). Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Portland, OR. DfCLG (2012) National Planning Policy Framework. Department for Communities and Local Government, London. Doarkes (1995) Fen Mangement Strategy. English Nature, Norwich. Dolman, P., Lake, I. R. & Bertoncelj, I. (2008) Visitor Flow Rate and Recreational Modelling

in Breckland. UEA, Norwich. Dunnett, N., Swanwick, C. & Woolley, H. (2002) Improving Urban Parks, Play Areas

and Green Spaces.Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, London. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

EDP (2012) Tourism Business Survey. Capacity. Available from: http://services.edp24.co.uk/norfolk/tourism-business-survey2011/content/features/capacity.aspx English Nature (1999) Habitats Regulations Guidance Note . English Nature, Peterborough. English Nature (2004) European Sites Guidance. English Nature, Peterborough. European Commission (2001) Sustainable Tourism and Natura 2000. Guidelines, initiatives

and Good Practices in Europe . Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. European Commission (2007) Guidance Document on Article 6(4) of the ‘Habitats Directive’

92/43/EEC. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/guidance_en.htm Evans, D.M. & Warrington, S. (1997) The effects of recreational disturbance on wintering waterbirds on a mature gravel pit lake near london. International Journal of Environmental

Studies 53,167–182. Fernandez, C. & Azkona, P. (1993) Human disturbance affects parental care of marsh harriers and nutritional status of nestlings. The Journal of Wildlife Management 57, 602607. Fox A.D. & Madsen, J. (1997) Behavioural and distributional effects of hunting disturbance on waterbirds in europe: Implications for refuge design. Journal of Applied Ecology 34, 1-8. Gamauf, A.; Preleuthner, M. (1996) Gamauf and Preleuthner (1996) nfluence of tourism on the Marsh Harrier (Circus aeruginosus) in the "National Park Neusiedlersee-Seewinkel" (Austria). Abhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Österreich 29, 173193 (English abstract) Geist, C., Liao, J., Libby, S. & D. T. Blumstein, D.T. (2005) Does intruder group size and orientation affect flight initiation distance in birds? Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 28, 1-6. George, M. (1992) The Land Use Ecology and Conservation of Broadland . Packard, Chichester. Gill, J.A., Watkinson, A.R. & Sutherland, W.J. (1996) The impact of sugar beet farming practice on wintering pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus populations. Biological

Conservation 76, 95–100. Gill, J.A., Norris, K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2001a) Why behavioural responses may not reflect The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

the population consequences of human disturbance. Biological Conservation 97, 265-268. Glenn, N. (2006) Best Birdwatching Sites in Norfolk. Buckingham Press, Cambridgeshire. Goss-Custard, J.D., Triplet, P., Sueur, F. & West, A.D. (2006) Critical thresholds of disturbance by people and raptors in foraging wading birds. Biological Conservation 127, 88–97. GNDP (2012) Greater Norwich Development Partnership. Joint Core Strategy . Greater Nrowich Development Partnership, Norwich. Guillemain, M., Hervé Fritz, H. & Duncan, P. (2002) The importance of protected areas as nocturnal feeding grounds for dabbling ducks wintering in western France. Biological

Conservation 103,183–198. Goss-Custard, J.D. (2008) National Cycle Network – Exe Estuary Cycleway. Update of the

Appropriate Assessment of the subsections from Turf Lock to Powderham Church. Report to Devon County Council. Available from: www.devon.gov.uk/plandoc_91_3396.pdf Grant, G. (2010) Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Great Yarmouth Waterfront Area

Action Plan. Further Preferred Options. October 2010 . Available from: www.greatyarmouth.gov.uk/view/GYBC110690 Great Yarmouth BC (2005) Core Strategy Development Plan Document 2021. Issues and

Options. Great Yarmouth Borough Council, Great Yarmouth. Great Yarmouth BC (2009) Great Yarmouth Profile. Available from: http://www.enterprisegy.co.uk/downloads/1/great_yarmouth_profile_2009%5B1%5D.pdf Handley, J., Pauleit, S., Slinn, P., Barber, A., Baker, B., Jones, C. & Lindley, S. (2003)

English Nature Research Reports. Number 526. Accessible Natural Green Space Standards in Towns and Cities: A Review and Toolkit for their Implementation . English Nature, Peterborough. Herbert Woods (2012) Norfolk Broads Holidays and Short Breaks. Herbert Woods, Norwich. Hill, D., Hockin, D., Price, D. Tucker, G. Morris, R. & Treweek, J. (1997). Bird disturbance: improving the quality and utility of disturbance research. Journal of Applied Ecology 34, 275-288. Hockin, D., Ounsted, M., Gormant, D., Hillt, V., Kellert, V. & Barker, M.A. (1992) Examination of the Effects of Disturbance on Birds with Reference to its Importance in Ecological Assessments. Journal of Environmental Management 36, 253-286. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Holling, M. & RBBP (2011) Rare breeding birds in the United Kingdom 2009. British Birds 104, 476-537. Holman, I.P. & White, S.M. (2008) Synthesis of the Upper Thurne Research and

Recommendations for Management. Cranfield University, Cranfield. Jefferies , D.J. (1987) The effects of angling interests on otters, with particular reference to disturbance. In Angling and Widlife in Freshwaters, P.S. Maitland and A.L. Turner (eds) pp 23-30. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Edinburgh. JNCC (2007) The Broads. Site Details. Available from: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/sac.asp?EUcode=UK0013577 Jones, A., Bateman, I. & Wright, J. (2003) Estimating Arrival Numbers and Values for

Informal Recreational Use of British Woodlands. CSERGE / FC, Norwich. Kirby, J.S., Clee, C. & Seager, V. (1993) Impact and extent of recreational disturbance to wader roosts on the Dee Estuary: some preliminary results. Wader Study Group Bulletin 68, 53-58. Klein, R. J. T. & Bateman, I. J. (1998) The Recreational Value of Cley Marshes Nature Reserve: An Argument Against Managed Retreat? Water and Environment Journal, 12, 280-285. Klein, M.L., Humphrey, S.R. & Percival, H.F. (1995). Effects of ecotourism on distribution of waterbirds in a wildlife refuge. Conservation Biology 9, 1454â&#x20AC;&#x201C;1465. Kirby, J., Davidson, N., Giles, N., Owen, M. & Spray, C. (2004). Waterbirds and Wetland

Recreation Handbook: A review of Issues and Management Practice. The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust. Slimbridge. Ledoux, L., Crooks, S., Jordan, A. & Turner, R.K. (2000) Implementing EU Biodiversity

Policy: A UK Case Study. CSERGE Working Paper GEC 2000-03. CSERGE, Norwich. Liley, D. (2007). Access to the Countryside and Bird Conservation: Priorities for Research.

Natural England Research Report 028 . Footprint Ecology / Natural England. Liley, D (2008). Development and the North Norfolk coast. Scoping Document on the

Issues Relating to Access. Footprint Ecology, Dorset. Liley, D., Hoskin, R., Underhill-Day, J. & Tyldesley, D. (2008) Habitat Reuglations

Assessment: breckland Council SuBmission Core Strategy and Development Control Policis. Breckland District Council, Dereham. Liley, D., Jackson, D.B. & Underhill-Day, J.C. (2006) Visitor Access Patterns on the Thames The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Basin Heaths. English Nature, Peterborough. Leung, Y-F. & Marion, J.L. (1999) Spatial strategies for managing visitor impacts in national parks. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 17, 20-38. Madsen, J. (1985) Impact of disturbance on field utilization of pink-footed geese in west jutland, denmark. Biological Conservation 33, 53–63. Madsen, J. (1998) Experimental refuges for migratory waterfowl in Danish wetlands. II. tests of hunting disturbance effects. Journal of Applied Ecology, 35, 398–417. Mott Macdonald (2010) Habitats Regulation Assessment. Joint Core Strategy for

Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk. Greater Norwich Development Partnership, Norwich. Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership (2008) Coastal and Grazing Marsh Habiat Action Plan . Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership, Norwich. Norwich City Council (2011) Norwich Key Statistics. Available from: http://www.norwich.gov.uk/YourCouncil/documents/CityKeyStatsDec11v1.pdf NNNS (2011) Bird and Mammal Report 2010. Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists’ Society, Norwich. Olson, E.C., Bowman, M.L. & Roth, R.E. (1994) Interpretation and nonformal environmental education in natural resources management. The Journal of Environmental Education 15, 6–10. Orams, M.B. (1996) A conceptual model of touristâwildlife interaction: the case for education as a management strategy. Australian Geographer 27, 39–51. Pouwels, R., Opdam, P. & R. Jochem, R. (2011) Reconsidering the effectiveness of scientific tools for negotiating local solutions to conflicts between recreation and conservation with stakeholders. Ecology and Society 16, 17-23. Pearce-Higgins, J.W., S. K. Finney, S.K., Yalden, D.W.& Langston, R.H.W. (2007) Testing the effects of recreational disturbance on two upland breeding waders. Ibis 149, 45–55. Remacha, C., Pérez-Tris, J. & Delgado J.A. (2011) Reducing visitors’ group size increases the number of birds during educational activities: Implications for management of naturebased recreation. Journal of Environmental Management 92, 1564–1568. Randler, C. (2006) Disturbances by dog barking increase vigilance in coots Fulica atra.

European Journal of Wildlife Research 52, 265–270. Rayment, R., Lewis, P., Henderson, R. & Broom, G. (2000) Valuing Norfolk’s Coast: The. The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Economic Benefits of Environmental and Wildlife Tourism. RSPB, Sandy, Beds Ravenscroft, N., Parker, B., Vonk, R. & Wright, M. (2007) Disturbance to Waterbirds

Wintering in the Stour and Orwell Estuaries SPA . Wildside Ecology, unpublished. Rees, E.C., Bruce, J.H. & White, G. (2005) Factors affecting the behavioural responses of whooper swans (Cygnus c. cygnus) to various human activities. Biological Conservation 121, 369–382. Reimers, M. (2001) Can human erosion be accepted in the seaside dunes? From sanddyke to mountain scenery: an example form Romo, Denmark. In Coastal Dune

Management J.A. Houston, S.E. Edmondson & P.J. Rooney (eds) pp 223-226. University of Liverpool Press, Liverpool. Rodgers, J.A. & Schwikert, S.T. (2002) Buffer-Zone distances to protect foraging and loafing waterbirds from disturbance by personal watercraft and Outboard-Powered boats distancias. Conservation Biology 16, 216–224. Scott Wilson (2010) Greater Norwich Development Partnership. Stage 2b Water Cycle

Study. Greater Norwich Development Partnership, Norwich. Sharrock, J.T.R. (2010) The Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland. Pyser, London. Shaw, P. & Reeve, N. (2008) Influence of a parking area on soils and vegetation in an urban nature reserve. Urban Ecosystems 11, 107-120. Schipperijn, J., Ekholm, O., Ulrika, K., Stigsdotter, U.K., Toftager, M., Bentsen, P., KamperJørgensen, F. & Randrup, T.B. (2010) Factors influencing the use of green space: Results from a Danish national representative survey. Landscape and Urban Planning 95,130–137. Sutherland, W.J., Armstrong-Brown, S., Armsworth, P.R., Brereton, T., Brickland, J., Campbell, C.D., Daniel E. Chamberlain, D.E., Cooke, A.L., Nicholas K. Dulvy, N.K., Dusic, N.R., Fitton, M., Freckleton, R.P.,Godfray, C., Grout, N., Harvey, H.J., Hedley, C., Hopkins, J.J., Kift, N.B., Kirby, J., Kunin, W.E., MacDonald, D.W., Marker, B., Naura, M., Neale, A.R., Oliver, T., Osborn, D., Pullin, A.S., Shardlow, M.E.A., Showler, D.A., Smith, P.L., Richard J. Smithers, R.J., jean-Luc Solandt, J.-L., Spencer, J., Spray, C.J., Thomas, C.D., Thompson, J., Webb, S.E., Yalden, D.W. & Watkinson, A.R. (2006) The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK. Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 617–627.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

ThurneFisheries (2011) Horsey Mere -Pike Fishing Trial 2011. Available from: http://thurnefisheries.co.uk/ Turner, R.K., Brouwer, R., Georgiou, S., Bateman, I.J., Langford, I.H., Green, M. & Voisey, H. (2003) Management of a multi-purpose, open access wetland: the Norfolk and Suffolk Broads, UK. In Managing Wetlands, R.K. Turner, J.C.J.M. van den Bergh & R. Brouwer (eds), pp 250-270. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2001) Draft Wildlife-Dependent Recreational Uses Policy

Pursuant to the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. Available from: http://www.fws.gov/policy/library/2001/01fr3681.html Tyldesley, D. (2011) Assessing projects under the Habitats Directive: Guidance for

Competent Authorities. Report to the Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor Visit England (2011) Annual Survey of Visits to Visitor Attractions . Available from: http://www.visitengland.org/insight-statistics/major-tourismsurveys/attractions/Annual_Survey/index.aspx Visit

England

(2012)

Top

Towns

2011.

Available

from:

http://www.visitengland.org/Images/Top%20Towns%202011_tcm30-33056.pdf Welsh Harp Management Committee (2012) Welsh Harp / Brent Reservoir Management

Plan. Welsh Harp Management Committee , Brent / Barnet. Wood, A.M. (2001) Coastal erosion and torism in Scoltand: a review of protection measures to combat coaslat erosion related to tourism activites and faciltlites. In Coastal

Dune Management, J.A. Houston, S.E. Edmondson & P.J. Rooney (eds) pp 227-232. University of Liverpool Press, Liverpool. Wildfrontier (2011) Broads Authority Development Management Policies DPD. Appropriate

Assessment (schedule of Proposed Minor Changes) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; March 2011. Available at: http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/broads/live/search.html Wildfrontier (2012) Broads Authority Draft Habitats Regulations Assessment of Site Specific

Policies. Broads Authority, Norwich. Zwart, F. (2001) Dune management and communication with local inhabitats. In Coastal

Dune Management, J.A. Houston, S.E. Edmondson & P.J. Rooney (eds) pp 219-222. University of Liverpool Press, Liverpool.

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 1: COMPONENT SITES BROADS

THE

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Table 36. Component SSSIs of The Broads SAC and Broadland SPA. As understood, all of these sites are components of The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site but Damgate Marshes and Trinity Broads are not within the Broadland SPA. SSSI Component Natural England Citation of SAC/SPA Alderfen SPA/SAC Classic succession from open water to carr woodland . Broad Nesting environment for a range of breeding birds. Several species of water plant. Ant Broads SPA/SAC Flood plain supporting extensive undeveloped, unpolluted and primary fen. Nationally important carr woodland and only Marshes known site for several plant communities. Wide range of breeding birds and wintering wildfowl. Nationally important assemblage of fenland invertebrates. Barnby SPA/SAC Open water, carr woodland, fen, grazing marsh and dykes. Broad and Threatened communities confined to Norfolk and Suffolk. Marshes Outstanding assemblages of rare plants, birds and invertebrates. Broad Fen, SPA/SAC Fen, fen meadow, carr woodland and open water. Species Dilham rich vegetation as a result of regular cutting of reeds. Range of breeding and wintering bird species. Bure SPA/SAC Wetland site of national and international importance. Broads Excellent example of unreclaimed marshland, supporting a and range of typical Broadland plant communities, including Marshes probably the finest example of swamp alder carr in Britain. Diverse and rare plants due to regular cutting for reed, sedge and marsh hay. Restoration efforts have succeeded in returning water plants to the broad. Supports rare marshland birds and relict fen invertebrates. Burgh SPA/SAC Important unreclaimed wetland, managed by traditional Common mowing and grazing regimes. Wide range of floristically rich and habitats present including fen meadows. Site is also of Muckfleet entomological and ontological interest. Marshes Calthorpe SPA/SAC Small, isolated broad having a low nutrient input and Broad retaining a diverse and productive aquatic flora and fauna. Cantley SPA/SAC Primarily an improved grazing marsh, with areas of species Marshes rich grassland and fen meadow. A range of soil types supports a range of plant communities, dykes support a rich and diverse aquatic flora and fauna, including two nationally rare dragonflies. Marshes support an internationally important population of wintering widgeon, and nationally important populations of other wintering and breeding bird species. Crostwick SPA/SAC Excellent example of unimproved valley meadow, supporting Marsh a range of plant communities and marshland bird species. Damgate SAC One of the richest areas of traditionally manages grazing Marshes, marsh and dykes in Broadland. The relatively nutrient poor Acle dykes support a rich aquatic flora and fauna, including several uncommon species. Decoy SPA/SAC Wetland community characteristic of the region. Rare ArcticCarr, Acle alpine mosses indicative of plant communities being undisturbed since post-glacial times. Sedge and reedbeds support uncommon fenland flora, and dyke networks support a range of aquatic plants. Ducanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s SPA/SAC Species rich fen and grassland communities maintained by Marsh, traditional management support many notable plant species. Claxton The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

SSSI Geldeston Meadows

Component of SAC/SPA SPA/SAC

Hall Farm Fen, Hemsby

SPA/SAC

Halvergate Marshes

SPA/SAC

Hardley Flood

SPA

Limpenhoe Meadows

SPA/SAC

LudhamPotter Heigham Marshes Poplar Farm Meadows, Langley Priory Meadows, Hickling

SPA/SAC

Shallam Dyke Marshes, Thurne

SPA/SAC

Smallburgh Fen

SPA/SAC

Sprat's Water and Marshes, Carlton Colville Stanley and Alder Carrs, Aldeby

SPA/SAC

Natural England Citation A diverse flora resulting from traditional management, graduated water table and range of soil types. System of drainage dykes supports a diverse aquatic flora. Site supports typical grazing-march bird species. Unimproved fen grassland with system of dykes. Supports plant communities favouring both acidic and calcareous conditions, resulting in high plant diversity. Dykes support a range of aquatic flora and fauna, including a nationally rare species of water snail. The largest expanse of traditionally grazed marshes in Broadland. A diverse habitat including well-developed woodland, unimproved pasture, wet fen meadow, reedbed and alder carr. Ditches represent a wide range of water conditions with associated diverse aquatic flora and fauna, including outstanding invertebrate assemblages. Site supports populations of nationally and internationally important wintering waterfowl. Area of shallow lagoons and reedbeds with exposed soft muds at low tide. Reedbeds support nesting nationally important wildfowl and soft muds attract a range of wading birds. Three rare species of fly have been recorded at the site. Large area of unimproved fen grassland with dykes. Maintained by summer grazing, the fen grassland is exceptionally diverse due to emerging springs. Dyke network supports a range of emergent and aquatic plants, including nationally rare and local species. One of the richest areas of grazing marsh remaining in Broadland. Drainage dykes are of particular importance, supporting several rare aquatic plants and a rich invertebrate assemblage. Small, spring-fed calcareous fen, with exceptionally diverse meadows. Dykes contain clear spring waters and support a rich aquatic flora. An area of permanent grassland on damp, acidic peat. Traditional annual hay-cut maintains an exceptionally rich and varied flora. Acidic plant communities are rare in Broadland. Drainage dykes support a rich aquatic flora. Area of semi-improved pasture. Tussocky, undisturbed grassland provides a habitat for several nesting wetland birds. Site is considered the most important area of grazing march for waders in Broadland. Clearwater drainage dykes support a diverse aquatic flora. Small, spring-fed valley fen of exceptional ecological interest. Diverse plant community including a number of rare and local species. Spring-fed mixed fen, open water, alder carr and grazing marsh. Fen community typical of Broadland. Rich floral diversity due to high summer water levels, seasonal grazing and reed cutting. Area also has high ornithological interest. The only extensive area of regularly flooded alder carr and fen in the Waveney Valley. Site acts as a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;washâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in periods of high river flow and supports a range of plants characteristic to Broadland. Site has a rich invertebrate fauna and breeding

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

SSSI

Component of SAC/SPA

Trinity Broads

SAC

Upper Thurne Broads and Marshes

SPA/SAC

Upton Broad and Marshes

SPA/SAC

Yare Broads and Marshes

SPA/SAC

Natural England Citation bird community, and part of the site is Qualifying as a conservation area for otters. A series of five shallow inter-connected lakes with fringing reedswamp, wet woodland and fen. Isolation from the main River Bure allows Trinity Broads to sustain a superior water quality and associated aquatic floral diversity. It is one of the few systems clear enough to sustain a charophyte flora. Open water areas support nationally important populations of breeding and wintering wildfowl. The site also supports a rich invertebrate diversity, and otters are regularly recorded here. The site comprises open water, woodland, grazing marsh, marginal swamp and fen and is one of the best examples of an unreclaimed wetland complex in Britain. Associated broads and marshes support flora and fauna of national importance. The site includes two of only four broads which have not suffered significant deterioration in water quality and offers an important site for research into the history and conservation of the Norfolk Broads. One of only four broads that retain clear water and abundant water plants, due to an isolated position preventing nutrient enrichment and recreational over-use. Clear waters support nationally rare water plants. Site has a rich invertebrate assemblage and supports grass snakes and harriers. Nationally important wetland site consisting of extensive unreclaimed fen, carr woodland, open water and grazing fen. Site supports high botanical and ornithological diversity

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

APPENDIX 2: FIGURE

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Figure 1. Percentage of visitors to each of the four sites from each of the Norwich city postcode districts (HGB: Hoveton Great Broad; Hick: Hickling; Ran: Ranworth; and Str: Strumpshaw).

The Ecology Consultancy NS&OC / Information to inform a HRA / Beyond Green

Beyond Green Developments North Sprowston & Old Catton

Appendix 5.3: Arboricultural Report

ES Volume 2: Technical Appendices

ARBORICULTURAL REPORT to BS 5837:2005 at Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre Norwich Norfolk NR7

Client: Beyond Green Client Address: 1 Albemarle Way Finsbury EC1V 4JB Client Contact: 020 7549 2184 (Tel) 020 7549 2182 (Fax) JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Page 2 of 24

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 3 of 24

Contents 1.

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................4

1.1

Purpose of the Report .................................................................................................................................4

1.2

Terms of Reference ....................................................................................................................................4

1.3

Scope of the Report ....................................................................................................................................4

1.4

Survey Details ............................................................................................................................................5

Site Description ...............................................................................................................................6

2.1

Land Use.....................................................................................................................................................6

2.2

Topography ................................................................................................................................................6

2.3

Treescape....................................................................................................................................................6

2.4

Visual Amenity Value ................................................................................................................................6

2.5

Age Class Mix ............................................................................................................................................6

2.6

Species Diversity........................................................................................................................................7

Status of the Trees...........................................................................................................................8

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations ....................................................................................8

Discussion.........................................................................................................................................9

5.1

Tree Condition & Recommended Works.......................................................................................................9

5.2

Potential Arboricultural Implications & Design Advice ..........................................................................11

Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................13

Appendix 1: Tree Descriptions and Recommendations ..................................................................16 Appendix 2: Explanation of Tree Descriptions ................................................................................17 Appendix 3: General Guidelines........................................................................................................19 Appendix 4: Glossary of Terms & Abbreviations............................................................................20 Appendix 5: Author Qualifications ...................................................................................................21 Appendix 6: Tree Constraints Plan...................................................................................................22

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 4 of 24

Introduction

1.1

Purpose of the Report

1.1.1

A report is required at a large area of land to the North of Sprowston and Old Catton (north east of Norwich City Centre), Broadland, to provide detailed, independent, arboricultural advice on the trees present, in the context of potential development.

1.2

Terms of Reference

1.2.1

I am instructed by Beyond Green to visit the site and prepare my findings in a report.

1.2.2

For this purpose I have been supplied with a topographical survey, Drawing No. BG/A071324SUR/01.

1.2.3

Although the topographical survey is highly detailed; due to the size of this particular site and due to the volume of vegetation within it, it was not practical to plot every tree stem. As such, many of the large areas of vegetation were only indicated as a green line on the topographical survey.

1.2.4

To avoid inaccuracies with regards to tree stem positions on the Tree Constraints Plan at Appendix 6, many of these large areas have been surveyed as groups or woodlands in order to produce this report.

1.2.5

Where particularly good or poor specimens were observed on the edges of these groups and woodlands, they have been surveyed individually and plotted as accurately as possible on the Tree Constraints Plan at Appendix 6 by using measurements taken on site.

1.3

Scope of the Report

1.3.1

This report is compiled in accordance with BS 5837:2005 Trees in relation to construction.

1.3.2

Preliminary recommendations are given with a view to the long-term management of a sustainable tree cover.

1.3.3

All trees within the site boundary with a stem diameter above 75mm are included.

1.3.4

Where applicable trees outside the site boundary, but close enough to be affected by the proposed development, are included.

1.3.5

The specific design of any proposed development is not generally taken into account at this stage.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 5 of 24

1.4

Survey Details

1.4.1

The survey took place during the month of August 2011.

1.4.2

The survey was conducted by Toby Parsons.

1.4.3

Inspection was made at ground level. Further investigation, such as climbed inspections or decay detection surveys, may be recommended where appropriate.

1.4.4

Measurements were obtained using clinometers, specialist tapes or electronic distometers. Where this was not possible measurements were estimated.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 6 of 24

Site Description

2.1

Land Use

2.1.1

The majority of this large site is arable agricultural land with its associated buildings and residential dwellings.

2.1.2

The site also encapsulates several large established woodland plantations, paddock areas, an area of private parkland and several sports fields.

2.2

Topography

2.2.1

Generally speaking, the site is approximately level. However, there are many minor undulations throughout the site

2.3

Treescape

2.3.1

To the south of the site are the residential areas of Sprowston and Old Catton, which currently form the north eastern fringe of Norwich city. There areas contain occasional mature garden trees and many mature street trees.

2.3.2

To the north, west and east of the site is mainly arable agricultural land with well established field boundary hedgerows, which include many mature trees of good form. Occasional woodland plantations were also observed.

2.3.3

The vegetation within the site itself consists of generally excellent quality mature individual specimens, some large woodland plantations and well established field boundary hedgerows.

2.3.4

The trees and other items of vegetation on this site have a significant impact on the local treescape.

2.4

Visual Amenity Value

2.4.1

The trees, groups, woodlands and hedgerows are important established landscape features that add to the rural/agricultural nature of this area. As such, they collectively provide an excellent visual amenity to the surrounding area.

2.5

Age Class Mix

2.5.1

The trees surveyed ranged in age from young to over-mature.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 7 of 24

2.6

Species Diversity

2.6.1

Species surveyed include Rowan, Crab Apple, Hawthorn, Norway Maple, Oak, Ash, Plum, Sweet Chestnut, Field Maple, Sycamore, Willow, Plum, Leylandii, Lawson Cypress, Laurel, Elm, Spruce, Birch, Beech, Cedar, Cherry, Aspen, Poplar, Lime, Scots Pine, Hornbeam, London Plane, Whitebeam, Horse Chestnut, Tulip Tree, Liquidambar, Privet, Alder and Hazel. The predominant species were Oak and Hawthorn, with other species being occasional, or even single, specimens.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 8 of 24

Status of the Trees

3.1

The area that was surveyed in order to produce this report is governed by Broadland District Council.

3.2

A check has yet to be made to the council with regards to Tree Preservation Orders or Conservation Areas enforced on this site. This is due to the shear size of the site and the volume of items of vegetation within it, and also that it is unlikely that the whole site will be developed in one phase.

3.3

As such, we would recommend that status checks of the trees within areas be done prior to when it is proposed to develop individual areas.

3.4

In this instance we would recommend that it is assumed that the trees within the site are protected, and that the Local Authority be consulted prior to the removal of, or work on any tree on site.

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

4.1

Full details of all individual trees, groups, woodlands and hedges surveyed are recorded in the tables at Appendix 1. A full explanation of the tables can be found at Appendix 2.

4.2

Please refer also to the Tree Constraints Plan at Appendix 6 (and Section 1.2.5) for tree locations.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 9 of 24

Discussion

5.1

Tree Condition & Recommended Works

5.1.1

The tree survey revealed a total of 605 items of vegetation (390 individual trees, 128 groups of trees, 76 hedges and 11 woodlands). Of these, 136 trees/groups/woodlands were identified as retention category ‘A’, 319 trees/group/hedges were identified as retention category ‘B’, 123 trees/groups/hedges were identified as retention category ‘C’ and 27 trees/groups were identified as retention category ‘R’. Please refer to Appendix 2 for retention category and definition criteria.

5.1.2

27 trees/groups (T33, T44, T73, T75, T83, T92, G137, T185, T207, T230, T235, T237, T242, T243, G266, T283, T322, T350, G381, T384, T409, T435, T438, T507, T524, T543 and T552) were identified as retention category ‘R’. These trees require removal for arboricultural reasons regardless of any on site development, detailed below: •

T322 is considered to be unsafe due to the presence of the wood decaying fungi Ustulia deusta at its base, and the trees position within falling distance of the adjacent road. As such, it should be removed as soon as it is reasonably practicable; its removal is of high priority.

•

The remaining trees have been recommended for removal to prevent them from becoming dangerous trees or in order to benefit adjacent trees; their removal is of a lower priority.

5.1.3

Some tree pruning works are recommended for reasons of public safety and to ensure the long-term health of the trees, as detailed at Appendix 1. Please note that some of these recommendations may not be necessary at present due to the current land use and limited public access, however, the works should be undertake if the area is developed or the land use changes.

5.1.4

Where a full detailed inspection of trees was inhibited by restricted access or by the presence of ivy/epicormic shoots/understorey vegetation, as detailed at Appendix 1, it is advised that these trees be re-inspected for any possible defects when the ivy/epicormic shoots/understorey vegetation has been removed or when access has been made available.

5.1.5

Please note that Ivy on trees is not ideal from an arboricultural perspective, as it can potentially hide defects and it increases the sail effect of the crown. However, it can provide an excellent ecological habitat for various species including bats. Due to the uninhabited rural nature of the majority of the site, the potential for some of these trees to be used by bats or other species is increased. As such, we would recommend that an ecologist be consulted prior to removing Ivy from these trees.

 JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 10 of 24

5.1.6

Trees which have been noted to have significant structural or physiological defects, as detailed at Appendix 1, should be monitored (re-inspected and re-assessed) on an annual basis to assess if their condition is still acceptable. Although these trees were considered to be in an acceptable condition at the time of the inspection, the defects observed may lead to their early demise of render them unsafe in the future.

5.1.7

Those trees which overhang the public footpaths or public highways, detailed at Appendix 1, shall require future maintenance in order to maintain clearance heights for vehicular or pedestrian traffic. These heights should be 5.6m above a road and 2.5m above a footpath.

5.1.8

There are many trees on site, particularly many of the individual Oak specimens that are reaching over maturity and are close to becoming veteran trees. Veteran trees are trees that have reached their full potential and are entering a stage of decline, although it should be noted that this decline would be very slow and that these trees are likely to contribute for many, many years to come. Ecologically, these trees are incredibly important as they provide habitats for a huge array of invertebrates, especially those that are associated with dead and decaying wood. From a safety point of view veteran trees may not be ideal as they often have cavities and large quantities of deadwood which could potentially pose a risk. However, with the correct management such as restricting access or diverting paths or roads away from these trees, they can be left to slowly decline without the need for radical remedial work. These trees also form important landscape features with not only ecological value, but also cultural value. As such, every effort should be made to retain and incorporate these trees into the final design.

5.1.9

The numerous hedgerows and woodlands within this site are also likely to have significant ecological value, and due to how well they have been managed over the years, they also provide excellent landscape features. As such, every effort should be made to retain and incorporate them into the final design.

5.1.10 The species and age diversity of existing trees on site is excellent; however is it possible that some trees may require removal to facilitate development on site. As such, careful consideration must be given to designating areas to be replanted during the initial design phase to ensure continued tree cover.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 11 of 24

5.2

Potential Arboricultural Implications & Design Advice

5.2.1

The full details of the proposed development are not known at present. However, the following comments can be made about the site in terms of its tree cover in relation to a potential development.

5.2.2

During development the part of the tree most commonly under threat, and most commonly ignored, is the rooting system. When trees are damaged, particularly the roots, their long-term health and stability can be affected. Most development activity can have an impact on the future condition and safety of a tree, and therefore careful planning and management of tree protection should ensure a continued sustainable tree cover with minimal stress to existing trees.

5.2.3

There are a numerous high amenity trees, groups, woodlands and hedgerows within this site that form well established natural landscape features. They will enhance any proposed development and care should be taken at the design stage to ensure that these trees, groups, woodlands and hedgerows are retained (please refer to Sections 5.1.8 & 5.1.9).

5.2.4

In order to ensure that the retained trees on site are properly protected during the development phase, the tree rooting zones are to be considered. For the purpose of development the rooting zone of the tree is known as the Root Protection Area or RPA. The RPA of each tree or group is marked on the Tree Constraints Plan at Appendix 6 and represents the rooting zone which, where possible, should remain undisturbed. The protection of retained trees can therefore be achieved by creating a Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ) based on the RPAs.

5.2.5

Damage caused by any construction activity such as demolition, soil stripping, and provision of services needs to be considered at the design stage. Care should be taken to avoid damage to tree roots when existing structures such as tarmac surfaces are removed within a RPA.

5.2.6

The laying of access roads, driveways, parking areas or any other hard surfaces planned in proximity to retained trees needs to be considered. There are many solutions available to construct hard surfaces over RPAs without causing damage to trees.

5.2.7

Boundary walls or other light structures can be constructed without damage to roots through the use of piled foundations rather than the more traditional strip foundations.

5.2.8

The location of drainage and utilities within the RPA can be achieved if need be, using special techniques and supervision.

5.2.9

The position of the site compound is a major consideration. It is recommended that this, which typically includes the site office, facilities, toilets, storage of materials and parking, is located away from trees and outside the RPA.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 12 of 24

5.2.10 Consideration must be given to movement of both vehicle and pedestrian traffic. If possible traffic should be diverted away from the RPAs. If this is not possible a range of temporary surfaces are available to distribute the weight of traffic and allow the roots to receive moisture and air. 5.2.11 Generally, the alteration of ground levels within the RPA is not acceptable, however, should ground levels need to be lowered in areas adjacent to trees or within the minimum distance recommended, appropriate measures should be taken to minimise the detrimental effects on the trees and their root systems. With regards to raising levels, it is necessary to maintain adequate supplies of moisture and oxygen through the soil to the tree roots. Therefore, no material should be placed within the RPA without arboricultural advice. 5.2.12 The shade that will be cast by the retained trees must also be considered. Where buildings are to be positioned within the shade cast area of trees, these should be designed in order to maximise light levels. If required, JCA can provide a shade cast prediction plan. 5.2.13 Many development sites contain areas of nature conservation interest. Trees and hedgerows, in particular, provide an important habitat for birds, bats, invertebrates and fungi and appropriate attention needs to be paid to preserving habitats throughout the development process. JCA can provide ecological and bat surveys where required. 5.2.14 Where a landscape planting scheme is proposed, consideration must be made at the planning stage as to where this is to be implemented on site. Such locations should be protected in order to prevent soil compaction and/or contamination and should therefore form part of the Construction Exclusion Zone. JCA can provide Tree Planting Schemes where required.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 13 of 24

Conclusions

6.1

The trees surveyed were generally found to be in good condition.

6.2

27 trees/groups have been recommended for removal for arboricultural reasons. These are discussed in Section 5 and detailed at Appendix 1.

6.3

Some pruning works were recommended for reasons of public safety and to ensure the long term health of the trees. These are summarised in Section 5 and detailed at Appendix 1.

6.4

Various trees require re-inspection when the Ivy/epicormic shoots/understorey vegetation that prevented detailed inspection has been removed. These are summarised in Section 5 and detailed at Appendix 1. Please also refer to Section 5.1.5.

6.5

Various trees require annual monitoring to assess if their condition is still acceptable due to the presence of structural or physiological defects. These are summarised in Section 5 and detailed in Appendix 1.

6.5.1

6.6

Due to the size of the site and the volume of vegetation within it, recommendations have been made to check for the status of the trees as and when it is proposed to develop individual areas. At this moment in time we would recommend that it is assumed that the trees within the site are protected and that the Local Authority be consulted prior to the removal of, or work on any tree on site.

6.7

All development work carried out in close proximity to trees should be done so in a manner sympathetic to their needs. Otherwise the condition of the trees may deteriorate in the months and years following the development, leading to a loss of amenity and potentially hazardous trees.

6.8

Care should be taken at the design stage to ensure that the retained trees are protected. The protection of retained trees can be achieved by the creation of a Construction Exclusion Zone based on the Root Protection Area of a tree. The Root Protection Area of each tree or group is marked on the Tree Constraints Plan at Appendix 6.

6.9

The proposed development should be accompanied by an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) detailing the specific protection measures necessary for each tree. This should specify fencing standards and positions (the creation of the Construction Exclusion Zone), acceptable construction techniques and necessary tree works.

6.10

Upon instruction JCA Ltd are able to provide a comprehensive Arboricultural Method Statement in order to ensure the continued health of trees throughout the proposed

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 14 of 24

development. We are also able to provide tree planting schemes and organise tree works.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 15 of 24

Appendices

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Appendix 1

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

G1 Mixed species

MOD

40+

See plan

Well maintained boundary hedge situated on adjacent land in between housing estate and open fields. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

See plan

5 trees forming linear group. Situated on adjacent land. All trees previously No action required. reduced and now with immature regrowth. No major visible defects.

MOD

20-40

See plan

Well maintained boundary hedge situated on adjacent land in between housing estate and open fields. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Height (m)

N W

Observations E

Semi-mature H2

Hawthorn

To 10 at base

To 30

To 10 at base

Crataegus monogyna

Early-mature G3

Norway Maple

To 5.5

Acer platanoides

Early-mature H4

Hawthorn

Crataegus monogyna

Norway Maple

2.4

Acer platanoides

2.4

Early-mature

Norway Maple

Early-mature

2 6

2.5

FAIR

Semi-mature

5.5 10

Situated within H4. Previously reduced. Acceptable condition at present. No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Situated within H4. Previously reduced. Acceptable condition at present. No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Situated within H4. Previously reduced. Acceptable condition at present. No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

GOOD

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Acer platanoides

English Oak

FAIR

2.4

Acer platanoides

Norway Maple

No action required. GOOD GOOD

2.4

Early-mature T5

Recommendations

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Semi-mature

Diameter (cm)

Mixed species linear group. Situated on adjacent land. Species include Ave. Ave. Ave. See plan (ave. 2.5 Rowan, Crab Apple, Hawthorn and No action required. GOOD GOOD 4.5 2 15 all round) Alder. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

Species Latin Name

Crown Spread

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Est 6

5.5 6

Quercus robur

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Crown overhangs the No action required. boundary over the adjacent garden. Metal screw in stem at 1m with some dark staining present. Acceptable condition at present.

Semi-mature G9

Hawthorn & Plum

To 3

To 12

See plan

Small group of Hawthorn and Plum. Possibly part of an old hedgerow. Acceptable condition at present.

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

See plan

Occasional vegetation Situated on adjacent land within residential gardens. No major visible defects. Species include Privet, Elder, Plum and Hawthorn.

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Crataegus monogyna & Prunus sp

Semi-mature To 3

G 10 Mixed species

JCA Limited 2011

To 10

Appendix 1

Retention Category

Mixed species

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

HIGH

40+

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

LOW

40+

Recommendations

E S

To 13

Est to 38

See plan

8 trees in a row situated just within the rear gardens of the adjacent properties. Species include Silver Birch, Norway Maple and Oak. Stems not plotted on topographical surevy, hence surveyed as a group. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects. Limited inspection due to location.

Est to 10

See plan

Well maintained boundary hedge belonging to the adjacent property. No major visible defects.

Early-mature G 11

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Amenity Value

Observations

Structural Condition

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Early-mature H 12

Privet Ligustrum ovalifolium

3.5

Early-mature T 13

T 14

Field Maple

6.5

2.5

Est 30

3.5

Situated on adjacent land within H12. No major visible defects. Limited inspection due to location. No action required. Dimensions estimated as a result. Minor dieback noted.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Multi-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Previously reduced No action required. now with immature re-growth.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

See plan

Mixed species group Situated on adjacent land within rear garden of the adjacent properties. Limited No action required. inspection and dimensions estimated due to position.

FAIR

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species linear group forming the rear boundary of the adjacent properties. Species include Hawthorn, No action required. Leylandii, Elder and Oak. Limited inspection due to location. Dimensions estimated.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the boundary. No major visible defects Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD HIGH although significant Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

40+

MOD

40+

HIGH

40+

3.5

Acer campestre

3.5

Early-mature

Plum

5.5

40 at base

3 Est 2.5

Prunus sp

Semi-mature G 15

Hawthorn & Lawson cypress

To 4.5

1.5

Est to 17

Crataegus monogyna & Chamaecyparis lawsoniana

Early-mature G 16 Mixed species

Early-mature G 17

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

To 5.5

Est to 30

Est 2 well trimmed/maintained to 24 See plan (ave. 1.5 To 3 0.5 at all round) Hawthorn. No major visible defects. base

Mature T 18

English Oak

93 over Ivy

6.5

7 Est 6

Quercus robur

No action required.

Early-mature G 19

Hawthorn

To 6

To 25

3.5

125 over Ivy

Hedgerow group. Maintenance now lapsed. No major visible defects.

See plan

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

Crataegus monogyna

8.5

Mature T 20

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

7 Est 7

Situated on boundary with the adjacent property. Twin-stemmed at 3m with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Occasional pruning GOOD GOOD wounds due to crown lifting. Significant Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Well maintained hedge, situated on No action required. GOOD GOOD boundary with the adjacent property.

LOW

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Some dieback noted. Remove Ivy and reMajor Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection. Stem not plotted on Prune out dieback. topographical survey.

HIGH

20-40

MOD

40+

Observations

Recommendations

E S

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Early-mature H 21

Leyland Cypress 1.5 & Laurel

To 10

See plan

X Cupressocyparis leylandii & Prunus

Mature T 22

English Oak

3.5

Quercus robur

6 85 over Est 7.5 Ivy 7.5

Early-mature H 23 Mixed species

To 2.5

To 15 at base

See plan

Mature T 24

T 25

T 26

English Oak

Est 58

Est 7

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

1.5

3.5

78 over Ivy

Est 6

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Mixed species field boundary hedgerow. Species include Plum, Hawthorn, Ivy and Ash. Excellent habitat and screening properties.

85 over Ivy

FAIR

MOD

40+

6.5

Situated within H23. Limited inspection as a result. Crown overhangs the road. Ivy to 9.5m Remove Ivy and reGOOD prevented detailed inspection. Some inspect for defects. deadwood noted. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Situated within H23. Limited inspection as a result. Crown overhangs the road. Major Ivy Remove Ivy and reGOOD prevented detailed inspection. Some inspect for defects. deadwood noted. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Field boundary hedgerow. Species include Hawthorn, Holly, Field Maple No action required. GOOD and Oak. No major visible defects. Provides excellent screen and habitat.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. Situated within H27. No major visible defects. Major Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD Ivy prevented detailed inspection. inspect for defects. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

MOD

40+

Situated within H27. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown lifting. Major Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

MOD

40+

5.5

MOD

40+

Early-mature H 27

To 7

Mixed species

See plan

Est 7

Early-mature T 28

T 29

T 30

English Oak

85 over Ivy

5.5

Quercus robur

7.5

Early-mature

Est 6

English Oak

67 over Ivy

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Est 6

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

125 over Ivy

Est 6 6.5

No action required. GOOD GOOD

8.5

To 33 at base

FAIR

Situated within H23. Limited inspection as a result. Crown overhangs the road. Ivy to 6m Remove Ivy and reprevented detailed inspection. Large branch GOOD inspect for defects. stub at 6m due to past snapped limb. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

Est 8

Quercus robur

FAIR

Appendix 1

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

FAIR

MOD

40+

GOOD

MOD

20-40

<10

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD HIGH inspect for defects.

40+

8.5 Twin-stemmed at 3.5m with a 95 balanced crown. Crown overhangs Remove Ivy and reover Est 7.5 Est 8.5 the road. Occasional pruning wounds GOOD GOOD HIGH inspect for defects. Ivy due to crown lifting. Significant ivy prevented detailed inspection. 8

40+

135 over Ivy

40+

20-40

Observations

To 6

To 28 at base

120 at base

Mixed species

Ash

Dead Ivy clad tree. Acceptable condition at present due to land use, Remove if the area however, it will require removal if the is developed. area is developed.

5 Est 1

Mature English Oak

5.5

Stem not plotted on topographical survey. Multi-stemmed (3 stems) at ground level Remove Ivy and rewith a balanced crown. Occasional pruning inspect for defects if wounds due to crown lifting. Dense Ivy area is developed. prevented detailed inspection. Acceptable condition at present.

Est 6

Fraxinus excelsior

T 33

Mixed species field boundary hedgerow. Species include Plum and No action required. GOOD Hawthorn. Excellent habitat and screening properties.

See plan

Early-mature T 32

75 over Ivy

1 5

Quercus robur

Mature G 34

English Oak

To 5.5

3.5

130 0ver Ivy

To 25 at base

See plan

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 35 Mixed species

To 4.5

See plan

Early-mature H 36 Mixed species

To 4.5

To 10

135 over Ivy

See plan

7.5

Mature T 37

English Oak

8.5

T 38

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature T 39

English Oak

7.5

Early-mature English Oak

Est 6 8.5

Quercus robur

T 40

Est 9 10

Quercus robur

Mature

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

78 over Ivy

Recommendations

Early-mature H 31

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

5.5

Est 6 1.5

2 Oak trees growing within H31. Stems not plotted on topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of both trees.

FAIR

DEAD DEAD DEAD

Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD inspect for defects.

Mixed species field boundary hedgerow. Species include Hawthorn, Oak and Elder. Excellent habitat and No action required. GOOD screening properties. Occasional gaps noted. Mixed species field boundary hedgerow. Species include Plum, Hawthorn, Oak, Elder and Field Maple. Excellent habitat and screening properties.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

No action required. GOOD

Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD HIGH inspect for defects.

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Crown overhangs inspect for defects the road. Major Ivy prevented and remove detailed inspection. Some significant deadwood. deadwood noted over the road.

FAIR

HIGH

Appendix 1

Physiological Condition

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

FAIR

HIGH

10-20

FAIR

MOD

10-20

GOOD

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

FAIR

POOR

HIGH

<10

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Group of Hawthorn adjacent to playground. Likely to have once been No action required. GOOD GOOD part of the adjacent long field boundary hedgerow.

LOW

20-40

Stem not plotted on topographical survey. Occasional pruning wounds Remove Ivy and redue to crown lifting. Minor deadwood GOOD GOOD inspect for defects. noted. Situated within hedgerow. Ivy to 5m prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species hedgerow situated between footpath/cycle path and the adjacent field. Species include No action required. GOOD GOOD Hawthorn and Field Maple. Provides excellent screen and habitat.

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species linear group situated between footpath/cycle path and road. Species include Plum, Hawthorn and No action required. Field Maple. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of all specimens.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 1m with a balanced crown. Re-growth from old stump. Monitor annually Some decay present close to base. due to basal decay. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

N W

T 42

T 43

English Oak

1 12

83 over Ivy

Est 4 1

Semi-mature

0 7.5

0.5

Ulmus sp.

Mature

5.5

English Oak

Mature English Oak

12.5

95 over Ivy

Single stemmed and vertical with an Remove Ivy and reunbalanced crown. Crown overhangs inspect for defects the road. Ivy prevented detailed and remove inspection. Deadwood noted. Sparse deadwood. Monitor upper crown. Likely to be in decline. annually.

Situated adjacent to T41. Stem not plotted on topographical survey. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD

Twin-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Est 5.5 Significant old bark wound at 0 to 1m Monitor annually. on road side. Minor Ivy to stem. Acceptable condition at present. 5

Quercus robur

T 44

Recommendations

Quercus robur

Elm

Observations

Mature T 41

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Est 7 7

Quercus robur

Twin-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Significant wound with cubical brown decay at base. Unnaceptable condition in road side position.

Remove.

Early-mature H 45

To 3

To 9

See plan

Mixed species

Early-mature G 46

Hawthorn

To 4.5

To 0.5 26 at base

85 over Ivy

See plan

Crataegus monogyna

Mature T 47

English Oak

2.5

7.5 5

Quercus robur

Semi-mature H 48 Mixed species

To 4.5

to 8

Early-mature G 49 Mixed species

To 5.5

Ave. 23

1.5

120 at base

Early-mature T 50

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

3.5

3.5 3.5

Well maintained hedgerow adjacent to playground. No major visible defects.

2.5

Est 7

7.5 8

Semi-mature 4.5

0.5

Mixed species

Ave. 25

T 53

T 54

English Oak

2.5

124

See plan

Est 7.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

14.5

2.5

124

Est 7.5 8

Quercus robur

Mixed species

To 7.5

0.5

Ave. 27

To 8 0.5 Mixed species

To 33

G 57 Mixed species

To 8

Ave. 26

To 40 over Ivy

Mixed species

Early-mature G 59

Field Maple

to 10

Acer campestre

Mixed species

To 12

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

To 35

40+

Deadwood.

GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

See plan

Hawthorn and Field Maple forming one crown. No major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of No action required. GOOD GOOD all stems. Acceptable condition at present.

MOD

20-40

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Field Maple and Hawthorn forming a linear group adjacent to to footpath and road. Ivy prevented detailed No action required. GOOD GOOD inspection of all stems. Acceptable condition at present.

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

See plan

Early-mature G 60

Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD HIGH inspect for defects.

FAIR

MOD

Semi-mature G 58

FAIR

See plan

Semi-mature Ave. To 9 2.5 27

40+

No action required.

2 Field Maple and 1 Oak forming one crown. Crown overhangs the footpath and road. No major visible defects. No action required. GOOD GOOD Ivy prevented detailed inspection of all stems. Acceptable condition at present.

Semi-mature G 56

Twin-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Overhanging footpath and road. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Multi-stemmed at 5m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the footpath Est 8.5 and road. Deadwood noted. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

Semi-mature G 55

HIGH

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH Minor deadwood throughout. Minor Ivy to stem.

2 Oak and I Field Maple forming a linear group. Only 1 stem plotted on topographical survey. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of all stems. Acceptable condition at present.

7.5

Mature

Quercus robur

G 52

40+

Recommendations

6.5 14

Retention Category

English Oak

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Mature T 51

Observations

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

See plan

4 Field Maple and 1 Hawthorn in linear group. No major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of all stems.

Linear group of Field Maple. No major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of all stems. Acceptable condition at present.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Mixed species group. Species include Plum Spruce, Birch, Hawthorn, Willow, Cherry and Laurel. Stems not plotted on topographical survey, hence surveyed as a No action required. group. Limited inspection due to being positioned in what appears to be private residential land. No major visible defects.

Appendix 1

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

20-40

Well maintained hedge. Situated on the boundary with 318 Buxton Road No action required. GOOD GOOD and the adjacent fields. No major visible defects.

LOW

40+

Situated within the garden of 318 Buxton road. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey. Limited No action required. inspection due to position. Dimensions estimated as a result.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

See plan

Mixed species group situated within the rear gardens of properties on Buxton Road. Species include Leyandii, Yew, Sycamore and Norway Maple. Stems not plotted on No action required. topographical survey. Limited inspection due to location and due to uncut mature crops in the adjacent field.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

See plan

Field boundary group. No major Re-inspect when visible defects. Surveyed from a crops have been considerable distance away due to the FAIR harvested and access presence of mature uncut crops is available. preventing access.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

FAIR

LOW

40+

See plan

Gappy Hawthorn hedge row with occasional mature Oak trees. No Re-inspect when stems plotted on the topographical crops have been FAIR survey. Surveyed from a considerable harvested and access distance away due to the presence of is available. mature uncut crops preventing access.

FAIR

MOD

40+

See plan

Unmanaged field boundary hedgerow adjacent to playing fields. No major visible defects although Ivy prevented detailed inspection of some stems. Ocasional specimaems have recenly failed and are obstructing the footpath.

FAIR

LOW

40+

FAIR

MOD

40+

Linear group of 7 mature Oak trees within H68. No stems plotted on the Remove Ivy and retopographical survey. Ivy prevented inspect for defects if GOOD GOOD HIGH detailed inspection of all stems. No land use changes. major visible defects.Minor deadwood noted throughout.

40+

44 at base

3.5

Est 7 3

Early-mature Beech

To 15 at base

See plan

Fagus sylvatica

Est 6

Mature T 63

Cherry

Est 6

Prunus sp

Early-mature G 64 Mixed species

To 10

to 25

To 25 at base

Early-mature G 65

Hawthorn

Crataegus monogyna

Early-mature to mature G 66 Mixed species

Est to 14

Est To 75

See plan

Early-mature G 67 Mixed species

Est to 17

Semi-mature to early-mature H 68

To 6

Mixed species

Est to 75

Ave. 25 at base

Mature T 69

English Oak

G 70

English Oak

5.5

6.5 6

Quercus robur

Mature To 15

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

FAIR

Salix caprea

H 62

No action required.

Amenity Value

2.5

Multi-stemmed (3 stems) at ground level with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the footpath.Situated on the edge of G60. No major visible defects.

MOD

3.5 8

Recommendations

Structural Condition

Goat Willow

Observations

FAIR

Early-mature T 61

To 89 over Ivy

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

See plan

Gappy Hawthorn hedge row with occasional mature Oak and semi-mature Re-inspect when Elm trees. No stems plotted on the crops have been topographical survey. Surveyed from a harvested and access considerable distance away due to the is available. presence of mature uncut crops preventing access.

Situated within H68. Vertical with a balanced crown. Dead Ivy in crown. No major visible defects. Minor deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Remove failed specimens.

FAIR

No action required. GOOD

Appendix 1

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

English Oak

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Unmanaged gappy hedge with mature Oak trees throughout. Individual stems not Crown clean, plotted on the topographical survey, hence particularly where surveyed as a group. Ivy prevented detailed GOOD crowns overhang the inspection of many stems. Deadwood and playing fields. hanging branches noted over the adjacent playing field.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Situated within G72. Stem not plotted Remove completely on topographical survey. Significant or cut to a 3m deadwood habitat decay cavity at 2 to 3m. Excellent habitat value, but potentially and monitor unstable. annually.

FAIR

HIGH

10-20

8.5

Situated at the southern end of G72. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. crown. Overhanging playing field. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects.

40+

Observations E

6.5 16

131

9.5 10.5

Quercus robur

Semi-mature to mature G 72 Mixed species

To 16

To 105

106 over Ivy

See plan

7.5

Mature T 73

T 74

T 75

English Oak

7.5

Quercus robur

8.5

Mature

9.5

English Oak

123

Quercus robur

Mature

5.5

English Oak

0.5

135 over Ivy

T 78

T 79

T 80

0.5

120 over Ivy

4.5

Quercus robur

4.5

Mature

English Oak

13.5

0.5

Quercus robur

Mature

5.5

English Oak

6.5

Quercus robur

10.5

Mature

4.5

English Oak

FAIR

POOR

MOD

<10

Single stemmed and slightly leaning Remove Ivy and rewith a balanced crown. Major Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Major Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Large cavity to stem at 0.5 to 2m. Will require heavy reduction in order to avoid possible collapse.

Pollard/top at 3m and monitor annually.

GOOD POOR

MOD

10-20

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Deadwood and very minor dieback noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually due the minor dieback.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a Reduce crown by balanced crown. Cavity at base with 5m to stabalize and FAIR some decay to 6m. Excellent habitat contain. Monitor the value. Acceptable condition at remainder annually. present. Due to land use.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

4.5

Mature English Oak

Remove.

GOOD GOOD HIGH

Quercus robur

T 77

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Major cavity at base. Acceptable condition at present. Due to land use, but unacceptable if the area is to be developed.

FAIR

5.5

Over mature English Oak

5 8

Quercus robur

T 76

Recommendations

Over mature T 71

Twin-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Overhanging playground and fields. Minor Monitor annually GOOD deadwood throughout. Bark wound at due to bark wound. base with some dysfunctional wood present.

N W

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

0.5

5 4

Appendix 1

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced Deadwood if area is crown. Minor decay to stem at 2.5m developed and at old pruning wound. Some large montor stem wound deadwood noted. annually.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Cavity at base with decay. Sparse crown with dieback noted. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Limited long term future.

FAIR

POOR

MOD

<10

No action required. GOOD GOOD

LOW

40+

10.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible No action required. GOOD GOOD defects. Minor deadwood noted. Fine specimen.

MOD

40+

10.5

Large specimen with sizeable stem wound which covers 30% of stem circumference. Acceptable condition at present. Due to land use, however it may require future works of the area is developed.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

POOR

MOD

10-20

6.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Several decay pockets noted at base. Acceptable condition at present.

Reduce by 5m to stabalize and contain.

GOOD

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

6 13

0.5

6.5 9.5

Mature

4.5 15

1.5

4.5

5.5 4 3

Mature English Oak

Single stemmed and slightly leaning with a balanced crown. Minor deadwood and vandal damage noted to the stem. Acceptable condition at present.

E S

Quercus robur

T 83

Amenity Value

Quercus robur

English Oak

Structural Condition

T 82

English Oak

Recommendations

Mature T 81

Observations

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

95 over Ivy

4 5

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 84 Mixed species

To 5.5

To 25 at base

See plan

7.5

Over mature T 85

T 86

T 87

English Oak

0.5

114

Quercus robur

9.5

Over mature

English Oak

132

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

141

6 6.5

Quercus robur

Young to semimature G 88

To 6

Mixed species

Est to 25

See plan

Semi-mature to early-mature G 89 Mixed species

To 20

0.5

To 59

See plan

To 18

To 55

See plan

Semi-mature to early-mature G 90 Mixed species

JCA Limited 2011

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Unmanaged Hawthorn and Elder hedgerow situated between 2 fields. No major visible defects. Excellent screening and habitat.

Remove.

Mainly over grown Bramble with occasional young/semi-mature Plum, Hawthorn and Elder growing along No action required. field boundary. No major visible defects. Good habitat. Mixed species linear group separating agricultural fields and Redmayne playing fields. Species include Scots Pine, Alder. Poplar, Lime, Leylandii and Beech. Stems not plotted on topographical surevy. No major visible defects. Provides excellent natural screen. Mixed species linear group separating agricultural fields and Redmayne playing fields. Species include Scots Pine, Alder. Poplar, Lime, Leylandii and Beech. Stems not plotted on topographical survey. No major visible defects. Provides excellent natural screen.

Appendix 1

Physiological Condition

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

2 Goat Willow forming one crown. No major visible defects. Acceptable No action required. condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Multi-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Stem wounds and included bark at base. Bleeding Canker of Horse Chestnut and Leaf Miner infection noted . Poor specimen. Limited long term future.

Remove.

POOR POOR

LOW

<10

Twin-stemmed at 0.5m with a balanced crown. Dense epicormic growths at base. Bark wounds at 0.5m. Sparse upper crown. Acceptable condition at present.

No action required.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

2 Hornbeam forming 1 crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

LOW

40+

See plan

1 Hornbeam and 1 Lime forming 1 crown. Occasional pruning wounds No action required. GOOD GOOD due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

LOW

40+

See plan

Mixed species group. Species include Lime, Hawthorn, Plum and Oak. Only 6 stems ploted on topographical survey however, 16 trees are in situ hence surveyed as a group. 1 Oak tree within the group had basal decay with fungal fruiting bodies present.

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

N W

Observations

Recommendations

E S

Early-mature G 91

Goat Willow

To 10

To 38 at base

See plan

Salix caprea

Early-mature T 92

T 93

Horse Chestnut

85 at base

5.5

Aesculus hippocastanum

Est 6

Early-mature

Lime

27 at base

3.5 Est 3

Tilia sp.

Early-mature G 94

Hornbeam

To 11

To 46 at base

To 52 at base

See plan

Carpinus betulus

Early-mature G 95 Mixed species

To 11

Early-mature G 96 Mixed species

To 10

Ave. 39

Early-mature T 97

T 98

English Oak

2.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Early-mature Lime

To 9

Tilia sp.

English Oak

4.5 10

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

GOOD

FAIR

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning Remove or shorten wounds due to crown lifting. 2 large the dead branch GOOD dead branch stubs in upper crown. stubs. Tag number 10235.

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

20-40

MOD

40+

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Crown has been reduced in the past. Ganoderma fungal bracket at 1m. Tag number 10234.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

5 lime trees forming a linear group however only 3 stems are plotted on Ave. See plan (ave. 3.5 the topographical survey. Hence No action required. GOOD GOOD 30 all around) surveyed as a group. No major visible defects.

Mature T 100

2 7.5

Quercus robur

G 99

Remove decayed Oak tree from the group.

FAIR

5.5

5 5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Has undegone some past management to control its size. Monitor annually FAIR Some deadwood and branch stubs due to dark staining. noted. Some dark staining noted at base.

FAIR

T 105

T 106

5.5

4.5 9

4 5

Mature

8 18

7.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Twin-stemmed at 5m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the Deadwood and building. Occasional pruning wounds monitor annually FAIR due to crown lifting. Deadwood over due to dark staining. building. Some dark staining noted at stem base. Tag number 10232.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Twin-stemmed at 1m with an unbalanced crown. Minor deadwood No action required. noted.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a Reduce by 4m due balanced crown. Crown overhangs to cavity at base and the building. Cavity at base filled position adjacent to FAIR with glass bottle. Some deadwood building. Monitor noted and wood pecker holes in the annually. upper crown.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant No action required. GOOD GOOD pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Quercus robur

Early-mature

6 11

2.5

43 at base

2.5

5.5

Fraxinus excelsior

5.5

Mature

5 14

2.5

Est 6

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Sycamore

4.5

Tilia sp.

English Oak

40+

Early-mature

Ash

Retention Category

T 104

English Oak

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 103

MOD

4.5 9

2.5

Recommendations

Tilia sp.

Lime

Amenity Value

T 102

Lime

Observations

Early-mature T 101

No action required. GOOD GOOD

N W

Acer pseudoplatanus

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Epicormic growths at base.

Twin-stemmed at 1.5m with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. significant pruning. No major visible defects.

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Early-mature G 107

Laurel

4.5

Est to 25

Well maintained Laurel group. No major visible defects.

See plan

No action required.

Prunus laurocerasus

Early-mature T 108

T 109

T 110

Lime

4.5

Tilia sp.

Early-mature

Lime

Tilia sp.

Early-mature

Lime

Tilia sp.

JCA Limited 2011

4 4

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

3.5

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Minor wound noted at base. No action required. GOOD GOOD Occasional small snapped branches noted. Acceptable condition at present.

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

LOW

40+

MOD

40+

3 8

1.5

4 3.5

Early-mature

5 10

1.5

5 5

Tilia sp.

Semi-mature to early-mature G 113 Mixed species

To 14

Ave. 30

See plan

Mixed species group.Species include Hawthorn, Cherry, Beech, Maple, Scots Pine and Oak. Only 15 stems plotted on the topographical survey however, over 70 trees are actually in situ, hence surveyed as a group. No major visible defects. Provides excellent natural feature.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

To 12

1.5

Ave. 30

See plan

5 Norway Maple forming 1 crown. Situated to the north of the chicken wire fence. No major visible defects. No action required. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey, hence being surveyed as a group.

2.5

To 10 at base

See plan

Well maintained boundary hedgerow. Species include Hawthorn and Field No action required. GOOD GOOD Maple. No major visible defects.

To 13

0.5

To 31

See plan

Group of Alder and Plum situated adjacent to H115. Stems not plotted on topographical survey. No major visible defects.

To 13

To 43

See plan

4 Lime trees forming 1 crown no major visible defects. Stems not plotted on topographical survey.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

to 12

To 45

See plan

Group of Lime and Field Maple. No major visible defects. Stems not plotted on the topographival survey.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species linear group. Species include Beech, Field Maple, Ash and Oak. No major visible defects. No action required. GOOD GOOD Provides excellent screen. Stems not plotted on topographical survey.

MOD

40+

See plan

Linear group of Beech and Leylandii. No major visible defects. Provides No action required. GOOD GOOD excellent screen. Stems not plotted on topographical survey.

MOD

40+

Early-mature G 114 Norway Maple

Recommendations

Tilia sp.

Lime

Amenity Value

T 112

Lime

Observations

Early-mature T 111

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible No action required. GOOD GOOD defects. Dense epicormic growths noted at base.

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Acer platanoides

FAIR

Semi-mature H 115 Mixed species

Semi-mature to early-mature G 116 Mixed species

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

Early-mature G 117

Lime Tilia sp.

Semi-mature to early-mature G 118 Mixed species

Semi-mature to early-mature G 119

To 9 1.5 Mixed species

To 43

Early-mature G 120

Beech

To 13

Fagus sylvatica

JCA Limited 2011

To 35

Appendix 1

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

No action required. GOOD GOOD

LOW

40+

See plan

Unmaintained field boundary hedgerow of Hawthorn, Elm, Field Maple and Plum. Occasional gaps and small trees noted.

No action required.

FAIR

LOW

40+

Situated within H122. No major visible defects. Dense undergrowth and uncut crops prevented detailed inspection.

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

MOD

40+

Situated within H122. No major visible defects. Dense undergrowth and uncut crops prevented detailed inspection.

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 1.5m with a balanced crown. Previously pollarded, and now with mature re-growth. Significant decay at base and at pollard point. Acceptable condition at present. Due to land use, but it would be prudent to re-pollard to avoid collapse.

FAIR

POOR

MOD

10-20

FAIR

LOW

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

LOW

40+

Mixed species hedgerow group of trees and shrubs. Species include Hawthorn, Plum, Cherry and Elder. No action required. GOOD Very limited inspection due to uncut crops preventing adequate access.

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Observations

G 121 Norway Maple

To 12

E S

Acer platanoides

Early-mature H 122

To 6

Mixed species

To 33 at base

Early-mature T 123

T 124

English Oak

Est 6.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

English Oak

0.5

Est 3.5 3.5

Quercus robur

6.5

Mature T 125

English Oak

130 at base

Est 7 7.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature G 126

Elder

Est to 5

To 20

See plan

To 12

0.5

Ave. 18

See plan

Sambucus nigra

Semi-mature to early-mature G 127

Poplar

Recommendations

Re-pollard at old pollard point and monitor annually.

Elder and bramble group situated in field within the fenced area. No major visible defects, however the groups No action required. position within the field of uncut crops prevented detailed inspection.

Small plantation of Poplar trees. No major visible defects. Provides excellent screen and cover.

FAIR

Structural Condition

See plan

7 trees forming 1 crown. Only 5 stems plotted on the topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects.

Early-mature To 0.5 38 at base

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Populus sp

Early-mature T 128

English Oak

6.5

Est 6.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 129 Mixed species

To 11

To 35

To 25 at base

See plan

Early-mature G 130

To 6 Mixed species

JCA Limited 2011

See plan

Mixed species group of trees and shrubs. Species include Hawthorn, Plum and Elder. Very limited inspection due to uncut crops preventing adequate access.

No action required.

FAIR

Appendix 1

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

See plan

Mixed species group of trees and shrubs. Species include Field Maple, Oak, Ash, Hawthorn, Plum and Elder. No action required. GOOD GOOD No major visible defects. Stems not plotted on topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group.

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species field boundary hedge. Species include Holly, Hazel, No action required. Hawthorn and Plum. Occasional gaps noted. No major visible defects.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

FAIR

LOW

40+

N W

Observations

Mixed species

To 11

To 35

To 85 (ave. 28)

Ave. 17

Semi-mature to early-mature G 132 Mixed species

To 16

See plan

Mixed species group of trees and shrubs. Species include Hawthorn, Plum, Cherry and Elder. Very limited No action required. GOOD inspection due to uncut crops preventing adequate access.

Early-mature H 133

To 6 Mixed species

Mature T 134

English Oak

76 over Ivy

6.5

7 6

Quercus robur

Mixed species

To 12

0.5

Ave. 27

Mixed species

To 12

0.5

Ave. 28

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species group separating agricultural land and the adjacent sports field. Species include Field Maple, Scots Pine, Hazel and Oak. Provides excellent screen and cover. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

MOD

40+

POOR

LOW

<10

Early-mature G 137

T 138

Ash

0.5

Ave. 27

Est 3

Fraxinus excelsior

6.5

Early-mature

Ash

Est 6

T 140

English Oak

Est 8

FAIR

LOW

40+

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Sitauted on the edge of G132. Stem not plotted on topographical survey. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Decay at base with an unidentifiable dried fungal fruiting body present. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

FAIR

LOW

40+

8.5

Quercus robur

Est 8

Mature

6.5

Ash

Twin-stemmed at 2.5m with a slightly unbalanced crown. Situated on the edge of G132. Stem not plotted on the No action required. GOOD topograpgical survey. Included bark noted at 2.5m. Acceptable condition at present.

Over mature T 139

8 stems forming 1 crown. Situated on the edge of G132. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey. Ganoderma fungal fruiting bodies at base. Limited long term future.

Fraxinus excelsior

180 over Ivy

Fraxinus excelsior

JCA Limited 2011

75 at base

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Ivy No action required. GOOD prevented detailed inspection. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

See plan

Early-mature G 136

FAIR

Mixed species group separating agricultural land and the adjacent sports field. Species include Field Maple, Scots Pine, Hazel and Oak. Provides excellent screen and cover. No major visible defects.

Early-mature G 135

Recommendations

Early-mature G 131

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Est 6

8 est 7

Remove.

Monitor annually and consider crown reduction if the land use change.

FAIR

Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Stem No action required. GOOD not plotted on the topographical survey. No major visible defects.

T 142

140

7.5

Quercus robur

7.5

Early-mature

Ash

2.5

65 at base

Mixed species

0.5

Est to 65

English Oak & Est to 16 Ash

Est to 65

See plan

Mixed species linear group situated on adjacent land. Species include Beech, Oak, Hawthorn and Plum. Stems not plotted on No action required. the topographical survey. No major visible defects. Limited inspection due to location. Dimensions estimated as a result.

GOOD GOOD

LOW

40+

See plan

GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Field boundary group of trees. Species include Oak, Goat Willow, Hawthorn and Field Maple. Densly No action required. GOOD planted nature of the group prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Situated on adjacent land. No major visible defects. Limited inspection due to location. Dimensions No action required. GOOD GOOD Est 3.5 Est 3.5 estimated as a result. Stem not plotted on topographical survey. Est 3.5

MOD

40+

Situated on adjacent land. No major visible defects. Twin-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Limited No action required. inspection due to location, and dimensions estimated as a result. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

No action required.

MOD

20-40

Mature

Mixed species

20-40

40+

Quercus robur & Fraxinus excelsior

G 145

MOD

LOW

Mature G 144

FAIR

GOOD GOOD

Early-mature to mature To 17

GOOD

Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Situated on the edge of G132. Stem not plotted on the topographical No action required. survey. No major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Acceptable condition at present.

Est 6

Fraxinus excelsior

G 143

Monitor annually.

S 7.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey. Situated on the edge of G132. Minor decay present at base. Acceptable condition at present.

Retention Category

English Oak

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Over mature T 141

Observations

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

To 12

Est to 40

See plan

2.5

To 7 at base

See plan

Early-mature H 146

Hawthorn

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow.

No action required. GOOD

Crataegus monogyna

Est 3.5

Early-mature T 147 Lawson Cypress

0.5

Est 31

Chamaecyparis lawsoniana

Est 5

Early-mature T 148

T 149

English Oak

Est 45

Est 4

Est 5

Quercus robur

5.5

Early-mature

English Oak

Est 35

Est 5

4 5

Quercus robur

Semi-mature G 150

To 2 Mixed species

JCA Limited 2011

Est to 20

See plan

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No major visible defects. Stem not plotted on topographical survey. Dense undergrowth prevented detailed inspection. Mixed species hedges forming boundaries between residential properties and adjacent fields. Species include Laurel, Plum and Hawthorn.

GOOD

FAIR

Recommendations

E S

Retention Category

Observations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Latin Name

Amenity Value

Crown Height (m)

2.5

Species

Diameter (cm)

Height (m)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Spread

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

FAIR

MOD

40+

Early-mature H 151 Mixed species

To 15 at base

Mature T 152

English Oak

Well maintained field boundary hedge of Hawthorn and Field Maple. No action required. GOOD No major visible defects.

See plan

120

7 7

Quercus robur

Situated within H151. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD inspect for defects.

MOD

40+

Well maintained field boundary hedge of Hawthorn, Plum and Field Maple. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

Early-mature H 153

2.5

Mixed species

To 15 at base

See plan

Est 7

Over mature T 154

English Oak

3.5

120 over Ivy

7 6.5

Quercus robur

Est 5

Over mature T 155

English Oak

3.5

125 over Ivy

T 156

English Oak

7.5

Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD inspect for defects.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD inspect for defects.

MOD

40+

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow of Hawthorn, Plum and Field Maple. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

MOD

40+

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow of Hawthorn, Plum and Field Maple. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

LOW

40+

Situated within H158. Some very minor dieback noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually.

GOOD

MOD

20-40

5.5

Situated within H158. No major visible defects. Minor Ivy to stem.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

8 Est 8

Over mature 15

3.5

135 over Ivy

5 7

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 157

2.5

To 15 at base

98 over Ivy

Mixed species

Early-mature H 158

2.5 Mixed species

Mature T 159

T 160

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Twin-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD lifting. Situated within H153. Minor wound inspect for defects. at 0.5m. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Situated within H153. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

7.5

Quercus robur

FAIR

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

4 5

FAIR

Appendix 1

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

FAIR

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

6.5

Situated within H161. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No major visible defects. No action required. GOOD GOOD Hedge prevented detailed inspection of the trees base.

MOD

40+

Situated within H161. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown. No major visible defects. Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

7.5

Situated within H161. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown. No major visible defects. Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

Situated within H161. Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Slightly Monitor annually. sparse crown noted.

MOD

20-40

Situated within H161. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD GOOD crown. Minor deadwood noted.

MOD

40+

Situated within H161. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown. Significant Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

MOD

20-40

MOD

40+

N W

Observations E

Early-mature H 161

2.5

Mixed species

T 163

English Oak

Mature

6 15

3.5

6 6.5 7

Mature English Oak

70 over Ivy

6 6

Quercus robur

Mature T 165

T 166

T 167

English Oak

3.5

43 over Ivy

Quercus robur

Early-mature

English Oak

3.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

3.5

Mature

T 169

English Oak

3.5

97 over Ivy

Quercus robur

Mature

6.5

English Oak

120

FAIR

Situated within H161. Dead Ivy to stem. Slightly sparse crown. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

Mature English Oak

FAIR

Quercus robur

T 170

Situated within H161. No major visible defects. Hedge prevented detailed inspection of the trees base.

Quercus robur

T 168

7 6

Quercus robur

T 164

No action required. GOOD

Quercus robur

English Oak

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow of Hawthorn, Plum and Field Maple. No major visible defects.

See plan

Mature T 162

Recommendations

To 15 at base

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

58 over Ivy

6 6

Situated within H161. No major Remove Ivy and revisible defects. Ivy prevented detailed GOOD GOOD inspect for defects. inspection.

Appendix 1

E S

Retention Category

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Latin Name

Structural Condition

Crown Height (m)

2.5

Species

Diameter (cm)

Height (m)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Spread

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

FAIR

MOD

40+

GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

Early-mature H 171 Mixed species

To 15 at base

Well maintained field boundary hedge of Plum and Hawthorn.

See plan

Early-mature to mature W 172 Mixed species

To 45

To 17

0.5

Est 2.5 60 at base

English Oak

Mixed species woodland group. Species include Oak. Scots Pine and Spruce. Situated to the north of H171, and spreading No action required. east. The majority of the woodland is not even indicated on the topographical survey. No major visible defects.

See plan

Est 6

Mature T 173

Semi-mature

Mixed species

To 2.5

Ave 5

See plan

3.5

Early-mature T 175

Goat Willow

0.5

26 at base

3.5

3.5 3.5

Salix caprea

Early-mature G 176

Ash

Situated within W172. H171 prevented detailed inspection. Minor No action required. GOOD GOOD Ivy noted. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Mixed species linear group of Field Maple, Hawthorn, Birch, Plum and Goat Willow. No major visible defects.

Quercus robur

G 174

No action required. GOOD

To 15

Ave. 27

See plan

To 3

To 15 at base

See plan

Fraxinus excelsior

No action required.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Stuated within G174. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey. Multi-stemmed at 0.5m with a No action required. balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Situated on adjacent land. Dimensions estimated as a result. Six stems forming one crown. No action required. Excessively crown lifted. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

MOD

40+

GOOD HIGH

40+

GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

20-40

Early-mature H 177

Hawthorn

Well maintained boundary hedge.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Crataegus monogyna

See plan

Mixed species linear group on raised banking between Buxton Road and footpath. Species include Oak, Field Maple, No action required. Hawthorn and Hazel. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

See plan

Mixed species linear group consisting mainly of a low hedgerow with occasional larger uncut trees. Species include Oak, No action required. hawthorn and Field Maple. Individual stems not plotted on the topographical survey. No major visible defects.

Early-mature G 178 Mixed species

To 13

0.5

To 31

Semi-mature to early-mature G 179 Mixed species

To 13

To 35

Est 27 at base

Early-mature T 180

Goat Willow

Salix caprea

JCA Limited 2011

4 4

FAIR

Multi-stemmed at 1m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects. No action required. GOOD Dense Bramble at base prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

Appendix 1

2.5

99 over Ivy

T 183

English Oak

HIGH

40+

Situated within G181. Dense Bramble and Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Large deadwood over road.

Deadwood and remove Ivy and GOOD GOOD HIGH Bramble and reinspect for defects.

40+

Situated on raised banking between Buxton Road and footpath. Multistemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

Mixed species field boundary group. Species include Hawthorn, Apple and Hazel. Individual stems not plotted on No action required. GOOD the topographical survey. No major visible defects.

See plan

8 17

Est 8 8

Mature

7 17

110

Est 9 8.5

Quercus robur

Semi-mature to early-mature G 184 Mixed species

To 10

To 28

2.5

110 over Ivy

T 186

English Oak

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

POOR POOR

HIGH

<10

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning Remove Ivy and rewounds due to crown lifting. GOOD GOOD HIGH inspect for defects. Significant Ivy and undergrowth prevented detailed inspection.

40+

2 trees forming 1 crown. Ivy Remove Ivy and reprevented detailed inspection of both GOOD GOOD HIGH inspect for defects. stems.

40+

See plan

Linear group along field boundary and road. Species include Hawthorn, Field Maple, Oak and Hazel. Individual stems not plotted No action required. on the topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group. Provides good screen and habitat.

GOOD

FAIR

HIGH

40+

See plan

Linear group along field boundary and road. Species include Hawthorn, Field Maple, Walnu, Oak and Hazel. Individual stems not No action required. plotted on the topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group. Provides good screen and habitat.

GOOD

FAIR

HIGH

40+

4 12

6.5 3

Early-mature

3 11

To 35

Est 7 3

Quercus robur

Mature T 187

english Oak

Quercus robur

6.5 65 over Est 6.5 6.5 Ivy 6.5

Semi-mature to early-mature G 188

Quercus robur

English Oak

To 14

2.5

To 78

Est 7

To 13

0.5

To 35

Semi-mature to early-mature G 190 Mixed species

Remove.

Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Has undergone some very poor past management due to No action required. utility clearance. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

Semi-mature to early-mature Mixed species

Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Unidentifiable shrivelled fungal fruiting bodies at base. Potentially unstable. Limited long term future.

FAIR

Quercus robur

G 189

Mixed species linear group on banking between Buxton Road and footpath. Occasional pruning wounds. No action required. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of most stems. Acceptable condition at present.

See plan

Mature T 185

Recommendations

Quercus robur

English Oak

FAIR

Observations

Mature T 182

Retention Category

Life Expectancy (yrs)

To 6 Mixed species

Amenity Value

G 181

To 25 at base

Structural Condition

Semi-mature to early-mature

N W

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

To 13

JCA Limited 2011

0.5

To 30

To 5

2.5

110 over Ivy

Observations

Recommendations

E S

Retention Category

Diameter (cm)

Latin Name

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Crown Height (m)

2.5

Species

Amenity Value

Height (m)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Spread

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

40+

Semi-mature H 191

Mixed species hedgerow (Hawthorn and Hazel) forming the front boundary of residential property.

See plan

Mixed species

Mature T 192

English Oak

Est 8 7

Quercus robur

Early-mature G 193

Field Maple

To To 7 0.5 30 at base

See plan

Acer campestre

English Oak

120 over Ivy

3.5

Semi-mature 1.5

To 8

See plan

Mixed species

To 12

To 43

See plan

Mixed species

To 13

To 40

See plan

Early-mature T 198

T 199

T 200

Beech

Fagus sylvatica

Early-mature

Hornbeam

45 at base

3.5

Carpinus betulus

Early-mature

Beech

HIGH

20-40

Linear group situated on grass strip between road and footpath. No major visible defects. Some poor past No action required. management noted due to utility clearance.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

GOOD HIGH

20-40

Major Ivy and Elm suckers at base prevented detailed inspection. No major visible defects.

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects.

Well maintained mixed species boundary hedge of Hawthorn and Field Maple. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD

Mixed species group of Hawthorn, Plum and Field Maple situated within H195 on the edge of the sports field. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of some of the stems. Individual stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

Early-mature G 197

FAIR

Mixed species group of Hawthorn and Field Maple situated within H195 on the edge of the sports field. Ivy No action required. prevented detailed inspection of some of the stems. Individual stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

Early-mature G 196

FAIR

4.5

Quercus robur

H 195

Multi-stemmed at 3m with an unbalanced crown. Poor past Remove Ivy and remanagement due to utility clearance. inspect for defects. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Over mature T 194

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

Fagus sylvatica

JCA Limited 2011

5 5

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

FAIR

LOW

40+

5.5

Twin-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Minor epicormic No action required. GOOD growths at base. Acceptable condition at present.

5.5

Multi-stemmed at 1m with a balanced crown. Slightly suppressed by the No action required. adjacent Beech trees. Minor deadwood noted.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Twin-stemmed at 2m with a balanced No action required. crown. No major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD

LOW

40+

Appendix 1

To to 16 2.5 55 at base

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. Very minor stem wound at No action required. GOOD base, occluding well. No major visible defects.

FAIR

MOD

40+

See plan

6 15

Retention Category

Beech

FAIR

Recommendations

Early-mature T 202

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Mixed species

2 Oak, 2 Hornbeam and 1 Scots Pine forming one crown. No major visible No action required. GOOD defects. Deadwood throughout. Acceptable condition at present.

Observations

Early-mature G 201

Amenity Value

Structural Condition

5 6

Fagus sylvatica

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Early-mature G 203 Mixed species

To 12

1.5

To 42

0.5

To 29

See plan

2 Beech and 1 Oak forming 1 crown. No action required. GOOD GOOD No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species linear group of Hawthorn and Field Maple adjacent No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH to the road and sports field. No major visible defects.

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Situated directly to the west of G204. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects. Minor deadwood noted.

MOD

40+

Group of Leylandii situated around No action required. GOOD GOOD fenced area. No major visible defects.

MOD

20-40

<10

Early-mature G 204 Mixed species

To 10

4.5

Early-mature T 205

English Oak

3 3.5

Quercus robur

Semi-mature G 206

leylandii

To 8

Ave. 23

See plan

X Cupressocyparis leylandii

Early-mature T 207

Elm

Est 40

4.5

Semi-mature to early-mature Mixed species

To 13

Ave. 35 at base

DEAD DEAD DEAD

FAIR

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Some included bark No action required. noted at 2m. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

5 10

1.5

Acer platanoides

2.5

Early-mature

T 210 Norway Maple

Remove.

Mixed species group made up mainly of Lawson Cypress with occasional Beech and Field Maple. No major No action required. GOOD visible defects. Individual stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

See plan

Early-mature T 209 Norway Maple

Dead tree. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

Ulmus sp.

G 208

Acer platanoides

JCA Limited 2011

0.5

5 5.5

FAIR

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

English Oak

MOD

40+

Mixed species group which includes the field boundary hedge. Species include Hawthorn, Oak and Norway No action required. GOOD Maple. No major visible defects. Individual stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects. Situated on the edge of G212.

FAIR

LOW

40+

Multi-stemmed at 1m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant No action required. pruning. No major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

FAIR

LOW

20-40

40+

Observations E

6.5 13

39 at base

7 7

Quercus robur

Semi-mature to early-mature G 212 Mixed species

To 12

To 28

See plan

Early-mature T 213 Norway Maple

T 214

Acer platanoides

Early-mature

English Oak

0.5

40 at base

7 5

Quercus robur

Semi-mature T 215 Horse Chestnut

27 over Ivy

Aesculus hippocastanum

Early-mature H 216

2.5

Mixed species

To 10 at base

See plan

Early-mature T 217

T 218

T 219

G 220

Beech

0.5

41 at base

5 5

Early-mature

5 7

4.5

Aesculus x carnea

Early-mature

6.5

London plane

1.5

5.5

Platanus x hispanica

Early-mature

Turkey oak

To 18

Quercus cerris

JCA Limited 2011

To 79

No action required.

FAIR

Well maintained mixed species boundary hedge of Hawthorn, Berberris and Cotoneaster. Provides excellent screen. No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

5.5

Multi-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. Early signs of Bleeding Canker of Horse Chestnut noted with Monitor annually. bark cracking and exudates to stem. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD

LOW

40+

2 trees forming 1 crown. The tree to the west is Multi-stemmed at 1.5m , and the tree to the east is single No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH stemmed. Minor deadwood noted. No major visible defects.

40+

Est 9 9

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Ivy noted to stem. Moderate Leaf Miner infestation noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Situated within H216. Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Minor included bark at base at No action required. GOOD the twin stemmed point. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey.

Fagus sylvatica

Red Horse chestnut

Recommendations

Early-mature T 211

Twin-stemmed at 1m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant No action required. GOOD GOOD pruning. No major visible defects.

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

T 222

T 223

To 16

To 67

7.5

7 8

Early-mature

7 16

2.5

Platanus x hispanica

Early-mature

Swedish Whitebeam

5.5

To 3

GOOD

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. Situated within H216. Small leaves and slightly sparse crown No action required. noted. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Well maintained boundary hedge. Species include Hawthorn and Plum. No action required. Occasion gaps noted. No major visible defects.

FAIR

40+

See plan

Semi-mature T 225

English Oak

0.5

5 at base

0 2

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 226

To 4

To 15 at base

120 over Ivy

Mixed species

See plan

English Oak

Est 9

Mature English Oak

No action required.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Well maintained boundary hedge. Species include Hawthorn and Plum. No action required. Occasion gaps noted. No major visible defects.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Situated within H226. Significant Ivy Remove Ivy and reprevented detailed inspection. inspect for defects. Slightly sparse crown noted.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

5 trees in a row along field boundary/road. Only 4 stems plotted on the topographical survey hence Remove Ivy and resurveyed as a group. Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection of all stems. Minor dieback noted.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

40+

6.5

Quercus robur

G 228

Twin-stemmed at 0.5m with an unbalanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds. No major visible defects.

GOOD HIGH

Over mature T 227

FAIR

Early-mature

Mixed species

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

6.5

To 10 at base

2 trees forming 1 crown. Minor deadwood noted. No major visible defects.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. significant pruning. No major visible defects.

Sorbus intermedia

H 224

40+

Quercus cerris

London plane

Retention Category

Turkey oak

E S

Early-mature G 221

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Ave. 85 over Ivy

See plan

To 7 0.5 to 22

See plan

To 15

Quercus robur

Early-mature G 229

Field Maple

Group of Field Maple, loosely forming part of H226. No major visible defects.

No action required.

Major dieback in top. Ganoderma fungal fruiting bodies at base. Very limited long term future.

Remove.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

POOR POOR

HIGH

<10

FAIR

Acer campestre

Over mature T 230

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

135 over Ivy

4 2

Appendix 1

Physiological Condition

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

See plan

Field boundary hedgerow made up of Elder, Hawthorn, Holly and Field Maple. Occasional gaps noted. It part No action required. forms the rear boundary of the adjacent properties gardens.

FAIR

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species linear group along road consisting mainly of Oak and Hawthorn. Doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t appear to form No action required. part of the development area. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of some of the stems.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Tree stem not plotted on topographical survey. Appears to be situated within the rear garden of No action required. number 26. Limited inspection due to location.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

POOR POOR DEAD

<10

GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Observations

To 3

To 15 at base

To 85 over Ivy

Mixed species

Semi-mature to mature G 232 Mixed species

To 17

Est 6.5

Over mature T 233

T 234

T 235

English Oak

Est 130

Est 7

Quercus robur

Est 7

Over mature

7.5

English Oak

Est 130

Est 7

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Est 120

Est 5

7.5

Situated on adjacent land. Stem not plotted on topographical survey. No major visible defects. Position prevented detailed inspection.

Large dead tree.

Remove.

Over mature specimen in hedgerow. No major visible defects. Dense epicormic growths throughout prevented detailed inspection.

Monitor annually.

Virtually dead tree. Only the very lower growths are bearing foliage.

Remove.

Quercus robur

7.5

Over mature 130 T 236

English Oak

0.5

over growth s

Est 7 7

Quercus robur

Mature T 237

English Oak

65 over Ivy

Mature English Oak

Quercus robur

Est 120 Est 6.5 over Ivy

T 240

English Oak

LOW

10-20

FAIR

LOW

10-20

Remove Ivy and reStag headed specimen. Completely inspect for defects, smothered in Ivy. Possibly in decline. and remove dieback if area is developed.

large significant specimen. No major visible defects. Epicormic growths to No action required. GOOD GOOD stem.

LOW

40+

large specimen. Deadwood noted. Ivy Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD prevented detailed inspection. inspect for defects.

MOD

40+

140

Est 8

Quercus robur

Over mature

8.5

English Oak

POOR

Over mature T 239

FAIR

Quercus robur

T 238

Recommendations

Early-mature H 231

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

140

Est 8 8

Appendix 1

Retention Category

Est 7

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Significant wound with decay at base and to the lower branches over the site. Damage most likely caused by fire. Potentially unstable as a result.

Remove.

POOR POOR

MOD

<10

Situated on the boundary with adjacent off site land. Limited inspection as a result. Significant wounds at base with decay. Potentially unstable. Limited long term future.

Remove.

FAIR

POOR

MOD

10-20

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects. Minor Ivy to stem.

MOD

40+

Mixed species group adjacent to field and footpath. Species include Goat Willow, Oak and Hazel. No major No action required. visible defects. Provides excellent screen.

GOOD

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

6.5

Mature

8 15

Est 7

Quercus robur

7.5

Over mature

6 17

Est 110

Est 6.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 244

FAIR

S 8

Est 5

Est 5.5

Quercus robur

Semi-mature to early-mature G 245

To 7

Mixed species

To 25

See plan

6.5

Mature T 246

T 247

T 248

T 249

English Oak

104

7.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

English Oak

6.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Ash

37 at base

Fraxinus excelsior

Mature

6.5

English Oak

6.5

Early-mature

Mixed species

FAIR

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the footpath and road. Occasional No action required. GOOD pruning wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey.

Multi-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the footpath Remove Ivy and reand road. Ivy prevented detailed GOOD GOOD inspect for defects. inspection. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey.

Twin-stemmed at ground level with an unbalanced crown due to suppression from adjacent trees. No major visible defects.

No action required.

No major visible defects. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

No action required. GOOD

Mixed species group situated within the allotmant gardens.species include Beech, Oak and Cherry. Limited inspection and dimensions estimated as a result. No major visible defects. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

FAIR

6.5

Quercus robur

G 250

Recommendations

English Oak

Amenity Value

T 243

FAIR

Observations

Quercus robur

English Oak

Structural Condition

T 242

English Oak

Remove Significant dieback in top. 1 large damaged/dead dead branch over site that is cracking branch and reduce at the attachment point. by at least 4m all over.

Mature T 241

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

To 12

JCA Limited 2011

Est to 37

See plan

Appendix 1

T 253

English Oak

To 30

4.5

4.5 4.5

Semi-mature

4 7

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. GOOD wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Situated within the allotment gardens. Occasional pruning wounds. Limted No action required. inspection due to location.

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

20-40

GOOD

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Mixed species group of trees bordered by a well maintained boundry Leylandii hedge. No major visible defects. Occasional trees No action required. overhang the hedge into the site. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

See plan

Quercus robur

English Oak

GOOD

4.5 9

FAIR

Recommendations

Early-mature T 252

Retention Category

Mixed species

Life Expectancy (yrs)

G 251

Amenity Value

Observations

Early-mature To 12

Structural Condition

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

FAIR

Quercus robur

Early-mature G 254 Mixed species

2 trees (1 Walnut & 1 Sycamore) forming 1 crown. Occasional pruning No action required. GOOD wounds. No major visible defects.

To 10

To 35

See plan

To 2

To 15 at base

See plan

Well maintained allotment/churchyard boundary hedge. No major visible defects.

See plan

7 trees on a row within churchyard. Species include Field Maple, English Oak & Sweet Chestnut. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey hence surveyed as a group. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Crowns overhang the boundary into site. no major visible defects.

MOD

40+

See plan

Well maintained hedgerow separating the paddock from the adjacent No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH housing estate. No major visible defects.

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Overhanging field Remove Ivy and reand the adjacent footpath. No major GOOD GOOD HIGH inspect for defects. visible defects. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor deadwood throughout. Fine specimen.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

Twin-stemmed at ground level with an unbalanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects. Forms part of H257.

No action required.

40+

Semi-mature H 255 Mixed species

Early-mature G 256 Mixed species

To 15

To 38

To 10 at base

120 over Ivy

Semi-mature H 257

Hawthorn

To 3.5

Crataegus monogyna

8.5

Mature T 258

T 259

English Oak

8.5

Quercus robur

8.5

Mature

9.5

English Oak

107

8.5

4.5

Semi-mature English Oak

FAIR

Quercus robur

T 260

8.5

No action required.

6.5

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

Both stems 22

2 2

FAIR

MOD

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

40+

Situated within H261. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD HIGH crown. Ivy and hedgerow prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection

40+

Situated just out of site within the rear garden of the adjacent residential No action required. GOOD GOOD property. Limited inspection as a result. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 4m with an unbalanced crown. Has possibly lost Remove Ivy and reGOOD a large limb in the past. Major Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

9 stems at base. Early onset of Bleeding Canker of Horse Chestnut noted. Acceptable condition at present, however it is likely to have a limited long term future.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

LOW

10-20

1 Sycamore and 1 Ash forming 1 crown. Both trees are virtually dead. Limited long term future.

Remove.

POOR POOR

LOW

<10

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Observations E

Early-mature H 261

To 6

Mixed species

To 15 at base

See plan

Early-mature T 262

T 263

English Oak

Quercus robur

Early-mature

English Oak

Est 28

5.5

Est 5 5

Quercus robur

Est 11

Over mature T 264

English Oak

135 over Ivy

9 Est 12

Quercus robur

Mature T 265 Horse Chestnut

Ave stem 37

Recommendations

Aesculus hippocastanum

FAIR

Amenity Value

Boundary hedgerow separating the field from the rear gardens of the adjacent properties. Occasional No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH sections are well maintained. Species within the hedge include Hawthorn, Plum and Oak.

N W

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Early-mature G 266 Mixed species

To 16

To 35

See plan

Early-mature T 267

T 268

English Oak

To 16

Ave. Est 6.5 38

Quercus robur

6.5

Mature

English Oak

Est 10

Est 5

3 stems at base forming 1 crown. Minor area of dead bark noted to 1 Monitor annually. stem. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

Situated on the edge of woodland group. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

LOW

40+

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 269

2.5

To 12 at base

See plan

Generally well maintained field boundary hedge of Hawthorn and Plum. Occasional gaps noted.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

LOW

40+

2.5

To 12 at base

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedge of Hawthorn and Plum.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

LOW

20-40

Mixed species

Early-mature H 270 Mixed species

JCA Limited 2011

Appendix 1

Est 27

4.5

8.5 16

Quercus robur

Mature

12 16

105

Early-mature

6 13

6 15

LOW

40+

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Minor stem wounds noted. No No action required. GOOD GOOD major visible defects.

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects. Minor stem wounds noted.

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown. No major visible defects. Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

GOOD

MOD

20-40

Est 98

POOR GOOD

MOD

20-40

MOD

10-20

MOD

40+

LOW

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor deadwood noted. Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Slightly sparse upper crown.

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects.

Twin-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Deadwood throughout. Sparse upper crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects.

Twin-stemmed at 4m with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Significant dieback noted. inspect for defects. Branch stubs noted due to past lost Also reduce by 3.5m FAIR limbs. Ivy prevented detailed in order to try and inspection. rejuvinate crown.

2.5

Quercus robur

Est 120 over Ivy

8 7.5 7 6

Mature English Oak

FAIR

Mature

T 279

GOOD

6 60 over ivy

7.5

English Oak

Monitor annually.

FAIR

7.5

Quercus robur

T 278

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor stem wounds with decay at 1m & 3m. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

7.5

Quercus robur

English Oak

7.5 85 over Ivy

Mature

T 277

20-40

Quercus robur

English Oak

LOW

Mature

T 276

FAIR

Quercus robur

English Oak

FAIR

7.5

Quercus robur

T 275

Retention Category

Mature

English Oak

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 274

No action required.

4.5

English Oak

Amenity Value

T 273

4.5

Situated within H270. No major visible defects. Hedge prevented detailed inspection of base. Minor deadwood and dieback noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Fraxinus excelsior

English Oak

Structural Condition

T 272

Ash

Recommendations

Early-mature T 271

Observations

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

115 over Ivy

7.5 8

Quercus robur

FAIR

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant No action required. GOOD GOOD pruning. Minor deadwood noted. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Early-mature H 280

2 Mixed species

JCA Limited 2011

To 15 at base

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedge made up of Plum and Hawthorn.No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Appendix 1

Recommendations

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Latin Name

To 15 at base

63 over Ivy

Diameter (cm)

Crown Height (m)

Species

Observations

Well maintained field boundary hedge made up of Plum and Hawthorn.No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

6.5

Situated within H281. No major visible defects. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Virtually dead tree. Limited long term future.

Remove.

POOR POOR

MOD

<10

Situated within hedgerow. Stem wound at 3m with some dark exudates noted. No major visible defects.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

20-40

Well maintained field boundary hedge consisting of Hawthorn and Ivy. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

See plan

Generally well maintained field boundary hedge of Hawthorn, Plum No action required. GOOD GOOD and Field Maple. Occasional sections have been left unmanaged.

MOD

40+

See plan

Generally well maintained field boundary hedge of Hawthorn, Plum No action required. GOOD GOOD and Field Maple. Occasional sections have been left unmanaged.

MOD

40+

5.5

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Ivy and position within the Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD HIGH hedgerow prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection. Minor flail damage noted to stem at 2.5m.

40+

7.5

Remove Ivy and reSingle stemmed and vertical with a inspect for defects balanced crown. Some minor dieback and crown. Monitor noted. Minor bark wound at base. Ivy annually because of prevented detailed inspection. dieback.

6.5

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds Remove Ivy and reGOOD due to crown lifting. Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

Crown Spread

Height (m)

Age Tree Ref.

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

N W

E S

Early-mature H 281 Mixed species

See plan

Mature T 282

Sycamore

Acer pseudoplatanus

6 5

Mature T 283

T 284

Sycamore

78 over Ivy

Acer pseudoplatanus

Mature

English Oak

2.5

5 7

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 285

To 20 at base

To 25 at base

Mixed species

See plan

Early-mature H 286

To 6 Mixed species

Early-mature H 287

To 6 Mixed species

5.5

Mature T 288

T 289

English Oak

2.5

Quercus robur

Mature

7.5

English Oak

5 6

Quercus robur

5.5

Mature T 290

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

75 over Ivy

4.5 7

FAIR

GOOD

LOW

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

7.5 16

2.5

8 7.5

Quercus robur

Mature T 292

T 293

T 294

English Oak

103 over Ivy

5.5 8

Mature

English Oak

6 6

Early-mature

Ash

60 at base

English Oak

8 14

0.5

125 over Ivy

6.5

Vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown lifting. Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection.

MOD

40+

Twin-stemmed at 0.5m with a balanced crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects, inspection. Decay wound at 2.5m, and monitor and a small Laetiporus sulphureus annually. fungus at 4m.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

FAIR

MOD

20-40

2 Ash tree forming 1 crown. No major visible defects.

No action required.

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Major Ivy prevented GOOD inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Major Ivy prevented GOOD inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Minor deadwood noted Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

20-40

6.5 10 17

106 over Ivy

6 8

Quercus robur

Early-mature English Oak

6 100 over Ivy

Mature

T 300

40+

Quercus robur

English Oak

Mature

T 299

MOD

6 75 over Ivy

Quercus robur

English Oak

No action required. GOOD GOOD

3.5

Mature

T 298

3 To 25 at base

Fraxinus excelsior

English Oak

6 8

Semi-mature Ash

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Minor Ivy and deadwood noted. No major visible defects.

40+

Quercus robur

T 297

7.5

Quercus robur

Mature

G 296

7.5

Quercus robur

Fraxinus excelsior

T 295

6.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Minor No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH deadwood noted. No major visible defects.

Retention Category

English Oak

E S

Mature T 291

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

88 over Ivy

5 6

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects.

Appendix 1

English Oak

Retention Category

Life Expectancy (yrs)

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Mature T 301

Recommendations

Amenity Value

Observations

Structural Condition

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

87 over Ivy

6.5

Vertical with a balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reGOOD inspect for defects.

Quercus robur

Early-mature G 302

Ash

To 13

To 27

Group of Ashs tree forming 1 crown. No action required. No major visible defects.

See plan

Fraxinus excelsior

Semi-mature G 303

Ash

To 11

Ave 16

Mature English Oak

110 over ivy

Mature

T 306

T 307

English Oak

115 over Ivy

Quercus robur

Semi-mature

English Oak

0.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

ash

Ave. 3.5 27

3.5

130 over Ivy

8.5

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds as a result of cutting No action required. back from the field. No major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Some stem wounds No action required. noted as a result of flail damage. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Minor deadwood noted. Ivy GOOD GOOD inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

Minor deadwood noted. No major Remove Ivy and reGOOD visible defects although Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Cavity at base. Acceptable condition at present due to land use however, Monitor annually. the tree may require removal on safety ground if the area is developed.

POOR

MOD

10-20

6.5 7

5.5

Mature English Oak

FAIR

9 125 over Est 6.5 Ivy

Quercus robur

T 310

FAIR

Est 11

Mature English Oak

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects.

9.5

Quercus robur

T 309

Minor dieback noted. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Mature English Oak

Fraxinus excelsior

T 308

Twin-stemmed at 3.5m with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Major Ivy prevented GOOD inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

Quercus robur

T 305

No action required.

Fraxinus excelsior

T 304

10 small stems forming 1 crown. Minor stem wounds noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

130 over Ivy

Est 7 6

FAIR

Appendix 1

Retention Category

6.5

Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects. Slightly sparse crown noted.

Monitor annually.

GOOD

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Est 5.5

Twin-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Stem bark wound at 1m. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

20-40

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Situated within H285. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Occasional pruning wounds GOOD GOOD inspect for defects. due to crown lifting. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

Well maintained mixed species field boundary hedge. Continuation of H224. Species include Sycamore, Ash No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH and Hawthorn. No major visible defects.

40+

20-40

E S 6.5

45 at base

6.5

Quercus robur

6.5

Early-mature

English Oak

3.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

English Oak

45 at base

6.5

Multi-stemmed at 1m with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD crown. No major visible defects. Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

Mature English Oak

6 6.5

Quercus robur

T 314

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 313

Amenity Value

T 312

English Oak

Recommendations

Structural Condition

T 311

Observations

Early-mature

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

3.5

110 over ivy

7.5

Vertical with a balanced crown. Minor deadwood noted. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reGOOD inspect for defects.

7.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 315

Hawthorn

Ave. 25

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. No major visible defects.

See plan

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Crataegus monogyna

6.5

Early-mature T 316

Ash

70 at base

Situated within H315. Multi-stemmed at 1m with a balanced crown. No No action required. GOOD major visible defects.

FAIR

Fraxinus excelsior

Early-mature H 317

To 15 at base

120 over Ivy

Mixed species

Mature T 318

English Oak

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. Species include Plum Hawthorn and Elm.

See plan

7 7

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 319 Mixed species

To 2.5

To 20 at base

To 25 at base

See plan

Semi-mature G 320

Sycamore

To 10

Acer pseudoplatanus

JCA Limited 2011

3 4

2 Sycamore forming 1 crown. Situated within H319. No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

T 323

Beech

To 70

See plan

7.5

T 326

T 327

T 328

T 329

T 330

2.5

7 4

Semi-mature

4.5

Scots Pine

0.5

4.5 4.5

Early-mature

4 2.5

Acer platanoides

Mature

English Oak

1.5

Quercus robur

9.5

Mature

English Oak

105

8.5

Quercus robur

Mature

5.5

English Oak

2.5

Quercus robur

Mature

Sycamore

2.5

Acer pseudoplatanus

Mature

English Oak

2.5

Quercus robur

8.5

Mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

1.5

Situated on the edge of G321. Single stemmed and leaning with an unbalanced crown. Ustulina deusta fungus present at base. Potentially unstable as a result.

MOD

<10

Situated on the edge of G321. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD GOOD crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects.

LOW

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Significant wound to stem. Acceptable condition at present. Due to land use.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

LOW

10-20

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Small leaves noted. Some bark wounding noted at base.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Extensive wounding at base with some decay. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

Monitor annually.

GOOD

FAIR

MOD

10-20

5.5

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Some wounding present at base. Acceptable condition at present. Due to land use.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Extensive bark wounding at base with a possible hollow stem. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

7.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown due to past suppression. Dense epicormic growths within crown. No major visible defects.

No action required.

MOD

20-40

4.5

Pinus sylvestris

POOR

Fagus sylvatica

T 324 Norway Maple

T 325

40+

Mature T 322

Retention Category

Mixed species

To 19

Mixed species group (Oak, Ash and Sycamore) situated adjacent to road Re-inspect annually and paddocks. Ivy prevented detailed due to road side GOOD GOOD HIGH inspection of most stems. No major position. visible defects. Stems no plotted on topographical survey.

Recommendations

Early-mature to mature G 321

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

5 5

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Remove.

FAIR

GOOD

Appendix 1

Structural Condition

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown due to past suppression. Reduce by 5 to 6m to stabalize and Extensive wounding at base. Branch stubs GOOD within crown as a result of past lost limbs. contain. Monitor Young Ganoderma fungal fruiting bodies at remainder annually. base.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

Single stemmed and vertical with a Reduce by 5 to 6m balanced crown. No evidence of to stabalize and significant pruning. bark wounds at contain. Monitor base with several small cavities. Stem remainder annually. is possibly hollow at base.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. Large ripped branch stub in upper crown due to No action required. GOOD past lost limb. Minor wounding at base. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

LOW

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

See plan

Mixed species group of Sycamore, Beech, Oak and Sweet Chestnut. No major visible defects. Stems not No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH ploted on topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group.

40+

See plan

Mixed species group. Species include Oak. Sweet Chestnut, Beech, Leylandii and Western red Cedar. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group. Occasional minor stem wounds noted. Provides excellent screen and habitat.

N W

T 332

T 333

T 334

T 335

English Oak

8 21

137

10 9

Mature

6 18

1.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

111

Quercus robur

9.5

Mature

3.5

English Oak

2.5

Quercus robur

9.5

Early-mature

4.5

Wellingtonia

0.5

Est 35

4.5

Sequoiadendron giganteum

4.5 4.5

Early-mature G 336

Leylandii

to 16

To 30 at base

See plan

Semi-mature to early-mature Mixed species

To 18

2.5

Ave. 35

Early-mature to mature G 338

to 18

Mixed species

Ave. 35

7.5

Over mature T 339

T 340

Lime

137

7.5

Tilia sp.

Early-mature

Wellingtonia

Sequoiadendron giganteum

JCA Limited 2011

4 4

Single stemmed and vertical with a slightly unbalanced crown. Some minor wounding noted at base. Acceptable condition at present.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Metal tree protective guard prevented accurate stem measurement. Mature Elder at base is growing into crown. Densly planted group of predominately Leylandii. No major visible defects. Provides excellent natural screen. Individial stems not plotted on topographical survey.

X Cupressocyparis leylandii

G 337

Recommendations

Quercus robur

English Oak

Observations

Over mature T 331

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. extensive wounding at 0 to 1m. Acceptable condition at present due to land use. Dense crown noted.

Remove Elder to benefit the Wellingtonia.

FAIR

GOOD GOOD

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Monitor annually.

MOD

20-40

MOD

40+

GOOD

FAIR

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

Mixed species

To 19

To 63

See plan

Mature T 342

T 343

T 344

English Oak

T 347

Early-mature

3.5 15

Quercus robur

6.5

Early-mature

English Oak

2.5

Early-mature

6 12

Mature

9.5

Sycamore

Acer pseudoplatanus

11.5

Mature

Cherry

FAIR

MOD

20-40

6.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Progressive dieback in top. Tree in slow decline.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Minor bark wounds noted at base. Very minor dieback noted.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Twin-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. Stem wound with decay at 0 to 2m. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

LOW

10-20

Multi-stemmed at 2m with a balanced crown. Significant bark loss to stem with dark exudates noted. Sparse Monitor annually. upper crown. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

FAIR

MOD

10-20

6.5

7 7

Prunus sp

40+

Monitor annually and remove if the land use changes.

Acer platanoides

MOD

Quercus robur

Remove snapped hanging branches as GOOD GOOD required.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Major dieback in top. Limited long term future. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

5.5 7

T 345 Norway Maple

T 346

Quercus robur

English Oak

Mixed species group (continuation of G338) Species include Oak, Sycamore and Elder. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group. Occasional minor stem wounds noted. Provides excellent screen and habitat. Occasional snapped hanging branches noted.

Retention Category

Semi-mature to mature G 341

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Significant dark exudates from stem. Sparse upper crown. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

Monitor annually.

Semi-mature G 348

To 9

To 25 at base

To 110 over Ivy

Mixed species

Semi-mature to mature G 349 Mixed species

To 14

Sycamore

Row of uncut trees within H157. No major visible defects. Group adds No action required. GOOD good diversity to the hedgerow.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

See plan

Stems not plotted on the topographical survey. Field Maple, Sycamore and Oak forming part of Remove Ivy and reGOOD H157. No major visible defects. Ivy inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection of some of the stems.

FAIR

LOW

40+

POOR POOR

MOD

<10

Mature T 350

See plan

Acer pseudoplatanus

JCA Limited 2011

Est 70

7 5

Situated within H158. The tree is almost completely defoliated. Very limited future.

Remove.

Mixed species

To 18

To 40

est to 30

G 352 Mixed species

Mixed species

To 15

Mixed species

To 17

Mixed species

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

No action required.

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

LOW

20-40

MOD

40+

See plan

L shaped group around farm buildings. Species within group include Scots Pine, Black Pine and Beech. Provides excellent natural screen. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of some of the stems. Some minor deadwood noted.

To 43

See plan

Once part of G353, now separated due to a section being cleared from the overhead power cables. Species within group include Scots Pine, Black Pine and Beech. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

To 35

To 17

To 42

See plan

Mixed species group mainly consisting of Leylandii with No action required. occasional broadleaf trees. No major visible defects.

2.5

Ave. 20

See plan

Very well maintained field boundary hedgerow. Provides excellent screen No action required. GOOD GOOD and habitat.

See plan

Mixed species woodland group. Species include Oak, Sweet Chestnut, Hawthorn, Elm and Scots Pine. No Remove dead Elms GOOD GOOD HIGH stems plotted on topographical as required. survey. Occasional dead Elm observed. No major visible defects.

20-40

Situated on the edge of G359. Twinstemmed at 0.5m with a balanced crown. Stem wound with decay at 2m. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually.

10-20

Mixed species group inbetween the road and the farm cottages. Species include Sycamore, Oak, Hawthorn, and Holly. No major visible defects. Excellent screen and habitat. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

Early-mature G 355

40+

See plan

Vegetation forming the garden of the residential part of Red Hall Farm. No action required. GOOD GOOD Limited access prevented detailed inspection.

Early-mature G 354

MOD

See plan

Mixed species group surrounding Red Hall Farm. Species include Scots Pine, Oak, Holly, Hazel and Sycamore. No major visible defects. Provides excellent screen and habitat. Stems not plotted on topographical survey.

Early-mature G 353

Semi-mature to mature To 15

40+

Recommendations

Early-mature to mature G 351

Retention Category

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Early-mature H 356

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Early-mature W 357 Mixed species

To 17

Ave. 30

Early-mature T 358

Sycamore

60 at base

Acer pseudoplatanus

Semi-mature to mature G 359 Mixed species

To 17

to 50

Est 8

Mature T 360

English Oak

See plan

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

115

Est 8

Est 8 12

FAIR

Situated within G359. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey. Single stemmed and vertical with an Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD unbalanced crown that is biased to inspect for defects. the south. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

LOW

MOD

Mixed species

To 11

To 25 at base

to 8

To 15 at base

Mixed species

2 Mixed species

See plan

Mixed species hedgerow with occasional uncut trees. Species include Sycamore, Hawthorn and Elder.

See plan

Well maintained boundary hedge of residential property made up of Lonicera and Lawson Cypress. No major visible defects.

T 364

Leylandii

4.5

X Cupressocyparis leylandii

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

No action required. GOOD

HIGH

40+

FAIR

HIGH

40+

LOW

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

LOW

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

4.5

Situated within H368. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH crown. No evidence of significant pruning.

40+

Situated within H368. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH crown. No evidence of significant pruning.

40+

4.5 4.5

Early-mature H 365

FAIR

4.5

Early-mature Est 2.5 40 at base

40+

Vegetation forming the garden of the Red Hall Farm cottages. Limited access prevented detailed inspection. No action required. GOOD GOOD Species include Cherry, Lawson Cypress, Willow and Lonicera.

Early-mature H 363

MOD

Early-mature H 362

Retention Category

G 361

Recommendations

Early-mature To 30 at base

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible No action required. defects. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey.

FAIR

See plan

Well maintained boundary hedge of residential property made up of Plum No action required. GOOD GOOD and Hawthorn. No major visible defects.

to 6

Est to 25

To 3

To 20 at base

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. No major visible defects.

To 3

To 20 at base

See plan

Continuation of H366. Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. No action required. GOOD GOOD No major visible defects.

To 3

To 20 at base

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. No major visible defects.

Mixed species

Early-mature H 366

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Early-mature H 367

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Early-mature H 368

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

4.5

Early-mature T 369 Norway Maple

2.5

Est 27

4.5

Acer platanoides

4.5

Early-mature

T 370 Norway Maple

Acer platanoides

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

4 4

Appendix 1

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

To 18 at base

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

To 9

Est to 22

See plan

Group of Scots Pine and Oak. No major visible defects. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

To 3

To 18 at base

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

Observations

Recommendations

E S

Amenity Value

Latin Name

Structural Condition

Crown Height (m)

2.5

Species

Diameter (cm)

Height (m)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Spread

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Early-mature H 371

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Semi-mature G 372 Mixed species

Early-mature H 373

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Early-mature T 374

Ash

Early-mature 2.5

To 20 at base

Mixed species

2.5 Mixed species

See plan

MOD

40+

See plan

Well maintained mixed species field boundary hedgerow. Species include No action required. GOOD GOOD Hawthorn, Plum, Elm, Hornbeam and Holly. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Situated within H376. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. No evidence of significant GOOD GOOD inspect for defects. pruning. No major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

FAIR

MOD

40+

FAIR

HIGH

40+

20-40

Mature T 377

English Oak

Est 95

Mature English Oak

7 7

Quercus robur

T 378

89 over Ivy

Semi-mature to mature Mixed species

To 15

Est to 40

See plan

Lime

Mixed species group adjacent to the road, running north east from the entrance of the golf course up to the layby. No major visible defects. Species include Ash, Sycamore, Elm, Hawthorn and Laurel. Only indicated on the topographical survey as an intermittent green line.

Mature T 380

Situated within H376. Previously Remove Ivy and recrown reduced. Major ivy prevented GOOD inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

Quercus robur

G 379

GOOD HIGH

Well maintained mixed species field boundary hedgerow. Species include No action required. GOOD GOOD Hawthorn, Plum, Elm and Holly. No major visible defects.

Early-mature H 376

FAIR

5.5

Fraxinus excelsior

H 375

Situated within H373. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible No action required. defects.

Tilia sp.

JCA Limited 2011

5.5 5.5

Situated at the entrace of the golf courese. Sparse upper crown, with dieback and chlorotic foliage.

No action required. GOOD

Reduce crown by 30% to remove FAIR dieback and monitor annually.

GOOD HIGH

To 17

To 130

See plan

4.5

Mature

T 383

English Oak

4.5

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

136 over Ivy

8 12

Quercus robur

T 385

Elder

Est 30 at base

Sambucus nigra

Semi-mature

Sycamore

18 at base

Acer pseudoplatanus

Sycamore

To 10

Ave. 25

Ave. 35 at base

Mixed species

FAIR

20-40

HIGH

40+

130

Mature

6 17

Chamaecyparis lawsoniana

2.5 5

Young to mature To 19

JCA Limited 2011

Est to 70

See plan

Remove.

20-40

Group of Sycamore on the edge of the golf course adjacent to the road. Approximately 14 semi-mature stems No action required. forming 1 crown. No major visible defects. Linear row of trees consisting of mainly Ash and Sycamore. Continuation of G379. Crowns overhang the road. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of most stems.

FAIR

HIGH

Remove Ivy as required and reinspect for defects.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

40+

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Deadwood and Major Ivy prevented detailed remove Ivy and reinspection. Significant deadwood inspect for defects. noted.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

20-40

Situated within the front garden of No 3. Twin-stemmed at 2m with a No action required. balanced crown. Ivy noted to stem. No major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

20-40

40+

Mixed species

Reduce crown by Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced 30% to remove crown. Crown overhangs the road. Ivy dieback, and remove prevented detailed inspection of base. FAIR Ivy from around the Sparse upper crown with deadwood trees base and reand dieback. inspect for defects.

20-40

Twin-stemmed at 0.5m with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH significant pruning. No major visible defects.

See plan

Quercus robur

W 390

GOOD HIGH

See plan

Over mature

T 389 Lawson Cypress

FAIR

<10

to 15

English Oak

Reduce crown by pruning out the dieback, and monitor annually.

<10

DEAD DEAD DEAD

Early-mature

T 388

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the road. Major dieback in top. Stem wound at 3m.

LOW

Dead specimen adjacent to the road.

Acer pseudoplatanus

G 387

POOR

Semi-mature G 386

FAIR

Over mature T 384

Remove.

Quercus robur

T 382

2 Oak trees on the edge of the golf course forming 1 crown. Crowns overhang the road. Deadwood throughout. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of both stems. Both trees have decay pockets at base. Unacceptable on this busy roadside position.

Retention Category

Life Expectancy (yrs)

English Oak

Recommendations

Structural Condition

Over mature G 381

Observations

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Amenity Value

Appendix 1

Large woodland plantation group No action required at (Sprowston Plantation). Crowns overhang present, however it the road.Species include Ash, Lime would be prudent to Sycamore, Oak, Hazel, Horse Chestnut and survey the roadside Hawthorn. No major visible defects. trees for defects on an Excellent habitat and screening. annualy basis.

GOOD GOOD HIGH

3 16

7 5

Fraxinus excelsior

Young to mature G 392 Mixed species

To 18

To 50

See plan

T 393

T 394

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

111

T 395

T 396

T 397

T 398

T 399

T 400

English Oak

100 over Ivy

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

120

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

Est 11

Mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

7 6

FAIR

Remove dead specimens.

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning Remove Ivy and rewounds due to crown lifting. Ivy GOOD inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection. Minor stem wound at 3m.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Significant deadwood in upper crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of the stem.

Deadwood, and remove Ivy and reinspect stem for defects.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a slightly unbalanced crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Some deadwood noted.

Deadwood, and remove Ivy and reinspect stem for defects.

FAIR

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with an Deadwood, and unbalanced crown. Crown overhangs remove Ivy and rethe road. No major visible defects. inspect stem for Deadwood noted. Ivy prevented defects. detailed inspection.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Multi-stemmed at 5m with an unbalanced crown. Deadwood noted over the road.

Deadwood.

GOOD

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor dieback noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

40+

Mature

Mixed species linear group between the main road and open fields. Species include Oak, Ash, Sycamore and Hawthorn. Generally in good condition but some dead specimens were observed within the group.

GOOD HIGH

HIGH

Quercus robur

FAIR

5.5

Early-mature

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. Situated on the Remove Ivy and reedge of G90. No major visible inspect for defects. defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Retention Category

Ash

E S

Early-mature T 391

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

GOOD HIGH

5.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove deadwood high balanced crown. Some dieback and reduce crown to noted. remove dieback.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with an Remove deadwood unbalanced crown. Some deadwood and reduce crown to and dieback noted. remove dieback.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

T 402

English Oak

3.5 6.5

Over mature

8.5 17

2.5

124

2.5

T 405

English Oak

1.5

See plan

Field boundary hedgerow with mature trees. Species include Ash, Hawthorn and Horse Chestnut. Provides excellent screen and Clear fallen stems as GOOD GOOD habitat. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of required. most stems. Occasional stems have failed and are lying on the floor.

LOW

40+

See plan

Field boundary group of trees. Species include Oak and Hawthorn. No major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of some stems. Occasional dead specimens observed. Acceptable condition at present. Individual stems not plotted on the topographical survey,

7 83

7 7

Quercus robur

Semi-mature to over mature G 406

to 18

Mixed species

To 65

Semi-mature to mature G 407

to 17

Mixed species

To 65

T 409

English Oak

7 6

Mature

4 16

n/a

Est 73

Monitor group annually.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

FAIR

HIGH

FAIR

MOD

40+

Situated within G407. Dieback in top. Dead Ivy to stem. Acceptable No action required. condition at present.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

<10

20-40

Remove or reduce to Dead tree within G407. Acceptable a standing DEAD DEAD DEAD condition at present due to land use. deadwood habitat if land use changes.

Over mature English Oak

4 3

Quercus robur

T 410

Quercus robur

English Oak

Deadwood.

Mature T 408

40+

Mature 2

20-40

5.5

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Some minor No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Quercus robur

English Oak

20-40

5 8

Squat specimen. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Squat specimen. Major Ivy prevented No action required. GOOD detailed inspection. Acceptable condition at present due to location.

Mature T 404

40+

Quercus robur

140 over Ivy

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor bark wound at base. Deadwood over road. Minor Ivy to stem.

Over mature English Oak

FAIR

5 7.5

92 over Ivy

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. Crown overhangs Deadwood and the footpath and road. Deadwood remove Ivy and renoted. Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Crown overhangs the footpath and road. Minor deadwood noted.

6.5

Quercus robur

T 403

Quercus robur

English Oak

GOOD HIGH

7 17

Retention Category

T 401

Recommendations

Mature 70 over Ivy

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

135 over Ivy

8 6

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Major Ivy prevented GOOD inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

Appendix 1

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

MOD

10-20

GOOD

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow of Plum and Hawthorn. No action required. GOOD GOOD Occasional sections not cut. Excellent natural screen and habitat.

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. No major visible defects. No action required. GOOD GOOD Situated within H414. Stem not plotted on the topographical survey.

LOW

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. GOOD GOOD wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Large woodland group called Fox Burrow Plantations. Species within include Ash, Oak, Hawthorn, Beech No action required. GOOD GOOD and Field Maple. No major visible defects. Excellent Landscape feature.

MOD

40+

Situated on the edge of W417. Twinstemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Wound at 7m due to past lost limb. Wooly Aphid infestation noted to stem, which will likely lead to Beech Bark Disease .

FAIR

LOW

10-20

Situated on the edge of W417. Major Remove Ivy and reGOOD Ivy prevented detailed inspection. inspect for defects.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Major Ivy prevented GOOD inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

7 13

150

Mature

5 4

Reduce heavily by Multi-stemmed at 2m with a balanced up to 40% to crown. Significant cavity at 2m. FAIR minimize chances of Excellent ecological value. collapse.

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown due to suppression and dieback. Acceptable condition at present. Due to land use.

7.5 7

Recommendations

Quercus robur

English Oak

Structural Condition

T 412

English Oak

Observations

Over mature T 411

FAIR

N W

3 10

Quercus robur

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Monitor annually.

FAIR

Early-mature G 413

Sycamore

To 16

0.5

To 58

To 25

2 Sycamore forming 1 crown. No major visible defects.

See plan

No action required. GOOD

Acer pseudoplatanus

Early-mature H 414

To 4 Mixed species

See plan

Mature T 415

T 416

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

8.5

English Oak

112

8.5 9

Quercus robur

Young to mature W 417 Mixed species

To 18

To 80

See plan

Over mature T 418

Beech

125

11 10

Fagus sylvatica

Mature T 419

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature T 420

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

Est 95 over Ivy

Est 120 over Ivy

Monitor annually.

FAIR

8 7.5 8 9 7.5 10

Appendix 1

T 424

8.5

0.5

7.5

5 15

7.5

6.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Slightly sparse upper No action required. crown noted. Acceptable condition at present.

GOOD

MOD

20-40

6.5

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Minor deadwood noted. Ivy GOOD GOOD inspect for defects. prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

FAIR

LOW

20-40

FAIR

MOD

10-20

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor bark wound at base. Deadwood throughout. No action required. GOOD GOOD Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

MOD

40+

Twin-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD inspection. Evidence of past snapped inspect for defects. limbs from within crown.

MOD

40+

6.5 14

6.5 6.5

Over mature

7 13

125

9 10 10

Over mature 18

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

140 over Ivy

11 9.5

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects, and monitor annually.

GOOD

105 over Ivy

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor dieback noted. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

5.5

Quercus robur

English Oak

40+

Quercus robur

T 430

MOD

5 125 over Ivy

Mature

English Oak

FAIR

5.5

Quercus robur

T 429

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Major ivy prevented Remove Ivy and reGOOD detailed inspection. Some minor inspect for defects. deadwood noted.

7 110 over Ivy

Mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

T 428

20-40

6 120 over Ivy

Mature

English Oak

LOW

Quercus robur

T 427

FAIR

6 140 over Ivy

Mature

English Oak

7.5

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed Remove Ivy and reGOOD inspection. Some evidence of past inspect for defects. lost limbs observed.

6.5

Mature

T 426

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. crown. No major visible defects.

6.5 125 over Ivy

7.5

English Oak

40+

8.5 8

Quercus robur

T 425

MOD

Quercus robur

English Oak

Retention Category

Mature English Oak

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Quercus robur

T 423

Amenity Value

Mature English Oak

GOOD

Recommendations

Quercus robur

T 422

Structural Condition

English Oak

Observations

Mature T 421

FAIR

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Significant dieback noted. Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Large Monitor annually. wound to central stem due to past lost limb. Rather poor specimen. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Dead Ivy to stem prevented detailed inspection. Slightly sparse upper crown with deadwood.

Monitor annually.

Mature

6.5 9

Est 68

7.5

English Oak

128 over Ivy

120 over Ivy

110 over Ivy

T 439

130 over ivy

10.5

Quercus robur

Mature

7.5

English Oak

Quercus robur

Over mature

13.5

English Oak

3.5

135

FAIR

LOW

10-20

POOR

FAIR

MOD

<10

Situated on the edge of G390. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Major Ivy prevented detailed GOOD inspect for defects. inspection. Minor bark damage at base.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Situated on the edge of G390. Multistemmed at 4m with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection.

MOD

20-40

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a slightly unbalanced crown. Large Ganoderma fungal fruiting bodies at base. Limited long term future.

POOR POOR

MOD

<10

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Crown clean if the crown. Deadwood, branch stubs and land use changes. hanging branches noted. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

20-40

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Large wound to secondary Monitor annually. stem at 6.5m. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

GOOD

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Mature English Oak

POOR

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Major dieback noted. Only lower branches are bearing foliage. Limited long term future.

Quercus robur

T 440

Monitor annually.

Over mature

T 438

40+

Quercus robur

English Oak

40+

MOD

Mature

T 437

MOD

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

Quercus robur

English Oak

Remove undergrowth and re- GOOD GOOD inspect for defects.

Over mature

T 436

Quercus robur

English Oak

40+

Mature

T 435

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Significant deadwood and dieback. Rather poor specimen.

Quercus robur

English Oak

6.5 73 over Ivy

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Significant undergrowth prevented detailed inspection.

Mature

T 434

7.5 8

Quercus robur

T 433

MOD

6 100 over Ivy

Quercus robur

English Oak

Retention Category

T 432

English Oak

E S

Mature T 431

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

78 over ivy

8.5 9

Remove.

8.5 7

Mature

7.5 17

2.5

7 6.5 7.5

Mature

T 444

T 445

English Oak

69 over Ivy

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

8.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

2.5

7.5

To 18

To 75

T 448

T 449

T 450

English Oak

115

8.5

Mature

10 18

120

20-40

FAIR

MOD

40+

GOOD

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Woodland group known as Spanish Plantation. Species include Sweet Chestnut Oak, Ash. Hawthorn, No action required. GOOD GOOD Sycamore and Elm. Ocasional dead specimens noted. Excellent landscape feature.

MOD

40+

Situated on the edge of W446. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. crown. Some large deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

No action required. GOOD

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Situated on the edge of W446. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD crown. Some large deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

GOOD

MOD

20-40

8.5

11.5

Quercus robur

Mature

9.5 17

Quercus robur

Est 8

Mature

English Oak

MOD

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

9.5 Est 7

FAIR

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds No action required. GOOD due to crown lifting. No major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

10 Est 7

English Oak

GOOD

Monitor annually.

7.5

Quercus robur

English Oak

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Slightly sparse crown with small leaf noted.

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant No action required. pruning. Wound in upper crown due to past lost limb. Acceptable condition at present.

See plan

Mature T 447

7.5

Young to mature

Mixed species

40+

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with an Remove Ivy and reunbalanced crown. No evidence of GOOD inspect for defects. significant pruning. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Quercus robur

W 446

MOD

Quercus robur

T 443

Situated on the edge of W417. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD GOOD crown. No major visible defects.

Recommendations

Quercus robur

English Oak

Retention Category

T 442

English Oak

Observations

Early-mature T 441

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Situated on the edge of W446.svb Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Split branch in lower crown. Acceptable condition at present..

Situated on the edge of W446. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. crown. Minor deadwood and branch stubs noted.

FAIR

Appendix 1

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

8 Est 7

Mature

8 17

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Situated on the edge of W446. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Deadwood and branch stubs No action required. noted. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Situated on the edge of W446. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Est 6

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Ash

Amenity Value

T 453

10 17

4 6

Fraxinus excelsior

Semi-mature to early-mature G 454

To 7 0.5 Mixed species

Ave. 26

See plan

Linear group of Oak with occasional Goat Willow. No major visible No action required. GOOD GOOD defects.

LOW

40+

See plan

Mixed species woodland group. Contuination of of W417. Species include Ash, Sycamore, Oak, Elm and Sweet Chestnut. No major visible defects. Excellent natural feature. Occasional dead specimen noted. Acceptable condition at present.

LOW

40+

FAIR

MOD

40+

GOOD

MOD

20-40

FAIR

Young to over mature W 455 Mixed species

To 19

To 110

Over mature T 456

T 457

G 458

T 459

T 460

English Oak

132

Quercus robur

Mature

7.5

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

To 17

To 88

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

3.5

138

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

125

Recommendations

Quercus robur

English Oak

Structural Condition

T 452

English Oak

Observations E

Mature T 451

Situated on the edge of W446. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds No action required. due to crown lifting. Deadwood and branch stubs noted Acceptable condition at present..

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

9.5 9.5

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Situated on the edge of W455. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Some deadwood and branch No action required. GOOD stubs noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Situated on the edge of W455. Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. Some deadwood and branch stubs noted. Acceptable condition at present. Some dark staining noted to stem.

Situated on the edge of W455. Some deadwood and branch stubs noted. No action required. GOOD Acceptable condition at present.

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Multiple pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Some deadwood and No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH branch stubs noted. Acceptable condition at present.

40+

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Multiple pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Some deadwood and No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH branch stubs noted. Acceptable condition at present.

40+

Monitor annually.

FAIR

T 464

T 465

T 466

T 467

127

5.5

Mature

5.5 17

3.5

Quercus robur

8.5

Over mature

12 20

124

Quercus robur

13.5

Mature

English Oak

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Hornbeam

6.5

Semi-mature

3 6

Semi-mature

3.5 7

1.5

40+

7.5

Situated on the edge of W455. Multistemmed at 4.5m with a balanced crown. Significant Deadwood in No action required. GOOD lower crown. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

20-40

Acer pseudoplatanus

5 9

Semi-mature to mature W 469 Mixed species

To 20

Est to 80

See plan

2.5

To 25 at base

See plan

FAIR

MOD

Situated on the edge of W455. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects.

GOOD HIGH

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH significant pruning. No major visible defects.

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH significant pruning. No major visible defects.

40+

Situated on the edge of Shrubbery Plantation. Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. Ivy and No action required. epicormic growths at base prevented detailed inspection.

MOD

40+

Large woodland group called Shrubbery Plantation. Species include Oak, Ash, Sycamore and Leylandii. No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH No major visible defects. Excellent natural landscape feature.

40+

5 Est 98 at base

Multi-stemmed at 4m with an unbalanced crown. Some deadwood and branch stubs noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Amenity Value

Situated on the edge of W455. Multistemmed at 4.5m with a balanced crown. Significant Deadwood in No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH lower crown. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

3.5

Mature Sycamore

3.5

Fagus sylvatica

T 468

40+

Fagus sylvatica

Beech

5.5

Twin-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Deadwood and branch stubs No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Carpinus betulus

Beech

14 11

English Oak

Retention Category

T 463

40+

9 18

Recommendations

Quercus robur

English Oak

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 462

English Oak

Observations

Over mature T 461

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

FAIR

GOOD

Early-mature H 470

Leylandii X Cupressocyparis leylandii

JCA Limited 2011

Well maintained garden boundary hedge for 'The Lodge'. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

Ave. 15

To 85

Retention Category

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Latin Name

Amenity Value

Crown Height (m)

To 8

Species

Diameter (cm)

Height (m)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Spread

LOW

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

Continuation of W469 (Shrubbery Plantation) running up to the plantation to the north. Species No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH include Oak, Leyland Cypress, Cherry and Hawthorn. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

40+

MOD

40+

8.5

Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH pruning. Minor deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

40+

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

20-40

N W

Observations

Mixed species

Mixed species Young to semi-mature plantation group. Species include No action required. GOOD GOOD Maple, Willow, Spruce and Holly.

See plan

Semi-mature to mature G 472 Mixed species

To 20

Mixed species group of Sycamore and Oak. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey. No major visible defects.

See plan

Semi-mature to mature W 473 Mixed species

Recommendations

Yound to semimature G 471

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

To 20

Est to 90

See plan

To 3

To 25 at base

See plan

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Early-mature H 474

Hawthorn

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Crataegus monogyna

Mature T 475

T 476

T 477

T 478

T 479

T 480

Lime

0.5

127

Tilia sp.

7.5

Early-mature

8.5

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

Cherry

Prunus sp

Early-mature

Wellingtonia

Sequoiadendron giganteum

Early-mature

Oak species

Quercus sp

Early-mature

4.5

Crab Apple

Malus sylvestris

JCA Limited 2011

5.5 4.5

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

MOD

40+

6.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Mixed species group of trees and shrubs forming the garden of Beeston St Andrew Hall. Species include No action required. GOOD Laurel, Holly, Holm Oak and Leyland Cypress. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

20-40

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

5 11

5.5 5

Early-mature

7 9

0.5

6.5 6

Ailanthus altissima

Early-mature G 483 Mixed species

To 17

To 65 at base

See plan

Mature T 484

English Oak

0.5

7.5

H 485

Yew

Est to 25 at base

To 90 (ave. 40)

Taxus baccata

Young to mature W 486 Mixed species

To 20

T 488

English Oak

Well maintained garden boundary hedge.

See plan

Well established mixed species woodland group called Coppersholes Plantation. Species include Leyland Cypress, Oak, Lime, Sweet Chestnut, Larch, Hazel, Sycamore and Elm. Occasional dead specimens observed. Excellent landscape feature.

12 22

160

11.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

English Oak

5.5

T 489

T 490

English Oak

Quercus robur

Mature

Turkey oak

Quercus cerris

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

103

7.5 10

GOOD HIGH

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Situated on the edge of W486. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Part forming a larger crown No action required. GOOD GOOD with the adjacent T489. No major visible defects.

LOW

40+

Situated on the edge of W486. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Part forming a larger crown No action required. GOOD GOOD with the adjacent T488. No major visible defects. Minor Ivy to stem.

LOW

40+

Situated on the edge of W486. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH crown. Occasional deadwood and branch stubs noted.

40+

Early-mature

FAIR

Situated on the edge of W486. Twinstemmed at 5m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds No action required. GOOD GOOD due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.Fine specimen.

Quercus robur

53 over Ivy

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. wounds due to crown lifting. Minor dieback noted.

See plan

Over mature T 487

7 8

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Recommendations

Ailanthus altissima

T 482 Tree of Heaven

4.5

Observations

Early-mature T 481 Tree of Heaven

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

T 494

T 495

T 496

T 497

T 498

T 499

T 500

5 4

Mature

9 16

Quercus cerris

7.5

Over mature

English Oak

124

Quercus robur

Over mature

7.5

Turkey oak

101

8.5

Quercus cerris

Over mature

Oak species

3.5

137

8.5

Quercus sp

Mature

6.5

English Oak

7.5

Quercus robur

12.5

Over mature

Turkey oak

117

7.5

Quercus cerris

Over mature

Turkey oak

115

11.5 13

Over mature

12 23

155

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Large stem wound at 8m. Sparse crown with dieback.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

Twin-stemmed at 5m with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting, (healing slowly). Deadwood and branch stubs noted. Some dark staining at base of the lower limb to the south.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

5.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Large shrivelled and unidentifiable fungal fruiting body at base. Internal decay likely.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

Multi-stemmed at 5m with a balanced crown. Dark staining noted Monitor annually. throughout. Possible Pythopthora infection.

Mature

7 16

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

11.5

HIGH

10-20

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

FAIR

HIGH

10-20

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

20-40

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

20-40

40+

Amenity Value

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Minor No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

8 11

40+

GOOD HIGH

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. Some deadwood and dieback noted. Wood pecker holes noted in upper crown. Acceptable condition at present.

Quercus cerris

English Oak

11.5

Quercus cerris

Turkey oak

FAIR

Retention Category

T 493

Monitor annually.

Quercus robur

Turkey oak

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Slightly suppressed by the adjacent T490. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Becoming slightly stag headed. Acceptable condition at present.

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 492

English Oak

Recommendations

Early-mature T 491

Observations

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Some dark staining noted to stems.

Monitor anually.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 5m with a balanced Monitor annually, crown. Deadwood and branch stubs and crown clean noted. Crown overhangs the road. over the road. Slightly small leaves noted.

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

20-40

10-20

Twin-stemmed at 4.5m with an unbalanced crown. Dark staining noted to stem. Various branch stubs noted and major split in mid crown. Potentially unstable.

Reduce by 50% to stabalize.

FAIR

HIGH

T 503

120

7.5

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

148

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

134

H 504

Lonicera

Lonicera nitida

Est to 5 at base

T 505

English Oak

Mixed species

To 58

T 507

T 508

T 509

Beech

Garden boundary hedge. No major visible defects.

2.5

Early-mature

Ash

0.5

Fraxinus excelsior

Early-mature

Ash

55 at base

3 4

Fraxinus excelsior

Early-mature G 510

Cherry

To 12

Prunus sp

JCA Limited 2011

To 38

See plan

No action required. GOOD GOOD

GOOD HIGH

40+

Situated on the edge of W486. 2 Ash and 1 Oak forming 1 crown. No No action required. major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and leaning with an unbalanced crown. Major decay at 0m to 3m. Limited long term future. Stem not plotted on topographical survey.

FAIR

POOR

MOD

<10

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown due to suppression. Monitor annually. Wound with decay at base. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

LOW

10-20

Twin-stemmed at ground level with an unbalanced crown. Some decay Monitor annually. and included bark at base. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

LOW

10-20

2 Cherry trees forming 1 crown. Both trees rather poor insignificant No action required. specimens. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

10-20

4 7

FAIR

Fagus sylvatica

20-40

GOOD HIGH

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

4 17

MOD

FAIR

See plan

Mature

Monitor annually.

To 17

10-20

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown due to suppression from the adjacent tree. Unidentifiable dried fungal bracket at 6m on old pruning wound.

Semi-mature to early-mature G 506

HIGH

FAIR

Quercus robur

Monitor annually.

7 15

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Dark staining noted from old pruning wound at 4m.

See plan

Early-mature

10.5

Early-mature

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Minor No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Quercus robur

Retention Category

T 502

English Oak

E S

Over mature T 501

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Remove.

Appendix 1

Retention Category

93 at 3.5 base

Early-mature

6 16

Quercus robur

Early-mature

5.5 12

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Field Maple

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 514

Monitor annually.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Situated on the edge of W486. Single stemmed and vertical with an No action required. unbalanced crown. No major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD

LOW

40+

Situated on the edge of W486. Single stemmed and leaning with an No action required. GOOD unbalanced crown. No major visible defects.

FAIR

LOW

40+

Situated within hedgerow. No major visible defects. Dense growth at base No action required. GOOD prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Mixed species hedgerow with occasional uncut trees. Species include Hazel, Plum and Hawthorn. No action required. GOOD Occasional gaps observed. Individual stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Stem not plotted on the topographical Reduce to a standing survey. Tree completely smothered in deadwood habitat if POOR Ivy. Major dieback. Limited long land use changes. term future.

FAIR

MOD

<10

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed Remove Ivy and reinspection. Stem not plotted on the inspect for defects. topographical survey,

GOOD

MOD

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed Remove Ivy and reGOOD inspection. Stem not plotted on the inspect for defects. topographical survey,

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed Remove Ivy and reGOOD GOOD inspection. Stem not plotted on the inspect for defects. topographical survey,

MOD

40+

MOD

10-20

English Oak

Amenity Value

T 513

Situated on the edge of W486. Twinstemmed at 0.5m with a balanced crown. Included bark at 0.5m. Acceptable condition at present.

Fraxinus excelsior

English Oak

Structural Condition

T 512

Ash

Recommendations

Mature T 511

Observations

N W

6 6

Acer campestre

Early-mature H 515

To 8

To 25 at base

0.5

150 over Ivy

Mixed species

See plan

Over mature T 516

English Oak

6 6

Quercus robur

Over mature T 517

English Oak

0.5

140 over Ivy

9 9

Quercus robur

Over mature T 518

English Oak

0.5

Quercus robur

Est 140 over Ivy

8 9 8 7

Early-mature T 519

English Oak

75 over Ivy

7 6

Quercus robur

Over mature T 520

English Oak

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

Est 120 over Ivy

5 7

7 8

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Some dieback noted. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

Remove Ivy and rePOOR inspect for defects.

FAIR

Field Maple

6 11

MOD

40+

Situated within H521. 5 stems forming 1 crown. No major visible defects. Stems not plotted on the topgraphical survey.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Well maintained field boundary hedge. No major visible defects.

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

LOW

<10

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

MOD

40+

See plan

Early-mature G 522

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Recommendations

To 30

Ave. 30

Retention Category

To 8 Mixed species

Mixed species hedgerow with occasional uncut trees. No major visible defects. Good screening and habitat value.

Observations

Early-mature H 521

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Amenity Value

6 6

Acer campestre

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Early-mature H 523

2.5

Ave. 25 at base

120 over Ivy

Mixed species

See plan

Over mature T 524

English Oak

130 over ivy

13.5

Mature English Oak

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced Remove Ivy and recrown. Major Ivy prevented detailed GOOD inspect for defects. inspection.

POOR POOR

Quercus robur

T 526

Remove.

Over mature English Oak

Virtually dead specimen smothered in Ivy. Limited long term future.

Quercus robur

T 525

115 over Ivy

Multi-stemmed at 2.5m with an unbalanced crown. Major ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reGOOD inspect for defects.

Quercus robur

Mature H 527

To 25 at base

To 28 at base

Est 85 over Ivy

Mixed species

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow of Hawthorn and Plum.

See plan

Mature H 528

To 6 Mixed species

Mature T 529

English Oak

Quercus robur

English Oak

Mixed species field boundary hedgerow of Hawthorn, Hazel, Holly No action required. and Plum. Occasional gaps and uncut sections observed.

See plan

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

FAIR

MOD

20-40

7 5

Tree completely smothered in Ivy. Unable to comment on condition at present.

Remove Ivy and reinspect for defects.

5 8

Mature T 530

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

88 over Ivy

8.5

8 8

Single stemmed and vertical with a Remove Ivy and rebalanced crown. Major Ivy prevented GOOD inspect for defects. detailed inspection.

40+

7.5

No major visible defects. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Ivy and reGOOD inspect for defects.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Mixed species hedgerow of Elm, Plum, Field Maple and Hawthorn. Majority of Elms have since died.

Remove dead Elms as required.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Situated within H533. Twin-stemmed at 1.5m with a balanced crown. No No action required. evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Mixed species woodland group. Species include Alder, Ash and Oak. No action required. GOOD GOOD Excellent Landscape feature. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Significant dark staining at Monitor annually. base. Minor dieback noted. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

LOW

10-20

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspection Slightly chlorotic leaves noted.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

LOW

10-20

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspection Some dieback noted. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

7 14

110 over Ivy

6 7.5

To 7

Mixed species

Ave. 25 at base

See plan

4.5

Early-mature English Oak

MOD

Early-mature to mature

T 534

Retention Category

Quercus robur

H 533

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Mature English Oak

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor Ivy noted to No action required. GOOD GOOD stem.

35 at base

4.5

4.5 4.5

Quercus robur

Young to mature W 535 Mixed species

To 18

Est to 70

See plan

8.5

Over mature T 536

English Oak

130

7.5

Mature English Oak

85 aver Ivy

7 6

Quercus robur

Mature T 538

English Oak

12.5 10.5

Quercus robur

T 537

120 over Ivy

9 8.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature G 539

English Oak

To 14

Ave 45

See plan

3 Oak trees forming 1 crown. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey. Ivy prevented detailed inspection of all stems. Acceptable condition at present.

No action required.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Est to 15 at base

See plan

Small insignificant section of hedgerow made up of Privet, Ivy and No action required. Hawthorn.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 540 Mixed species

Recommendations

Quercus robur

T 532

Amenity Value

English Oak

Observations

Mature T 531

8.5

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

To 3.5

JCA Limited 2011

Appendix 1

Amenity Value

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

MOD

40+

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. Species include Plum No action required. GOOD GOOD Hawthorn, Field Maple and Elm. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Situated within H451. Major Ivy prevented detailed inspection. Decay present at base. Major dieback present. Limited long term future.

MOD

<10

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning Remove Ivy and rewounds due to crown lifting. No GOOD inspect for defects. major visible defects. Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Twin-stemmed at ground level with a balanced crown. No major visible No action required. defects.

GOOD

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. GOOD GOOD wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No major visible defects. Small secondary stem at No action required. 0.5m is rubbing main stem and causing wound. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning Remove Ivy and rewounds due to crown lifting. GOOD inspect for defects. Significant Ivy prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

6.5

Twin-stemmed at 5m with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection. Minor dieback noted.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

4.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. significant pruning. No major visible defects.

40+

Observations

H 541

2.5

To 25 at base

120 over Ivy

Mixed species

E S

Early-mature H 542

2.5 Mixed species

Mature T 543

English Oak

7 7

Quercus robur

Mature T 544

T 545

T 546

T 547

Ash

73 over Ivy

Fraxinus excelsior

Mature

Plum

0.5

80 at base

6.5

Prunus sp

Early-mature

English Oak

0.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Ash

0.5

6 5.5

Fraxinus excelsior

Mature T 548

English Oak

107 0ver Ivy

6 8

Quercus robur

T 550

English Oak

130 over ivy

8.5

Quercus robur

7.5

Early-mature

English Oak

Remove.

POOR POOR

FAIR

Mature T 549

Recommendations

Structural Condition

See plan

Well maintained field boundary hedgerow. Species include Plum No action required. GOOD GOOD Hawthorn, Field Maple and Elm. No major visible defects.

Early-mature To 25 at base

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

6 6

FAIR

GOOD HIGH

Appendix 1

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Est 58

20-40

POOR POOR

MOD

<10

FAIR

MOD

40+

Small section of well maintained field boundary hedge of Plum, Hawthorn, No action required. GOOD GOOD Field Maple. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

7.5

Situated within H554. Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Remove Ivy and reSignificant Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Ivy prevented No action required. detailed inspection. Minor deadwood noted. Stem bark wound 3m.

FAIR

MOD

40+

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

40+

Multi-stemmed at 4m with a balanced crown. Major Ivy prevented detailed No action required. GOOD GOOD inspection. Fine specimen.

MOD

40+

LOW

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No major visible defects Bramble at base prevented detailed inspection.

Remove Bramble and re-inspect for defects.

Major dieback noted. Central stem is completely dead. Limited long term future.

Remove.

Single stemmed and vertical with an unbalanced crown. No evidence of No action required. significant pruning. No major visible defects. Suppressed by adjacent tree.

6.5 6 6

115 over Ivy

7 8 1

Semi-mature Ash

HIGH

Recommendations

5.5

Quercus robur

T 553

FAIR

Observations

Mature English Oak

Amenity Value

Quercus robur

T 552

Structural Condition

English Oak

GOOD

Mature T 551

Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

0.5

20 over Ivy

5 5

Fraxinus excelsior

Early-mature H 554

To 25 at base

100 over Ivy

Mixed species

See plan

7.5

Over mature T 555

T 556

English Oak

7.5

Quercus robur

Mature

5.5

English Oak

3.5

5.5 8

Quercus robur

Early-mature H 557 Mixed species

To 25 at base

To 28 at base

13 165 over Est 13.5 13.5 Ivy 13

To 4

To 26 at base

To 2.5

See plan

Early-mature H 558

To 5 Mixed species

Over mature T 559

English Oak

Ref:10249/TP

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Quercus robur

See plan

FAIR

Small section of well maintained field boundary hedge of Plum, Hawthorn No action required. GOOD GOOD and Field Maple. No major visible defects.

Well maintained Hedgerow of Elm, Field Maple and Hawthorn. A small section of of the hedge borders the garden of the adjacent Manor Farm Cottage. No major visible defects.

Early-mature H 560 Mixed species

JCA Limited 2011

See plan

Mixed species hedge surrounding 1 and 2 Manor Farm Cottage's. No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

Appendix 1

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Retention Category

Mixed species

To 20

To 70

58 over Ivy

T 563

Ash

40+

20-40

HIGH

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Situated in the rear garden of Park farm.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible No action required. GOOD defects. Ivy to stem prevented detailed inspection.

FAIR

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species field boundary hedgerow. Species include Hawthorn No action required. GOOD and Elm. No major visible defects.

FAIR

MOD

40+

See plan

Mixed species woodland group. Species include Oak, Hawthorn, Hazel, Ash, Sycamore, Cedar and Leylandii. Indicated on the topographical suvey with a vague green line. No major visible defects. Excellent natural feature.

MOD

40+

LOW

40+

See plan

5 15

Fraxinus excelsior

Mature

6.5

Cherry

2.5

Est 54

Mixed species

Est to 75

Multi-stemmed at 1m with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible defects. No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH Situated within the front garden of the farm cottage.

See plan

Over mature T 565

T 566

Turkey oak

2.5

125

Quercus cerris

Over mature

Turkey oak

Est 92

Mature Turkey oak

Mixed species group around Park farm. Species include Sycamore, Elm, Oak, Ash, Cherry, Cedar and Lawson No action required. Cypress. Good screen and habitat. Occasional dead specimens noted.

FAIR

No action required. GOOD GOOD

MOD

Est 8

Quercus cerris

T 567

GOOD GOOD HIGH

Semi-mature to mature To 18

Remove dead specimens as required.

Situated on the edge of G561. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection.

Prunus sp

G 564

Mixed species group. Species include Sycamore, Field Maple, Ash, Oak and Plum. Crowns overhang the road. No major visible defects. Occasional dead specimens noted.

E S

Early-mature T 562

Recommendations

Amenity Value

Observations

Structural Condition

40+

Semi-mature to mature G 561

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

2.5

96 over Ivy

12 Est 7

Quercus cerris

Early-mature H 568

To 5

Mixed species

To 25 at base

Young to mature W 569 Mixed species

To 18

Est to 85

5.5

Early-mature T 570

English Oak

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

6.5 6

Situated on the edge of W569. No major visible defects. Rather scrappy No action required. specimen.

FAIR

7.5

Est 12 10

Semi-mature to mature G 572

Mixed species

To 69

See plan

#N/A

Over mature T 573 Sweet Chestnut

T 574

T 575

T 576

T 577

200+

9.5

Over mature

10 23

135

Mature

13 20

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

120

Quercus robur

Mature

8.5

English Oak

1.5

120

Early-mature H 578

To 6

Est to 27 at base

To 18

To 40 at base

Ave 30

Mixed species

Mixed species group of Ash, Elder and Plum. Individual stems not plotted on topographical survey. No major visible defects.

LOW

40+

LOW

20-40

No action required. GOOD GOOD

Situated on the edge of W569. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced No action required. GOOD GOOD crown. No major visible defects. Fine specimen.

MOD

40+

Situated on the edge of W569. Multistemmed at 8m with a balanced crown. Some significant bark wounds Monitor annually. in upper crown. Acceptable condition at present.

GOOD

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning wounds due to crown lifting. Some No action required. GOOD GOOD deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present.

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of significant pruning. No major visible No action required. defects. Occasional branch stubs noted.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Mixed species hedgerow of Elm and No action required. Hawthorn. No major visible defects.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

MOD

40+

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

8 Est 9.5

Quercus robur

English Oak

40+

Situated on the edge of W569. Stem not plotted on topographical survey. Twin-stemmed at 3m with a balanced No action required. GOOD crown. Deadwood and decay noted. Very fine veteran specimen.

Castanea sativa

English Oak

LOW

Quercus robur

To 18

Retention Category

Recommendations

9 18

Life Expectancy (yrs)

English Oak

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

Observations

Mature T 571

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

See plan

Large Leylandii group. No major visible defects. Not plotted on the topographical survey.

See plan

Mixed species group of Sweet Chestnut, Oak, Ash and Leylandii. No major visible defects. Stems not plotted on the topographical survey.

FAIR

Early-mature G 579

Leylandii

No action required. GOOD GOOD

X Cupressocyparis leylandii

Early-mature G 580 Mixed species

To 16

JCA Limited 2011

1.5

150

Mixed species

To 11

0.5

Ave. 25

Mixed species

T 586

T 587

T 588

Atlas Cedar

LOW

40+

See plan

Vegetation forming the garden of Beeston hall. Species include Yew, Oak, Beech and Rhododendron. Not No action required. GOOD GOOD plotted on topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group.

To 20

To 80

MOD

40+

See plan

Group of Vegetation within the garden of Beeston hall. Species include Monterey Cypress, Tulip Tree, Liquidamber, Sycamore, Holly and Ash. Not plotted on topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group. No major visible defects.

To 19

To 55

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

40+

MOD

40+

6.5 0.5

5 6

Mature

13 19

109

Quercus robur

Over mature

English Oak

3.5

129

Quercus robur

Semi-mature

Tulip Tree

25 at base

Liriodendron tulipifera

Semi-mature

2.5

T 589 Indian Bean tree

T 590

Cedrus atlantica

English Oak

0.5

3.5

Catalpa bignonoides

2.5

Over mature

English Oak

GOOD GOOD

Early-mature T 585

10-20

See plan

Semi-mature G 584

LOW

Mixed species group within the rear garden of Beeston Hall. Species include Norway Maple, Honey Locust and Oak. No major No action required. visible defects. Only a few stems plotted on topographical survey, hence surveyed as a group.

Young to mature G 583

POOR POOR

Early-mature

Mixed species

Monitor annually.

Cedrus atlantica

G 582

Previously heavily reduced due to significant decay to stem. Acceptable condition at present.

Retention Category

Atlas Cedar

E S

Over mature T 581

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

2.5

151

11 11

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No evidence of No action required. GOOD GOOD significant pruning. No major visible defects.

6.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Wound present at base, and to stem in upper crown. Acceptable condition at present.

Monitor annually.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Stem wound in upper crown. Significant Deadwood noted. Acceptable condition at present due to land use.

Deadwood if land use changes.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Twin-stemmed at 0.5m with a balanced crown. Various stem No action required. wounds noted. Acceptable condition at present.

FAIR

MOD

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Slightly sparse crown noted.

No action required.

FAIR

LOW

20-40

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. No major visible defects. Minor stem wound at base. Deadwood throughout. Acceptable condition at present.

No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH

20-40

T 592

T 593

T 594

T 595

T 596

T 597

T 598

7.5 19

5.5

Over mature

9.5 20

2.5

145

6.5

Quercus robur

11.5

Mature

English Oak

111

7.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

122

6.5

Quercus robur

Early-mature

Ash

Fraxinus excelsior

Over mature

9.5

English Oak

127

7.5

Quercus robur

Mature

English Oak

113

Over mature

10 21

123

Multi-stemmed at 5m with a balanced Crown reduce by crown. Multiple branch stubs within 30% to stablize and crown due to past snapped limbs. contain.

5.5

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor wounds at base. Deadwood and woodpecker holes in the upper crown. Acceptable condition at present.

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Several large branch stubs noted. Acceptable condition at present.

G 599 Mixed species

T 600

English Oak Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

170

Monitor annually.

GOOD

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Monitor annaully.

FAIR

HIGH

20-40

Multi-stemmed at 4m with an unbalanced crown due to suppression No action required. from adjacent trees. No major visible defects.

FAIR

HIGH

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Dense epicormic growths to lower stem. No major visible defects.

No action required.

FAIR

GOOD

MOD

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor bark wounds No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH at base. Acceptable condition at present.

40+

Mixed species group situated around the pond. Species include Ash, No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH Sycamore, Oak and Rowan. No major visible defects.

40+

14 14

<10

See plan

20-40

HIGH

10 21

HIGH

FAIR

Over mature

FAIR

POOR

Semi-mature to early-mature Ave. 33

FAIR

Monitor annually.

To 18

8.5

Quercus robur

40+

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Dieback in top. Slightly small leaves noted. Dark exudates to stem. Likely to be in decline.

8.5

Quercus robur

English Oak

5.5

Quercus robur

English Oak

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

Retention Category

English Oak

E S

Mature T 591

Recommendations

Life Expectancy (yrs)

Observations

Amenity Value

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Structural Condition

Appendix 1

Vertical with a balanced crown. Deadwood observed. Ocasional branch stubs noted due to past lost limbs. Fine specimen.

Monitor annually.

GOOD

FAIR

LOW

5.5

Mature

9.5 22

104

Quercus robur

Mature

5 19

102

T 605

99 over Ivy

Fraxinus excelsior

9.5

Semi-mature

3.5

English Oak

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Minor bark wounds No action required. GOOD GOOD HIGH noted at base. Acceptable condition at present.

Crown reduce by Single stemmed and vertical with a 30% by cutting back balanced crown. Significant dieback into live wood and FAIR noted. Rather poor specimen. monitor remainder annually.

FAIR

Multi-stemmed at 3m with a balanced Remove Ivy and reGOOD crown. Ivy prevented detailed inspect for defects. inspection.

FAIR

Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Occasional pruning No action required. GOOD GOOD wounds due to crown lifting. No major visible defects.

MOD

20-40

40+

HIGH

20-40

MOD

20-40

MOD

40+

Mature Ash

GOOD

7.5

Quercus robur

T 604

FAIR

Retention Category

English Oak

Monitor annually.

Life Expectancy (yrs)

T 603

Situated on the edge of G559. Single stemmed and vertical with a balanced crown. Some dieback noted and dark staining to stem. Acceptable condition at present.

Quercus robur

English Oak

Structural Condition

T 602

English Oak

Recommendations

Mature T 601

Observations

N W

Ref:10249/TP Physiological Condition

Latin Name

Height (m)

Species

Crown Spread Diameter (cm)

Age Tree Ref.

Crown Height (m)

Tree Descriptions and Recommendations

Amenity Value

Appendix 1

Quercus robur

JCA Limited 2011

0.5

4.5 5

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 17 of 24

Appendix 2: Explanation of Tree Descriptions A2.1 Measurements A2.1.1 HEIGHT of the tree is measured from the stem base in metres. Where the ground has a significant slope the higher ground is selected. A2.1.2 CROWN HEIGHT is an indication of the average height at which the crown begins. A2.1.3 STEM DIAMETER is measured at 1.5 metres above (higher) ground level. Where the tree is multi-stemmed at this point; the diameter is measured close to ground level, just above the root buttress. A2.1.4 CROWN SPREAD is measured from the centre of the stem base to the tips of the branches in all four cardinal points.

A2.2 Evaluations A2.2.1 AGE CLASS of the tree is described as young, semi-mature, early-mature, mature, or over-mature. A2.2.2 PHYSIOLOGICAL CONDITION is classed as good, fair, poor, or dead. This is an indication of the health of the tree and takes into account vigour, presence of disease and dieback. A2.2.3 STRUCTURAL CONDITION is classed as good, fair or poor. This is an indication of the structural integrity of the tree and takes into account significant wounds, decay and quality of branch junctions. A2.2.4 LIFE EXPECTANCY is classed as; less than 10 years, 10-20 years, 20-40 years, or more than 40 years. This is an indication of the number of years before removal of the tree is likely to be required.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 18 of 24

A2.3 Retention Categories A2.3.1 A (marked green on the plan) = retention most desirable. These trees are of high quality and value with a good life expectancy. They may be further sub-divided as follows: A1) Particularly good examples; perhaps rare or unusual species, or forming an essential part of arboricultural features e.g. avenues. A2) Groups of trees having a significant landscape impact or with excellent screening properties, or those softening the effect of existing structures. A3) Those having significant conservation or historical value e.g. veteran trees.

A2.3.2 B (marked in blue on the plan) = retention desirable. These trees are of moderate quality and value with a significant life expectancy. They may be further sub-divided as follows: B1) Trees that might be included in the high category but because of their numbers or slightly impaired condition, are downgraded in favour of the better individuals. B2) Groups of trees forming distinct landscape features, thereby attracting a higher collective rating than they might as individuals. B3) Trees with clearly identifiable conservation or other cultural benefits.

A2.3.3 C (marked in grey on the plan) = trees which could be retained. These trees are of low quality and value, and are in adequate condition to remain until new planting could be established. They may be further sub-divided as follows: C1) Trees not qualifying in higher categories. C2) Groups of trees which do not form a distinct landscape feature. C3) Trees with very limited conservation or other cultural benefits.

A2.3.4 R (marked in red on the plan) = trees for removal. These trees are in such a condition that any existing value would be lost within 10 years. This may be due to any of the following: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5)

Failure is likely due to serious, irredeemable, structural defects. Removal of other category R trees will render them exposed and unstable. They are in serious, overall decline or are dead. They are of low quality and suppressing adjacent trees of better quality. Diseases are present which may affect the health of adjacent trees.

These trees should be removed or treated in such a way as to make them safe where they have high ecological value, such as in a woodland setting.

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 19 of 24

Appendix 3: General Guidelines A3.1

All work must be to BS 3998: 2010 - ‘Recommendations for tree work’.

A3.2

Staff carrying out the work must be qualified, experienced and ideally be Arboricultural Association approved contractors. They should be covered by adequate public liability insurance.

A3.3

This report is based upon a visual inspection. The consultant shall not be responsible for events which happen after this time due to factors which were not apparent at the time, and the acceptance of this report constitutes an agreement with the guidelines and the terms listed in this report.

A3.4

Any defects seen by a contractor or the employer that were not apparent to the consultant must be brought to the consultant's attention immediately.

A3.5

No liability can be accepted by JCA Limited in respect of the trees unless the recommendations of this report are carried out under the supervision of JCA and within JCA’s timescale.

A3.6

It is advisable to have trees inspected by an arboricultural consultant regularly. In this instance it is recommended that these inspections are made every year.

 JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 20 of 24

Appendix 4: Glossary of Terms & Abbreviations Arboriculture

The cultivation of trees in order to produce individual specimens of the greatest ornament, for shelter or any primary purpose other than the production of timber.

Canker

Disease damaged area of a tree, usually caused by fungus or bacteria.

Co-dominant Stem

A stem which has grown in direct competition to the main stem and which has formed a substantial size influencing the appearance of the tree.

Crown Lift

The removal of the lowest branches, usually to a given height. It allows more residual light and greater clearance underneath for vehicles, etc.

Crown reduce

The reduction of a tree’s height or spread while preserving its natural shape.

Crown thin

The removal of some of the density of a tree’s crown, usually 5-25% allowing more light through its canopy and reducing wind resistance.

Deadwood

Either dead branches, or a procedure involving the removal of dead, dying and diseased branches.

Dieback

Where branches are beginning to show signs of death usually at the tips in the crown.

Epicormic shoots

Small branches that grow in uncharacteristic clusters around the base or the stem of a tree, usually as a result of bad pruning or some other stress factor.

Formative pruning

The trimming of a tree to remove weaknesses and irregularities which may lead to problems. The formative pruning operation is aimed at reducing the potential for future weaknesses or problems within the tree’s crown.

Included bark

Where the bark on two adjoining branches or stems is growing tight together, forming a joint with limited physical strength.

Pollarding

A method of tree management in which the main trunk of the tree is cut at about 4m, and the resulting branches are then cropped on a regular basis.

Remedial pruning

The removal of old stubs, deadwood, epicormic growth, rubbing or crossing branches and other unwanted items from the tree’s crown. Sometimes referred to as crown cleaning.

RPA

Root Protection Area – The theoretical rooting area of a tree as defined in BS5837: 2005 Trees in relation to construction.

Topping

Topping is a form of pruning that removes terminal growth leaving a ‘stub’ cut end. Topping causes serious health problems to a tree.

 JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 21 of 24

Appendix 5: Author Qualifications Principal Consultant and Managing Director Jonathan Cocking F.R.E.S., Tech. Cert. (Arbor.A), PDipArb (RFS) FArborA CBiol MSB. MICFor. Jonathan is a Registered Consultant and Fellow of the Arboricultural Association and sits on its Professional Committee. He has 31 years experience in the Arboricultural profession and served for eight years as Senior Arboriculturist with a large local authority before establishing JCA in 1997. He has since developed JCA’s portfolio of services and its extensive client base. Jonathan is a Chartered Biologist, a Chartered Arboriculturalist and an Expert Witness with much experience of litigation work.

Technical Coordinator Toby Thwaites BSc (Hons), HND (Arboriculture). Toby joined JCA in 1998 after graduating in Ecology at the University of Huddersfield and has since graduated in Arboriculture at the University of Lancashire. A former JCA team leader and Consulting Arboriculturist, Toby was promoted to Technical Coordinator and now oversees all office and on-site activities at JCA and is on hand to offer technical support and advice.

Consulting Staff: Arboriculture Andrew Bagshaw FD (Arboriculture). Andrew joined JCA in 2005 having gained several years experience in tree surgery and landscaping. He is trained in aerial rescue and is JCA’s principal first aid person. Andrew has obtained a foundation degree in Arboriculture at the University of Lancashire, is QTRA qualified and is a JCA team leader who manages an office of Consulting Arboriculturists. Adam Winson BSc (Hons), ND (Arboriculture) MSc (Arboriculture and Urban Forestry). Adam is a Professional Associate of the Institute of Chartered Foresters and an Associate Member of the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management. Prior to joining JCA Adam worked as a tree surgeon. During his BSc in Environmental Conservation he gained the CPRE award for best dissertation. Adam has recently obtained an MSc in Arboriculture and Urban Forestry. Robert Godwin BA (Hons), MSc (Arboriculture and Urban Forestry), MArborA. Robert is a Professional Member of the Arboricultural Association and a Professional Associate of the Institute of Chartered Foresters. He has a degree in Landscape Planning & Management and has several years experience as a Consulting Arboriculturist. Robert has recently obtained an MSc in Arboriculture and Urban Forestry. Victoria Black FD (Arboriculture). Victoria has been with JCA since 2002 building her knowledge of the Arboricultural business. She has recently obtained her foundation degree in Arboriculture at the University of Lancashire. Andrew Bussey Andrew joined JCA having spent 12 years doing tree surgery for various private companies and a Local Authority. He has various NPTC qualifications, is QTRA qualified and is currently studying for his Arboricultural Technicians Certificate. Toby Parsons Cert. Arb. (RFS), Tech. Cert. (Arbor.A). Toby joined JCA after spending 6 years working as a senior climber for various Arboricultural contractors in the East Midlands and the South-West. He has gained the Level 2 Certificate in Arboriculture (RFS), the Arboricultural Associations Technicians Certificate and is QTRA qualified. Raphael Skerratt BSc (Forestry) FArborA. Raphael covers the London area for JCA. He ran his own Arboricultural businesses since 1972 and is experienced in tree surveys for development, safety and subsidence purposes, and is an Expert Witness.

Consulting Staff: Ecology Christopher Shaw BSc (Hons). Chris is our in-house Ecologist, and joined JCA in 2010 after achieving a First Class degree in Biology at the University of Leeds. Prior to joining JCA, Chris has volunteered with a number of organisations including the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust, BTCV and a local Ecological Consultancy. He is currently undertaking a ‘Certificate in Ecological Consultancy Course’ with Acorn Ecology. Chris is actively involved in building JCA’s portfolio of ecological services.

Administrative Staff Sue Guest Administrative Team Leader. Sally Whitwam Administrative Assistant. Simeon Haigh BSc (Hons). IT Officer.

 JCA Limited 2011

Catherine Cocking Accounts Manager. Yasmin Hussain Administrative Assistant. Liz Bone Trainee Administrative Assistant Alec Fielden Cert. Arb. (RFS). CAD Technician.

N W

E G473

G473

S G473 W357

W357

H368

G473

T369

H568

H367

W357

T538

G473

T537 H568

G539 G67 T370

W535

W357 T536

G473

G572

W535

T571

G179

G372 G572

T170

H541 W535

G67 W469 H542

W172 W172

H366

H171

T543

T173 T570 T575

T573

T169

T574

G471

G471 G472 H356

G372 H371 T534

W569 G66

T576

G472 G178

H558

G472

T168

T175

H474

H533

H558

H62 G178

T63

T565

T167

W569

G174

T566

W569 H356

G564 T567

H365 H540

H528 T166 T544

G174 H364

H161

T577

T545 W469 T165

T559 H528

G564 G64 H363

T548

T546

T547

T549

H578

G66

T532 T550 H523 T551 G353

H527

H578 G582

T164

H554

G351

G579

T555

T552

H560

G582 G353

T553 T556 T526

G176

T531

T525

H557 T581

G579

G564

G351

H528 H523

G583

T524

T562 H362

G353 G352

T563

T163

T605

G561 T530

T604

H177 G580

H153

H521 G522

T155

T154

T529

G580 T156

H151

G583

T603

H153 G354

T601

G579

G584 W469

G150

H151

G561 H151

G355

T152

T602

G584

T598

T519

T597

H151 T350 H373

G351

G65

G584

G352

T502

G599

H504

T520

G352 T162

T503

T484 G483

T585 T596 T587

H485 T586

T180

T518

T594 G150

T482 T593 T501 G349 T159

H158

T358

T160

T600

T595

T481 G361

T517

T480 T588 T347 G348

G359 T516

T149 T182

T147

T479

T374

T148

T589

H470

H157

T478

G359

G510

T183 T592

T346

T508

T505

T590 T477

T509

T360 T345 T476 T500 T324

G506

T323

G181

H470 H375

T591

T507 G322 G341

T499

T475 G321 T344

H376

T378

T468 T377

H146 T343

T497

T325 T467

T342

T498 T326

G184

T465 T327

G321

T466

T328

T185

T464

T330 T329

H515 T492

T187

T495

T496 W455

G341

T461 T331 T491 T334

T186

T463 T333

T332 T493 T490 T494

T340

G145 T141

W486

T462

T140

G320

G188

T460

G137

G336

T489

T459 T142 T335

H319

H317 T488

T138 G189

T511

T339 T139 G145 G132

G338 T512

T513 G336 G144

G458

T318

G132

G338

T514 T487

G143

H285

G136 T134

H133

G136

G143 W455 G135 T192 H319 G132

W486

G337

G132

T457

H27 G190

G127 T456 T28 H31 H191 T32

G135

G127

T33

T30

G34

H270

T29 T194 T223 H285 G193

T222 T125 H319 H129

T26

G190 T128 H129

G221

T282

G130

H35

T219

T25

W455 H270 G220 G126

Boundary row of netles & bramble along fenceline

G131

T218

H281

T271

T61

H23

H216 H122 T24 W486 T283 G60

T449

T448

T215

T284

H36

T217

T450

G121 T451 T447

T214

H224

T213 G60

H281

W446 T22

G212

T37 T124 T211

T452

T210

G454

H36

H21

Boundary row of netles & bramble along fenceline

G17

T20

T209

T123

T288

G19 G59 T18

W417

T38

T453

T279 G208

W446

G16

T278

H84 G15

G58 T14

H84 H84

H36

G116

G114

G117

T13 G208 H115

T85

H12

T277

H115

G118

G120

T207 H280

G57 G89

T289 G119 G120 T445

G206

T444

T443

G56

T442 T441

T39

T440

G113

T276

G55

G11

T439

W390

H224

Area of dence brambles G204 T54 T40

H48

W417

T275 T41

G113 T42

T205 T53

T418 T86 T273

T274

H287

G52

T416

H286

T51

T272 W417

G203

T438

T419

T290

G10 G49 T112 T50

T415

Area of dence brambles T202

T111

G201

G113

T43

T110 T421

T87 T420

T291

T109

T316

T47

T44

T225 T69

G46

G70

T81

T77

T75

T82

T83

H68 T76

G107 T78

T79

T80 T200

T422

T108 H45

T71

T199

T227

T292

T423

T198

G89

T424 H315

G9 T106 Area of dence brambles along fenceline

G197 T293

T425

T104 G3

G228

T105

T294 H2 H195

T426

H414

T427 T103 T73 T102 W390 T101 T295 G72 T428

T100

G88

H226

G296 T429

T297

G99 T389

H269 G229

G72

T388

T98

T298

T230

G387

T97

T300 H269

G196 T299 G88

G89 T430

G72 G413

G96 T431 T301 T411 G302

T432

T412

T74

G96

G303 T433

G379

G407 T434 W390

T233

T92

G88

T410

T93

G90

G89

T435

T304

G90

T305 G95

G90

G94 T409

G91

T436

T408 T306

G232 T437

G379

G407

T393

T307

T391 T394 T234

T395

G379

G232

G407

T396

T268

T309

T308

H231

T397

G406 T398 G392 T310

T380 G406 T264

T267 T265 T399 T382

G406 G266

G381 T400

T383 G392

T235

T402

T401

T311

T403

T312

T384 T236

T237

T385

T313 T405

T404

G386

T238

T239

T314

T240

G251

T241 G250

T249

T242

G251 T248

T243

T244

T247 G245

G245

T246

G245

T252

T253

T263

G254

H261 H255 G256

T259

Appendix 6: Tree Constraints Plan

T262

T258

H257

T260

TITLE: Land To The North East of Norwich City Centre JCA Ref: 10249/TP SCALE 1:5000 SURVEYED BY: TP

PAPER SIZE

DRAWN BY: AF

APPROVED BY: TP, AF

Root Protection Area: RPA

THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS SHOULD THEREFORE BE DESIGNED TO AVOID THE RPA OF ANY TREE WHICH IS TO BE RETAINED. IF IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT TO ENCROACH INTO THE RPA OF A TREE WHICH IS TO BE RETAINED THEN SPECIALIST CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES AND MATERIALS MUST BE CONSIDERED.

ited Lim

THE ROOT PROTECTION AREA (RPA) INDICATES THE LIKELY ROOTING ZONE OF A TREE. THE RPA SHOULD IDEALLY REMAIN UNDISTURBED IF A TREE IS TO BE RETAINED.

BRITISH STANDARD 5837: 2005 4.3.1 RETENTION CATEGORIES Detailed definitions of these catagories are at Appendix 2 of our report. N.B. These categories do not necessairly represent or correspond to recommendations for action made in this report.

CATEGORY A: 'RETENTION MOST DESIRABLE' CATEGORY B: 'RETENTION DESIRABLE' CATEGORY C: 'TREE WHICH COULD BE RETAINED' CATEGORY R: 'TREE FOR REMOVAL'

CENTRE OF TREE/SHRUB

CENTRE OF TREE/SHRUB TO BE REMOVED

Arboricultural & Forestry Consultants ROOT PROTECTION AREA

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

Page 23 of 24

I hope that this report provides all the necessary information, but should any further advice be needed please do not hesitate to contact the author.

Signed

.................................................................... Toby Parsons Cert. Arb. (RFS), Tech. Cert. (Arbor.A). On behalf of Jonathan P Cocking. F.R.E.S., P.Dip. Arboriculture (RFS), F Arbor A, C.Biol., M.I.Biol., Registered Consultant of the Arboricultural Association. 21st September 2011

For and on behalf of JCA Ltd Registered Office: Unit 80 Bowers Mill Branch Road Barkisland Halifax HX4 OAD Tel. 01422 376335 Fax. 01422 376232 Email: jon@jcaac.com

www.jcaac.com Report printed on recycled paper

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Arboricultural Report at: Land to the North East of Norwich City Centre, Norwich, Norfolk. JCA Ref: 10249/TP

ď&#x203A;&#x2122; JCA Limited 2011

Page 24 of 24