RAUK - Archived Forum - Great-cresteds and development.

Thomas, actually 'Brownfield' sites are where some of the highest concentrations of our native herpetofauna can be found. Particularly ex-MOD etc. Green-field such as intensively farmed arable is practically useless to our wildlife. Brownfield sites are often far better than nature reserves also, as they are not over managed.

Matt raises a good point. Unfortunately many of us who are experienced with native reptiles and Great Crested Newts will have come across those who try to use the newts simply to cause problems for developers.

Often this leads to unnecessary expense and delays to the developer, disruption to mitigation works etc. The overall effect? Next time the developer will not bother to get a site surveyed for protected species so it achieves very little in terms of real conservation.

There is no reason that you should not flag the presence of GCN in your area (if they have been positively identified) so that appropriate mitigation can be carried out. You should be aware that presence of GCN is very UNLIKELY to stop a development going ahead.

On paper the presence of crested newts should stop the development of small sites.....but this seems to be rarely the case

I have recently taken on a job where a neighbour let another neighbour know that land was being sold at the rear of their gardens - when he found out that two instead of the one house was being built he called 'Newt!' that he found in his small garden pond

Nevermind that two very large houses were built very closeby a few years back the site is next to his garden so he is using the newts as the only issue to try and stop the development......

Brownfield sites are as Gemma says are the most important sites for herpetofauna locally - many thousands of reptiles and amphibians are relocated off brownfield sites while many thousands of acres of farmland are left untouched - the act of farming intensively to me is the same as 'development' though the difference is the plough, pesticides, fertiliser and other farming practises which reduces the wildlife potential of the majority of our green and pleasant land.

Still it keeps a few of us in business though I would love to see policy change to target greenfield sites! I dont care if I would lose work I would then know that less wildlife would be affected.

It would be wise to get you newts identified - maybe a picture on this forum would help - then you should do as Gemma says - inform the local authority planning department about the presence of protected species....

Jon

Hi Thomas

Your right organic production may increase the wildlife value of farmland - but when you have very large companies pouring billions of pounds into biotechnology you wouldnt expect that they would take organic production when they need to sell their biotechnology to farmers -

Developers are bound to survey sites - if they are making a planning application to a local authority it is the duty of the planning department that all material considerations are resolved before planning permission is given

A European Protected species such as the gcn on a development site and beyond is a material consideration under PPS 9 and the relevant planning law.

Councils have moxed reactions to this issue across the country often they are on steep learnign curves when it comes to protected species and now biodiversity aswell

Jon

I have yet to survey a site in the Southeast that did not support at least one protected reptile species. The conservation issues are not so much to do with present distribution as current and future losses.

Can we not presume that at West Raynham the vegetation in open areas surrounding the previous dwellings will have developed in the last 11 years to provide the perfect environment for sustaining wildlife? It would be very unusual for such a site NOT to be a haven for wildlife. If we are talking about RAF West Raynham, then I know this to be the case. Perhaps you should ask Jon what was found at a similar site in Kent when it was redeveloped?

Jon has explained the position regarding obligations to survey sites. This only occasionally filters down to the ground however. I would give an estimate that as little as 1-2% of development sites that support native protected species are mitigated. I would not like to give an estimate of the percentage that are mitigated adequately.

Not much I can do about organic farming, except support local farmers that produce organic goods. Quite agree though, bring it on

The site which I have been involved in was a very small part of a much larger site which was developed at the end of the 1990's. This year we have moved over 400 reptiles to safe parts of the site which will become a nature reserve/country park - you wouldnt believe how many dormice were found during this work

I will be working on that site probably for the next two to three years - mainly reptiles including adders. Some of the gravid female adders (we suspect) gave birth around their release site so we hope that this would be a sucessful relocation for the adder.

I have been working on this site since 2002 so 4 years - two to three years worth of surveying and I am still finding out more about the site. The majority of what remains of the MOD site is going to be built on - though a big area will be managed for wildlife and thankfully the dreams of the Wildlife Trust cannot be fulfilled - restoring the main area to heathland - as there is a large Dormouse population

Great this means less disturbance to the adder population etc which will hopefully work in the medium term I am hoping for the long term

Jon

Same in Essex Tony. In my experience records do not seem to count for much. I just get told that turning these areas into artificial heaths will benefit the reptiles, don't you know they like open (moonscape) areas of heath?

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Birch/Bracken, the lost habitat of the future?

Tony/Gemma: I'd be interested in your thoughts as to what makes a "super braken/birch site."  Is it a case of birch woodland with braken at the margins and in interior clearings?  Presumably large blocks of dense birch woodland aren't that useful, or are they? 

I ask because my local nature reserves consist of two wet heaths - both of which had been largely taken over by woodland/ Molinia grass since grazing ceased in the 1970s.  And both have areas of braken.  One of them has now been partially recleared to create an open area for heather and rarer wet heath plants to grow, and is managed by grazing with ponies.  That site has Grass Snakes and Common Lizards, but no Adders have been seen recently. The other, which supports at least one colony of Adders is still largely unmanaged, although some clearance of birch woodland took place a couple of years ago. 

Is it the case that, as far as the reptiles are concerned, a mixture of woodland, braken and heather would be beneficial, with patches of birch and other bushes allowed within the heather areas? (we only seem to get dwarf gorse on the sites).   We do leave woodpiles and there are some ponds which dry-up during the summer.

Peter  

Hi Peter,

Birch infill can be a problem at birch/bracken sites. In which case small scale felling of the birch and creation of log piles will help. This is all the management I would want to see. (This needs to be done carefully if adder are present and active hibernacula identified and managed very sympathetically)

Good bracken sites are usually mature. i.e. unmanaged for decades. It isn't the same as when you have a heathland fire and all that comes up is bracken from the rhizomes.. I mean heavily layered and structured habitat. It probably is pretty poor for plant diversity, but it can be extremely good for the widespread reptiles. All my best sites are birch/bracken.

I have actually stood beside land managers whilst they have descibed habitat such as this as 'rubbish' with the intent of clearing the lot to encourage heather growth. If only they could see the full picture of how well structured some of these sites can be and had the first clue of just how high the concentration of reptiles can be.

I would like to see consideration given to such sites during heathland restoration schemes, but again this comes down to pre-survey of the site. This rarely happens in an adequate or appropriate way and we continue to lose these areas.

Hi Peter

I have been talking with the warden for that site and we have been discussing options to protect the main adder areas which I hope that you would be able to point out.

The idea of large dead thorny hedges around the main basking areas has been discussed to try and keep the ponies or other grazing animals out of the way of the adders etc

I have collected up some old tin which I can finally get to you by the way....sorry for the wait

Jon

I have data that shows a very strong association between bracken and adder at some sites. Again, it is just these areas that are first on the hit list for management. If only the sites were surveyed to gain an understanding of which features are important to the species present we could preserve so much more diversity at these sites. It really is tragic these day that we lose so much to those who are either too arrogant or too ignorant to listen even when such survey data is collected and presented.  

I think it is still a widely held belief by many 'wildlife conservation organisations' that all reptile species are evenly distributed across a site and that by opening up vast areas the management benefits reptiles.. how wrong they are.

Jon has explained the position regarding obligations to survey sites. This only occasionally filters down to the ground however. I would give an estimate that as little as 1-2% of development sites that support native protected species are mitigated. I would not like to give an estimate of the percentage that are mitigated adequately. [/QUOTE]

As has been noted already, the 'requirement' for a site to be surveyedmitigated is very much dependant on the expertise within a local planning authority.  Issues such as protected species legislation and biodiversity are a steep learing curve. 

It really comes down to the attitiude and expertise of perhaps one or two people within an authority, some have ecologists or biodiversity offices who can give advice to the planning department - in others there is nothing. 

I have come across both good and bad examples of  both, locally to me the planning department has a very good working relationship with the ecologist and good processes put in place so that planning applications do go across his desk for comment or decisions about surveys.  Having said that, I have also met LA officers on site who tell me that 'I'm not bloody interested in GCN or Water Voles (both of which were on site), my job is to get houses built. 

Most seem to fall in the middle, though I have noticed more 'notice' being paid to things like slow worms and lizards over the past few years - not just to the 'protected' species like GCN.

Matt

Evening all.  For some reason I couldn't access this site yesterday (timed-out each time), but it seems to be working fine tonight.

Thanks very much to Tony and Gemma for the information on birch/braken site.  I've learnt a lot from that which will be of practical application.  I must admit I'd picked-up the idea that heaths were best for reptiles, and under-appreciated the importance of woodland habitat.  Actually it's quite encouraging to learn that birch/bracken sites are so important, because, while there is not much heath left locally, there are still many areas of woodland of various forms.  Something to think about if I get a chance to look for other adder sites next spring.

Jon - it is good that the wildlife trust is alert to reptile considerations and that you have advised them about those. 

I'm not sure about the practicality of the large dead thorny hedge idea to protect the reptiles from trampling/having their cover eaten though because:

a) We have yet to fully explore for other Adder colonies on the sites (so don't know which other areas need protecting apart from the known adder location) 

b) A conservation workparty had a go at building such a hedge at one of the boundaries of the reserve earlier this year.   Although an impressive structure was assembled it was very slow work, many man (and women) -hours work resulted in only a few meters length being produced.  So I fear the hedges may be too labour intensive for anything other than very small inclosures.  Still at least the hedge itself would be good cover.  Thanks very much for the help with the tins - I'll pm you about that.

Suzi - I was struck by their markings mirroring the vegetation.  The Adders I saw this  spring were (almost) invisible against the dead braken.

Peter