Below is our survey calendar, which will allow you to plan for commission of survey in a timely manner. WFE are usually positioned to provide a rapid response to client requests, but inevitably there are very busy periods when this is more of a challenge.

The narrowest survey season is for great crested newts, where at least 4 survey visits are normally spread between March and June. If your development has ponds nearby, these surveys may be required. As with many of the surveys, it can be problematic to remedy a missed survey window later in the season. In the event great crested newts are observed by surveys and considered to be affected by the proposal, it may take a further month or more to receive a development licence from Natural England.

Bat roost assessments for development can take place at any time of year. However, if signs of bats are found, further investigations in the form of evening emergence and/or dawn surveys will be required to support a development licence application. These surveys are seasonal, and would only be meaningful if undertaken in the time of year that bats are active, April to September.

Ecological appraisal and Phase 1 habitat survey, the look-see and scoping surveys for sites, can be undertaken at any time of year – however in areas rich in flora, a return visit may need to be made in the spring/ summer when some plant species are more visible. BREEAM and C4SH surveys are possible at any time of year although spring/ summer is preferable in terms of survey reliability.

Getting all surveys completed at the correct time of year greatly improves the prospect of a smooth and efficient passage towards planning permission, and will provide a sound basis for reaching solutions to any ecological issues. Our team are always ready to discuss particular proposals, so if in doubt, give us a call.

Rob

Workwise, much of the early season was devoted to reptile and amphibian works, with a lot of staff time devoted to the Broadland Flood Alleviation Project, and two mitigation schemes, one in West Norfolk and the other along a popular stretch of the Norfolk Coast at Burnham Overy.

Breeding bird surveys also run in the April to June period, and we were assigned a number of wind farm proposal sites to survey. These proposals are often in intensive farmland, so the yield of interesting bird species can be quite low, although sometimes we are lucky enough to encounter a few goodies. Over the years this kind of survey has picked up stone curlew, crane, woodlark, quail and red-backed shrike, as well as good fistfuls of red and amber-listed farmland birds. This kind of survey is highly skilled, with the surveyor needing to know songs and calls of a large number of species.

This year has seen a definite upturn in the number of BREEAM and Code for Sustainable Homes assessments we have been involved with. These are often brownfield sites, and as the BREEAM credit system is based on the number of plant species present, it is usually to the developer’s benefit that the existing site is not very diverse. However, we do find that most of our clients are very keen to create a positive biodiversity benefit, even on the most urban of sites.

Typical BREEAM site

Finally, we have also been busy attending the small wind conference in March, giving presentations on small wind developments and ecological risk, contributing to research into Norfolk barbastelles, showing reptiles to members of the public and conducting bat walks.

Looking forward, the autumn is likely to bring a lot more bat surveys, and often a rush of small development projects as they look to get planning permission before the winter sets in. There is often another peak of reptile work in August/ September, while bird vantage point surveys continue, and reports and assessments become more of a priority.

Rob

Robert Yaxley

Of course, I wanted to know where these birds were heading, where they had been and what they were doing during the day. I still haven’t really got all the answers, but gradually a few observations have helped me to have some understanding of this daily commute as predictable as the sunrise and sunset. The general pattern seems to be that of a night-time gull roost at the coast, probably Wells Harbour, but maybe other places too. Then, as I have now seen many times, a dawn or pre-dawn southward movement and dispersal. This is very noticeable at my house in Foulsham, where each morning flocks of common and black-headed gulls come in low across the fields from the north-west, often settling for a short time before moving on.

During the daytime, the gulls often display a more random movement, presumably roaming in search of good food sources. Then, early or mid-afternoon, the familiar V shaped formations start appearing with a steady northward bearing, back to the coast. There is at least one regular en-route stop-off, the lake at Holkham Park where gulls will pause for a brief wash before flying down the length of the serpentine lake towards the tidal sands of Wells. 

Although the five species mentioned above are the most usual, other gulls will inevitably get caught up in these daily movements. Viewed from my stupendous back garden one early morning a few years ago in March were two perfect summer plumaged adult Mediterranean gulls, mixed in with the commons and black-heads. I am sure that keen gull-watchers would find yellow-legged, Caspian and maybe glaucous and Iceland gulls every now and then.

Some mysteries remain. Presumably in other areas, the gulls perform the same commuting movements to and from other roosts. It would be interesting to map the hinterland from each roost; how far is a gull prepared to fly for its scavenged lunch?; what observations have been made at the north Norfolk roost (numbers? What happens when it’s high tide?; And are there well-used flight lines overland, or is it just a random spread of flocks across a broad front (I think there are flight lines). 

For me, a wintry Norfolk sunset is not complete without a gull or two.

Rob

Robert Yaxley

Rob Yaxley is Wild Frontier’s director and chief gull lover. His hobbies include obsessive pursuits such as counting the freckles on his children’s faces, adding up the numbers on number plates and collecting wooden rhinoceri under 10cm in length.

A Phase 1 habitat survey is designed to map an area under consideration based on the habitats present. As ecological consultants we use it as tool to inform on the need for further survey; as a baseline to record an area’s current state; or to help in the impact assessment of a development.

In a Phase 1 habitat survey, habitats are assigned a type in accordance with guidance set down by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC); primarily this refers to the landscape structure and vegetation present. With standardised habitat definitions and map colour schemes, areas can be compared at a national level. As well as large habitat areas, boundary features are also assessed and classified. Hedges and ditches can also be important habitats. The output from a Phase 1 habitat survey is often a colourful map, with additional “target notes” to provide further information on any points of interest and habitats too small to map.

Whilst a Phase 1 habitat survey is exceedingly useful, an extended Phase 1 habitat survey is often preferred. This provides further information on a site, above that specified by JNCC, and allows the survey results to be of use in the context required, for example the assessment of a proposed development. An extended survey might include more detailed information on hedgerows, a botanical species list, and a further appraisal of the areas as habitat for legally protected species. As the major component of any Phase 1 habitat survey is the time taken walking the site the extended survey information can generally be obtained with minimal additional effort on the part of a competent surveyor.

A Phase 1 habitat survey is generally the first survey undertaken at a site and is often akin to a site assessment. By determining what habitats are present on a site the ecologist can say what, if any, protected species might be supported there. They can then assess the need for any further targeted surveys. Common protected species surveys in lowland habitats are for badgers, bats, breeding birds, great crested newts, otter, reptiles and water vole. However, it is exceptional that all these surveys would be required on a small site. Although protected species surveys are generally the second phase of ecological assessment of a site, in the jargon a Phase 2 survey specifically would refer to further botanical work on a site. This is generally in the form of a more detailed vegetation survey called ‘National Vegetation Classification’ (NVC). For the majority of lowland development work this level of vegetation survey is not necessary.

Ideally a Phase 1 habitat survey would be the first survey undertaken, this is inevitably not always the case. A Phase 1 habitat survey is best conducted between April and October when deciduous and annual plant species are identifiable. Dependent on a site we can often undertake an initial assessment to get a project underway. For many small development sites a Phase 1 habitat survey may not be appropriate as it takes a landscape approach. However, the same skills can be applied to assess the habitat quality of a site on a small scale.

As an ecologist the Phase 1 habitat survey is one of my favourites. By its very nature the most interesting habitats on a site must be inspected, and as these surveys often take us off roads and footpaths it provides the opportunity to be inquisitive and see the flora and fauna in areas that would normally be off limits. This off-piste kind of activity does also come with its disadvantages. As the newest addition to a field the local livestock normally find you fascinating. Then of course there may not be the handy gates and styles a footpath has to offer. Deep ditches, dense hedges and barbed-wire fences all provide their own challenges and impenetrable barriers normally show up just when it’s least convenient. Finally with thousands of plant species in the UK aspects of this survey are by no means easy. Plants may stay still, but they can hugely variable in size and form depending on the surrounding conditions. Still give me an interesting site any day, I like a challenge.

A Phase 1 habitat survey can often be a considerable walk in the countryside, so let’s face it as long as it’s not pouring with rain that is always better than a day in the office!

Susie

Susannah Dickinson

Susie has always liked plants (although maybe not grasses). She cut her teeth as a Phase 1 habitat surveyor working on surveys for a 45km cable route across Norfolk, and spent the last year attempting to do as many of WFE’s extended Phase 1 habitat surveys as possible. The highlight was a floriferous green lane in Northamptonshire. Susie has a rapidly expanding knowledge of arable weeds, and aspires to have as good a botanical knowledge as Rob!

For more information see:

Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit.

Possibly the main conclusion of Making Space for Nature is that currently, the network of protected sites, including statutory and non-statutory designations, “does not provide a resilient or coherent ecological network” and is not going to sustain the UK’s biodiversity as is without a “step change in nature conservation”. The government itself has promised to “introduce measures to protect wildlife and promote green spaces and wildlife corridors in order to halt the loss of habitats and restore biodiversity”. Strong words indeed, but can the White Paper deliver the goods?

The emphasis here is on networks, linkage and barriers to movement. Ecological barriers are not always easy to define, and of course different species disperse using very different methods, so while for one species a new road may form a significant ecological barrier, this may be no problem for a wind-dispersed plant or a migratory bird. Conversely, ecological linkages can be problematic. What best links two semi-natural areas with diverse ranges of species, or two areas with particularly poor dispersers? How do we measure the benefits of ecological connectivity against possible negative impacts (say transmission of invasive species or increased predation)?

The Lawton report specifies four methods of improving ecological connectivity, aside from improving the management of existing wildlife sites – make existing sites bigger, create wildlife corridors, create new sites and buffer existing sites. It also foresees a much more prominent role for the current network of non-statutory wildlife sites, two thirds of which are not currently being managed for their special interest. The Lawton report also specifies 24 recommendations for establishing a coherent and resilient ecological network, including the setting up of 12 Ecological Restoration Zones in the next 3 years. Estimates of the costs of implementing these 24 recommendations, estimated at the end of the report, appear miniscule in comparison with such things as bailing out of banks, trade deficits, NHS budgets etc.

What would our countryside look like in fifty years’ time, if any of the vision progresses and is effectively rolled out? How will such a fundamental demand on our land fit against the background of a rapidly growing UK population, a higher demand for locally produced foods, and the ever-progressing technology applied to agriculture? It will require the strongest leadership, the brightest minds and the greatest goodwill to make this happen, but dare we raise our hopes to think that it might? Those of us who have grown up with the backdrop of disappearing songbirds, ploughing up of grasslands and woods and degradation of habitat quality through neglect and encroachment will need to raise our sights beyond the here and now.

Rob

Robert Yaxley

It’s been a busy year for Wild Frontier Ecology.

Catch up with all the news with our 2010 Newsletter!

I had the excitement of seeing a flock of 18 flying in over the shingle bank at Cley marshes NWT in early November, as well as singles over our office, 3 on survey in Perthshire and 1 over Norwich Cathedral yesterday. Those tuned in to their call will find that it’s not unusual to encounter the odd roaming singleton flying over in these irruption years.

Waxwings are an irruptive species, arriving in the UK in varying numbers each winter. The key driver to their movements would seem to be the supply of wild berries in Scandinavia. The 1965 irruption, according to Birds of the Western Palearctic, was a result of an “acute imbalance between population size and food supply in Fenno-Scandia”. An awesome set of photos from Fair Isle  shows that birds crossing the North Sea were hungry enough to feed from the hand. Judging by the plethora of photos of waxwings appearing this autumn, once birds reach Britain, their favourite nosh would seem to be rowan berries, including ornamental varieties.

Waxwing spotted by Rob. Photo Jonny Rankin

An interesting article in BirdGuides  shows the movement through the country of a colour-ringed waxwing, from Orkney to Aberdeen in six days, and from Aberdeen to Cumbria in another seven. Previous patterns of invasion have shown that larger flocks tend to aggregate in city centres later in the winter, presumably because of the variety of food sources available.

And here’s the tenuous link; here is a piece of evidence that all the BREEAM assessments we undertake which recommend berry planting, and all the urban landscaping schemes which include berry-bearing shrubs and trees, do at least benefit this one species of bird in its hour of need. That is not to say that they do not benefit other birds in the same way. What sometimes seem like token efforts on small sites can cumulatively be of critical importance.

Rob

Robert Yaxley

Rob Yaxley started birdwatching at the age of 3 and saw his first waxwing in a garden in Costessey in 1985. Best memories including seeing a single waxwing in the trees at Guist Bridge in 1987, and hearing a flock go over while coppicing in Wayland Wood with the golden pheasants sometime in the early 1990s. Rob enjoys eating berries and hanging around in supermarket car parks.

As Suitably Qualified Ecologists (SQEs), we are regularly consulted by developers looking to obtain credits for the Lane Use and Ecology part of BREEAM or Ecology section of the CSH. These sections of the assessments offer credits for projects which reuse previously developed land or land of low ecological value, protect features of ecological value, mitigate the ecological impacts of development, provide ecological enhancement, minimise building footprint and consider the long term ecological impact of the development. By visiting the site before development commences and examining the site plans we can determine how many BREEAM Land Use and Ecology credits or CSH Ecology credits a building project is eligible for. Occasionally this is a straightforward process; if a developer is looking to put a car park in a woodland, for example, it is fairly evident that they will not be able to comply with most (if any) of the creditable issues. Alternatively if a green-roofed eco-house with a surrounding wetland and wildflower meadow is proposed on a contaminated urban industrial site, credits will be widely available.

However, such clear-cut developments are rare, and it is more often partially disused brownfield, suburban or arable plots which are subject to BREEAM and/or CSH developments. These plots are typically overgrown, completely hedged or fenced off from surrounding areas and are often home to dilapidated buildings. At first this type of land seems ideal for developments; it is often in prime locations, its disuse means it is likely to be considered an untidy eyesore, ripe for development, and landowners are often keen to sell or develop these relatively unprofitable parcels of land. However, there is a conflict in the BREEAM and CSH guidance which frequently occurs when such sites are developed. These plots are often undergoing a process of being reclaimed by nature, as weeds spread across the site, climbing plants encase derelict buildings, shrubs and hedges create impenetrable perimeter walls and small creatures take up residence. While these sites look untidy and out-of-place amongst the geometric hard surfaces of towns and villages, they can become ecological oases of great value to birds, small mammals, insects and plants. This ecological oasis element regularly comes into conflict with the BREEAM and CSH credits on a range of issues, raising the following questions: what can be classed as land of low ecological value; has the development protected features of ecological value?; have ecological impacts been adequately mitigated?; can a relative ecological enhancement can be achieved? It is understandable that these questions arise as the raisons-d’être of BREEAM and CSH are to minimise negative ecological impacts, but some developers are learning how to avoid this conflict…

The method for determining whether the development will result in an ecological enhancement (and whether it deserves BREEAM/CSH credits) involves counting the number of plant species present on each plot before development, and comparing it with the numbers of plants present (or planned to be planted) after development. If the numbers have increased it is considered an improvement and credits are awarded. If the numbers fall by a large enough margin, no credits are awarded. Some developers have become wise to this issue and only consult an ecologist once the site has been partially or completely cleared of vegetation. This way the number of plant species observable before development is so low that a minimal level of post-development planting will result in an increase in species numbers, earning credits. Furthermore it is possible that features of ecological value which should have been protected in order to earn BREEAM/CSH credits (such as trees, hedges or ponds) have been removed, with no signs that they were ever present by the time the ecologist visits the site. Early clearance of a site can be necessary for access or topographic survey, for example, but an ecologist should ideally be consulted as soon as possible so that an accurate assessment can be conducted. The BREEAM guidance does state that the SQE’s report must be based on an assessment of the site prior to commencement of development, but this is often unrealistic as developers do not want to delay their project while they await quotations, site visits and reports from ecologists. Consultation with BREEAM and CSH specialists more commonly happens during the project, i.e. when site preparation or construction is underway. Unfortunately this delayed consultation can result in loss of credits which could otherwise have been easily achievable through simple measures such as erection of protective fencing or timing of works. This is why we always aim to visit a BREEAM and CSH sites within one week of instruction, and issue our report within the following week.

As ecologists we are passionate about maximising the value of ecological enhancement and minimising the negative ecological impacts associated with any development. We want to see BREEAM and the CSH working to their full potential as they can achieve these things, as they were designed to do. When assessing any project we want to recommend that maximum credits are awarded whenever this is possible. Early consultation is a key part of this, so if you are involved in a BREEAM or Code for Sustainable Homes development, please don’t hesitate to contact us during the project’s conception or infancy. The sooner we can become involved with a project, the more likely it is that you will be able to earn more credits.

It is also worth noting that in certain districts, such as North Norfolk, all housing developments are required to have a CSH minimum 3 star rating by 2010, rising to 4 star in 2014. As environmental awareness becomes more prevalent, it is possible that other councils will adopt a similar standard at some stage in the future.

Will

William Riddett

Will is Wild Frontier Ecology’s BREEAM and Code for Sustainable Homes expert. He has been responsible for undertaking BREEAM assessments on a variety of projects including office blocks, medical centres and a hospital. He has undertaken Code for Sustainable Homes work for large  scale housing developments in Thetford and Mildenhall, as well as numerous smaller development projects throughout Norfolk and Suffolk. Will also undertakes protected species and habitat surveys.   Visit our BREEAM and Code for Sustainable Homes webpage or contact us for further information on these surveys.

Rob

Robert Yaxley

In work terms, the dewy early morning at the start of a Common Birds Census survey always provides a frisson of excitement, especially for some sites in East Anglia, where even the most average-looking piece of farmland could turn up the odd quail, marsh harrier or stone curlew. Indeed, over the years, surveys have turned up the odd genuine rarity such as crane, red-backed shrike, Savi’s warbler, purple heron, and lesser grey shrike (not all original finds, for the bird historians out there).

Bird surveys can provide genuine ecological surprises too – birds nesting out of their known range, surprising densities, or (more commonly) surprising absences. They also give a snapshot of what is really going on with the general bird zeitgeist – for examples, ever increasing numbers of buzzards, little egrets and peregrines in the East of England, and ever dwindling numbers of willow warblers, cuckoos and grey partridges in the wider countryside.

It has also provided me with intimate knowledge of a few species – the difficulties faced by pairs of yellowhammers in a modern farming environment where the machine is king, and the bizarre behaviour of the huge flocks of golden plovers that overwinter in East Anglia, particularly on the huge prairie fields of Norfolk and Cambridgeshire. My colleague Graham spent many years getting to know all of Norfolk and Suffolk Breckland’s stone curlews on first name terms, and sure knows a thing or two about their weird ways.

Wild Frontier has evolved a pragmatic but thorough approach to ornithological and bird assessments partly through the experience our bird team has accrued, particularly in lowland situations, but also through our understanding of the impacts of development on birds. Our pool of expert surveyors, some of them big league birders, is not just a tool for getting the best quality surveys, it is also an unbeatable resource of shared practical experience and knowledge.

Rob