skip to Main Content

Preliminary appraisal used to inform project design

In March 2019 a small proposed housing development in Suffolk required a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (or PEA) to understand ecological risks prior to our client making key planning and design decisions.  We would always advise doing this: issues flagged early can avoid significant delays and costs associated with seasonal survey constraints and re-design. Unfortunately an all too common occurrence when this advice is not followed.

In this case we were able to inform the client of the presence of great crested newts and reptiles in the surrounding area, both of which were flagged by a habitat survey and the data search we conducted. The data search also identified a sensitive grassland close by which was a County Wildlife Site.

ecological appraisal informs project design

A great crested newt found on site

The report we produced provided clear advice on the next steps, timings for necessary surveys, likely mitigation requirements and possible future licencing requirements. This information was fed into the design and planning stages.

Incidentally, the required great crested newt eDNA surveys were mobilised in April and we were able to complete our final report for planning by late May 2017 with no delay to the project timetable. If the client had come to us at the end of their design process, due to the seasonality of the surveys needed, the project would have been delayed until early-2020.

Botanical surveys for A47 expansion

WFE were commissioned to undertake a botanical survey along a section of the A47 trunk road to assist in scoping for dualling the road. A previous survey by a different consultant in 2016 had considered some areas of habitat to be of county value. WFE botanists revisited these areas and a number of other blocks of land within the proposal’s corridor, and recorded all plant species present, rating them for abundance. Several locally scarce species were found, and their locations recorded.

Hedgerows were surveyed, and assessed for their likelihood of being an important hedge from the botanical information collected.

Each area of habitat was then evaluated for ecological value. The aerial photography record and old maps were consulted to further inform the historical provenance of each area. From this it was possible to see that some areas had been incorrectly assumed to be ancient woodland of county value, while another previously un-surveyed area was determined likely to be ancient by WFE. 

botanical surveys A47 expansion

WFE’s surveys found a previously unidentified area likely to be ancient woodland

What is Phase 1?

  • February 16, 2011
  • Blog

The Phase 1 habitat survey. To those in the industry this is a well known term; to those outside our little world this can be another piece of mysterious jargon. So here is my guide to a ‘Phase 1 habitat survey’.

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

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.

Ecology Technology

  • June 14, 2010
  • Blog

When I started out on my career in ecology – as an assistant warden on the Farne Islands – new boys were sent on a computer training course. I remember the darkened room with green monitor screens, the general confusion caused by the clunky and counter intuitive spreadsheet and word processing packages, and the general amusement caused by the whole charade, as in reality there was only one computer to be shared between nine of us. One generally felt that the technology was more trouble than it was worth, and anyway none of us were that good at it.

Life on the islands was simple, with two way radios our only regular form of communication. All our ornithological note-taking was done by gaslight, mainly in notebooks with paper and pencil. No-one had the money to buy decent photographic equipment. Communicating with friends and family was possible by letter or occasional phone call. The toilet flushing water had to be hand pumped from the North Sea. Need I say more?

When I visited the Islands last year, Dave Steele the head warden explained how the wardens’ lives had been revolutionised by mobile phones, blogging, solar panels, motorised winches and the bird recording by the use of digiscoping. The wardens looked like healthy, balanced individuals as opposed to the crazed bunch of half-starved zombies that emerged from the islands in December 1991. There was no doubt that in the intervening 18 years what is at times a very challenging job had become significantly easier, more effective and more fun for those lucky enough to work there. If you visit their excellent blog http://farnephoto.blogspot.com you can readily see the results of the tech advances. I didn’t ask about the toilets.

In more mundane localities, ecologists have also taken full advantage of the available technology to make their work more effective, accurate and accessible. Our reports are now full of accurate site plans, using GPS, lavishly illustrated, superbly designed, and take far less time to produce than even ten years ago. Surveys are supported by superb pieces of kit like bat detectors coupled to recordable mp3 devices, crystal clear optics, mobile phone cameras, sophisticated weather recording devices, endoscopes, night vision equipment – the list goes on. Use of digital aerial imagery has also greatly assisted in accuracy of site mapping. Ecologists are, as a result, able to achieve a great deal in much less time, and to a much higher standard.

Technology has driven up the standards of ecological work as new kit has become readily available. I have frequently seen tenders and work specifications which request data or survey techniques which require a technological solution – be it recordings of bat calls, sophisticated mapping imagery or use of complex databases. Digital photos allow evidence to be scrutinised thoroughly, and accurate mapping has changed vegetation survey from an art to a science.

So, looking forwards, how can technology improve yet further the quality of ecological work, and what would be on my own wish list for ace gadgets? Well, this is not an exhaustive list, but here goes:

  1. More practical and sophisticated equipment for static bat detection and recording, perhaps with predictive software for bat identification.
  2. The further integration of high quality optics with digital camera technology at an affordable price.
  3. An all-in-one field device for ecologists – a weatherproof gadget that takes photos with GPS location, and allows mapping directly in the field, as well as the collection of audio and visual evidence.
  4. Satellite imagery that’s completely up to date (like – yesterday).
  5. Teleport (no more Travelodge!).
  6. X ray vision (this would also be fun for a number of reasons).
  7. Bionics.

The last three are optional, but just think…

Rob

Robert Yaxley

Back To Top