United Environmental Services Ltd
1 Booths Park
Chelford Road
Knutsford
Cheshire WA16 8QZ
Telephone 01565 757788
Mobile 07736 683151
[email protected]
www.ues.org.uk
Reptile Presence / Absence Survey
At
Former Stanton Foundry Works
Gate 2
Merlin Way
Ilkeston
Derbyshire
DE7 4BG
NGR: SK 47514 39463
For
Trust Utilities Management Ltd c/o Oaktree Environmental
Prepared for:
Surveyed by:
Approved by:
Trust Utilities Management Ltd
Toby Hart, Declan Ghee
Toby Hart, Managing Director
UES reference:
Date:
UES01304/05
22nd October 2014
Contents
Executive summary .................................................................................................... 3
1
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Author, surveyors and qualifications .................................................................. 4
1.2 Instructions received from the client................................................................... 4
1.3 Survey objectives, issues and focus .................................................................. 4
1.4 Structure of the report ........................................................................................ 4
2
Methodology ......................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Desk study......................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Survey technique ............................................................................................... 5
2.3 Equipment ......................................................................................................... 5
2.4 Timings .............................................................................................................. 6
2.5 Presence / absence survey................................................................................ 6
2.6 Habitat assessment ........................................................................................... 6
2.7 Limitations ......................................................................................................... 6
3
Results .................................................................................................................. 7
3.1 Desk study......................................................................................................... 7
3.2 Survey timings and weather conditions .............................................................. 7
3.3 Presence / absence survey................................................................................ 7
3.4 Habitat assessment ........................................................................................... 8
4
Evaluation of results ............................................................................................ 9
5
Mitigation and compensation measures .......................................................... 10
5.1 Mitigation ......................................................................................................... 10
5.2 Compensation ................................................................................................. 11
6
Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 12
7
References.......................................................................................................... 13
Appendices ............................................................................................................... 14
Appendix 1 – Site plan .............................................................................................. 14
Appendix 2 – Aerial photographs .............................................................................. 15
Appendix 3 – Photographs........................................................................................ 16
Appendix 4 – Reptile hibernacula ............................................................................. 17
Appendix 5 - Statutory and planning context ............................................................. 18
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 2 of 18
Executive summary
United Environmental Services Ltd (UES) conducted a preliminary ecological
appraisal at the Former Stanton Foundry Works in July 2014 (UES01304/02). The
survey found habitats on site which have potential to support reptiles, therefore
further survey work was recommended.
A reptile presence / absence survey was undertaken in August / September 2014
by UES (UES01304/05). The objective of the survey is to establish whether or not
reptiles are using the site, and if so to determine the species and importance of the
site in order to inform the planning process.
The methodology of the survey follows that in Froglife Advice Sheet 10: Reptile
Survey (1999), which is used as the standard technique for reptile surveys across
the UK.
No reptiles were recorded on site during the presence / absence survey. It is
UES’ opinion that no further survey work is required in relation to reptiles.
However, due to the presence of suitable habitat on site, and records of
Grass snake Natrix natrix and Slow-worm Anguis fragilis within 2km of site,
there is a residual risk that reptiles may move on to site prior or during
works on site. Therefore, reasonable avoidance measures, as detailed in
section 5.1, should be followed to ensure no protected species are adversely
affected by the proposed development.
Although no compensation measures are statutorily required any development can
be seen as an opportunity to increase biodiversity locally. General compensation
measures, such as construction of artificial hibernacula, as detailed in section 5.2,
could improve habitats on site for use by reptiles.
The report should be read in conjunction with the appendices 1 to 5, which include
photographic and mapped GIS representation of the survey results.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 3 of 18
1
Introduction
1.1
Author, surveyors and qualifications
This report is compiled and written by Declan Ghee BSc and UES Graduate
Ecologist.
Other surveyors include,
 Toby Hart BSc MCIEEM and UES Managing Director
1.2
Instructions received from the client
UES were commissioned in July 2014 by Oaktree Environmental Ltd to conduct
reptile surveys at the Former Stanton Foundry Works, including the following
activity listed on the service agreement:

1.3
Reptile presence / absence survey: 7 site visits to assess the use of
the site by reptiles.
Survey objectives, issues and focus
The objective of the survey is to establish whether or not reptiles are using the
site, and if so to determine the species and importance of the site in order to
inform the planning process.
1.4
Structure of the report
The report should be read in conjunction with the appendices 1 to 5, which
include photographic and mapped GIS representation of the survey results.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 4 of 18
2
Methodology
2.1
Desk study
A desk study was undertaken with Derbyshire Wildlife Trust as part of the
preliminary ecological appraisal in July 2014. The desk study included identifying
any reptile species within 2km of site. See UES’ PEA report (UES01304/02) for
further information.
2.2
Survey technique
The methodology of the survey follows that in Froglife Advice Sheet 10: Reptile
Survey (1999), which is used as the standard technique for reptile surveys across
the UK.
Three standard survey techniques were employed in the search for reptiles: a
walkover survey, in situ refugia and artificial refugia.
2.3

Walkover survey – the surveyor walked slowly between refugia,
examining suitable basking places, to record any incidental sightings
of reptiles.

In situ refugia – such as log piles and discarded corrugated sheet
materials, were examined during site visits. Where necessary,
destructive searches of log piles were conducted to ensure no reptiles
were missed. These searches were undertaken with care to ensure
that no reptiles were harmed. Log piles were then returned to their
original state once the search was complete.

Artificial refugia – artificial refugia were laid throughout the site and
examined during site visits. See below for further details.
Equipment
Artificial refugia consisted of corrugated bitumen coated sheets which were cut
into approximately 0.5m x 1m mats, which warm up quickly and retain heat, thus
attracting reptiles. The refugia were collected on completion of the survey work.
Current survey guidelines recommend a density of 10 artificial refugia per hectare
(Froglife, 1999). The total site area is 3.2 hectares; however suitable habitat for
reptiles constitutes a smaller area than this, approximately 1.8ha to the east of
site. As such, 26 artificial refugia were deployed around the most suitable habitat
on site.
The refugia were left to bed down for 11 days prior to the first checks. During this
time they develop favourable conditions i.e suitable humidity and temperature
gradient, and the reptiles become more familiar with them.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 5 of 18
2.4
Timings
Where possible, site visits were undertaken during suitable weather, i.e. when
temperatures were between 9°C and 18°C, with intermittent sunshine following a
cool or rainy night, when reptiles need to bask. Site visits were not carried out
during predicted wind or rain (except when rain occurred mid-survey) and very
hot days were also avoided, as reptiles do not generally use refugia under these
conditions.
2.5
Presence / absence survey
To ascertain presence / absence of reptiles on a site typically requires a minimum
of 7 site visits (English Nature et al, 2003).
Surveys were conducted in suitable weather conditions from 22nd August to 19th
September 2014.
2.6
Habitat assessment
Habitats on site were assessed for suitability to support reptiles at the time of
survey, taking into account a number of biotic and abiotic factors, such as prey
availability, vegetation, substrate, weather exposure and location.
2.7
Limitations
2 of the site visits were conducted in temperatures above 18°C. However, the
results of these surveys were consistent with the findings of the other 5 site visits,
which were conducted in optimal weather conditions.
2 artificial refugia were missing from site during the last 2 site visits. However,
that still left 24 traps on site, which is a sufficient number for conducting the
survey.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 6 of 18
3
Results
3.1
Desk study
A record search was undertaken with Derbyshire Wildlife Trust for reptile species
within 2km of site:

Numerous Grass snake records (1989 – 2010), the closest being
approximately 420m to the south of site
1 x Slow-worm record (1996)

3.2
Survey timings and weather conditions
Table 1 – Survey timings and weather conditions
Survey
no.
Date & time
/
11/08/14 AM
1
22/08/14 PM
19
70%
Still
Intermittent, light
rain during survey
2
27/08/14 PM
16
50%
Windy
Dry
3
28/08/14 AM
14
100%
Still
Rained overnight
4
03/09/14 PM
22
100%
Still
Dry
5
04/09/14 AM
16
100%
Still
Dry
6
18/09/14 PM
17
100%
Still
Dry
7
19/09/14 AM
13
100%
Still
Light rain during
survey
Temp. (°C)
Cloud cover
Wind
Rain
Site preparation
3.3 Presence / absence survey
Table 2 – Presence / absence survey results
Survey
no.
Date & time
Reptiles
/
11/08/14 AM
X
1
22/08/14 PM
X
1x Field vole Microtus agrestis
2
27/08/14 PM
X
1x Field vole
3
28/08/14 AM
X
4
03/09/14 PM
X
5
04/09/14 AM
X
6
18/09/14 PM
X
7
19/09/14 AM
X
Other wildlife
1x Common toad Bufo bufo (juvenile)
1x Grey heron Ardea cinerea flyover
1x Common toad (female)
1x Field vole
2x Common toad (both female)
1x Common toad (juvenile)
1x Field vole
1x Common frog Rana temporaria
2x Common toad (both juvenile)
1x Field vole
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 7 of 18
3.4
Habitat assessment
The Former Stanton Foundry Works lie to the south of Ilkeston, adjacent to the
Erewash Canal. The immediate surrounding area is predominantly industrial with
residential housing further to the north and arable land to the south. Blocks of
woodland, ponds and hedgerow lined fields provide suitable reptile habitat to the
south of site. See Appendix 2 – Aerial photographs.
Stanton Foundry Works is a former ironworks, which has recently been subject to
building demolitions works. Artificial spoil heaps and ruderal / grassland
communities to the east of site provide ideal microhabitats for use by reptiles.
See Appendix 3 – Photographs.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 8 of 18
4
Evaluation of results
No reptiles were recorded on site during the presence / absence survey. It is very
difficult to prove that reptiles are absent from a site. However, after completing
the recommended minimum 7 site visits reptiles were not detected on site,
therefore reptiles are likely to be absent.
It is UES’ opinion that no further survey work is required in relation to reptiles.
However, due to the presence of suitable habitat on site, and records of Grass
snake and Slow-worm within 2km of site, there is a residual risk that reptiles may
move on to site prior or during works on site. Therefore, reasonable avoidance
measures, as detailed in section 5.1, should be followed to ensure no protected
species are adversely affected by the proposed development
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 9 of 18
5
Mitigation and compensation measures
5.1
Mitigation
It is recommended that the following reasonable avoidance measures are
followed to ensure no protected species are adversely affected by the proposed
development:
5.1.1
Toolbox talk prior to start on site
A suitably qualified ecologist will deliver a toolbox talk to the contractors
responsible for the works. The talk will cover reptile ecology, reptiles and the law,
and what to do if reptiles are found during the works.
If during the works period any reptiles are found on site works should cease in
that area and a suitably qualified ecologist should be contacted for advice. It is an
offence to kill or injure any species of reptile.
5.1.2
Strimming
Grassland and ruderal vegetation areas will be directionally strimmed in two
stages to allow any reptiles or amphibians present to move out of the working
area naturally.
All vegetation will be removed from the working area to prevent potential areas of
refuge being created for reptiles to shelter in. Vegetation could be used
elsewhere on site to create artificial hibernacula (see section 5.2).
5.1.3
Destructive search
Suitable refugia, for example log or rubble piles, will be dismantled carefully by
hand under the supervision of a suitably experience ecologist.
Suitable refugia could be moved to elsewhere on site to create artificial
hibernacula (see section 5.2).
5.1.4
On-going advice
UES will remain on-call throughout the development in case any further advice is
needed or reptiles are encountered. UES can be contacted directly on 01565
757788.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 10 of 18
5.2 Compensation
Although no compensation measures are statutorily required any development
can be seen as an opportunity to increase biodiversity locally. General
compensation measures, such as construction of artificial hibernacula could
improve habitats on site for use by reptiles. See Appendix 4 – Reptile hibernacula
for further information.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 11 of 18
6
Conclusion
No reptiles were recorded on site during the presence / absence survey,
therefore no further survey work is required in relation to reptiles. However,
reasonable avoidance measures, as detailed in section 5.1, should still be
followed to ensure no protected species are adversely affected by the proposed
development.
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 12 of 18
7
References
Anon (2012) National Planning Policy Framework. Department for Communities
and Local Government
Edgar. P., Foster. J and Baker, J (2010. Reptile habitat management handbook.
Amphibian and reptile conservation, Bournemouth.
Froglife. (1999). Reptile Survey: An introduction to planning, conducting and
interpreting surveys for snake and lizard conservation. Froglife Advice Sheet 10.
Froglife: Halesworth.
Hereforeshire Amphibian and Reptile Team and Herefordshire Nature Trust
(2008 – 2010). Reptile habitat management: Guidelines for landowners. HART,
Hereford.
Herpetofauna Groups of Britain and Ireland (1998). Evaluating Local
Mitigation/Translocation Programmes: Maintaining Best Practice and Lawful
Standards. Herpetofauna Groups of Britain and Ireland: Bournemouth.
Stace. C (2010). A new flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 13 of 18
Appendices
Appendix 1 – Site plan
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 14 of 18
Reptile presence/absence survey Former Stanton Foundry Works
GR: 447514 339463
Author - Declan Ghee
Site boundary
Posts
Reptile survey area
43.1m
Artificial refugia
S
Disturbed land - ephemeral/short perennial
Parkland / scattered trees - broad-leaved
Buildings
Hard-standing
S
S
S
Chy
Rock exposure and waste - artificial spoil
Def
S
C
Trav
Path
Cycle
Stanton Works
Foundry Park
Tanks
el
Trav
S
ling
e
Cran
S
L Twr
L Twr
THIS PLAN IS BASED UPON THE ORDNANCE SURVEY MAP WITH THE SANCTION OF
THE CONTROLLER OF H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE.
CROWN COPYRIGHT RESERVED. UNAUTHORISED REPRODUCTION INFRINGES
COPYRIGHT AND COPYRIGHT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.
THIS PLAN IS ISSUED BY UNITED ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD SUBJECT TO
THE CONDITION THAT IT IS NOT COPIED EITHER IN WHOLE OR IN PART OR
DISCLOSED TO THIRD PARTIES UNLESS PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORISTATION IS GIVEN.
Appendix 2 – Aerial photographs
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 15 of 18
Former Stanton Foundry
Works, Ilkeston
Close aerial photograph
Key
Site boundary
Former Stanton Foundry
Works, Ilkeston
Wide aerial photograph
Appendix 3 – Photographs
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 16 of 18
Photo 1 – Looking west, across surveyed area, towards foundry building.
Photo 2 – Looking north, in north-east corner of site.
Photo 3 – Close up of typical vegetation and substrate to the east of site.
Photo 4 – Common toad recorded on site during the survey.
Appendix 4 – Reptile hibernacula
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 17 of 18
Reptile habitat design projects
Building a reptile hibernaculum
This must be situated on a south facing site with
well-drained soil. Dig out a 50 cm base and line
with sand and gravel. Fill up with stones, rocks
and logs and then pile branches and brash over
the top, creating lots of nooks and crannies
where snakes and lizards can hibernate. Wood
from coppicing or scrub clearance is ideal for this.
REPTILE HIBERNACULUM
BUILD IN SOUTH FACING ASPECT ON
WELL DRAINED SOIL
Grass snake (Nigel Hand)
Hibernacula are generally located on south
facing slopes, situated under bramble thickets,
roots, dead bracken litter and in small mammal
burrows, offering protection from frosts and
warmth on spring emergence.They are used from
October to February when all reptiles have to
hibernate to survive our winter. Hibernacula are a
vital habitat feature for reptiles and they remain
faithful to them all their lives. If a hibernaculum is
lost through incorrect management it is likely to
result in losses of the reptile species on the site.
Place soil and turfs from excavation over the pile
as an insulating layer and to protect it from frost.
Ensure gaps are left for reptiles to enter and exit
the finished hibernaculum. Ideally build at least
two hibernacula on a site.
TOP HEAP WITH SOIL AND
TURF FROM EXCAVATION
APPROX
150CM
MIN
DIG DOWN APPROX 50CM
LINE HOLE WITH SAND AND
GRAVEL FOR GOOD DRAINAGE
APPROX. 200CM MINIMUM
BRASH BRANCHES,
TWIGS, PILED ON
TOP OF LOGS
APPROX. 150 - 200CM MINIMUM
GRASS SNAKE EGG-LAYING HEAP
BUILD IN SUNNY ASPECT IN QUIET AREA
APPROX
100CM
MIN
TOP LAYER:
COMPOST, DEAD LEAVES, VEGETATION,
WOODCHIP, SAWDUST, HORSE MANURE,
GRASS OR REED SWATHES
Building a grass snake egg-laying heap or
slow-worm refuge
The grass snake is the only reptile in Herefordshire which lays eggs and requires an incubation
heap. She lays her eggs between May and July
and the eggs hatch between late August and
September.This requires a sunny, warm site. Build
a base layer of branches and brash for aeration of
the heap and on top of this place any of the
following:
BOTTOM LAYER:
BRANCHES, BRASH FROM
COPPICING
a pond you may well be pleasantly surprised to
see grass snakes regularly through the late
summer.You may also find that slow-worms will
use the compost heap for refuge, hibernation and
for their favoured prey, slugs.
Build 2 or 3 heaps as large as possible. Place old
corrugated tin or carpet over the heap, making it
warmer and more attractive to reptiles.
• vegetation cuttings
• leaf mould
• farmyard manure
• woodchip
• old straw
• reed
• hay bales
Top up the vegetation every year and try to leave
the heap undisturbed. If located on good grass
snake habitat amongst long vegetation and near
Ideal egg-laying heap (Nigel Hand)
Appendix 5 - Statutory and planning context
Former Stanton Foundry Works / UES01304/05 / Reptile Survey / October 2014
Page 18 of 18
STATUTORY AND PLANNING CONTEXT
Ecological assessments
Ecological assessments play an important part within the planning context; they
include an initial assessment which highlights any specific interests of a site. From
the initial site assessment, the surveyor assesses the suitability of habitats within the
site to support protected species and makes recommendations for further survey
works if required. The following paragraphs provide a brief interpretation of the
legislative protection that is relevant to the findings of this report.
Reptiles
Common lizard (Zootoca vivipara), Slow worm (Anguis fragilis), Grass snake (Natrix
natrix) and Adder (Vipera berus) are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act
1981 (as amended), they are listed as a Schedule 5 species therefore part of Section
9(1) and section 9(5) apply; the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000
(CROW) also strengthens their protection.
It is offence to:
 Intentionally, or recklessly, kill or injure any of the above species, and/or;
 Sell, or attempt to sell, any part of the species, alive or dead.
If a proposed development is likely to have an impact on these reptiles the statutory
nature conservation organisation must be consulted.
Sand lizard (Lacerta agilis) and Smooth snake (Coronella austriaca) receive 'full
protection' under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) Section 9 and
the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) (Amendment) Regulations 2007; the Sand
lizard and Smooth snake are listed on Schedule 2 thus regulation 39 applies. Read
together it is an offence:









Deliberately kill, injure or capture any wild animal of European protected species;
Deliberately disturb wild animals of any European protected species in such a
way to be likely to significantly affect:
The ability of any significant groups of animals of that species to survive, breed,
rear or nurture their young; or
The local distribution of that species.
Recklessly disturb sheltering European protected species or obstruct access to
their resting place;
Damage or destroys breed sites or resting places of such animals;
Deliberately takes or destroys the eggs of such an animal
Possess or transport or any part of a European protected species, unless
acquired legally;
Sell, barter or exchange any part of a European protected species.
The maximum fine per offence is £5000 and if more than one animal is involved, the
fine is £5000 per animal (Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 21)
The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW)amendment contains a
provision for a custodial sentence of up to 6 months instead of, or in addition to, a
fine. Along with a lengthy development delay until appropriate mitigation has been
agreed and completed.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (NERC) lists all reptile
species as a species of principle importance under Section 41. Section 40 requires
every public body in the exercising of its functions ‘have regard, so far as is
consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving
biodiversity’ (all biodiversity and not just section 41 species and habitats); therefore
making reptiles a material consideration in the planning process and requiring a
detailed ecological reptile survey before planning permission can be granted.
Planning Policy
National Planning Guidance is issued in the form of the National Planning Policy
Framework 2012 (NPPF). The most relevant section is 11. Conserving and
enhancing the natural environment.
Key principles stated in 11. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment are;
109
The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local
environment by:
Protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation
interests and soils
Recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services
Minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity
where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitments to halt the
overall decline in biodiversity, including establishing coherent ecological
networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures
117
To minimise impacts on biodiversity and geodiversity, planning policies
should:
Plan for biodiversity at a landscape-scale across local authority
boundaries
Identify and map components of the local ecological networks, including
the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites of
importance for biodiversity, wildlife corridors and stepping stones that
connect them and areas identified by local partnerships for habitat
restoration or creation
Promote the preservation, restoration and re-creating of priority habitats,
ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species
populations, linked to national and local targets
118
When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim
to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principles:
- Development proposals where the primary objective is to conserve or
enhance biodiversity should be permitted
- Opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments
should be encouraged
Biodiversity Action Plans
Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) are a series of documents setting out targets and
actions for species of conservation concern. BAPs are divided into three main
categories: National Habitats, National Species and Local Plans. The UK Biodiversity
Action Plan (UKBAP) is a set of national strategies for the conservation of biological
diversity and the sustainable use of biological resources. The UKBAP contains action
plans for 382 ‘UK Priority Species’ and 45 ‘UK Priority Habitats’, considered of
national conservation concern.
‘UK Priority Species' are defined in the 'UK Biodiversity Group Tranche 2 Action
Plans' (HMSO, 1998) as either globally threatened or rapidly declining in the UK, i.e.
by more than 50% in the last 25 years. Some of the UK Priority species are statutorily
protected, while others receive partial or no protection.
In addition to the national BAP, many Local Authorities have prepared Local
Biodiversity Action Plans (LBAP). These LBAPs highlight species and habitat types
that are of national concern (UKBAP species and habitats) and may also include
non-UKBAP species that are of local concern. LBAPs will be prepared for these
species and habitats. As with the UKBAP, listing of a habitat type, a site or a species
in a LBAP does not confer any new statutory or planning policy protection. However,
impacts upon sites, habitats or species prioritised in LBAPs may be a material
consideration in a planning application.
The above sections provide an overview upon current planning policy and legislation
relating to species and habitats that could be located within the survey area.