Techniques for assessing shingle communities - University of Sussex

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6. Pioneer communities 6a. Honckenya peploides dominated communities 6b. Senecio viscosus dominated communities 6c. Beta vulgaris dominated communities 6d. Raphanus maritimus 1 dominated communities 6e. Herb-dominated pioneer communities 6f. Silene maritima dominated pioneer communities The above studies of Rodwell (2000) and Sneddon & Randall (1993) excluded Dungeness as it was subject to a three year mapping project aimed at providing a classification of the shingle communities of Dungeness based on the NVC scheme and a sufficiently detailed classification for use in field mapping of the vegetation (Ferry et al, 1990). The study revealed 18 distinguishable vegetation types, two of which could possibly have been further subdivided and several that are believed to be unique to the Dungeness shingle system. On a more local level, a preliminary assessment of vegetated shingle sites in East and West Sussex was carried out (Ryland, 1993) using aerial photographs to identify possible areas of vegetated shingle. The list produced was further refined during field visits, and for those sites considered to be of greatest interest, a species list was produced and quadrat data was collected where appropriate (Williams & Cooke, 1993). The baseline for significant interest was the presence of a recognisable pioneer community, generally characterised by C. maritima and G. flavum. TWINSPAN analysis of the quadrat data identified six end groups (Fig. 2) which represented three basic types of community; pioneer, intermediate and established. The definitions of these three community types are as follows (Williams & Cooke, 1993; Ryland, 1999). Pioneer communities (Groups 1 and 4) are species poor and occur furthest down the beach where shingle is more prone to disturbance. C. maritima, R. crispus, B. vulgaris ssp. maritima, G. flavum and A. prostrata are characteristic. Intermediate communties (Groups 2 and 5) retain some of the pioneer species, but in addition support species such as Plantago lanceolata (Ribwort Plantain), Senecio jacobaea (Common Ragwort), Cerastium fontanum (Common Mouse-ear), Arenaria serpyllifolia (Thyme-leaved Sandwort) and Sonchus oleraceus (Smooth Sowthistle). Established communities (Groups 3 and 6) have a closed turf, often bryophyte and lichen rich, characterised by a range of species including Festuca rubra (Red Fescue), Pilosella officinarum (Mouse-ear-hawkweed, syn. Hieracium pilosella), Medicago lupulina (Black Medick) and S. uniflora. 1 Raphanus maritimus syn. Raphanus raphanistrum ssp. maritimus Techniques for assessing shingle communities 6
Crambe maritima Rumex crispus Cirsium vulgare Senecio viscosa Atriplex prostrata Group 1 With Arrhenatherum elatius Echium vulgare Rumex crispus Cerastium fontanum Sonchus oleraceus Cirsium vulgare Group 2 Plantago lanceolata Senecio jacobea Shingle vegetation Festuca rubra Hieracium pilosella Medicago lupulina Galium mollugo Daucus carota Silene maritima Crepis capillaris Group 3 Rumex crispus Beta vulgaris Atriplex prostrata Glaucium flavum Solanum dulcamara Sonchus arvensis Trifolium scabrum Without these species Tripleurospermum maritimum Arenaria serpyllifolia Rumex crispus Beta vulgaris Atriplex prostrata Glaucium flavum Solanum dulcamara Sonchus arvensis Trifolium scabrum Group 4 Group 6 Group 5 Fig. 2. Vegetated shingle community types (after Williams & Cooke, 1993). Due to the difficulties in recording and classifying shingle habitats described above, there is relatively little baseline data available on the distribution of coastal vegetated shingle in the UK. As part of a project to describe the size, location and quality of the main coastal habitats in Great Britain (saltmarshes, sand dunes, vegetated shingle, sea cliffs, strandlines, ‘reclaimed’ land and maritime islands) commissioned by the Nature Conservancy Council in 1987, a survey of shingle structures was carried out (Sneddon and Randall, 1993b, 1993a, 1993b). However, the surveys were restricted to plant communities found on stable or semistable shingle structures, and therefore excluded many of the fringing shingle beaches found within the BAR region. Indeed, the only shingle structures surveyed within the region were Rye Harbour (East Sussex) and Walmer (Kent) (Sneddon and Randall, 1994b). On a regional level, some site specific surveys have been carried out, particularly for designated sites (e.g. Ferry et al, 1990; Ryland, 1993; Williams & Cooke, 1993; Clark & Finch, 1996a & 1996b). In addition, English Nature hold detailed information on most groups of plants and animals for SSSIs, and the Sussex and Kent Biodiversity Record Centres maintain databases of known environmental information. Other survey information has been collected on a piecemeal basis, largely as a result of planning applications (e.g. Technitas, 1988) or in relation to coastal defence works (e.g. Ryland, 1999, 2000, 2001). The surveys detailed in this report, together with surveys undertaken by Rye Harbour Nature Reserve staff and consultants in the Rye Bay area (B. Yates, pers. comm.), comprise the first comprehensive survey of coastal vegetated shingle in East Sussex. The collection of basic data on coastal habitats is an important first step in identifying the most ecologically significant sites, and establishes a baseline for monitoring and understanding the impact of management practices and developments on them (Sneddon and Randall, 1993a). The JNCC have produced guidelines for monitoring sites designated for coastal vegetated shingle (Joint Nature Conservation Committee, 2004b) to ensure they are in favourable condition. The guidelines recommend the montoring of specific targets relating to a series of attributes including habitat extent, physical structure (functionality and Techniques for assessing shingle communities 7
Page 1 and 2: TECHNIQUES FOR ASSESSING SHINGLE CO
Page 3 and 4: Contents Summary ..................
Page 5 and 6: TECHNIQUES FOR ASSESSING SHINGLE CO
Page 7 and 8: Introduction The eastern Channel co
Page 9: In the UK, the NVC is the main syst
Page 13 and 14: Aims To establish a technique for s
Page 15 and 16: Relative value of sites Notable spe
Page 17 and 18: Results In total, 44 polygons compr
Page 19 and 20: Notable species Table 4 below lists
Page 21 and 22: Species and community types 1.1 Tid
Page 23 and 24: 1.2 Tide Mills East, Newhaven, seaw
Page 25 and 26: 1.3 Tide Mills West, Newhaven, seaw
Page 27 and 28: 1.4 Tide Mills West, Newhaven, land
Page 29 and 30: 2.1 Seaford Bay, Dane Road to Marte
Page 31 and 32: Species Common Name Beta vulgaris s
Page 33 and 34: Species Common Name Beta vulgaris s
Page 35 and 36: 3.1 Cuckmere Haven west, east of ca
Page 37 and 38: 3.2 Cuckmere Haven west, shingle ri
Page 39 and 40: 3.3 Cuckmere Haven west, around sal
Page 41 and 42: Species Common Name Linaria purpure
Page 43 and 44: Species Common Name Agrostis capill
Page 45 and 46: Species Common Name Agrimonia eupat
Page 47 and 48: Species Common Name Cerastium arven
Page 49 and 50: Species Common Name Agrimonia eupat
Page 51 and 52: 4.1 Holywell, treatment works to ac
Page 53 and 54: Species Common Name Reseda luteola
Page 55 and 56: 1 1 Fig. 7. Aerial Photograph of Ho
Page 57 and 58: Species Name Common Name Rumex cris
Page 59 and 60: Arenaria serpyllifolia Thyme-leaved
Page 61 and 62:
Species Common Name Euphorbia sp. S
Page 63 and 64:
Species Common Name Achillea millef
Page 65 and 66:
Species Common Name Calystegia sepi
Page 67 and 68:
6.1 Eastbourne sailing club, Redoub
Page 69 and 70:
6.2 Eastbourne sailing club, Channe
Page 71 and 72:
7.1 Pevensey, Bay View caravan park
Page 73 and 74:
7.2 Pevensey, Bay View caravan park
Page 75 and 76:
7.3 Pevensey, Martello Tower to Bay
Page 77 and 78:
8.1 Pevensey sailing club west TQ 6
Page 79 and 80:
Species Common Name Trifolium campe
Page 81 and 82:
Species Common Name Abundance (DAFO
Page 83 and 84:
8.3 Pevensey sailing club east TQ 6
Page 85 and 86:
9.1 Sandcastle Hotel, Pevensey, sea
Page 87 and 88:
9.2 Sandcastle Hotel, Pevensey, car
Page 89 and 90:
9.3 Sandcastle Hotel, Pevensey, acc
Page 91 and 92:
10.1 Coast Road, Normans’ Bay, se
Page 93 and 94:
Species Common Name Cochlearia dani
Page 95 and 96:
10.2 Coast Road, Normans’ Bay, Aq
Page 97 and 98:
Species Common Name Papaver rhoeas
Page 99 and 100:
Species Common Name Centaurea nigra
Page 101 and 102:
11.2 Pevensey Bay, Herbrand Walk TQ
Page 103 and 104:
11.3 Pevensey Bay, chalk bank, EA d
Page 105 and 106:
Species Common Name Sedum anglicum
Page 107 and 108:
Rumex acetosa Common Sorrel R Salic
Page 109 and 110:
Species Common Name Galium aparine
Page 111 and 112:
11.6 Pevensey Bay, east of sluice T
Page 113 and 114:
11.7 Pevensey Bay, shingle ridge ea
Page 115 and 116:
11.6 11.4 11.7 11.3 11.1 11.2 11.5
Page 117 and 118:
Species Common Name Armeria maritim
Page 119 and 120:
12.3 Cooden Beach, Beaulieu Road TQ
Page 121 and 122:
Distribution of key species Eleven
Page 123 and 124:
Techniques for assessing shingle co
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Shingle habitat score Relative valu
Page 135 and 136:
species including C. maritima, A. m
Page 137 and 138:
study, a large number of species wa
Page 139 and 140:
The Nationally Scarce UK BAP specie
Page 141 and 142:
References Bratton, J. (Ed.) 1991.
Page 143 and 144:
Dolphin Ecological Surveys. Unpubli
Page 145 and 146:
Bryonia dioica White Bryony Buddlej
Page 147 and 148:
Geranium molle Dove’s-foot Crane
Page 149 and 150:
Polygonum aviculare Knotgrass Polyg
Page 151:
Tussilago farfara Colt’s-foot Ule
show all

Techniques for assessing shingle communities - University of Sussex

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?