Marrs, R. H., Hicks M.J., and Fuller, R.M. (1986) Losses of lowland heathland through succession atfour sites <strong>in</strong> <strong>Breckland</strong>. East Anglia, England. Biological Conservation, 36, 19-38.Morley, C. (1908) The <strong>in</strong>sects of the Breck. Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich NaturalistsSociety, 8: 579-586.Murphy, J. M., Sexton, D. M. H., Jenk<strong>in</strong>s, G. J., Booth, B. B. B., Brown, C. C., Clark, R. T., Coll<strong>in</strong>s, M.,Harris, G. R., Kendon, E. J., Betts, R. A., Brown, S. J., Humphrey, K. A., McCarthy, M P.,McDonald, R. E., Stephens, A., Wallace, C., Warren, R., Wilby, R., Wood, R. (2009), UK ClimateProjections Science Report: Climate change projections. Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK.NE. (2010) Lost Life: England’s Lost and Threatened Species. Natural England, Peterborough.Newman, E. I. (2002) Medieval sheep-corn farm<strong>in</strong>g: how much gra<strong>in</strong> yield could each sheep support?Agricultural History Review, 50.Nichols, B. (2004) NWT Thompson Common Management Plan. Norfolk Wildlife Trust.Nobes, g. (2008) A Survey of the Aquatic Coleoptera and Aquatic Hemiptera-Heteroptera of Frost’sCommon Report to the Forestry <strong>Commission</strong>.Panter, C., Nichols, B., Dolman. P.M. (2010) <strong>Breckland</strong> <strong>Biodiversity</strong> Audit Report of Workshop: ArableManagement for <strong>Breckland</strong> <strong>Biodiversity</strong>. Unpublished report, University of East Anglia andNatural England.Ratcliffe, D. (1977) A Nature Conservation Review: The Selection of Biological Sites of NationalImportance to Nature Conservation <strong>in</strong> Brita<strong>in</strong>. Volume 2, Site Accounts., Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.Pedley, S. & Dolman, P. M. (2010) <strong>Breckland</strong> Biogeographic Region Local Diversity Action Plan: Phase1: Invertebrate Component. Invertebrate Survey work on <strong>Breckland</strong> Heathlands: F<strong>in</strong>al Report,November 2010. Unpublished UEA Report to Suffolk <strong>Biodiversity</strong> Partnership.Perk<strong>in</strong>, S. & Norden, M. (2007) BIiodiversity Conservation <strong>in</strong> the Brecks: An Assessment of Progress toDate, Lessons Learned and Priorities for the Future. Report of a technical workshop organisedby the Suffolk and Norfolk <strong>Biodiversity</strong> Partnerships on 17 July 2007, Thetford.Pitcairn, C. E. R., Leith, I. D., Sheppard, L. J., Sutton, M. A., Fowler, D., Munro, R. C., Tang, S. andWilson, D.: 1998, The relationship between nitrogen deposition, species composition andfoliar nitrogen concentrations <strong>in</strong> woodland flora <strong>in</strong> the vic<strong>in</strong>ity of livestock farms, Environ.Pollut. 102, 41–48.Pitcairn, C. E. R., Fowler, D., and Grace, J. (1991) Changes <strong>in</strong> Species Composition of Semi-naturalVegetation Associated with the Increase <strong>in</strong> Atmospheric Inputs of Nitrogen. Report to NatureConservancy Council., Institute for Terrestrial Ecology, Ed<strong>in</strong>burgh.Pitcairn, C. E. R., Fowler, D., and Grace, J. (1995) Deposition of fixed atmospheric nitrogen and foliarnitrogen content of bryophytes and Calluna vulgaris (L) Hull. Environmental Pollution, 88, 193-205.Postgate, M. R. (1962) Field systems of the <strong>Breckland</strong>. Agricultural History Review, 10, 80-101.Postgate, M. R. (1973) Field systems of East Anglia. Studies of field Systems of the British Isles. (eds A.R. H. Baker & R. A. Cambridge), pp. 281-324.Rodwell, J. S. (1991) British Plant Communities. Volume 2: Mires and Heaths, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.Rodwell, J. S. (1992) British Plant Communities. Volume 3: Grasslands and Montane Vegetation.,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Rothera, S. (1998) <strong>Breckland</strong> Natural Area Profile., English Nature, Norfolk Team, Norwich. url:http://www.englishnature.org.uk/Science/natural/NA_Details.asp?Na_Id=46&S=&R=RSPB (2002) Fen Graz<strong>in</strong>g at Mid-Yare, Conservation Science <strong>in</strong> the RSPB, 2002 p. 39.208
Sastre, B.(2003). Ground spider community associated with the coniferous plantation <strong>in</strong> ThetfordForest: the potential impact of forestry clear fells. MSc dissertation, University of East Anglia,Norwich.Schw<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g, S., and Parsons, A.J. (1996) Analysis of the coexistence mechanisms for grasses andlegumes <strong>in</strong> graz<strong>in</strong>g systems. Journal of Ecology, 84, 799-813.Sheail, J. (1971) Rabbits and Their History, David and Charles, Newton Abbot.Sheail, J. (1979) Documentary evidence of the changes <strong>in</strong> the use, management and appreciation ofthe grass-heaths of <strong>Breckland</strong>. Journal of Biogeography, 6, 277-292.Skipper, K., and Williamson, T. (1997) Theford Forest: Mak<strong>in</strong>g a Landscape, 1922-1997, Centre of EastAnglian Studies, Norwich.Smith, C. J. (1980) The Ecology of the English Chalk, Academic Press, London.Smith, C. J., Elston, J. & Bunt<strong>in</strong>g, A. H. (1971) The effects of cutt<strong>in</strong>g and fertilizer treatments on theyield and botanical composition of chalk turf. Journal of the British Grassland Society, 26, 213-219Stamp, L. D. (1938) The Land of Brita<strong>in</strong>. The Report of the Land Utilisation Survey of Brita<strong>in</strong>. Part 70:Norfolk. Geographical Publications, London.Suffolk Moth Group[(2009) Suffolk Moths. http://www.suffolkmothgroup.org.uk/<strong>in</strong>dex.shtmlSutton, M. A., Pitcairn, C.E.R., and Fowler, D. (1993) The exchange of ammonia between theatmosphere and plant communities. Advances <strong>in</strong> Ecological Research, 24, 301-393.Tansley, A. G. & Watt, A. S. (undated) The Nature Conservance: Sites of Special Scientific Importance.Report on Foxhole Heath. Undated document <strong>in</strong> Natural England Bury Office.Telfer, M. G. & Eversham, B. C. (1995) Invertebrate record<strong>in</strong>g on Suffolk <strong>Breckland</strong> Sites of SpecialScientific Interest dur<strong>in</strong>g 1993 and 1994. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Hunt<strong>in</strong>gdon.Telfer, M. G. & Eversham, B. C. (1996) Ecology and conservation of heathland Carabidae <strong>in</strong> easternEngland. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 33, 133-138.Telfer, M.G. (2004). Action for Harpalus froelichii dur<strong>in</strong>g 2001 to 2004. Report to the Scarce GroundBeetle Project. Unpublished Report to English Nature.Telfer, M. (2009) Monitor<strong>in</strong>g Ophonus laticollis at Gallows Hill, Thetford. Unpublished Report toNorfolk Biodviersity Partnership.Telfer, M. (2009b) Survey for the Brush-Thighed Seed-Eater Harpalus froelichii In Norfolk <strong>Breckland</strong>.F<strong>in</strong>al Report. Unpublished Report to the Norfolk <strong>Biodiversity</strong> Partnership.Thompson, H. (2007) Norfolk <strong>Biodiversity</strong> Action Plan: Brush-thighed seed-eater beetle (Harpalusfroelichii): F<strong>in</strong>al Draft. Norfolk County Council, Norwich.Thompson, H. (2008) Norfolk <strong>Biodiversity</strong> Action Plan: Flixweed Flea Beetle (Psylliodes sophiae): F<strong>in</strong>alDraft. Norfolk County Council, Norwich.UK Climate Impact Programme(2002). UKCIP02 Climate Change Scenarios. Produced by Tyndall andHadley Centres for UKCIP for Defra.Walsmley, A. (2009) The Norfolk ‘P<strong>in</strong>go’ Mapp<strong>in</strong>g Project 2007 – 2008. Norfolk Wildlife Trusts,Norwich.Watson, R. (1974) Report on the Ecological Survey of the <strong>Breckland</strong> Meres <strong>in</strong> Connection with theproposed Ground Water Abstration Scheme. Unpublished report to the NatureConservancy.Watt, A. S. (1936) Studies <strong>in</strong> the ecology of <strong>Breckland</strong>. I. Climate soil andvegetation. Journal of Ecology, 24, 117-138.Watt, A. S. (1937) Studies <strong>in</strong> the ecology of <strong>Breckland</strong>. II. On the orig<strong>in</strong> and development of blowouts.Journal of Ecology, 25, 91-112.Watt, A. S. (1938) Studies <strong>in</strong> the ecology of <strong>Breckland</strong>. III. The orig<strong>in</strong> and development of the Festuco-Agrostidetum on eroded sand. Journal of Ecology, 26, 1-37.209
- Page 1 and 2:
Securing Biodiversityin BrecklandGu
- Page 3 and 4:
Commissioning GroupNeil Featherston
- Page 5 and 6:
Wind-blown sand guild .............
- Page 7 and 8:
milder winters and increased winter
- Page 9 and 10:
Creating broad ruderal and disturbe
- Page 11 and 12:
Introduction“Few of the lowland d
- Page 13 and 14:
Inland DunesThe 1km wide dune and b
- Page 15 and 16:
Following the Black Death of the mi
- Page 17 and 18:
The area of grass-heath declined by
- Page 19 and 20:
PingosPingos are ground water fed p
- Page 21 and 22:
Breckland Conservation and the Need
- Page 23 and 24:
SSSI. The Breckland Forest SSSI cit
- Page 25 and 26:
The Breckland Biodiversity Audit ha
- Page 27 and 28:
The Breckland bio-geographic region
- Page 29 and 30:
polygons of alternating calcareous
- Page 31 and 32:
quality calcareous fen communities
- Page 33 and 34:
Figure 2. The extent of Breckland,
- Page 35 and 36:
Table 3. Grass-heath vegetation in
- Page 37 and 38:
The Conservation Resource: Designat
- Page 39 and 40:
All other SSSIs are less than 600 h
- Page 41 and 42:
GrasslandHeathWoodlandWetlandFlowin
- Page 43 and 44:
Calcicolous grasslandsShingle, stra
- Page 45 and 46:
Figure 4. Location of designated si
- Page 47 and 48:
Figure 6. Location of Plantlife’s
- Page 49 and 50:
Figure 7. Locations of stations in
- Page 51 and 52:
Scheme for Stilt & Stalk Flies, Dra
- Page 53 and 54:
Table 6. Rare vascular plant specie
- Page 55 and 56:
Recommendation BTO be commissioned
- Page 57 and 58:
Table 7. Species for which records
- Page 59 and 60:
Table 8. Descriptions of Red Data B
- Page 61 and 62:
If the sub-species was designated b
- Page 63 and 64:
Collating and Synthesising Species
- Page 65 and 66:
Table 11. Published, documentary an
- Page 67 and 68:
Baron de Worms, C.G.M. (1953) Colle
- Page 69 and 70:
Guild AnalysisA number of habitat a
- Page 71 and 72:
The specific questions for the work
- Page 73 and 74:
Findings of the Breckland Biodivers
- Page 75 and 76:
Recording Effort and CoverageThere
- Page 77 and 78:
Butterfly Conservation (Suffolk) 17
- Page 79 and 80:
Norfolk Biodiversity InformationSer
- Page 81 and 82:
Figure 11. Number of taxonomic grou
- Page 83 and 84:
difference is partly attributable t
- Page 85 and 86:
There were Breckland specialist spe
- Page 87 and 88:
Figure 13. Proportion of Breckland
- Page 89 and 90:
Distribution of Breckland Conservat
- Page 91 and 92:
Figure 15. Number of Breckland cons
- Page 93 and 94:
Evidence of Climatic Change: Long-T
- Page 95 and 96:
Figure 17. Total seasonal precipita
- Page 97 and 98:
Biodiversity Implications of the Ch
- Page 99 and 100:
Ariel depositions to agricultural s
- Page 101 and 102:
the status of Deschampsia flexuosa.
- Page 103 and 104:
The relative effects of ploughing,
- Page 105 and 106:
Trends in Species Status: Extinctio
- Page 107 and 108:
HymenopteraHymenopteraHymenopteraCo
- Page 109 and 110:
In addition to the loss of rare lic
- Page 111 and 112:
edstraw Galium parisiense (Tansley
- Page 113 and 114:
The relative extent of lichen rich
- Page 115 and 116:
The Feasibility and Usefulness of t
- Page 117 and 118:
Across patch arrangementLandscape c
- Page 119 and 120:
Across patcharrangementJuxtapositio
- Page 121 and 122:
Delivery of Multiple Species by Int
- Page 123 and 124:
Figure 24. Number of Breckland cons
- Page 125 and 126:
Mechanical disturbance to create br
- Page 127 and 128:
Figure 25. Number of Breckland cons
- Page 129 and 130:
estricted to road verges, with the
- Page 131 and 132:
131
- Page 133 and 134:
Records of species from this guild
- Page 135 and 136:
© Jeremy Earlywww.natureconservati
- Page 137 and 138:
Figure 26. Number of Breckland cons
- Page 139 and 140:
Open with sward mosaics guildChryso
- Page 141 and 142:
Grazing without physical disturbanc
- Page 143 and 144:
Deadwood in an open-woodland ecoton
- Page 145 and 146:
Specific Requirement in a Variety o
- Page 147 and 148:
Management to Sustain Dry Terrestri
- Page 149 and 150:
Heather should rather be considered
- Page 151 and 152:
GrazingrequirementsLightly sheep-gr
- Page 153 and 154:
a mosaic of overlapping ploughed, a
- Page 155 and 156:
Wind-blown sandThere is great uncer
- Page 157 and 158: IntensityProcess Technique Immediat
- Page 159 and 160: Complex Sward MosaicsComplex sward
- Page 161 and 162: Management for Assemblages of Light
- Page 163 and 164: Management for Species of Physicall
- Page 165 and 166: Key Recommendations for Cultivated
- Page 167 and 168: Shallow cultivation is preferable t
- Page 169 and 170: Maidscross Hill is largely overgrow
- Page 171 and 172: Ecological Requirements of Wetland
- Page 173 and 174: numbers of conservation priority sp
- Page 175 and 176: Recommendation Requirements of wetl
- Page 177 and 178: Figure 31. Number of Breckland cons
- Page 179 and 180: Restored pingo complexAt Great Hock
- Page 181 and 182: Figure 32. Number of Breckland cons
- Page 183 and 184: the difficulties of achieving this
- Page 185 and 186: Strategic Challenges to Biodiversit
- Page 187 and 188: Table 22. Problems arising from poo
- Page 189 and 190: Recommendation: Natural England and
- Page 191 and 192: It is therefore vital to carefully
- Page 193 and 194: Creating networks for resilienceTo
- Page 195 and 196: More ambitious possibilities that c
- Page 197 and 198: Figure 34. Example of a potential c
- Page 199 and 200: Connectivity networks© Neal Armour
- Page 201 and 202: and consider whether these repeated
- Page 203 and 204: Ensure that scrub removal, ploughin
- Page 205 and 206: ReferencesADAS. (1997) Biological M
- Page 207: Haes, E. C. M. & Harding, P. T. (19