Securing Biodiversity in Breckland - European Commission

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Merritt, R. Moore, N.W., & Eversham, B C. (1996) Atlas of the dragonflies of Britain and Ireland. Institute ofTerrestrial Ecology. Huntingdon.Haes, E.C.M. & Harding, P.T. (1997) Atlas of grasshoppers, crickets and allied insects in Britain and Ireland.Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Huntingdon.Barber, A.D. & Keay, A.N. (1988) Provisional Atlas of the Centipedes of the British Isles. Biological RecordsCentre, Huntingdon.Sankey, J.H.P. (1988) Provisional Atlas of the Harvest-Spiders (Arachnida:Opiliones) of the British Isles.Biological Records Centre, Huntingdon.Plant, C.W. (1994) Provisional atlas of the lacewings and allied insects (Neuroptera, Megaloptera,Raphidioptera and Mecoptera) of Britain and Ireland. Biological Records Centre, Huntingdon.Martyn, K.P. (1988) Provisional atlas of the Ticks (Ixodoidea) of the British Isles. Biological Records Centre,Huntingdon.68
Guild AnalysisA number of habitat and process categories were rarely completed or the information available wasnot sufficiently detailed to allow them to be accurately completed. For example, it was rarelypossible to differentiate between a requirement for standing versus fallen deadwood and thesewere combined prior to guild analysis. It was also not possible to differentiate between differingkinds of dung and therefore, livestock and rabbit dung were combined into one dung category. Thedistinction between a species requiring unsprayed or uncropped field margins was not possiblewith the information available and these were combined together as cultivated, arable margins.Using the habitat matrix, completed for 2149 Breckland conservation priority species, habitats andprocesses with values of +2, +3, -2 and -3 were selected and used to create a list keywords (usuallybetween three and six words) for each species. These were then used to group species withidentical keywords to form initial guilds of species with the same requirement. This allowed theimmediate identification of a number of important guilds:1) Species for which our information indicated a requirement only for one of the following:woodland, open woodland, veteran trees, wetland, standing water or running water. Thesewere assigned to a guild of the appropriate name, e.g. woodland. Generally, these werespecies for which current ecological knowledge is limited.2) Species that had one essential requirement e.g. dung or deadwood, but that are notecotone specific.3) Species that occur in a range of ecotones were assigned as such, e.g. open and woodlandecotone and open, woodland, wetland ecotone.The remaining species (approximately 86% of the total number) were classified into one of sixbroad ecotones; open, open with scrub, open woodland, woodland, wetland, wet woodland. Withinthese broad ecotones the requirements of species for disturbance and grazing was assessed andguilds were formulated based on these options.Guilds were formulated independently of normal habitat associations (e.g. dune, brownfield etc.).However, information on ecological structures and micro-habitat requirements were used to informguilds. For example, species of arable or brownfield habitats but that were not recorded from anyhabitats likely to experience grazing, i.e. not recorded from lowland heathland, calcareousgrassland or sand dune, unless otherwise known, were taken to have a requirement for disturbancein the absence of grazing. They were therefore, assigned to a disturbance-no/light grazing guild.Similarly, species that occur in grassland were taken to require some intensity of grazing.Detailed and specific information on species requirements for grazing and disturbance wasavailable for almost no species. However, it was possible to assess the needs and tolerances ofmany species in relation to high and low levels of grazing and disturbance. Where there wasuncertainty regarding responses to important ecological processes such as grazing or disturbance,then species were retained within a general guild for their key habitat type.Species assigned to standing water and running water guilds are mostly aquatic or semi-aquatic forall or part of their lifecycle. Species assigned to the littoral guild may be either largely aquatic orterrestrial but occupy similar habitats, often related to fluctuating water bodies. Species requiringplant stems, seeds or flower-heads were assigned to guilds without or with limited grazing.69
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: Baron de Worms, C.G.M. (1953) Colle
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:
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:
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:
Page 179 and 180:
Restored pingo complexAt Great Hock
Page 181 and 182:
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 and 208:
Haes, E. C. M. & Harding, P. T. (19
Page 209 and 210:
Sastre, B.(2003). Ground spider com
show all

Securing Biodiversity in Breckland - European Commission

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?