A Biodiversity Monitoring Framework for Devon Summary for BIRG discussion 31/07/08 Ray Perrins

1) BAP reporting and monitoring 2) EU Directives (habitats, birds) 3) CROW Act ) NERC Act ) Strategic Environment Assessment/Sustainability Appraisals 6) UK legislation compliance (generic) 7) Local Development Framework Annual Monitoring Reports 8) Corporate strategy/policies 9) Development impact monitoring (PPS9) 10) Local Authority Performance Monitoring Indicator (NI197) 11) Local Area Agreement/Sustainable Community Strategy 12) PSA Targets 13) Water Framework Directive 14) Other driver Key Drivers for Biodiversity Information

Identified Indicators 1) Loss of selected BAP habitats 2) Loss of BAP habitats through developments 3) Gain of BAP habitat through planning mitigation 4) Gain of BAP habitat through BAP initiatives 5) Gain of BAP habitat through management schemes 6) Gain of selected BAP habitat through other processes 7) Proportion of Local Wildlife Sites with positive management 8) Net change in habitat condition in Local Wildlife Sites 9) Change in extent of designated sites 10) Proportion of SSSIs in favourable (target?) condition

Work Programmes 1) Loss from (selected) BAP habitat inventories * 2) Loss and gain from development 3) Gain from BAP initiatives 4) Gain from management schemes 5) Spontaneous BAP habitat gain * 6) Local Wildlife Site monitoring 7) Changes in biodiversity site designations Key processes: 1) Aerial Photo Interpretation 2) Desk based communication (organisations + landowners/managers) 3) Field survey * On a seven year cycle

1) Loss from BAP habitat inventories 2) Loss and gain from development 3) Gain from BAP initiatives 4) Gain from management schemes 5) Spontaneous BAP habitat gain 6) Local Wildlife Site monitoring 7) Changes in site designations Clear about loss and gain: extent vs quality CS – just tweaking what Dorset already do to some extent gives focus and backing to what they want to do 1) Loss of selected habitats 2) Loss of habitats through planning 3) Gain of habitat through planning 4) Gain from BAP initiatives 5) Gain from management schemes 6) Gain from other processes 7) LWS with positive management 8) Habitat condition in LWS 9) Extent of designated sites 10) SSSIs target condition Work Programmes to Indicators

Selected Habitats Criteria for selection: Of special importance to Devon Relatively high proportion in County Wildlife Sites Defined with high accuracy on aerial photos Wide distribution in Devon Habitats: Lowland mixed deciduous woodland Purple moor grass and rush pasture Lowland meadow Lowland Heathland Upland oak wood Coastal saltmarsh Sabellaria reefs

Relationship of Framework to Drivers 1) BAP reporting and monitoringsignificant 2) EU Directives (habitats, birds)significant 3) CROW Act 2000habs are section 74 4) NERC Act 2006major 5) SEA/SAessential baseline 6) UK legislation compliance (generic)covered by other drivers 7) LDF Annual Monitoring Reportsdirect for habs and sites 8) Corporate strategy/policiesuseful component 9) Development impact monitoringimpact known for first time 10) NI197completely fulfil 11) LAAsassist delivery 12) PSA Targetsno net loss known for habs 13) Water Framework Directiven/a 14) Other drivern/a

Costs Assumptions: Sample sizes and confidence limits 100 CWS per year DBRC day rate, 2008 Aerial photo costs already covered BARS-GIS tool costs by NE 7 year cycle Total = £59,980 per annum Pilot project at £24,700 What about additional “start up” costs?

Key Basic Issues for Discussion Are there any other significant drivers? Are the indicators generally appropriate? Are the work programmes feasible? Could the work programmes generate the indicators? Are the selected habitats suitable Do the indicators answer the drivers? Remember: consider county AND regional context

Regional Drivers Climate change (species) RSS (aggregate) Green space/infrastructure AONB/NP management plans etc Marine agenda Nature Map/BioSW Individual organisations (eg wildlife trusts) State of the SW (Observatory)

Indicators Species (expensive?) via BAP action plans? Water voles, bats, GC newts, individual county lists Community/volunteer monitoring of species Long term indicator? National recording schemes Habitat fragmentation/patch size – regional issue (RSS = driver) Need to “sell” the indicators to get funding Teasing out cause and effect in relating indicators to drivers Timescale – up to 7 years before baseline established for all habitats Recorder bias

Habitats: Devon: sab reef gain/loss particularly difficult to relate to cause of change. Glouc: limestone grassland Somerset: coastal floodplain and grazing marsh Dorset: 5 + calcareous grassland, dry acid grassland, lowland fens Regional problem habitats (dry acid grass, lowland fens) ones which are too spread for individual county monitoring. Group habs that “share” impacts to get a regional list. Maritime habitats

Relationship of Framework to Drivers (crucial/desirable) 1) BAP reporting and monitoringsignificant 2) EU Directives (habitats, birds)significant (monitors supporting hab network) 3) CROW Act 2000habs are section 74 4) NERC Act 2006major 5) SEA/SAessential baseline 6) UK legislation compliance (generic)covered by other drivers 7) LDF Annual Monitoring Reportsdirect for habs and sites 8) Corporate strategy/policiesuseful component 9) Development impact monitoringimpact known for first time 10) NI197completely fulfil 11) LAAsassist delivery 12) PSA Targetsno net loss known for habs 13) Water Framework Directiven/a 14) Other drivern/a