11. ECOLOGY AND NATURE CONSERVATION...The key legislation for the protection of nature conservation and biodiversity in the UK is set out under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981,

Dunsfold Park Chapter 11 Environmental Statement Ecology and Nature Conservation

11-1

11. ECOLOGY AND NATURE CONSERVATION

INTRODUCTION 11.1. This Chapter describes the findings of the ecological assessment of ‘The Proposed

Scheme’ at Dunsfold Park. It includes consideration of potential impacts of the development on both floral and faunal communities.

11.2. The assessment includes the following aspects:

• Descriptions of current plant and animal populations potentially affected by ‘The Proposed Scheme’.

• Descriptions of the potential impacts of The Proposed Scheme on these populations and

• Scope for avoiding, mitigating and compensating for potential impacts.

Key Issues

• Direct impacts of the development on ecological receptors, e.g. habitat loss and/or loss of plant or animal species.

• Indirect impacts of the development on ecological receptors, e.g. the disturbance of protected species.

• Direct and indirect impacts of the operational phase of the development on ecological receptors, e.g. disturbance of habitats and/or species.

• Opportunities for habitat management and enhancement.

LEGISLATIVE, REGULATORY AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

International and National Legislation 11.3. The key legislation for the protection of nature conservation and biodiversity in the

UK is set out under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981, as amended).This Act provides the basis for most of the UK’s wildlife protection measures. Further details are provided later in this report where relevant. The Act was significantly strengthened by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) (the CRoW Act), which also introduced a statutory duty for government to promote steps to further the conservation of priority habitats and species listed on the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP). Further protection is provided by The Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc,) Regulations (1994, as amended) which transposes the EC Birds and Habitats Directives in to UK Law and protects sites and species of international importance.


11-2

11.4. Specific protection is provided to badgers and their setts under the Protection of Badgers Act (1992).

National and Local Planning Policy 11.5. Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation was

published by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in 2005, replacing PPG9. It details national policies regarding how biodiversity and geological features of conservation interest are to be protected through the planning system. One of the key principles of PPS9 is that all plan policies and planning decisions should aim to maintain and enhance, restore or add to biodiversity and geological conservation interests, with the intention that harm to these resources must be prevented.

11.6. This includes the protection of international and nationally designated sites, and legally protected species. Additional emphasis is placed on habitats and species not subject to specific legal protection. These include:

• UKBAP priority species and habitats.

• Landscape features of importance for wildlife as corridors or stepping stones for movement.

• Veteran trees and ancient woodland.

• Local wildlife sites.

11.7. The Waverley Borough Council Local Plan (2002) includes a number of policies relevant to nature conservation. Key policies are outlined below (with full text in Appendix 11-1):

• Policy D1 – the consideration of the environmental implications of development (including ecological), and the promotion and encouragement of environmental enhancement.

• Policy D5 – Development to take into account nature conservation including the prevention of harm to protected species or its habitat.

• Policies C10/11 – prevention of damage to the interest of undesignated sites.

• Policies D7/C7 – protection of trees, woodland and hedgerows, particularly those with an associated wildlife and historic interest.

• Policy C12 – protection of the ecological value of the Wey and Arun Canal.

Biodiversity Action Plans 11.8. The UK and local BAP target habitats and species of high ecological interest and

list associated management actions required to conserve and enhance them within the UK and Surrey respectively. The Government has a duty to ensure that parties take reasonable practicable steps to further the conservation of these listed habitats


11-3

and species (CRoW Act 2000 Section 74 (2) and (3)1). The Surrey BAP also lists a range of habitats that are considered to be conservation priorities within the county, with species action plans prepared for the small blue butterfly and otter.

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

Data Sources 11.9. Contextual ecological information relating to Dunsfold Park and its surrounds was

collated through a desk-top study. Details of statutory and non-statutory designations for nature conservation were obtained from Natural England (NE), Surrey County Council and the Surrey Wildlife Trust (SWT).

11.10. Records of protected species or species of nature conservation interest on or within 2 km of Dunsfold Park were requested from the SWT (2006). In addition, additional species records were requested from the Surrey Bat Group (of Annex II species within 15 km of Dunsfold Park or Annex IV species within 5 km), the West Surrey Badger Group and the Surrey Amphibian and Reptile Group (SARG, records for approximately a 5 km radius of Dunsfold Park).

Consultation 11.11. Account has been taken of the scoping responses set out in Table 11-1: Summary

of Ecology Consultee Responses.

Table 11-1: Summary of Ecology Consultee Responses

Consultee Scoping Response Action taken

Natural England

• No Statutory sites, such as SSSIs are likely to be affected.

• Impacts likely to be restricted to protected species and habitats, as addressed in the scoping report.

• In particular impacts on ancient woodlands must be fully addressed.

Phase I Habitat and appropriate protected species surveys have been undertaken for the development footprint in line with survey guidelines.

Potential impacts on adjacent and nearby ancient woodlands have also been addressed.

Surrey Wildlife Trust

• Survey requirements identified in the Scoping Report considered appropriate.

• Impacts should include all nesting birds.

• Reptile survey – refugia should be checked on suitable days

• Recommend the Ecology and Nature Conservation impacts are assessed according to the IEEM Guidelines for

Full breeding bird survey was undertaken.

Reptile surveys were undertaken in accordance with guidelines with increased survey effort due to weather conditions.

The EIA methodology employed by LUC incorporates the IEEM guidelines.

1 Reinforced by ODPM Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation 2005 and accompanying DEFRA Circular 06/2005


11-4

Consultee Scoping Response Action taken

Ecological Impact in the United Kingdom.

RSPB • No comments at the scoping stage. None required

Environment Agency

• Generic recommendations include the need for appropriate baseline ecological surveys for habitats and species.

• Impacts on watercourses should be avoided including through use of buffer zones from waterbodies.

• The proposals should include ecological enhancements including waterbodies / wetlands.

• Great crested newt populations should be a priority target for habitat maintenance / enhancement.

• Potential enhancement measures also to target small mammals, invertebrates, bats etc., including green roofs for invertebrates.

• A landscape management plan should be implemented, including a planting scheme with native species.

• The ES should consider impacts on protected sites, including recreation.

Phase I Habitat and appropriate protected species surveys have been undertaken for the development footprint in line with survey guidelines.

Measures will be in place to protect waterbodies, including best construction practice and maintenance of undisturbed habitat buffers.

Extensive enhancement works are included as part of the proposals including for protected and BAP species. Living roofs and other green infrastructure will be provided within the settlement.

A landscape management plan will be provided for the long term management of Dunsfold Park at the detailed design stage.

Appropriate consideration of impacts on nearby sites of nature conservation value with protection of particularly sensitive habitats on site.

11.12. In addition informal consultations were undertaken in 2006 with NE and Surrey County Council in relation to requirements for off-site great crested newt surveys. It was agreed that surveys sufficient to obtain a NE licence (if required) could be undertaken at a later date, nearer to the time of construction works, and once the extent and nature of off-site works had been confirmed.

Field Survey Methodologies 11.13. Ecological surveys undertaken for this assessment include:

• Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (with reference to National Vegetation Classification [NVC]).

• Dormouse survey.

• Bat survey.

• Badger survey.


11-5

• Bird survey (Common Bird Census and Raptor Surveys).

• Great crested newt survey.

• Reptile survey.

• Invertebrate survey.

11.14. The methodologies for each of these surveys are described in the relevant sections below. These surveys were undertaken over the entirety of Dunsfold Park (referred to as ‘Dunsfold Park’ or ‘the site’ from here on). For the purposes of the Extended Phase 1 Survey this includes habitats immediately to the north east of Dunsfold Park, east of the Canal (within Holdhurst Farm) associated with the proposed A281 link road.

11.15. In addition off site Extended Phase 1 Habitat surveys were undertaken to include potential outline transport improvement works. These have been referred to as offsite surveys in the text but are not detailed given the outline nature of ‘The Proposed Scheme’ at this stage.

Impact Assessment 11.16. Ecological Impact Impact Assessment (EcIA) is primarily based on the evaluation of

the value of the site or specific receptor (habitat or species) and the anticipated magnitude of the impact resulting from the Proposed Scheme. The Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) has produced guidelines to assist with ecological evaluation and impact assessment which have been adapted by LUC and are used as a general guide in this assessment (IEEM, 2006). These guidelines have no legal standing and are not a substitute for professional judgement and interpretation, particularly where the ecological value of a site and impact magnitudes are not clear and/or are borderline.

11.17. Ecological receptors are normally valued according to specific ‘biodiversity benefits’ that they provide to the environment, people or wider society. These benefits can include the conservation of genetic diversity, people’s enjoyment or understanding of biodiversity, and the health benefits of biodiversity. A summary of the definitions of ecological value are presented in Table 11-2: The LUC Approach to Valuing Ecological Receptors in England. The table shows how ecological value can be ascertained using a combination of statutory measures (legally protected sites and species) and non-statutory but widely accepted measures. These may include the presence of notable habitats and species including those listed in BAPs, with use of the Ratcliffe assessment criteria for the selection of sites with nature conservation value (Ratcliffe, 1977), or recent guidelines for the selection of local wildlife sites (Defra, 2006). The value criteria used are appropriate at varying geographical scales.

11.18. In addition, specific criteria were consulted for the assessment of bird and invertebrate assemblages (Technical Appendix 11-5: Breeding Bird Survey at Dunsfold Park; and Technical Appendix 11-8: Invertebrate Survey 2006).


11-6

Table 11-2: The LUC Approach to Valuing Ecological Receptors in England

Level of Value Examples

International An internationally designated site or candidate site (SPA, pSPA, SAC, cSAC, pSAC, Ramsar site, Biogenetic Reserve) or an area which English Nature has determined meets the published selection criteria for such designations, irrespective of whether or not it has yet been notified.

A viable area of a habitat type listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive, or smaller areas of such habitat essential to maintain the viability of that ecological resource.

Any regularly occurring population of an internationally important species, i.e. those listed in Annex I, II or IV of the EC Habitats Directive, or Annex I of the EC Birds Directive.

National A nationally designated site (SSSI2, NNR3, Marine Nature Reserve4) or a discrete area which Scottish Natural Heritage has determined meets the published selection criteria for national designation irrespective of whether or not it has yet been notified.

A viable area of a Priority Habitat identified in the UK BAP5, or smaller areas of such habitat which are essential to maintain the viability of that ecological resource.

A viable area of Ancient Semi-Natural or Ancient Replanted Woodland6 as defined by Natural England (Reid 1997).

Hedgerows protected by the 1997 Hedgerow Regulations

A regularly occurring population of a nationally important species e.g. a priority species listed in the UK BAP and/or Schedules 1, 5 (S9 (1, 4a, 4b)) and 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, or breeding birds listed on the Red or Amber List of species of conservation concern.

A regularly occurring and viable population of a Red Data Book species (i.e. those occurring in 15 or less 10 km squares of the UK).

County / Metropolitan

Viable areas of key habitat identified in County/Metropolitan LBAPs and/or Natural Area Profile or smaller areas of such habitats essential to maintain the viability of that ecological resource.

Any regularly occurring, locally significant population of a species listed as being nationally scarce (occurring in 16-100 10 km squares in the UK) or in a County/Metropolitan BAP or relevant Natural Area Profile on account of its rarity or localisation.

Non-statutory designated wildlife sites (e.g. SNCIs7, SINCs8,).

2 Site of Special Scientific Interest designated under UK law as being the best examples of the UK’s flora, fauna, geological or physiographical features. 3 National Nature Reserve designated under UK law as containing the best examples of natural or semi-natural ecosystems in Britain. 4 Marine Nature Reserve designated under UK law to conserve marine flora, fauna and geological features. 5 Biodiversity Action Plan identifies targets for improving and protecting biodiversity in an area to meet the UK’s commitments under the Rio Convention. 6 Ancient Woodland: Land that has had continuous woodland cover since at least 1600 AD. Are defined as:

i) Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland ASNW: ancient woodland sites that have retained the native tree and shrub cover that has not been planted, although it may have been managed by coppicing or felling and allowed to regenerate naturally, and

ii) Ancient Replanted Woodland ARW: ancient woodland sites where the original native tree cover has been felled and replaced by planting, usually with conifers and usually this century.


11-7

Level of Value Examples

District / Borough

District/Borough sites and other sites which the designating authority has determined meet the published ecological selection criteria for designation.

Sites/features that are scarce within the district/borough or which appreciably enrich the district/borough habitat resource.

Neighbourhood Commonplace and widespread semi-natural habitats, e.g. scrub, poor semi-improved grassland, coniferous plantation woodland, intensive arable farmland etc.

Less than neighbourhood

Habitats of little or no ecological value, e.g. amenity grassland or hard standing.

11.19. Impact magnitude refers to changes in the extent and integrity of an ecological receptor. In this context, ecological integrity is used in accordance with the definition given in the ODPM circular 06/2006 on Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, meaning, for designated sites, ‘the coherence of its ecological structure and function across its [the site or population] whole area, that enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of habitats and/or the level of populations of species for which it was classified’. For non-designated sites, this can be amended to: ‘the coherence of ecological structure and function, that enables the feature to be maintained in its present condition’.

11.20. Impact magnitude seeks to characterise the degree of change in an ecological receptor. It takes into consideration the fact that different sources of change can result in permanent or temporary effects, that different impacts have different probabilities of occurring, and that some changes may be positive (beneficial). The magnitude of impacts is also dependent on their timing and/or frequency of occurrence, and whether they can be reversed. These factors are all components of ecological impact magnitude.

11.21. Impact magnitude can be high, medium low, or neutral. High magnitude impacts could include large-scale permanent and/or high probability changes that affect receptor integrity as well as the extent (size) of the receptor. Low magnitude impacts would be unlikely to affect integrity, and would typically be small in scale and possibly temporary in their effect. A summary of this approach is provided in Table 11-3: Criteria for Describing Impact Magnitude.

Table 11-3: Criteria for Describing Impact Magnitude

Impact magnitude Description

High negative High impacts may include those that result in large-scale, permanent changes in an ecological receptor, and likely to change its ecological integrity. These impacts are therefore likely to result in overall changes in the conservation status of a species population or habitat type at the location(s) under consideration.

7 Site of Nature Conservation Importance locally: important sites of nature conservation adopted by local authorities for planning purposes. 8 Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation Importance: locally important sites of nature conservation adopted by local authorities for planning purposes.


11-8

Impact magnitude Description

Medium negative Medium impacts may include moderate-scale permanent changes in an ecological receptor, or larger-scale temporary changes, but the integrity of the feature is not affected. This may mean that there are temporary changes in the conservation status of a species-population or habitat type at the location(s) under consideration, but these are unlikely to be long-term.

Low negative Low impacts may include those that are small in magnitude, have small-scale temporary changes, and where integrity is not affected. These impacts are unlikely to result in overall changes in the conservation status of a species population or habitat type at the location(s) under consideration, but it does not exclude the possibility that mitigation or compensation will be required.

Neutral There is no change in the ecological receptor.

Positive The changes in the ecological receptor are considered to be beneficial.

11.22. Combining ecological value/sensitivity and impact magnitude gives ecological impact significance (see Table 11-4: Matrix for Determining Significance of Ecological Impacts). Ecological receptors with impacts of moderate negative or major negative significance will be priorities for mitigation and/or enhancement. In some cases, such as protected species, there may also be a legal obligation to provide such mitigation. Impacts judged to be of Major or Moderate significance will be considered to be ‘significant effects’ in accordance with the EIA Regulations. The matrix is not to be used slavishly. As stated above, some professional judgement is required in determining ecological significance.

Table 11-4: Matrix for Determining Significance of Ecological Impacts

Magnitude of Impact Impact Significance Level High

negative Medium negative

Low negative

Neutral Positive

International Major Major Moderate Negligible

National Major Moderate Moderate Negligible

County Moderate Moderate Minor Negligible

District Moderate Minor Minor Negligible

Neighbourhood Minor Minor Negligible Negligible

Val

ue/s

ensi

tivity

ofec

olog

ical

rece

ptor

Less than Neighbourhood

Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible

Can be Minor, Moderate or Major. Moderate and Major positive effects are of material consideration to the planning application

EXISTING CONDITIONS

Sites Designated for Nature Conservation 11.23. Statutory international designations within 20 km of the development area are shown

in Figure 11-1: Natura 2000 Sites Within 20 km of Dunsfold Park. Statutory national and non-statutory nature conservation designations, and ancient woodlands,


11-9

within 1 km of the development area are shown in Figure 11-2: Sites Designated For Nature Conservation and Areas of Ancient Woodland Within 1 Km of Dunsfold Park. A wider distance criteria was used for the international sites as these are already known to be impacted by recreational disturbance (particularly the Thames Basin Heaths) as they attract large numbers of visitors, whilst the nationally and locally designated sites are more likely to be affected by direct impacts.

Statutory Designations

11.24. There is considerable overlap between some of the internationally designated sites within 20 km of Dunsfold Park. Thursley, Ash, Pirbright and Chobham Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Thursley, Hankley & Frensham Commons Special Protection Area (SPA) and Wealden Heaths SPA are located over 8 km to the west and north west of Dunsfold Park. The Ebernoe Common SAC is located some 9 km to the south west of Dunsfold Park, with The Mens SAC over 10 km to the South. The Thames Basin Heaths SPA is located some 18 km to the north of Dunsfold Park.

11.25. The Chiddingfold Forest Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is located some 150 m to the south west of Dunsfold Park at the closest point. The Forest is primarily designated for its diverse woodland habitats including ancient oak woodland, wet woodland and a ride system. These habitats support a diverse invertebrate assemblage, in particular Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths) and Coleoptera (beetles). Many of these species are Red Data Book listed. Diverse basal flora, bryophyte and bird assemblages are also supported.

Non-Statutory Designation and Ancient Woodlands

11.26. Eleven non-statutory Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCIs) are found within 1 km of the Dunsfold Park boundary. These include Furtherfits, Benbow Rew, Honeymead Copse (within Dunsfold Park); Mill Copse (immediately to the north east); Sayers Land, Jewings Hurst and Benbow Rew (West) (partially within Dunsfold Park); Sidney Wood (to the south). A summary is provided in Table 11-5: Non statutory Sites and Ancient Woodland found within 1km of Dunsfold Park.

11.27. There is considerable overlap between SNCIs and areas identified as ancient woodland, with a number of areas of Ancient Semi-Natural and Ancient Replanted Woodland (ASNW and ARW) on site and in the vicinity as identified in the Ancient Woodland Inventory. These are defined as woodlands which have been in existence since 1600AD. Only sites over 2 ha were included in the inventory, although smaller fragments also exist. Five areas in Dunsfold Park have been identified within the inventory including parts of Furtherfits Woodland, Sayer’s Land, Chalcrofts Rough and Roundles Copse.


11-10

Table 11-5: Non statutory Sites and Ancient Woodland found within 1km of Dunsfold Park (Information Source: Surrey Wildlife Trust 2006, Natural England)

SNCI / ancient woodland

Grid reference

Approximate distance from Dunsfold Park at closest point (m)

SNCI? Ancient Woodland?

ASNW / ARW

Reasons for SNCI notification (Source: Surrey Wildlife Trust 2006)

Furtherfits SNCI

TQ023366 Within site � Part ASNW and ARW

ASNW forming over 5 ha in conjunction with Benbow Rew

Benbow Rew SNCI

TQ024368 Within site � Part ASNW Broad-leaved woodland, some ancient, adjacent to ANSW

Honeymead Copse SNCI

TQ014360 Within site � Majority ASNW

Small area of ASNW with probable breeding nightingale

Roundles Copse

TQ028353 Within site x ASNW n/a

Chalcrofts Rough

TQ022359 Within site x ASNW n/a

Mill Copse TQ035372 Immediately adjacent

� Majority ASNW

ASNW over 5 ha with 18 indicator species

Farnhurst Copse

TQ038362 Immediately adjacent

x ASNW n/a

Sayers Land, Jewings Hurst and Benbow Rew (West)

TQ016366 Part within site � Majority ASNW

ASNW over 5 ha with 26 indicator species, an uncommon butterfly and a number of birds

‘Baker’s Bottom’ / ‘Firtree Copse’

TQ023353 20 x Majority ASNW

n/a

Sydney Wood TQ020345 80 � Majority ASNW

Valuable bryophyte assemblage. Mostly ancient in origin. Contiguous with Chiddingfold Forest SSSI

Burnwood Copse

TQ011355 120 � ASNW ASNW forming over 5 ha in conjunction with Rickhurst Rews

Rickhurst Rews

TQ014354 220 � ASNW ASNW forming over 5 ha in conjunction with Burnwood Copse

Dunsfold Common and Green

TQ006356 320 � x Nationally rare flora and fauna

Wrotham Great Copse

TQ007348 670 � Majority ASNW

ASNW and ghyll with 29 indicator species

Alfold Cricket Field

TQ039352 810 � x Containing county rare flora


11-11

Natural Area

11.28. Dunsfold Park falls within the Low Weald and Pevensey Natural Area (English Nature 1998). This is one of the most densely wooded areas in England. Key habitat features identified within the NA profile are:

• Ancient semi-natural woodland.

• Ancient pasture woodland.

• Hedgerow and shaws.

• Unimproved permanent grassland.

• Grazing marsh.

• Rivers and streams and

• Ponds

11.29. Priority species and habitats under the UK BAP identified within the Natural Area (English Nature 1998) and likely to be of relevance in the context of Dunsfold Park are listed below.

Table 11-6: UK Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Habitats and Species Identified within the Natural Area and Potentially Associated with Dunsfold Park

Habitats Species Ancient and/or species-rich hedgerows Brown hare

Great crested newt

Pearl bordered fritillary (butterfly)

Pipistrelle bat

Faunal records 11.30. Records of herpetofauna and bat species are provided in Figure 11-3:

Herpetofauna and Bat Records with data provided by local record centres. Species records are detailed in the relevant survey section.

Habitats

Methodology

11.31. An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (JNCC, 1993) was undertaken for all land within the proposed development site (Dunsfold Park). Phase 1 Habitat Survey is considered an appropriate habitat survey methodology for EIA, providing a nationally recognised means of classifying and mapping habitats, highlighting areas and aspects requiring more detailed survey if and when they arise.

11.32. The Phase 1 Habitat Surveys were undertaken between May and June 2006, in periods of clear weather conditions with good visibility. Habitats were marked on a


11-12

1:10,000 base map using the standard Phase 1 classification and mapping codes. The Minimum Mappable Unit (MMU) was 20m x 20m except where specific features marked on the base map allowed more precise mapping of features. Target notes were made to detail habitat characteristics (such as abundance of plant species, structure and so on), and also to record the locations of signs of or potential for protected or notable species. Mapped habitats were subsequently transferred to a digital map base within a Geographical Information System (GIS).

11.33. Additional Extended Phase 1 Habitat Surveys were undertaken off site in relation to potential road improvement works. Where visible, land either side of the route up to a distance of 50m was surveyed, there was no direct access to much of the land due to ownership constraints. Areas surveyed included:

• Land to the south east of Dunsfold Park associated with a proposed link road to the A281.

• Compasses Bridge to Dunsfold Road, and Dunsfold Road to the built up edge of Alfold Crossways.

• Wildwood Lane and Knowle Lane.

• Junctions along the B2130 and A281.

• Benbow Lane, High Loxley Lane, Lion’s Lane Byway Open to All Traffic, and bridleway across Holdhurst Farm.

11.34. Professional judgement and reference materials (Rodwell 1991 and 1992) were used to assign the woodland and grassland habitat types to NVC communities.

Results

11.35. The Phase 1 Habitat Map for Dunsfold Park is shown in Figure 11-4: Phase 1 Habitat Map (2006) and summarised in Table 11-15. Target notes are supplied in Technical Appendix 11-2: Phase 1 Habitat Survey Target Notes 2006. Anumber of habitat types were found within the site, in particular grasslands (amenity, improved, semi-improved and unimproved neutral grasslands), a network of semi-natural broad-leaved woodland (including those classified as ancient), scrub, hedgerows, tree lines and scattered trees. Other habitats include small areas of ruderal and ephemeral communities, and wetlands comprising ponds, ditches and the Wey and Arun Canal.

Grasslands

11.36. Grasslands dominate the habitats at Dunsfold Park, comprising two-thirds (66.86 %) of the surveyed area. These include areas of the site within and immediately within the peritrack (the outermost hard standing vehicle circuit surrounding the runways), as well as fields around the periphery of the site. Mostly, excluding areas of amenity grassland, the grasslands are managed on a fairly low intensity, with no cutting between 1st April and 30th June. This management regime has been followed since 2005 when the grassland was entered in to an Environmental Stewardship Scheme.


11-13

Previously more intensive mowing regimes were implemented on the majority of the site within and adjacent to the peritrack.

11.37. A small area (2.71 %) in the north east of the site supports unimproved neutral grassland. This comprises a mosaic of grassland types broadly comparable to the NVC community MG1 Arrhenatherum elatius grassland and MG5 Cynosorus cristatus - centaurea nigra grassland. The presence of early-purple orchid Orchis mascula, adder’s tongue spearwort Ranunculus ophioglossiflolius (both rarely found) and pignut Conopodium majus indicate the unimproved nature of the grassland. Parts of this area also support species more characteristic of acid soils, including mouse-ear hawkweed Hieracium officinarum, heath bedstraw Galium saxatile and tufted hair-grass Deschampsia cespitosa.

11.38. The majority of the grassland habitat (14.33 % of the site) out with the peritrack is classified as semi-improved neutral grassland, broadly comparable to NVC MG5 Cynosurus cristatus - Centaurea nigra grassland. The dominant/abundant species in this community varies across the site. These areas support a relatively diverse flora but lack the species associated with unimproved communities. They are relatively infrequently managed, with one field in the north eastern part of the site used as pasture following cutting in mid-summer.

11.39. The dominant or abundant grass species within these communities include red fescue Festuca rubra, tall fescue Festuca arundinacea, meadow-grass Poa sp., creeping bent Agrostis stolonifera and sweet vernal-grass Anthoxanthum odoratum. Other relatively frequent species include common knapweed Centaurea nigra, common bird’s-foot trefoil Lotus corniculatus, common sorrel Rumex acetosa, bush vetch Vicia sepium,meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris, meadow vetchling Lathyrus pratensis and creeping cinquefoil Potentilla reptans.

11.40. Poor semi-improved grassland covers the majority of Dunsfold Park (46.43 %). This includes the extensive grassland habitats within the peritrack, two fields in the north, a network of fields in the south, and fields to the north east adjacent to the A281. These support a similar species assemblage as described above but with a lower diversity and abundance of species, particularly forbs (flowering species).

11.41. Approximately 2.84 % of the Dunsfold Park site supports amenity grassland. This includes areas of closely mown grassland located in the northern part of the site within landscaped areas of the industrial park. These are dominated by perennial rye-grass Lolium perenne with other common ‘weed’ species of lawns frequent. Other amenity grassland areas have a more diverse species assemblage. For example, a closely mown area to the west of the industrial park includes ox-eye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare, common stork’s-bill Erodium cicutarium, bugle Ajuga reptans,selfheal Prunella vulgaris, parsley-piert Alchemillia arvensis, wood speedwell Veronica montana, ivy-leaved speedwell Veronica hederafolia and early forget-me-not Myosotis ramosissima. Several of these species are characteristic of more acidic or sandy soils.

11.42. Occasional small areas of marshy grassland were recorded within the site, comprising 0.24 % of the site in total. These are generally dominated by species such as hard rush Juncus inflexus, soft-rush Juncus effusus and common bent Agrostis capillaris, with other species including marsh thistle Cirsium palustre and great


11-14

willowherb Epilobium hirsutum. Within the southern most part of the site a relatively large area of marshy grassland was formed by the overflow from pond W1 and included additional marginal species such as common reedmace Typha latifolia, water plantain Alisma plantago-aquatica and gypsywort Lycopus europaeus, with willow Salix sp. and alder Alnus glutinosa colonising. A small area in the south west of the site included abundant early-purple orchid.

Scrub and Woodland

11.43. Small areas of scrub habitats together cover 1.06 % of Dunsfold Park. Areas include land to the east of Honeymead, at the foot of a large artificial mound in the west of the site, the eastern part of Chalcrofts Rough, and a dense scrub belt dividing fields in the north east (east of the canal). Scrub includes areas of willow, with other species including gorse Ulex sp., hawthorn Crataegus monogyna and blackthorn Prunus spinosa.Some scrub areas in the southern part of the site are outgrown hedgerows or those which have been supplemented by shrub planting (thereby exceeding the 5 m width generally accepted as the definition of a hedgerow, Bickmore 2002).

11.44. Areas of introduced scrub (0.22 % of the site) were associated with the landscaped parts of the industrial park, scattered development in the south east and the gardens of Honeymead in the west. These include evergreen screen planting, such as Leyland cypress x Cupressocyparis leylandii.

11.45. A number of semi-natural broad-leaved woodland blocks were recorded around the site boundaries, including coppice and high forest stands. Together these cover 10.82 % of the site, and are largely comparable to NVC type W8 Fraxinus excelsior – Acer campestre – Mercurialis perennis woodland, a woodland community particularly characteristic of southern and eastern England (Rodwell, 1991), occurring relatively frequent in Surrey. The structure of the woodland stands varied in relation to their management (including the type and regularity of management). The majority appear to have lacked any recent management (in the last 15 or so years) excepting some ‘tidying up’. They include several areas classified as ancient woodland (refer to Table 11-5: Non statutory Sites and Ancient Woodland found within 1km of Dunsfold Park).

11.46. The largest woodland blocks are located in the north and western parts of Dunsfold Park, and these form part of larger interconnected woodlands on adjacent land. These include Furtherfits Woodland and Sayers Land.

11.47. The southern part of the site supports smaller, isolated blocks of woodland (such as Chalcrofts Rough and Shiftland Copse) and small linear woodlands along the site boundaries (outgrown hedges). Roundles Copse (ancient woodland) in the very south of the site is connected to an extensive linear woodland along the Wey and Arun Canal, and to Sydney Wood (off-site to the south). The woodlands are described more fully in the target notes (Technical Appendix 11-2: Phase 1 Habitat Survey Target Notes 2006).

11.48. In general the woodlands are dominated by oak Quercus robur and ash Fraxinus excelsior in the canopy, with lime Tilia sp., field maple Acer campestre, sweet chestnut Castanea sativa, sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus, Scots pine Pinus sylvatica and wild


11-15

service-tree Sorbus torminalis also recorded. The understorey of the woodland varied in density and diversity, although frequently this was dominated by coppiced hazel Corylus avellana (with very little recent coppice management observed). Other frequent understorey species include holly Ilex aquifolium, hawthorn, blackthorn and elder Sambucus nigra.

11.49. In terms of the ground flora, particularly rich woodland blocks include parts of Furtherfits, Roundles Copse, Chalcrofts Rough, Sayers Land and a small area of woodland in the north east, east of the canal (presumed to have once formed part of Farnhurst Copse ancient woodland). Relatively frequent species within these areas include bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta, dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis, yellow archangel Lamiastrum galeobdolon, wood anemone Anemone nemorosa, pignut, lords-and-ladies Arum maculatum, primrose Primula vulgaris, dog violet Viola riviniana and early-purple orchid, stinking iris Iris foetidissima and common spotted orchid Dactylorhiza fuchsii, with broad-leaved helleborine Epipactis helleborine recorded occasionally.

11.50. The woodland blocks on the whole support an abundant dead wood component, with other features indicative of past management practices including woodland banks and ditches.

11.51. Shiftland copse and parts of Furtherfits were relatively poor in terms of the species diversity within the canopy and basal flora, as well as structural diversity. A small degraded woodland was present on the far side of the A281 in the vicinity of the proposed A281 junction, with frequent signs of dumping.

Ruderal and Ephemeral Habitats

11.52. A number of areas throughout Dunsfold Park support tall herb/ruderal (0.98 % of the site) and ephemeral (0.18 %) communities associated with disturbed ground or localised nutrient enrichment. One large such area in the north east of the site is surrounded by a 1.5 m high bund with the central areas used for earth storage. This has been colonised by nettle Urtica dioica, teasel Dipsacus fullonum, bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. and curled dock Rumex crispus.

11.53. In the southern part of the site an area had been created for testing/training the fire service. This included a central area with limited colonisation by ephemeral species, whilst to the south west an area had been colonised by common nettle, teasel, bramble and greater burdock Arctium lappa. During 2007 much of this areas was cleared and a temporary track created.

11.54. In the western part of the site, a mound had been created during previous on site works (when under previous ownership), partially infilling a small valley. This has since been colonised by a diverse range of ruderal species, including teasel, curled dock and creeping thistle Cirsium arvense, with other species more characteristic of grassland also present.

Other Habitats

11.55. A number of scattered mature trees are found around the site periphery including:


11-16

• Mature oak in the south east of the site.

• Mature oak as well as willow and evergreen species including Monteray cypress Cupressus macrocarpa in the northern built up area (particularly around the main site entrance).

• Mature oak as well as Corsican pine Pinus nigra ssp. laricio and a type of cedar within a field in the northern part of the site.

11.56. Many of the mature trees support dead wood as well as cracks, crevices and holes which may be of value to other wildlife.

11.57. A large proportion of the site comprises built up areas and hard standing, including the northern industrial park, scattered buildings in the south east and south of the site with associated access roads, and the runways and peritrack.

Aquatic Habitats

11.58. Dunsfold Park supports a number of standing water habitats (comprising 0.63 % of the site area). The Wey and Arun Canal (W2) forms the south east site boundary. It is currently subject to restoration works by the Wey and Arun Canal Trust with the long-term aim to restore the entire canal. Currently along the section adjacent to the site this has involved scrub and woodland management (effectively coppicing) along the western bank. Progress has been made from the vicinity of Tickners Heath towards Compass Bridge. Works have not commenced on the eastern bank.

11.59. The entire length of the canal is shaded by adjacent woodland. The majority (to the north of Compass Bridge and approximately one third of the canal south of bridge) are water-filled. These areas support few marginal species due to the steep sides with occasional species including soft-rush, great willowherb and gypsywort, and became increasingly covered by duckweed Lemna sp. throughout the summer. These sections also support fish, including stickleback.

11.60. The southern most section of the canal is mostly silted up with small, shallow pools of standing water interconnected by streams through the silt. Relatively sparse marginal communities include brooklime Veronica beccabunga, gypsywort, soft-rush, water mint Mentha aquatica and creeping bent. Common reedmace is also present. Fish were also noted in some of the pools.

11.61. A few small ponds are also located around the site. On the most part these ponds were entirely overshaded by scrub (W1 in the southern part of the site) or woodland (W4-7 in Furtherfits in the north. The water depths fluctuated greatly over the survey season with a maximum depth of approximately 0.5 m in May, and rapidly falling water levels during drought conditions. Deep silt deposits and leaf litter form the pond floors, with marginal species largely absent. Other depressions in Furtherfits seem to hold water periodically, although were dry in 2006.

11.62. Two brick built artificial settling tanks (W3 in the east and W8 in the west) receive drainage from the runway area. Both are approximately 1.5 m deep, with 1 m depth of constantly flowing water. The outflow from W8 feeds into a small


11-17

stream, which in turn feeds in to Springfield Rew. The outflow from W3 was culverted and feeds in to the canal. Marginal communities are absent with occasional opportunistic species growing from between the brickwork, such as common bent and great willowherb.

11.63. The stream Springfield Rew forms the western site boundary and flows north to south. This is located within a narrow but steep sided, wooded valley. Due to the overshading no marginal species are present. The stream floor largely comprises natural gravels.

11.64. This is fed in part by a small watercourse receiving water from settling tank W8. The stream flowed through a steep valley approximately 3 m deep. An additional stream is found within fields to the north east of the site (east of the canal) which flows from a farm pond through a dense scrub belt and inflows to the canal.

Linear Features

11.65. The survey area supports 17 hedgerows including those forming field and site boundaries, and those which are remnants of historic field patterns.

11.66. Of the hedgerows, five were defined as species-rich9, with the majority (12) including trees and three defined as tree lines. A species-poor intact hedge was located alongside the A281 (regularly trimmed). Oak is the most frequent hedgerow tree species with outgrown ash and field maple also recorded. Many of the trees, particularly those forming tree lines, are mature, with frequent dead wood, cracks, crevices and holes which provide opportunities for wildlife. Although several of the hedgerows display signs of historic management, such as laying or coppice stools, the vast majority are currently unmanaged. This in part explains the generally poor condition, with three of the five hedgerows without trees defined as defunct10, and many of those with trees also with large gaps or leggy sections within the shrubby component.

11.67. The hedgerows mostly include hawthorn, blackthorn, hazel, field maple and ash within the scrubby component, with holly, willow, and gorse. A sapling wild service tree was also recorded within one hedgerow within the southern part of the site.

11.68. In many cases, due to a lack of management (and resultant dense shading) and/or rabbit activity the hedgerows supported a sparse ground flora. However, in some cases, and in particular associated with some of the more mature hedgerows or tree lines, a diverse basal flora includes woodland species indicating continuity of habitat and the lack of detrimental agricultural activity. Such species include bluebell, primrose, lords and ladies, pignut, distant sedge Carex distans and male fern Dryopteris filix-mas.

11.69. Occasional ditches were also present at Dunsfold Park, associated with hedgerows or woodland blocks (either as boundary or internal ditches). Many of these were dry

9 Supporting five or more native woody species on average in a 30 metre length, as per the Ancient and/or species-rich hedgerow UK Biodiversity Action Plan: http://www.ukbap.org.uk/UKPlans.aspx?ID=7 10 Defunct defined as not stockproof, either with significant gaps (generally exceeding 10% of the length) or significant outgrown and leggy sections.


11-18

or showed evidence of only minimal seasonal wetting. Those which were wet showed wide variation in water depth with rainfall, the majority likely to hold water for only part of the year. Marginal ditch vegetation was rarely recorded, with a ditch in a field in the north of the site (known as Benbow Rew) including hemlock water-dropwort Oenanthe crocata and floating sweet-grass Glyceria fluitans, and one in the southern part of the site including common reedmace. Other species within the seasonally wet ditches include hard rush, soft-rush and great willowherb.

Off Site Habitats

11.70. Habitats with potential to be affected by road improvements works are within land under ownership of the Highways Agency. In general this will result in the loss of roadside verges which were mostly less than 1-2 m in width and supported improved or semi-improved neutral grassland verges (species-poor). On detailed design of road enhancement measures it will be possible to identify specific areas of habitat loss.

11.71. Land adjacent to the highways boundary in private ownership often included hedgerows and mature trees, with fields of improved grassland pasture. Semi-natural broad-leaved woodland blocks are also frequent along the routes, with occasional private dwellings and small settlements.

11.72. Occasional dry or seasonally wet/damp ditches are found culverted under roads within the area, and a number of ponds are located within the vicinity of the road network.

SPECIES

Dormouse

Introduction

11.73. The dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius is listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and within Annex IV of the Habitats Directive. This makes it an offence to intentionally or deliberately kill or injure a dormouse or to recklessly damage, destroy or disturb their nesting or resting places. It is a Red Data Book species for UK and Kent (Waite, 2000) and on the UK Biodiversity Steering Group Short List of Globally Threatened/Declining Species. The population is likely to be declining due to changes in woodland management (reduction of food sources and viable habitat) and fragmentation of woodland leaving unviable populations.

11.74. Although declining in the UK, the dormouse is believed to be widespread in southern counties (from Devon to Kent) but with only a patchy distribution.

Methodology

Historical Records

11.75. The desk study encompassed a preliminary review of the National Biodiversity Network (NBN) for the four 10 km grid squares containing and surrounding the site,


11-19

and pre-existing records were sought from the Sussex Wildlife Trust within a search radius of 2 km from the site boundary.

Field Survey

11.76. A dormouse survey was carried out between August 2006 to August 2007 by experienced licensed surveyors, with a level of effort employed exceeding that recommended by English Nature guidelines (English Nature, 2003, formerly Natural England) and the Dormouse Conservation Handbook (2006). 48 tubes and 57 nest boxes were installed in June 2006 and were surveyed on four occasions in 2006 (monthly August – November). The tubes and boxes were left in situ until August 2007, when they were checked and removed.

11.77. The dormouse nest boxes were erected within upright/woodland vegetation and the nest tubes within scrub, hedgerow and bramble habitats. Areas of optimum dormouse habitat and those areas most likely to be affected by the development were selected for survey (Refer to Appendix 11-3: Dormouse Survey).

11.78. The preferential food of the dormouse is hazelnuts. Due to the presence of grey squirrel on the site which are responsible for large amounts of hazel nut foraging, a systematic nut search was not undertaken. However, when located nuts were checked for signs of dormouse feeding, including cherry stones which are less susceptible to grey squirrel foraging. Other dormouse signs were also recorded if identified, such as the presence of nests and stripped honeysuckle bark.

Results

Historical Records

11.79. No records of dormouse in the vicinity were provided by the SWT. However, a search on the NBN website recorded the presence of dormouse in the 10 km grid square which includes Dunsfold Park.

Field Survey

11.80. No evidence of dormouse was found in any of the areas surveyed. Evidence of small mammals including yellow-necked mouse Apodemus flavicollis and wood mouse A. sylvaticus were recorded via feeding remains left within the tubes and boxes, with animals also found in some of the tubes and boxes.

Discussion

11.81. Dunsfold Park itself includes optimum habitats for dormouse, with frequent woodlands (including ancient woodlands), scrub and hedgerow habitats around the boundaries. These provide the canopy and understorey density, diverse woodland structure, and woody species diversity often associated with dormouse. These habitats are also well connected to suitable dormouse habitats off-site, including large ancient woodland blocks immediately adjacent to the site.

11.82. However, dormouse was not recorded on the site despite a high level of survey effort. This would suggest that if they have been present on the site in the past that


11-20

they may have become locally extinct (possibly as a result of past management practices). Dormouse can be very difficult to locate when at low population densities.

11.83. If present in the near vicinity to Dunsfold Park, dormouse could colonise the site given the connectivity to surrounding habitat suitable for this species. However, given the findings of these surveys, dormouse is not considered further in this assessment.

Bats

Introduction

11.84. All British bats are species of European importance and are protected by the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regulations 1994 (as amended). Under this legislation, it an offence to:

• Intentionally or deliberately or recklessly kill, injure or capture (take) bats.

• Deliberately or recklessly disturb bats (whether in a roost or not).

• Deliberately or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to bat roosts.

• Possess or transport a bat or any parts of bats, unless acquired legally and

• Sell, barter or exchange bats, or parts of bats.

11.85. In this interpretation, a bat roost is ‘any structure or place which any wild animal uses for shelter or protection'. As bats tend to reuse the same roosts, legal opinion is that the roost is protected whether or not the bats are present at the time.

11.86. A licence is required for all developments that will affect areas known to contain bat roosts. This is obtainable from NE on the submission of a method statement detailing the works required and a mitigation package designed to maintain a favourable conservation status of bat populations.

11.87. There is an obligation on the developer and owner of the site to consider the presence of bats. Damage to a roost caused by a lawful operation is no longer an accepted defence (reasonableness would be taken into account should such an offence be committed).

11.88. Six species are also listed on the UKBAP. These include the greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum, the lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros,barbastelle Barbastella barbastellus, Bechstein’s Myotis bechsteinii, brown long-eared Plecotus auritus and soprano (55 kHz) pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus.

11.89. The full survey report is provided in Technical Appendix 11-4 Bat Survey 2006,with the methods, results and discussion summarised below.


11-21

Methodology

Historical Records

11.90. The desk study encompassed the following data searches:

• A preliminary review of the NBN database was carried out for the four 10 km grid squares containing and surrounding the site.

• Pre-existing records were sought from the SWT within a search radius of 2 km from the site boundary and

• Pre-existing records were sought from the Surrey Bat Group encompassing a search radius of 15 km from the centre of the site for bat species listed on Annex II of the EU Habitats Directive, and 5 km for all other bats.

Field Survey

11.91. Internal and external building surveys were undertaken in 2006 to ascertain their Bat Roost Potential. This involved searching for actual evidence of bat occupation, such as droppings and staining, and to assess whether or not the buildings had potential to support bats. Internal survey included inspection of cavities, including any within the joints of beams, using a Pro-Vision endoscope.

11.92. A tree survey was carried out from ground level to ascertain their Bat Roost Potential. Trees in the area of the proposed A281 link road in the east of the site were assessed in September 2006, and trees across the wider site potentially affected by the Proposed Scheme were subject to a detailed assessment in August 2007. The site was divided into discrete areas within which trees were generally assessed individually. Where blocks of woodland / groups of trees occurred general descriptions were made with details of the age, structure and species recorded.

11.93. The trees were placed into one of three categories as described below:

• Category 1 – Trees with obvious bat potential, i.e. cracks, crevices, raised bark and other features which could provide roosting opportunities.

• Category 2 – No obvious potential although the tree is of a size and age that elevated surveys may result in cracks or crevices being found or the tree supports some features which may have limited potential to support bats and

• Category 3 – Trees with no potential.

11.94. Bat emergence and activity surveys were also undertaken, using the following techniques:

• Emergence survey of buildings and trees that may be affected by the scheme (Primemeads Cottage, Honeymead Cottage and Broadmeads Cottage; trees north east of the site and east of the canal).

• Transect survey (walked or driven with paused monitoring points, between June and September 2006). and


11-22

• Static monitoring points (three per transect survey, using Duet or Anabat Frequency Division Detectors).

11.95. Dusk emergence survey commenced at sunset and typically continued for at least 1 hour after sunset. Pre-dawn emergence survey commenced approximately 1 hour prior to sunrise and continued until sunrise. Frequency division bat detectors (Duets) and time expansion detectors (Peterson D240X) were used and bat echolocations were recorded onto digital mini-disc recorders for subsequent sonogram analysis using ‘BatSound V.3.31’.

11.96. The scope of surveys was determined in accordance with best practice and satisfies the now published Bat Conservation Trust guidelines (BCT, 2007). More detail can -be found in Technical Appendix 11-4 Bat Survey 2006.

Results

Historical Records

11.97. A summary of the historical records for bat species present around the Dunsfold Park site can be found in Table 11-7: Historical Bat Records Within a 15 km Radius of Dunsfold Park and are mapped in Figure 11-3: Herpetofauna and Bat Records. There are no pre-existing bat records within the site, however, this cannot be taken to represent absence of bat activity.

Table 11-7: Historical Bat Records within a 15 Km Radius of Dunsfold Park

Bat species Number of records

Years of records

Brown long-eared 137 1988-2005

Pipistrelle spp. 908 1988-2005

Daubenton’s Myotis daubentonii

1 2003

Noctule Nyctalus noctula 5 2000-2003

Serotine Eptesicus serotinus 11 1991-2001

Bechstein’s 2 1999-2003

11.98. The NBN identified seven species of bats including common (45 kHz) pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus, soprano (55 kHz) pipistrelle, long-eared, natterer’s Myotis Nattereri, Daubenton’s, whiskered Myotis mystacinus / Brandt’s Myotis brandtii, serotine and noctule / Leisler’s Nyctalus leisleri.

11.99. Ebernoe Common SAC, designated for its barbastelle and Bechstein’s populations, is located some 9 km to the south west of Dunsfold Park.

11.100.In addition, Sussex University have recorded Bechstein’s bats in nearby woods (D.Hill pers. comm.).


11-23

Field Survey

11.101.Full results of the field surveys can be found in Technical Appendix 11-4 Bat Survey 2006. Results are summarised in Figure 11-5: 2006 Bat Survey - Summary of Results (2006).

Building Surveys

11.102.Of the 19 buildings inspected long-eared bat roosts were identified in two: Primemeads Cottage and Honeymead Cottage. Additionally, Broadmeads Cottage was considered to have potential to support bats, although no evidence was found during emergence surveys (inspection was not possible due to health and safety concerns).

Tree Assessments

11.103.182 trees were assessed of which 78 (42.9%) were identified as being Category 1 trees, although no evidence confirming presence was noted. The features of potential ranged from the older oak and ash standards to young ash poles with woodpecker damage. The relatively high proportion of Category 1 rated trees is considered to be in part due to the high number of medium to large sized pedunculate oak standards, many of which are isolated or in single rows and therefore relatively exposed to windblow. Within the peritrack, Area J was assessed as holding perhaps the greatest number of Category 1 rated trees.

Emergence Surveys

11.104.Although evidence of small long-eared bat roosts were identified during the daytime inspections of each the Honeymead and Primemeads cottages, no bats were subsequently recorded emerging from either of these roosts during the 2006 surveys. Similarly, none of the trees subject to emergence surveys were determined as supporting bat roosts.

Activity Surveys

11.105.Over 107 hours of recording time was collated through the use of transect and SMP detectors throughout the survey season. The transect surveys recorded a total of 1361 bat passes over a period of 51 hours 52 minutes (3112 minutes in total). The SMP detectors recorded a further 2594 passes over a period of 55 hours 21 minutes (3321 minutes in total).

11.106.Sonogram analysis confirmed eight bat species as present on the site, namely common and soprano pipistrelles, brown long-eared bat, noctule bat, Leisler’s bat, Natterer’s bat, serotine and barbastelle. Difficulties associated with the positive identification of lower frequency calls means that it is probable that Daubenton’s, whiskered and Brandt’s are also present given their distribution across the UK and the suitability of habitat at Dunsfold.

11.107.The majority of recorded calls were from pipistrelle bats (c. 80%); common pipistrelle was frequently recorded across the site, with soprano pipistrelle notably absent from the north of the study area. Myotis bats were recorded along all the survey transects, the majority of which were Natterer’s within the dense woodland


11-24

to the north and south west. Serotine bats were also recorded throughout the surveyed area, and early passes recorded during July and August suggest a roost of this species nearby. Barbastelle were recorded in the west and south of the site associated with woodland edges.

Discussion

11.108.In addition to the roost sites confirmed or suspected in buildings, the following locations were considered to be key areas for bat activity:

• The west and south of the site where woodland and hedgerow habitats supported at least seven species of bat.

• The canal and associated woodland and hedgerows in the south that also supported at least seven species and

• The areas to the north immediately around the industrial areas in which five to seven species were recorded.

11.109.The central area of the site is comprised of short sward grassland with limited value to bat foraging. Negligible activity was recorded over this central area and the lack of commuting bat activity across this area is likely to be a reflection of the high quality perimeter habitats.

11.110.Whilst roosts are considered to be of most legal significance, foraging habitats and dispersal corridors are vital to the maintenance of a breeding population of bats, therefore an evaluation of the presence of an assemblage of bats gives due consideration to not only the presence of any given species but also the nature and level of use.

Badger

Introduction

11.111.Badger Meles meles and its setts are protected in the UK by the Protection of Badgers Act, 1992, as strengthened in England and Wales by the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act, 2000. Under this legislation, the following are considered to be criminal offences:

• To intentionally or recklessly kill, injure, take, possess or cruelly ill-treat a badger, or to attempt to do so.

• To intentionally or recklessly interfere with a sett by damaging or destroying it.

• To intentionally or recklessly obstruct access to, or any entrance of, a badger sett.

• To intentionally or recklessly disturb a badger when it is occupying a sett.

11.112.For some activities, disturbance is considered to occur with a buffer radius of up to 30 m from a sett, even if there is no apparent direct damage or interference. Activities within this zone can only be undertaken legally under a licence from NE


11-25

(English Nature, 1995). Information relating to the location of badger setts should be treated in confidence and not passed to unauthorised third parties to minimise the risk of badger persecution. Therefore details relating to locations are provided in a separate Confidential Badger Annex.

Methodology

Historical Records

11.113.Historical records for badger setts within a 2 km radius of Dunsfold Park were investigated. This information was provided by the West Surrey Badger Group.

Field Survey

11.114.A badger survey of the site was carried out in May 2006, and updated on 13 February 2008. Surveys involved searching for:

• Badger setts.

• Badger latrines.

• Other signs such as tracks, trails, badger hair and snuffle holes.

11.115.The size and form of entrance holes were used to differentiate between badger, fox and rabbit holes. Any setts located were classified by the number of entrance holes and level of activity, based on the criteria provided by Harris et al, 1989.

11.116.Signs of badger were also recorded during the off site habitat surveys associated with potential transport enhancement works.

Survey Constraints

11.117.The 2008 survey was carried out in late winter and therefore visibility was generally good, with hedges and scrub without leaf. However, occasionally dense stands of blackthorn and bramble impeded surveyor access. Areas that could not be fully searched were checked from the nearest access point for badger paths and other signs that might indicate the presence of badger activity or setts within them. These signs were then investigated in more detail as appropriate. Due to the volume of recent fallen leaves, latrines were also difficult to locate.

Results

Historical Records

11.118.Seven records of setts were provided by the West Surrey Badger Group (WSBG) within approximately 2 km of the site, including one on the site boundary. No records were provided of setts within the site itself. Anecdotal evidence was provided by security staff of badger using the site, with sightings of badger during bat surveys 2006.


11-26

Field Survey

11.119.Full survey results are provided in the Confidential Badger Annex. Relatively few signs of badger were recorded on the site, with scattered evidence around the periphery indicating use of the site for foraging by low numbers of badgers with setts near the site boundary (either on or off site). In total nine setts were recorded in 2006 and 2008, with two of those recorded as active in 2006 having become disused in 2008. These were mainly outlier setts, with no main setts were located on the site and two probable main setts recorded off-site.

11.120.In addition, occasional signs of badgers including setts were recorded during off site Phase 1 Habitat Surveys.

Birds

Introduction

11.121.All wild birds in the UK, their nest and eggs are protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981, and later amendments) and the CRoW Act 2000. Under this legislation, it is an offence, with certain exceptions, to:

• Intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take any wild bird.

• Intentionally or recklessly take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while it is in use or being built and

• intentionally take or destroy the egg of any wild bird.

11.122.Furthermore, bird species included within Schedule 1 of the Act, such as barn owl, are protected by special penalties and an additional offence of intentional disturbance whilst it is building a nest, or is in or near a nest containing eggs or young.

Methodology

Historical Records

11.123.Historical bird records were sought from the SWT for the site and the surrounding 1 km. These were provided to the bird surveyor to provide background as to species which may be present.

Field Survey

Common Bird Census

11.124.A bird survey was conducted in 2006 using a standard Common Birds Census (CBC) methodology as developed by the British Trust for Ornithology (Gilbert et al., 1998). The full survey report is provided in Technical Appendix 11-5 Breeding Bird Survey At Dunsfold Park. The site was walked on 5 occasions between May and July 2006, with each survey commencing around dawn and continuing until late morning. 5 surveys were also undertaken between late afternoon until after dark to detect nocturnal and crepuscular species such as owls. CBC usually entails 8 – 10 visits from late March to Early July. However, given that both evening and morning


11-27

visits were employed, and given good accessibility around the site, it was considered that the level of survey effort was sufficient.

11.125.On each visit the whole of the area to be surveyed was slowly walked and the location and behaviour of each bird registered on an individual visit map. Standard British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) species and activity codes were used. Visit map registrations were subsequently transferred to individual species maps.

11.126.Not every individual of each species will be detected on all visits and some, can be quite elusive and require several visits to detect. Also breeding activity varies between species, with migrant species arriving at different times during the breeding season. Therefore five visits were conducted to achieve reasonably accurate population estimates.

Raptor Surveys

11.127.Specialist raptor surveys were undertaken at Dunsfold Park. The Hawk and Owl Trust undertook an initial walkover survey of the site in May 2007 to identify raptor species using the site and particularly valuable habitats including possible roosts and nests, as well as possible nest box locations. This was followed by a survey in January 2008 by LUC ecologists to identify potential roost and nest sites for barn owl Tyto alba and tawny owl Strix aluco in areas of the site likely to be affected by the development, including woodland and structures in the east and south of the site, particularly along the Wey and Arun Canal. Following this an evening survey was undertaken to identify potential tawny owl breeding territories within these areas with the use of playbacks on a transect along the canal.

Results

Common Bird Census

11.128.The Common Bird Census recorded a total of 66 bird species of which at least 54 species were considered to be breeding within the survey area. A further 12 species were recorded which, while not nesting within the survey area, were noted feeding or hunting within it, or which range widely and were passing over.

11.129.Species of nature conservation concern which were recorded on the site are listed in Table 11-8: Species of Conservation Concern Recorded in the Dunsfold Park Survey Area, May-July, 2006, and their territories are mapped in Figures 11-7i) to 11-7iv) Territories of Birds of Conservation Concern (2006). This includes two species listed on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (red kite Milvus milvus, although only passing over, and barn owl with historic roost), 12 on the Red List of Birds of Conservation Concern, and seven UKBAP priority species. Cuckoo Cuculus canorus and willow warbler Phylloscopus trochilus are thought to breed at Dunsfold Park and may be added to the Red List because their populations have recently crossed the 50% decline threshold.


11-28

Table 11-8: Species of Conservation Concern Recorded in the Dunsfold Park Survey Area, May-July, 2006.

Species Wildlife and Countryside Act Schedule 1 species/ Rare Breeding Birds Panel

Red List of Birds of Conservation Concern11

UK BAP Priority Species

Comments

Barn owl Tyto alba Yes Evidence of roosting in Area 4; hunting in 2 and 5

Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula

yes yes Areas 3-6; 7 territories

Cuckoo Cuculus canorus

yes (qualify) yes No evidence of breeding but heard singing adjacent

Dunnock Prunella modularis

yes

House sparrow Passer domesticus

yes yes 2 territories in area 3

Lesser spotted woodpecker Dendrocopos minor

yes 1 Territory in area 3

Linnet Carduelis cannabina

yes yes Areas 1, 3 and 5; 4 territories

Marsh tit Poecile palustris

yes yes 1 territory in area 4

Red kite Milvus milvus yes Wandering individual only recorded on one occasion and not considered associated with the site

Reed bunting Emberiza schoeniclus

yes yes 1 territory in area 3

Skylark Alauda arvensis yes yes 41 territories in area 2; also low numbers of territories in areas 3, 5 and 6

Song thrush Turdus philomelos

yes yes Areas 3, 4, 5 and 6; total of 15 territories

Spotted flycatcher Muscicapa striata

yes yes Areas 3, 4, and 6; 4 breeding territories

Starling Sturnus vulgaris yes yes 1 territory in each of area 1 and 4

Turtle dove Streptopelia turtur

yes yes Areas 3, 4 and 5; 4 territories in total

Willow warbler Phylloscopus trochilus

yes (qualify) 1 territory in area 4

Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella

yes yes Areas 4-6; 4 territories

11 UK breeding population, or breeding range, has contracted by 50% or more in the preceding 25 years


11-29

Raptor Surveys

11.130.Evidence of barn owl roosts were recorded in 2008 from three structures within the north east of the site, and three in the south. Signs of particularly frequent use were recorded in two RAF buildings on the southern boundary near Shiftland Copse. However, none of the buildings showed signs of nesting barn owl, nor provided opportunities for nesting. In addition, the derelict Broadmeads Cottage on the southern boundary could provide potential roosting and nesting sites, although there was no internal survey access here due to health and safety concerns. Scattered potential tawny owl nest locations were noted along the southern site boundary, but no territories within this part of the site were recorded during the evening survey 2008.

Discussion

11.131.The site supports a diverse bird species assemblage, with the number of breeding species within the threshold of those defined as of County Importance (50 – 69 species) by Fuller (1980).

11.132.However, 16 of the species considered to be associated with the site12 are classed as of National Importance due to their scarcity or declining trends in population size.

11.133.The peripheral habitats supported the greatest diversity of territories, with particularly diverse habitats provided in the eastern, western and southern parts of the site. These included mature hedgerows and tree lines, blocks of woodland and scrub, and rough grassland habitats including networks of small fields. As a result woodland and hedgerow birds are most frequent within the site. Survey Areas 3 and 4 in the east and south were particularly valuable.

11.134.Grassland areas provide important foraging areas for raptor species as rough grassland habitats are likely to support small mammal species. Breeding opportunities within grassland habitats are largely restricted to skylark and meadow pipit Anthus pratensis, and skylark was present in high densities following a relaxation of mowing regimes in 2005.

11.135.Site buildings also provide nesting opportunities for some species, including swallow Hirundo rustica, house martin Delichon urbica, pied wagtail Motacilla alba, house sparrow and starling.

Great Crested Newt

Introduction

11.136.Great crested newt (GCN) is protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended by the CRoW Act 2000) and the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994. Taken together, the 1981 Act and the 1994 Regulations make it illegal to:

• Intentionally or deliberately capture or kill, or intentionally injure great crested newt.

12 This excludes a single red kite seen passing over the site on one occasion.


11-30

• Deliberately disturb great crested newt or intentionally or recklessly disturb them in a place used for shelter or protection.

• Damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place.

• Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to a place used for shelter or protection.

• Possess a great crested newt, or any part of it, unless acquired lawfully.

• Sell, barter, exchange or transport or offer for sale great crested newt or parts of them.

11.137.The legislation covers all life stages such that eggs, tadpoles and adult newts are all equally covered. Otherwise illegal actions can be undertaken subject to a NE licence.

Methodology

Historical Records

11.138.Biological records were sought for the site and surrounds from the SWT (2 km radius) and the SARG (approximate 5 km radius).

Field Survey

11.139. Waterbodies on the site and within 500 m (in accordance with the 2001 English Nature Guidelines) were identified from Ordnance Survey mapping, and initial field surveys undertaken to identify further waterbodies and assess suitability for GCN (e.g. whether they were water filled or supported large fish populations). However, many of the off site ponds were in private ownership and access was not available.

11.140. In relation to ponds off site, including those in the vicinity of potential road improvement works, it was agreed in consultation with English Nature (as was) and the Surrey County Council ecologist in 2006 (consultees for Waverley Borough Council) that if required surveys of these ponds could be undertaken following submission of the Environmental Statement. It was agreed that presence had been established in the area, and that more detailed surveys sufficient to obtain a NE licence (if required) could be undertaken at a later date, nearer to the time of construction works, and once the extent and nature off site works had been confirmed.

11.141.Surveys of the waterbodies were completed May 2006. Four initial visits were undertaken to determine GCN presence/absence, followed by two additional surveys for waterbodies where GCN were found. Surveys were undertaken on 15-18th and 30-31st May 2006.

11.142.Four survey techniques were employed, where practicable, including egg searches, night torch survey, bottle-trapping and netting.


11-31

Results

Historical Records

11.143.There are records of GCN in Cranleigh, 1.5 km to the north east of the site..

Field Survey

11.144. In total ten waterbodies were surveyed for GCN, including nine on the site itself (Figure 11-8 Great Crested Newt Survey (2006)). A single pond was surveyed outwith the site in Holdhurst Farm (2 km to the east of the site). A summary of the survey results are provided in Technical Appendix 11-6 Great Crested Newt Survey Results.

11.145.GCN were recorded in three of the ten waterbodies (W1, W2 and W6), with an assumed breeding population recorded in W1. A maximum of nine GCN were recorded in W1 on any one night by any one method (bottle trapping on the 16 May 2006). Single sub-adult GCN were recorded in W2 and W6. No eggs were recorded in any of the waterbodies.

11.146.Other amphibians recorded during the surveys included smooth newt (W1, W2, W3, W6, W8 and W9) and common toad (W3).

Discussion

11.147. In Surrey, GCN have a wide but scattered distribution and are considered rare (Wycherley and Anstis, 2001). A maximum of nine GCN were recorded in W1 on any one night by any one method (bottle trapping) which constitutes a small population (EN, 2001). Single sub-adult GCN were recorded in W2 and W6 and it was concluded that neither W2 or W6 represent breeding habitat but are used as part of larger areas of foraging habitat (broad-leaved woodland) and for dispersal by sub-adult newts. In the case of W6 this indicates that a GCN breeding waterbody is present off site to the north.

11.148. All surveyed waterbodies were considered sub-optimal for breeding GCN either due to heavy overshading (W1, W2, W4-7), a lack of marginal vegetation for egg laying (all waterbodies), greatly fluctuating water levels which may prevent maturation of larvae (W4-7), the presence of fish (W2 and W3) and presence of vertical brick sides (W3 and W8). With continued succession to dry land as a result of increased siltation and colonisation by willow scrub, in addition to increased overshading from adjacent scrub/woodland growth, W1, W2 and W4-7 represented habitat declining in quality.

11.149.However, the site supports abundant optimum terrestrial habitat for GCN foraging and dispersal, including broad-leaved woodland, scrub, hedgerows, ditches and rough grassland habitats around the site periphery. Dead wood, rubble piles and frequent rabbit burrows would also provide many opportunities for hibernation. The condition of the aquatic breeding habitat is therefore considered to be the factor currently limiting the population size.

11.150.The peritrack (approximately 15 m wide hard standing) is likely to restrict GCN access to the centre of the site. However, habitats here are suboptimal for GCN.


11-32

11.151.The majority of the site’s boundary habitats and waterbodies are also suitable for use by common amphibians, with smooth newt Lissotriton vulgaris and common toad Bufo bufo recorded (common frog Rana temporaria would be expected).

Reptiles

Introduction

11.152.All native UK reptiles are protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981 and later amendments) and the CRoW Act (2000) against deliberate or reckless killing, injury or sale. Certain reptile species, including smooth snake Coronella austriaca and sand lizard Lacerta agilis are also protected under the terms of the EU Habitats Directive.

Methodology

Historical Records

11.153.Biological records were sought for the site and surrounds from the SWT (2 km radius) and the SARG (approximate 5 km radius).

Field Survey

11.154. The reptile survey was carried out in accordance with Froglife guidance (1999) for reptile survey, the Herpetofauna Worker’s Manual (Gent and Gibson, 1998) and Reptile Survey Methods (EN, 1996).

11.155. An initial site assessment identified areas of suitable reptile habitat, in particular providing refugia, basking and foraging opportunities for the more widespread species (common lizard Zootoca vivipara, slow worm Anguis fragilis, grass snake Natrix natrix and adder Vipera berus). The site is unsuitable for sand lizard and smooth snake due to the absence of appropriate heathland habitats.

11.156. Artificial refugia (heavy duty roofing felt approximately 1 x 1 m) were set out at a density of approximately one every 10 m within areas of appropriate habitat (particularly rough grassland / ruderal communities adjacent to scrub habitats). A sampling approach was used with five distinct areas surveyed (Figure 11-9 Reptile Survey (2006)) and approximately 200 artificial refugia used. Following a settling period of ten days, seven visits were undertaken in May and June 2006 to check for the presence of reptiles, during suitable weather conditions (typically these are taken to be early morning and late afternoon/early evening to coincide with the optimum air temperatures of 9-18°C). Given hot weather during the survey period, the numbers of visits was extended from seven to 10. Reptiles were recorded regularly through the survey period.

11.157. The numbers, sex and life stage of individuals were recorded, in addition to any incidental records of sloughs (shed skin). During each visit, visual surveys were also conducted to record reptiles sighted without refugia.


11-33

Results

Historical Records

11.158. Slow worm and grass snake were recorded in 2002 in Lakers Green, 100 m to the east of the site. Two records of grass snake were provided by the SWT within 1 km of the site (both to the south). Further records provided by the Surrey Reptile and Amphibian Group include grass snake approximately 800 m to the west (Dunsfold Common), common lizard approximately 3 km to the south west (Oaken Wood), and slow worm, adder and grass snake over 5 km to the north east of the site (at Winterfold Wood).

Field Survey

11.159.Areas selected as suitable for the reptile surveys included either rough grassland or ruderal habitats adjacent to bracken, woodland, scrub or hedgerows (Figure 11-9 Reptile Survey (2006)). These areas also supported potential refugia / hibernacula such as rubble or earth mounds, or piles of dead wood.

11.160.A summary of the results (adult records) is provided in Table 11-9: Summary of Reptile Survey Results. Full survey results are provided in Technical Appendix 11-7 Reptile Survey Findings. Slow worm and grass snake were recorded within all of the survey areas using artificial refugia or via direct observation. Lone lizards were also recorded in the north west of the site, and an adder in a field also in the north west of the site (east of Area 2).

Table 11-9: Summary of Reptile Survey Results

Survey area

Area (ha)

Brief habitat description Maximum adult reptile counts

1 1.0 Man made mound supporting ruderal vegetation and surrounded by scrub.

Slow worm: 7

Grass snake: 2

2 0.7 Rough grassland adjacent to hedgerows. Grass snake: 2

Lizard: 1

3 1.1 Area of ruderal/scrub vegetation surrounded by a man made earth bund, and including a scrub belt to the north.

Slow worm: 1

Grass snake: 1

4 0.5 The burning pit: an area of ruderal and scrub vegetation surrounded by woodland (presumed cleared). Mounds of rubble/debris.

Slow worm: 2

Grass snake: 2

5 2.5 Three rough grassland fields, surrounded by hedgerows and scrub, with areas of ruderal vegetation and piles of debris.

Slow worm: 1

Grass snake: 1

Discussion

11.161.In line with HGBI guidelines (1998) these adult reptile records give population size class estimates of Low for each reptile species. Much of the site’s peripheral habitats were suitable for reptiles and provide opportunities for connectivity between the


11-34

areas of optimum habitat. There is therefore likely to be movement of reptiles around the periphery of the site between optimum areas, particularly with the more mobile reptiles such as grass snake and adder. Given the presence of all four common and widespread reptile species, the site qualifies for inclusion on the key reptile site register (Froglife, 1999).

11.162.Relating to seasonal conditions and management prescriptions (mowing regimes), grassland areas of the site are likely to provide foraging opportunities for reptiles for parts of the year, prior to mowing. However, the peritrack (approximately 15 m wide hardstanding) would be very likely to prevent access to the centre of the site and therefore foraging habitat would be limited to the site periphery.

11.163.Abundant overwintering opportunities are also present around the site boundary, including within woodlands, animal burrows and rubble/dead wood piles. Particular areas which provide refugia or possible hibernacula include Area 1 (large mound of spoil with cracks in the soil and piles of dead wood), Area 3 (earth/rubble bunds), Area 4 (rubble and debris piles – largely cleared 2007) and the western part of Area 5 (rubble and debris piles) [Refer to Figure 11-9].

Invertebrates

Introduction

11.164.The extensive areas of grassland, scrub and woodland edge habitats at Dunsfold Park potentially provide valuable habitat for invertebrate populations. Invertebrate surveys of the site were undertaken during June and July 2006. The full survey report including methods, results and discussion is provided in Technical Appendix 11-8: Invertebrate Survey 2006.

Methodology

Historical Records

11.165.Historical invertebrate records were sought from the SWT for the site and adjacent 2 km radius.

Field Survey

11.166.Invertebrate surveys were undertaken on 6 June 2006, and 3 and 20 July 2006. Surveys were not undertaken in May 2006 due to unusually cold and wet conditions, and in August particularly hot and dry conditions prohibited survey.

11.167.As well as direct observation, survey techniques included sweep-netting, sieving leaf litter and beating trees and bushes.


11-35

Results

Historical Records

11.168.A number of records of nationally rare and scarce invertebrate species have been recorded from the nearby Chiddingfold Forest SSSI. This includes Red Data Book (RDB3),13 Nationally Notable,14 and Nationally Local15 status species.

Field Survey

11.169.A full species list recorded during the invertebrate survey is included in Technical Appendix 11-8: Invertebrate Survey 2006. In total 331 invertebrate species were recorded, the majority of which were found in woodland habitats (Table 11-10: Number of invertebrate species recorded by habitat).

Table 11-10: Number of Invertebrate Species Recorded by Habitat

Habitats No species % of total Whole site (all species) 331 100 Species found in woodland edge areas 270 82 Species found in grassland areas 160 48 Species found in both areas 99 30

11.170.No species that are afforded protection under any UK or European legislation were recorded during the survey, nor were any species listed in the British Red Data Books (Shirt, 1987; Bratton, 1991) or those which have been elevated to the status of Nationally Endangered, Nationally Vulnerable or Nationally Rare by subsequent formal reviews.

11.171.Four species were recorded which have recently been added to the list of UKBAP species list (list reviewed and adopted 2007). These species have been added on the basis that they have declined in number (classified as a marked decline) although are not strictly endangered (Colin Plant pers. comm.). In particular, small heath, shaded broad-bar and cinnabar have been added as priority species for research purposes only (Butterfly Conservation pers. comm.). Five species that are formally placed in Nationally Notable category Na16 were recorded, as well as six species in the Nationally Notable category Nb17. Of the eleven Nationally Notable species recorded, nine no longer warrant the application of that status. This leaves just two species, the picture-winged fly Oxyna flavipennis and the weevil Rhynchaenus pratensis,that may genuinely be scarce. A further 18 species were listed as Nationally Local.

13 RDB 3 ‘Rare’; taxa with small populations which are not at present ‘endangered’ or ‘vulnerable’ but which are at risk. These are species which are estimated to occur in fifteen or fewer localities. 14 Taxa which do not fall within RDB categories but which are none-the-less uncommon in Great Britain and are thought to occur in between 16-100 10 km squares of the National Grid. 15 Species which, whilst fairly common, are evidently less widespread than truly common species, but also not qualifying as Nationally Notable having been recorded from over one hundred, but less than three hundred, ten-kilometre squares of the UK National Grid. 16 Species estimated to occur within the range of 16 to 30 10-kilometre squares of the National Grid System. 17 Species estimated to occur within the range 31 to 100 10-kilometre squares of the National Grid System.


11-36

Discussion

11.172.The majority of the invertebrate interest at Dunsfold Park is associated with woodland and woodland edge habitats, rather than the grasslands. This in part relates to the relatively low forb species and structural diversity of much of the grassland areas. Transitional or edge habitats often have greater value for invertebrates, due to enhanced macro- and micro-level habitat and structural diversity, as well as the provision of more sheltered conditions. Therefore the periphery of the site is of greater value to invertebrates than the central part of the site.

11.173.The comparatively low level of notable invertebrate species is perhaps surprising given the relatively undisturbed nature of much of the site.

VALUING ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS 11.174. Using the ecological valuing criteria18, the value of designated sites are summarised in

Table 11-11. The habitats and animal species within the site are valued in Tables 11-12 and Table 11-13.

Table 11-11: Ecological Value of Designated Sites and Ancient Woodland Within the Vicinity of Dunsfold Park

Site name Level of ecological value

Distance from Dunsfold Park (m)

Description

Chiddingfold Forest SSSI

National 150 m Site has a national statutory designation

Furtherfits SNCI County Within site Site has a county-level designation, with part classified as ASNW / ARP woodland

Benbow Rew SNCI County Within site Site has a county-level designation, with part classified as ASNW

Honeymead Copse SNCI

County Within site Site has a county-level designation, and the majority, although a relatively small area, is classified as ASNW

Roundles Copse County Within site Small area of ASNW woodland

Chalcrofts Rough County Within site Small, isolated area classified as ASNW

Mill Copse SNCI National Immediately adjacent

Site has a county-level designation, the majority and a relatively large area is classified as ASNW.

Sayers Land, Jewings Hurst and Benbow Rew (West) SNCI

National Part within site Site has a county-level designation, with the majority and a relatively large area classified as ASNW

‘Baker’s Bottom’ / ‘Firtree Copse’

National 20 Extensive area of ASNW, forming part of a larger area of ancient and designated woodland

18 Table 11-2: The LUC Approach to Valuing Ecological Receptors in England; Technical Appendix 11-5: Breeding Bird Survey At Dunsfold Park; and Technical Appendix 11-8: Invertebrate Survey 2006


11-37

Site name Level of ecological value

Distance from Dunsfold Park (m)

Description

Sydney Wood SNCI National 80 Site has a county-level designation, and forms part of an extensive area of ancient woodland

Burnwood Copse SNCI

National 120 Site has a county-level designation, and forms part of an extensive area of ancient woodland

Farnhurst Copse County 135 Isolated woodland classified as ASNW

Dunsfold Common and Green SNCI

County 350 Site has a county-level designation

Rickhurst Rews SNCI


Wrotham Great Copse SNCI


Alfold Cricket Field SNCI

County 800 Site has a county-level designation

Table 11-12: Ecological Value of Habitats at Dunsfold Park

Habitat feature

Level of Ecological Value

Area within Survey Boundary (ha / %)

Description

Unimproved neutral grassland

County 6.71 (2.71%) Relatively small area of nationally threatened habitat type listed on the UK and Surrey BAP. Important in terms of rarity, fragility, typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and potential enhancement under improved management.

Semi-improved neutral grassland

District 35.44 (14.33%) Widespread habitat on circum-neutral soils, of some value for its typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic, and potential value. Relatively diverse floral assemblages.

Poor semi-improved grassland

Neighbourhood 114.78 (46.43%) Common and widespread habitat locally, of some value for its typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic, and potential value.

Improved grassland

Neighbourhood 0.75 (0.30%) Widespread and commonplace habitat with low intrinsic ecological value, product of agricultural improvement and management.

Amenity grassland


7.01 (2.84%) Widespread and commonplace habitat with little intrinsic ecological value.

Marshy grassland

Neighbourhood 0.60 (0.24%) Comprising only small isolated areas of habitat, but providing some intrinsic value and contributing to the habitat mosaic

Dense/ Neighbourhood 2.09 (0.85%) Small isolated areas of a widespread and


11-38

Habitat feature



Description

continuous scrub

commonplace habitat. Of some importance for its position in the ecological mosaic, provision of a buffer to more fragile habitats, and with potential value under improved management.

Introduced shrub

Neighbourhood 0.54 (0.22%) A common habitat locally, largely comprising species of little ecological value or aggressive/invasive species, although of some value in the habitat mosaic.

Semi-natural broadleaved woodland (includes areas designated as SNCIs and ancient woodland)

County to National

26.77 (10.83%)19 Nationally threatened habitat type listed on the UK and Surrey BAP and considered under PPS9. Important in terms of rarity, fragility, typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and potential enhancement under improved management. Includes some areas of lower quality woodland (e.g. not classed as ancient, or forming small isolated woodland remnants)

Tall herb/ruderal

Neighbourhood 2.42 (0.98%) Widespread and commonplace transitional habitat with low intrinsic ecological value, important for its position in the ecological mosaic.

Ephemeral Neighbourhood 0.44 (0.18%) Widespread and commonplace transitional habitat with low intrinsic ecological value, important for its position in the ecological mosaic.

Standing water District 1.55 (0.63%) A common habitat locally, mostly of degraded quality. Important for its fragility, typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and its potential value through improved management.

Hard standing / buildings


43.97 (17.79%) Widespread and commonplace habitat with little or no intrinsic ecological value.

Total 254

Linear Habitat Feature


Length within Site Boundary (m)

Description

Running water District 1095 Widespread and commonplace habitat important for its connectivity and impact on adjacent habitats, typicalness, fragility, position in the ecological mosaic and potential value through enhanced management.

Species-poor hedgerows (including with

District 1445 Widespread and commonplace degraded habitat included within the Surrey Farmland BAP. Important for its connectivity,

19 Area includes SNCIs and ancient woodlands


11-39

Habitat feature



Description

trees) typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and potential value through enhanced management.

Species-rich hedgerows (including with trees)

National 696 Nationally threatened habitat type listed on the UK and Surrey BAP, and protected under the hedgerow regulations 1994. Important in terms of connectivity, rarity, fragility, typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and potential enhancement under improved management.

Tree lines (including scattered trees)

County 660 Widespread and commonplace habitat type included within Surrey BAP (Farmland/Parkland). Important in terms of connectivity, fragility, typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and potential enhancement under improved management.

Dry ditch Neighbourhood 853 Widespread and commonplace habitat important for its typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and potential value through enhanced management.

Wet ditch Neighbourhood 792 Widespread and commonplace habitat important for its typicalness, position in the ecological mosaic and potential value through enhanced management.

Total 5541

Table 11-13: Ecological Value of Faunal Receptors

Species/ Group


Description

Bats International Protected under the EU Habitats Directive.

Badgers National A species protected by national legislation.

Birds National Include species that are on the Red Lists of Birds of Species of Conservation Concern, UK BAP species, and are protected by national legislation during nesting.

Great crested newt

International Protected under the EU Habitats Directive.

Reptiles National Includes species that are protected under UK national legislation.

Invertebrates County Includes 4 species recently added to the UKBAP species list, and 9 species described as nationally notable although 7 of these no longer warrant this level of value due to increased records.


11-40

ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS 11.175.This section details potential impacts on ecological receptors associated with the

construction and operation phases of the scheme. For the purpose of this assessment, construction is assumed to take place on a phased basis over approximately a 10 year period commencing 2010 and finishing in 2020. Operational phase impacts consider the development as a whole, rather than individual phases and represent the impact of the entire development. In practice, due to the programme of the proposed scheme, there is an overlap between construction and operation, with certain phases completed and residents moving in whilst others are still under construction.

Construction Phase Impacts 11.176. The construction phase of the development is anticipated to last approximately 10

years. Potential direct impacts of this phase include:

• Direct loss of habitat through land take.

• Direct loss of species through construction activities.

11.177. Indirect impacts of construction include:

• Disturbance of habitats and species, including that caused by changes in noise and lighting.

• Increased pollution risk associated with accidental spillage of fuels and oils, silty run-off and dust emissions.

• Changes in land management during the construction phase.

Sites Designated for Nature Conservation and Ancient Woodland

11.178. Construction impact significance on nature conservation sites within the vicinity are summarised in Table 11-14.

11.179. There will be no direct impacts on the SNCIs and ancient woodland located within the site boundaries due to construction activities, as there will be no habitat loss.

11.180. In terms of indirect impacts, pollution from on site works may effect SNCIs/ancient woodlands within and adjacent to Dunsfold Park. The majority of the main construction works are some distance from any SNCI or ancient woodland (for example, Farnhurst Copse lies approximately 80 m to the south of the proposed A281 link road). Localised redevelopment will occur within the existing employment land in the north which lies adjacent to Furtherfits SNCI and ancient woodland, but works will be restricted to the existing built footprint. Furthermore, given the current use of Dunsfold Park for light industry and as an aerodrome, and the likely isolated nature of spillage events, it is considered unlikely that such impacts will alter the integrity of the SNCIs and ancient woodlands. Therefore impacts on on site and adjacent nature conservation sites are considered of low magnitude and variously of minor to moderate negative significance relating to the value of the site.


11-41

11.181. In terms off site impacts there will be no hydrological impacts on the Chiddingfold SSSI (Refer to Chapter 16: Hydrology and Water Resources). Similarly the nearby SNCIs have limited hydrological connectivity with Dunfold Park. Vehicular traffic is currently high in the area, and construction traffic is likely to be mostly directed to the east to avoid increased congestion around Guildford. For these reasons it is considered that indirect impacts during construction on off site nature conservation sites will not be of neutral magnitude given existing conditions, and that construction impacts will be of negligible significance.

Table 11-14: Summary of Potential Construction Impacts on Sites Designated for Nature Conservation and Ancient Woodlands Prior to Mitigation.

Site Value Area of direct impacts (ha)

Indirect impacts

Impact magnitude

Impact Significance


National - Yes Neutral Negligible

On site and adjacent SNCIs/ancient woodland

County - National

- Yes Low negative

Minor - Moderate negative

Off site SNCIs/ancient woodland

County - National

- Yes Neutral Negligible

Habitats

Direct Impacts

11.182. GIS was used to determine the development “footprint” for the Proposed Scheme at Dunsfold Park. The affected habitat areas are summarised in Table 11-15: Summary of Potential Construction Impacts on Habitats (on-site) Prior to Mitigation. In total the construction of the settlement including the associated commercial extension, sports pitches, allotments and helipad will result in the permanent loss of approximately 19 ha of bare ground, and 69 ha of grassland (the majority comprising poor semi-improved grassland at 61ha, but also 5 ha of semi-improved neutral grassland and 1.7 ha of unimproved neutral grassland).

11.183. The vast majority of the mature trees, hedgerows and woodlands within the site will be retained. Approximately 0.2 ha of woodland will be removed in the eastern part of the site for the construction of the A281 link road. The road has been located to minimise woodland removal, as informed by ecological and tree surveys, the chosen section comprising a narrow part of the wood/outgrown hedgerow. In addition, a length of approximately 70 m of species-poor hedgerow may be lost along the A281 for the creation of a new junction and associated sightlines.

11.184. Two small waterbodies (settling tanks) will also be directly impacted.


11-42

11.185. Additional habitat loss will result from landscaping works, although this will result in the creation of new habitats which will mature in time (including creation of mounds, wetlands, and large blocks of tree planting). Again, in the most part this will result in the immediate loss of poor semi-improved neutral grassland and semi-improved neutral grassland from the central part of the site (approximately 24 ha and 11 ha respectively).

Indirect Impacts

11.186.Indirect habitat impacts may include the deposition of aerial and aquatic pollution during construction works, for example through increased dust, run off from bare ground/hard standing, vehicle washes and accidental spillages. Such impacts could lead to a decrease in habitat quality. Certain habitats are likely to be more vulnerable such as ancient woodland, unimproved grassland and waterbodies. However, the site is currently subject to high levels of disturbance and potential sources of contamination/pollution associated with aircraft flights, vehicle test driving and commercial activities such as haulage.

11.187. Some additional indirect habitat loss is also expected through off site road works, although this will be limited in extent and largely restricted to occasional narrow stretches of regularly managed improved or species-poor neutral grassland verge of neighbourhood, or less, value.

11.188. Indirect disturbance impacts may occur to woodland, tree and hedgerow features to be retained, for example due to soil compression, collision or alterations to local hydrology.

11.189. Temporary and permanent impacts on hydrology may include alterations to ground water flow. The loss of the settling tanks may result in indirect impacts, with a resultant reduction in flow to Springfield Rew.

Magnitude and Significance of Construction Phase Impacts on Habitats

11.190. Impacts of high magnitude are predicted for poor semi-improved neutral grassland and semi-improved neutral grassland associated with permanent and short-term habitat loss within the built footprint and for landscaping works. In addition medium magnitude impacts are associated with the loss of the majority of a species-poor hedgerow and resultant impacts on connectivity. Impacts of medium magnitude are also predicted for standing and running water habitats associated with alterations to hydrological conditions and potential contamination.

11.191. As a result, impacts of moderate negative significance are predicted for semi-improved neutral grassland, species-rich hedgerows and tree lines / scattered trees. All other habitat impacts are considered to be of minor negative or negligible significance.


11-43

Table 11-15: Summary of Potential Construction Impacts on Habitats (on- site) Prior to Mitigation.

Habitat Value Area/Length of direct impacts (ha)

Indirect impacts

Impact magnitude

Impact Significance

Bare ground/ buildings


1.23 No Low negative

Negligible

Unimproved grassland

County 1.69 Yes Low negative

Minor negative


District 16.40 Yes High negative

Moderate negative


Neighbourhood 85.10 Yes High negative

Minor negative

Improved grassland Neighbourhood 0.33 Yes Low negative

Negligible

Amenity grassland Less than neighbourhood

- Yes Neutral Negligible

Marshy grassland Neighbourhood 0.15 Yes Low negative

Negligible

Dense/continuous scrub

Neighbourhood 0.46 Yes Low negative

Negligible

Introduced shrub Neighbourhood 0.15 Yes Low negative

Negligible

Semi-natural broadleaved woodland20

County 0.21 Yes Low negative

Minor negative

Tall herb/ruderal Neighbourhood 0.04 Yes Low negative

Negligible

Ephemeral Neighbourhood 0.36- Yes Low negative

Negligible

Standing water Neighbourhood 0.04 Yes Medium negative

Minor negative

Running water District - Yes Medium negative

Minor negative

Total 106.09 ha

Species-poor hedgerow

District 70.00 m Yes Medium negative

Minor negative

Species-rich hedgerow

National - Yes Medium negative

Moderate negative


County - Yes Medium negative

Moderate negative

Ditches Neighbourhood - Yes Low negative

Negligible

20 Impacts on SNCIs and ancient woodlands are dealt within the earlier section Sites Designated for Nature Conservation and Ancient Woodland


11-44

Habitat Value Area/Length of direct impacts (ha)

Indirect impacts

Impact magnitude

Impact Significance

Total 70.00 m

Species

11.192.The significance of construction impacts on species recorded within the site are summarised in Table 11-16: Summary of Potential Construction Impacts on Species Prior to Mitigation.

Bats

11.193. The likely renovation of Primemeads Cottage and Honeymead Cottage will result in the loss of two long-eared bat roosts. Restoration of Broadmeads Cottage may result in the potential loss of a roost site.

11.194. The majority of valuable bat foraging habitat and flight corridors will be retained within the scheme, including interlinking copses, tree lines, scrub, wet ditches and associated grassland margins. However, the A281 link road will sever the woodland corridor along the canal (a known bat flight corridor) and a hedgerow at the junction with the A281 (a possible bat flight line although this is well-managed).

11.195. Disturbance to bats from noise and lighting arising from construction machinery is of primary concern along the south east boundary of the site parallel to the canal and, to a lesser extent, at Shiftland Copse. Disturbance may deter foraging and commuting and in the worst instance cause abandonment of a roost. There is also increased pollution risk associated with fugitive dust emissions.

11.196. The loss of at least two bat roosts, will represent a large-scale permanent change to the local population of brown long-eared bats, which may affect the local conservation status of this species. Therefore, construction phase impacts on bats are anticipated to be of high negative magnitude and hence of Major Negative significance.

Badger

11.197.A single, well-used outlier sett will require closure under a NE licence prior to commencement of works, if it remains open/used.

11.198.There may be an increased risk of badger mortality through vehicular collisions, although there is existing vehicle use of the site and evening construction vehicle movements will be restricted. Hazards to badger may be posed by construction methods, such as creation of holes/trenches and presence of hazardous materials.

11.199.Four outlier setts are likely to be subject to low level temporary disturbance from landscape works.

11.200. Given the low level of badger activity recorded, the abundance of available habitat and the limited loss of woodland / scrub habitat it is considered that there will be


11-45

negligible impact on badger foraging habitat. There is the risk of fragmentation to badger foraging habitat by the A281 link road, although this will affect a relatively small proportion of potential badger foraging habitat in the locality. Lighting during construction may also affect badger foraging.

11.201. Off site transport enhancement works may potentially disturb badgers.

11.202. Given the low level of use of the site by badgers, the status of the setts as outliers (including that to be closed) and the extent of suitable foraging habitat available for badger these impacts are unlikely to affect their conservation status in the locality. Impacts are therefore considered of low negative magnitude and of Moderate Negative significance.

Birds

11.203. Direct impacts on birds will include the risk of killing or injuring breeding birds during the removal of habitat for development, including:

• Grassland habitats for ground nesting birds, such as skylark and meadow pipit. This will include habitat loss through construction, and also tree planting works which will reduce the suitability of the remaining grassland areas for foraging and nesting. Much of this grassland has only become suitable for nesting since 2005 following the restriction of management.

• Localised loss of woodland, scrub and ornamental shrub habitats. In particular, loss of small areas associated with the A281 link road.

• Demolition, renovation and restoration of buildings.

11.204. This will also result in temporary and permanent loss of breeding habitat, and foraging habitat with reductions in invertebrate abundance, and also small mammals for raptors. However, much of the peripheral habitats, particularly in the west of the site, will be retained as rough grassland.

11.205. Construction works will also result in increased disturbance, particularly as a result of works within the north east of the site which is currently relatively undisturbed and through breaking up of the peritrack and runways (phased through the construction period). Much of the site is currently subject to regular disturbance as a result of aircraft flights, test driving and haulage / light industrial activity.

11.206. Overall, it is considered construction impacts on birds will be of high negative magnitude and therefore of Major negative significance.

Great Crested Newt

11.207. No direct impacts are predicted on any GCN breeding sites, or other waterbodies where roaming GCN were recorded.

11.208. There is a risk of killing or injury of GCN during works within peripheral areas of the site (including demolition and removal of structures and areas of debris/mounding; construction; and landscaping works) which may affect terrestrial habitat. Construction traffic may also result in killing or injury of GCN, however construction


11-46

traffic will be restricted during evening hours when GCN are active, and site traffic is currently high. The risk to GCN arising from site traffic is therefore unlikely to increase.

11.209. Given the small GCN population recorded, there is abundant optimum terrestrial habitat which will remain unaffected. The main areas of construction are unlikely to be used by GCN given the barrier formed by the peritrack and distance from the breeding pond.

11.210. There may be an increased risk of indirect impacts on GCN, such as the contamination of breeding ponds through accidental spillage or runoff.

11.211. It is considered that there is a low probability of impacts on GCN during off-site works, if in the vicinity of ponds, given that the majority works will be restricted to narrow managed grassland verges.

11.212. Given the vulnerability of the population, particularly due to the poor quality of the breeding habitat, these impacts are considered to be of high negative magnitude, and therefore of Major Negative significance.

Reptiles

11.213. Direct impacts on reptiles during construction are predicted outwith the peritrack through the risk of killing or injury during landscape works, and also localised demolition, removal of debris and construction works. Specific areas which are likely to be affected by clean-up works include Survey Area 4 (mostly cleared in 2007; proposed site of a reedbed) and Survey Area 3 in the north east (A281 link road, and Energy and Waste Centre) – Refer to Figure 11-9: Reptile Survey. Construction traffic will also present a risk to reptiles, although current on site vehicular movements are high.

11.214. Works will also result in the temporary loss and fragmentation of reptile foraging habitat around the site periphery, and the potential loss of refugia and hibernacula. However the majority of the peripheral habitats providing these habitat types will be retained. There are abundant refugia and hibernacula which will remain largely unaffected throughout the site periphery.

11.215. These impacts are considered to be medium negative in magnitude due to the likely widespread nature of the populations around the periphery, and relatively localised areas of works. Impact significance is therefore Moderate Negative.

Invertebrates

11.216. Construction of the Proposed Scheme is likely to result in negative impacts on the invertebrate assemblage noted on site through the clearance of extensive areas of grassland habitat and construction of hard surfaces over previously semi-natural habitat. The risk of damage or destruction of invertebrates during this process is high.

11.217. However, the grassland habitats to be lost are considered to be of minimal value in contributing to local invertebrate ecology. The woodland edge and peripheral


11-47

grassland habitats provide the highest quality invertebrate habitat on the site and are mostly to be retained.

11.218. The impact on invertebrates is considered to be low negative in magnitude and therefore of Minor Negative significance.

Table 11-16: Summary of Potential Construction Impacts on Species Prior to Mitigation.

Species Value Direct Impacts

Indirect impacts

Impact magnitude

Impact Significance

Bats International Yes Yes High negative Major negative

Badger National Yes Yes Low negative Moderate negative

Birds County -National Yes Yes High negative Major negative

Great crested newt

International Yes Yes High negative Major negative

Reptiles National Yes Yes Medium negative

Moderate negative

Invertebrates County Yes Negligible Low negative Minor negative

Operational Phase Impacts 11.219. The potential operational impacts have been identified as:

• Disturbance to wildlife.

• Changes in habitat management.


11.220. The significance of operation impacts on sites of nature conservation value in the vicinity of Dunsfold Park are summarised in Table 11-17: Summary of Potential Operation Impacts on Sites Designated for Nature Conservation and Ancient Woodland Prior to Mitigation. With increased numbers of local residents, visitor pressure may increase at sites of nature conservation value (SSSIs, SNCIs and ancient woodland) on the site itself and nearby, with a risk of disturbance to habitats as well as fauna (erosion, damage to the basal flora, pets and eutrophication).

11.221. These impacts are considered of low to medium negative magnitude, dependent on the location of the sites of nature conservation value, and therefore of Moderate Negative significance.


11-48

Biomass Supply to the Site

11.222.As mentioned within the Energy Strategy which accompanies this application, biomass for the CHP Plant will be sourced from off site woodland. At this stage the exact locations of biomass sources are unknown.

11.223.In terms of off site impacts associated with biomass supply, figures provided by the Forestry Commission have indicated that there is substantial potential for woodfuel production within a 20 mile radius of Dunsfold Park, in excess of the annual requirement of the proposed CHP plant. While the specific woodlands and biomass sources which will be used are yet to be identified, the selection of biomass resource shall be guided by the principle that transport distances should be limited as far as practicable.

11.224.It is also assumed that best woodland management practice will be employed during the supply of biomass, in line with all relevant legislation (and Forestry Commission and Natural England guidance). Although on the whole large scale forestry operations will be required to provide sufficient woodfuel, opportunities will also be sought to include a proportion of the woodfuel from the active management of small woodlands, including those which have become unmanaged. A rotational approach to coppicing in these woodlands, thereby maintaining a mosaic of woodland development structures, will improve woodland habitats to the benefit of biodiversity. It is therefore assumed that there would be no significant negative ecological impacts associated with biomass supply, and indeed that this would stimulate good woodland management in the area and potentially result in a beneficial impact.

Table 11-17: Summary of Potential Operation Impacts on Sites Designated for Nature Conservation and Ancient Woodland Prior to Mitigation.

Site Value Area of direct impacts (ha)

Indirect impacts Impact magnitude

Impact Significance


National - yes Low negative

Moderate negative

On site and adjacent SNCIs/ancient woodlands

County - National

- yes Medium negative

Moderate negative

Off site SNCIs/ancient woodlands

County - National

- yes Low negative

Moderate negative

Habitats

11.225. Increased recreational use of the retained habitats will result in greater levels of disturbance, with permanent negative impacts including footpath erosion and the degradation of the woodland ground floras, trampling of marginal vegetation, and eutrophication of habitats from dog waste. Other habitats are less vulnerable to, or


11-49

even benefit from, disturbance, such as amenity grassland, improved grassland and ruderal habitats.

Magnitude and Significance of Operation Phase Impacts on Habitats

11.226. The magnitude of impacts during the operational phase largely relates to the sensitivity of the habitats, and the likelihood of recreational activity within the vicinity of the habitat type. Impacts of medium magnitude are predicted for unimproved grassland in the north east of the site, and for semi-natural broad-leaved woodland and standing water habitats, with permanent but localised changes in habitat condition.

11.227. As a result, impacts of Moderate Negative significance are predicted for unimproved neutral grassland, semi-natural broadleaved woodland and species-rich hedgerows. All other habitat impacts are considered to be of Minor Negative or Negligible significance.

Table 11-18: Summary of Potential Operation Impacts on Habitats (on- site) Prior to Mitigation.

Habitat Value Area of direct impacts (ha)

Indirect impacts

Impact magnitude

Impact Significance

Bare ground/ buildings


No Yes Neutral Negligible

Unimproved grassland

County No Yes Medium negative

Moderate negative


District No Yes Low negative

Minor negative


Neighbourhood No Yes Low negative

Minor negative

Improved grassland Neighbourhood No Yes Neutral Negligible

Amenity grassland Neighbourhood No Yes Neutral Negligible

Marshy grassland Neighbourhood No Yes Low negative

Negligible

Dense/continuous scrub

Neighbourhood No Yes Neutral Negligible

Introduced shrub Neighbourhood No Yes Neutral Negligible

Semi-natural broadleaved woodland21

County No Yes Medium negative

Moderate negative

Tall herb/ruderal Neighbourhood No Yes Neutral Negligible

Ephemeral Neighbourhood No Yes Neutral Negligible

Standing water Neighbourhood No Yes Medium Minor

21 Impacts on SNCIs and ancient woodlands are dealt within the earlier section “Sites Designated for Nature Conservation and Ancient Woodland”


11-50

Habitat Value Area of direct impacts (ha)

Indirect impacts

Impact magnitude

Impact Significance

negative negative

Running water District No Yes Low negative

Minor negative

Species-poor hedgerows

District No Yes Low negative

Minor negative

Species-rich hedgerows

National No Yes Low negative

Moderate negative


County No Yes Low negative

Minor negative

Ditches Neighbourhood No Yes Neutral Negligible

Species

Bats

11.228. Increased ambient light levels will be likely to negatively impact on bat activity, reducing the suitability of existing bat flight lines, in particular the canal corridor and lighting associated with the two road links. This could result in shifting patterns of bat activity, and reduce foraging area and decrease local bat populations. However, it is intended that the Country Park in the west of the site will remains unlit (as far as practicable), as will the majority of the canal. The site is currently lit in specific commercial areas, and therefore bat distribution will already be affected to some degree.

11.229. Large numbers of bats currently commute along the canal corridor, passing over Compass Bridge. The increase in dusk and night time vehicular movements across this bridge may possibly increase the risk of collision with bats, although the frequency of strikes is uncertain.

11.230. Impacts on bats during the operational phase are considered to be of medium negative magnitude and therefore of Major Negative significance.

Badger

11.231. Increased night-time traffic on site will increase the risk of vehicle collisions with badger.

11.232. Increased recreation use of the site will increase levels of disturbance for badgers by site users and dogs, and could possibly lead to a risk of greater levels of persecution by the public. However, such impacts are considered unlikely given low badger activity on the site and the abundant opportunities for badgers to establish setts and forage in habitats surrounding the site. Therefore this will not affect the integrity of the badger population. Increased use of off site public rights of way may have similar implications.


11-51

11.233. Changes in ambient night time lighting levels may alter the behaviour of badger and reduce the suitability for badger (for foraging and the establishment / use of setts), such as the canal corridor. The site is currently lit in the commercial areas and therefore badgers are likely to either be habituated to some extent or may already avoid these lit areas.

11.234. Given the current low level of badger activity, and existing levels of disturbance on the site, these impacts are considered to be of low negative magnitude and therefore of Moderate Negative significance.

Breeding Birds

11.235. Disturbance from vehicles, recreation and domestic pets will be likely to deter certain species from nesting within parts of Dunsfold Park and affect the spatial distribution of birds on the site. Although activity and noise is currently high on the site with vehicle movements and aircraft flights, human presence causes greater disturbance to bird species. Pets, particularly cats, will also present a greater predation risk to birds.

11.236. Landscape management works will also present a risk of disturbance to breeding birds, and will be likely to reduce areas of relatively ’wild’ unkempt habitats which are generally preferable to wild birds.

11.237. Overall during the operational phase, impacts are considered to be medium negative in magnitude and therefore of Moderate Negative significance on birds.

Great Crested Newt

11.238. Whilst new waterbodies are proposed within the development, without ecological input to ensure their suitability for breeding GCN these would not present a positive impact.

11.239. With increased public use of the site it is possible that fish or invasive plant species may be introduced to ponds, reducing their suitability for GCN breeding.

11.240. Increased numbers of site users and domestic animals (cats and dogs) may increase mortality of GCN through persecution and/or predation. Similarly greater vehicular use of roads at night may increase newt mortality. If present, this may also impact on off site populations of this species.

11.241. GCN foraging behaviour may be indirectly impacted by altered ambient light levels, whilst ‘tidying up’ of the site (for example removal of debris / leaf litter, dead wood, control of ruderal and transitional communities) during landscape management may reduce the long-term suitability of terrestrial habitat, and pose a risk of killing or injuring newts.

11.242.Given the vulnerability of the population, these impacts are considered to be high negative in magnitude and therefore of Major Negative significance.


11-52

Reptiles

11.243. An increase in site users and domestic animals (cats and dogs) will have a direct impact on reptiles through persecution and predation. Increased vehicular traffic with residential use may also increase mortality.

11.244. The potential for more intensive management than at current of the remaining grassland areas and tidying up may cause long-term indirect impacts on reptiles by reducing the suitability of terrestrial habitat for basking, foraging and shelter. This may also have direct impacts by killing or injuring reptiles. It is assumed that much of the site would come under more intensive management.

11.245.These impacts will be of medium magnitude, and therefore of Moderate Negative significance.

Invertebrates

11.246. During operation, direct impacts on the invertebrate population may be associated with the tidying up of the site, reducing habitat availability, including removal of transitional ruderal and ephemeral, and dead wood habitats. There will also be potential for indirect impacts with altered behaviour of certain invertebrate species, such as moths, due to increased levels of ambient night time lighting.

11.247. These impacts are considered to be of low negative magnitude and therefore Minor Negative significance.

Table 11-19: Summary of Potential Operation Impacts on Species Prior to Mitigation.

Species Value Direct Impacts

Indirect impacts

Impact magnitude

Impact Significance

Bats International Yes Yes Medium negative

Major negative

Badger National Yes Yes Low negative

Moderate negative

Birds National Yes Yes Medium negative

Moderate negative

Great crested newt International Yes Yes High negative

Major negative

Reptiles National Yes Yes Medium negative

Moderate negative

Invertebrates County Yes Yes Low negative

Minor negative

MITIGATION AND MONITORING 11.248. It is possible to reduce the significance of impacts through a combination of

Mitigation and Compensation. Mitigation refers to measures undertaken to reduce negative impacts, such as redesign or alterations to timing of works. Compensation refers to measures taken to offset significant negative impacts, for


11-53

example, habitat creation or enhancement. Where there are protected species issues there may also be a legal requirement to provide such measures. Residual impacts refer to those impacts which remain after mitigation and/or compensation has been implemented.

Construction

Best Construction Practice

11.249. Best construction practice (Construction Industry Research and Information Association guidance, Connelly and Charles, 2005), will be followed at all times to reduce potential impacts, such as contamination, including:

• Secure storage and safe disposal of any materials and substances to prevent accidental contamination.

• Prevention or reduction of dust through timing of works or damping down.

• Control of surface water runoff, including from damping down, to prevent contamination of waterbodies.

11.250. Toolbox talks will be given and information sheets prepared for construction workers, including information such as protected species identification and the implications of legislation, and instructions of how to proceed if such a species is located.

11.251. Ecological input will be provided throughout the construction period, with ecological supervision of sensitive works, attendance during progress/work planning meetings, and regular site visits and spot checks.

11.252. Combined tree protection and wildlife exclusion fencing will be erected around the site periphery, excluding sensitive areas to be retained from the working area (Figure 11-10: Indicative wildlife protection fencing and receptor areas). Tree protection measures will be in accordance with BS5837:2005 (BSI, 2005). Such measures will also be implemented where practicable and appropriate during any off site road works.

Lighting

11.253.On the whole, construction will be during daylight hours without the need for artificial lighting. If required, lighting and night time working will be restricted to the centre of the site, and lighting directed inwards away from sensitive habitat features.

Advanced Landscape Works

11.254.Certain landscape works will be implemented prior to construction, or early within the phasing programme (Refer to Chapter 10: Landscape and Visual Amenity for more details). This will include woodland buffer planting (surrounding sensitive woodland habitats) and the preparation of receptor areas (see sections Great Crested Newts and Reptiles).

11.255.Prior to the commencement of works, areas of more diverse grassland will be translocated from the works footprint (either as turfs or substrate) to areas to be


11-54

retained which are of a similar character to the ‘donor’ site (such as aspect, shading, drainage). This will include unimproved grassland in the north east and an area of apparent sandy substrate west of the existing commercial area in the north of the site.


11.256.Best construction practice will be followed to reduce the risk of contamination to adjacent and nearby nature conservation sites and habitats during construction. Furthermore, surface water flows from the site will be maintained to the western boundary stream and the canal to prevent significant off-site impacts. Advance planting will also be undertaken. Tree protection and wildlife exclusion fencing will also be erected to protect SNCIs and ancient woodland during construction, with an appropriate buffer maintained between works such as a minimum of 15 m from the woodland edge (Refer to Figure 11-10: Indicative Wildlife Protection Fencing and Receptor Areas). If required, localised works within this zone will be undertaken following appropriate precautions.

Bats

11.257.Given the timeframe for development, emergence surveys of the Primemeads, Broadmeads and Honeymead cottages and the trees in the immediate vicinity of the A281 link road will be repeated in advance of construction. This must allow sufficient time to develop and programme mitigation, and where applicable licensing, in advance of works. In particular, any works with potential to affect bat roosts will be undertaken at a time of year to avoid potential impacts during the bats sensitive breeding and hibernation periods.

11.258.Any felling and lopping of trees (such as for the A281 link road) will be minimised to retain as much of the canopy as possible, whilst facilitating safe construction working. Replacement roosting opportunities will be provided, with bat boxes erected in trees along the canal.

11.259.The renovation of Primemeads and Broadmeads Cottages will be appropriately licensed. If no further evidence of roosting is ascertained at Honeymead cottage, the works will be completed in a precautionary manner as far as practicable, given its advanced derelict state. Renovation design at all three cottages will encompass the provision of roost space within the building design, incorporating a range of features appropriate to the numerous bat species at Dunsfold. Where long-eared bat roosts are to be replaced, features will include larger voids of adequate height. Owing to long term management requirements, opportunities will be investigated to include bat roost opportunities within other peripheral buildings to be retained (retention of which is dependent on health and safety considerations – refer to Chapter 15: Land Quality). Furthermore, bat roosting opportunities will be incorporated within the urban area.

11.260.Bridges over the Wey and Arun Canal will be designed to enable the passage of canal boat traffic. As such, bats will be able to pass under the bridges, thereby reducing the risk of bat collision with road traffic. This will include the replacement of Compass Bridge which currently has a minimal arch which is currently unsuitable for bats to


11-55

pass underneath. Opportunities will also be investigated for the inclusion of bat roosting opportunities within the bridges.

11.261.The extent of construction lies in close proximity to Shiftland copse and the scrub and woodland habitats along the south east of the site. Habitat protection fencing will prevent encroachment into retained habitats, particularly the woodland edge of value to bats. Lighting will be directed away from these sensitive habitat interfaces, as far as practicable.

11.262.Other peripheral woodland, rough grassland, scrub and hedgerow habitats will be retained and protected, as far as practicable, during construction, maintaining valuable bat foraging habitats and commuting routes.

Badgers

11.263. Badger surveys will be updated prior to the commencement of construction. If still in use, the closure of a single outlier will be undertaken under a NE licence and in line with best practice guidelines. This will be achieved through the use of one-way badger gates and will ensure badgers are not present within the sett prior to closure. Given the status of the sett as a single holed entrance, it may be possible to close the sett if at any stage it can be definitively confirmed that it is no longer in use and following consultation with NE. Given the nature of the outlier sett, the abundance of suitable sett locations (including embankments / slopes, old rabbit warrens and disused outlier setts around the site) it is not considered necessary to create a replacement sett.

11.264. Any works constituting disturbance to badger (English Nature, 2002), such as the removal of existing security fencing and planting within the vicinity of setts, will also be undertaken under a NE licence. Mitigation is likely to include undertaking the works by hand or with small machinery, the timing of the works within July - November only (dependent on the nature of the sett), and restricted hours of works.

11.265. Best practice construction procedures will also reduce risk to badger during construction. This may include installation of wildlife exclusion fencing around the site periphery (preventing access to the working area), retaining escape ramps within excavations, and the secure storage and disposal of chemicals.

11.266. In relation to potential future off site transport enhancements, further badger surveys would be undertaken and impacts assessed once detailed designs are available. However, it is assumed that any road improvement works will be restricted to the current highway footprint (i.e. road verges). These works would be highly unlikely to require sett closure although NE licences may be required for disturbance. Additional planting would be undertaken where appropriate to screen sett entrances.

Breeding Birds

11.267. There is a risk of killing, injuring or disturbing breeding birds, their nests and eggs, during works. Any clearance of vegetation likely to support breeding birds will be undertaken outside of the breeding bird season (generally taken as March through August).


11-56

11.268.In particular, prior to construction of the various phasing compartments, grassland areas will be regularly mown or stripped outside of the bird breeding season. This will render areas unsuitable for bird nesting, thereby reducing the risk of killing, injuring or nest destruction. Where areas are not required for construction works during that breeding season these will be retained to maintain nesting habitat for as long as possible.

11.269.Buildings subject to works will be similarly rendered unsuitable for nesting birds outside of the bird breeding season. Buildings to be demolished which are suitable to support nesting barn owl will be checked by an ecologist to determine whether or not there has been any recent nesting, in particular Broadmeads Cottage. If nesting is recorded, works which may disturb nesting barn owl will only proceed under a NE licence.

11.270.Four A-frame barn owl nest boxes will be erected as replacement roosts and potential nest sites prior to construction works. These will be located in appropriate locations as advised by the Hawk and Owl Trust along the southern and western site boundaries, in areas away from potential construction disturbance.

11.271.If works are required on potential bird nesting habitats during the breeding season, these will only proceed following an inspection by an experienced ecologist that has confirmed breeding birds are not present.

Great Crested Newts

11.272. Translocation works will be undertaken, subject to a NE licence, to remove GCN from areas of suitable terrestrial habitat and programmed for construction/landscape works within 500 m of the on-site breeding pond; as per English Nature guidelines (2001). This will include demolition and landscape works in the south of the site near Tickners Heath. This will either involve the installation of exclusion fencing and trapping of the areas, or through destructive searches by qualified ecologists (will be detailed in the licence application dependent on the works and location).

11.273. Prior to translocation, a receptor area will be prepared within the vicinity of the current breeding pond and its surrounds, near Tickners Heath (Refer to Figure 11-10: Indicative Wildlife Protection Fencing and Receptor Areas). Enhancement works will include the restoration of the pond and creation of new ponds. These works will also be undertaken under a NE licence with appropriate precautions in place, such as initial translocations or destructive searches.

11.274. Translocation will include the erection of exclusion and internal drift fencing, with pitfall traps and refugia lain to capture newts. The trapping period will reflect the population size (a minimum of 30 days is required for a small population) and will be in accordance with English Nature guidance (2001). Newts will be released to the receptor area.

11.275. Elsewhere, habitat manipulation will be undertaken in areas of sub-optimal newt habitat. For example, grassland areas will be strimmed during warm weather until unsuitable for reptiles and wildlife exclusion fence erected. This will reduce the risk


11-57

of newt (and reptiles) from straying in to the construction area and areas of proposed works.

11.276. An update site-wide GCN survey will be undertaken prior to further development of mitigation proposals, given the timescale of the development works and to determine whether GCN have colonised additional ponds or whether populations have changed in size. Future monitoring will be a condition of the NE licence.

11.277. Given the restriction of potential highway enhancement works to grass verges, no mitigation will be required in relation to GCN for this aspect of the works. However, this will be reviewed when detailed design is available.

Reptiles

11.278. Translocation of reptiles from particularly sensitive areas of the site which are proposed for construction or landscape works will follow similar procedures as the GCN translocation. The two translocations will often be run in parallel. It will be undertaken over a timescale appropriate to the population size and in accordance with HGBI (1998) and NE guidelines (2001). A reptile strategy will be prepared for approval by NE and the local authority ecologist.

11.279. Translocations will include areas scheduled for demolition and landscape works in the south of the site near Tickners Heath and the clearance of habitats in the north east of the site (A281 link road and Energy and Waste centre). Other areas of the site will be subject to habitat manipulation and / or the erection of wildlife exclusion fences as described for newts.

11.280. Any reptiles caught will be relocated to a receptor site in the north of the site, north east of Honeymead (Figure 11-10: Indicative Wildlife Protection Fencing and Receptor Areas). This area will be enhanced prior to the commencement of trapping works, including localised tree and scrub planting, the creation of hibernacula and refugia, and the implementation of appropriate mowing regimes.

11.281. In terms of off site highway enhancement works, precautionary strimming of vegetation will be undertaken under ecological supervision, prior to the commencement of works. This will be reviewed once detailed design is available.

Invertebrates

11.282.Habitat manipulation measures as described for birds, GCN and reptiles will also encourage the dispersal of invertebrates from working areas, reducing incidental killing. Wherever possible, woody arisings, particularly those of native species, will be retained as dead wood piles. Arisings will not be burnt.

11.283.The majority of the peripheral habitats of most value to invertebrates will be protected by tree protection and wildlife exclusion fencing.


11-58

Operation

Lighting

11.284.Wherever possible artificial lighting will be avoided outwith the built footprint (commercial estate, residential area and Energy and Water Centre), particularly along the Wey and Arun Canal, and adjacent to woodland blocks. Floodlighting will be avoided wherever possible within the Country Park (in accordance detailed lighting design).

11.285.Where lighting is required for security / personal safety, for sports (the sports pavilion and car park at the western end of the Runway Park, at the Energy and Water Centre, and at bridge crossings over the Canal) and for events, appropriate measures will be implemented to minimise light spill and impacts on sensitive species, including:

• Minimisation of Lux levels.

• Use of lighting at low height wherever possible, or strongly directional hoods / cowling, to minimise upward lighting.

• Lighting design such as use of using low-pressure sodium lamps instead of high-pressure sodium or mercury lamps, or fitting mercury lamps with UV filters.

• Potential to limit the hours of lighting dependent on the purpose of the lighting and exact location, or use of motion sensors.

11.286.Similarly, street lighting within the commercial and residential areas will be of a design so as to fulfil its primary function for residents / employees whilst also potentially enabling nocturnal species, such as bats, to use the areas for foraging.

11.287.Such issues will be determined at the detailed design stage once precise lighting requirements are known.


11.288. Proposals to reduce the impact of increased recreational pressure on SNCIs and ancient woodlands within the site are discussed below in Habitat Management and Enhancement. Management of these woodlands will also enhance their robustness, in terms of resilience to disturbance, including reinstatement of coppicing where appropriate. The Country Park and open spaces should provide sufficient high quality recreational space to reduce the numbers of residents visiting other nearby SSSIs, SNCIs and ancient woodlands thereby minimising disturbance impacts.

11.289. Regular bins, including those for dog waste, signage and information will aim to reduce potential eutrophication and littering. The effectiveness of this could be monitored by the park managers as part of a landscape management plan.

Habitat Management and Enhancement

11.290. Habitat management and enhancement principles have been produced for each of the main habitat types found on the site. Further detail is provided where appropriate in


11-59

relation to species specific measures. A zoning approach will be used to address recreational impacts (see Figure 11-11 Biodiversity enhancement and protection strategy with further detail in Technical Appendix 11-9 Table of Nature Conservation Enhancement Works). The zones are outlined in Table 11-20: Habitat Creation, Enhancement and Management Zones. In practice, management will be implemented through the construction period where capital landscaping works are not required or have been completed.

Table 11-20: Habitat Creation, Enhancement and Management Zones

Zones Description

1: Areas of particular sensitivity with controlled public access

This includes areas of Ancient Woodland, SNCIs and the great crested newt breeding pond. Public access will be discouraged in these areas through the diversion of footpaths away from these areas, dense tree and scrub planting and the maintenance of rough, tussocky grassland. Only native species will be planted.

2: Areas managed for wildlife with controlled public access

This comprises the periphery of the site and includes woodland habitats, and areas in the north and south to be used as reptile receptor areas. Measures to control access will be similar to that above, and the areas will provide additional buffering for more sensitive habitats. Only native species will be planted.

3: Areas managed for wildlife and informal recreation

These areas are internal to the site. Habitat creation and management in these areas will benefit both wildlife and people with parkland tree and scrub planting, and maintenance of meadow grasslands. This will enable informal recreation, with footpaths and cycleways providing access to nature for residents. Planting will predominantly be of native species.

4: Intensively managed areas and wildlife habitats adjacent to the urban edge

These areas comprise those areas subject to more intense management and use, such as sports and events areas, and those areas adjacent to the urban area which are likely to be more heavily used. Wherever possible (for example, excluding sports areas, play facilities, allotments) these areas will be managed sympathetically for wildlife including woodland/scrub, grassland and waterbodies, and will therefore also provide access to nature. Planting to include native species and ornamental species with recognised value for wildlife.

5: Urban areas Wildlife-friendly green infrastructure will be incorporated in to the urban design including: - greenspace with wildlife areas, waterbodies and planting

native trees and shrubs, or those ornamental species with recognised value for wildlife,

- incorporation of bird nesting and bat roosting opportunities within buildings,

- inclusion of living roofs (e.g. extensive green roof systems including sedum or wildflower vegetation), and green walls,

- street planting to create green corridors (again using species of value for wildlife where appropriate).

11.291. The key elements of habitat creation and enhancement are outlined below.


11-60

Grassland

11.292.Four grassland management regimes are likely to be implemented outside of the urban areas:

• Areas cut on rotation, either topped annually or cut every three years (tussock/rough grassland: Zones 1 and 2, and 3 in parts).

• Areas receiving a single annual cut (meadow: particularly Zones 3 and 4).

• Areas cut four times per year (semi-intensive use: particularly Zones 3 and 4).

• Cutting for intensive recreational and sports use (Zone 4).

11.293.The later two regimes would be implemented on the site periphery in particular, providing more varied edge habitats adjacent to woodland, scrub and hedgerows. More extensive areas of meadow grassland will be created surrounding areas designated for more intensive use.

11.294.Areas subject to earth works will be sown with an appropriate wildflower meadow mix, if possible sourced locally. Opportunities to enrich retained grassland areas will be investigated.

Woodland, Scrub and Trees

Existing Areas of Woodland

11.295.SNCIs and ancient woodlands will be managed to restrict public access. This will include Furtherfits Woodland, Sayers Land and the western site boundary, and Roundles Copse.

11.296.Coppice management will be reintroduced to appropriate woodlands (i.e. those historically coppiced), with management units cut on a 10 - 20 year rotation maintaining a mosaic of stages of re-growth. Within non-coppice woodlands (such as part of Furtherfits Woodland and Shiftland Copse) selective thinning will be undertaken to create a more open canopy, and encourage a more diverse basal flora, understorey and age structure.

11.297.A Landscape Management Plan (see later) will incorporate woodland management including the retention of dead wood and mature standards. This will include measures to minimise impacts on protected species including bats and badgers. NE licensing will be required for certain activities.

New Planting

11.298.New woodland, tree, hedgerow and scrub planting will be targeted in areas to create or enhance connectivity between existing blocks and hedgerows, reinstating the pre-airfield landscape structure. Also planting will buffer particularly sensitive/valuable areas, including dense scrub to discourage public access in some areas, whilst improving edge habitats.


11-61

11.299.Any new planting within the vicinity of sensitive habitats, such as adjacent to existing woodland, will be undertaken with due care to minimise potential impacts.

Wetlands

Existing Waterbodies

11.300.Existing waterbodies will be restored, including dredging and the removal of overhanging vegetation. Further information is provided within the Great crested newt. These enhancements will benefit other species including invertebrates, birds and bats.

11.301.As part of a Sustainable Drainage Strategy (SuDS - see Chapter 16: Hydrology and Water Resources) input will be maintained to the western stream and canal, with the creation of new waterbodies and wetland systems (ditches, reedbeds and ponds).

New Waterbodies

11.302.Wetland creation will include small lakes, connected and isolated ponds, reedbeds, wet depressions, and ditches including as part of a SuDS. This will be designed to meet biodiversity, amenity and water attenuation / treatment objectives dependent on their exact location and purpose (see Great Crested Newt).

Species Specific Mitigation

Bats

11.303. The proposed grassland management regimes around the periphery, strengthening of woodland edge habitat and restoration/creation of wetland habitats will result in a more complex habitat mosaic of greater value to bats than is currently present. This will enhance foraging habitat and strengthen and create bat flight lines.

11.304. To maintain and enhance bat flight lines where there is risk of severance by the A281 link road, a closed canopy will be retained or encouraged along the canal. The link road will be planted with species-rich hedgerows on both sides for the entire length, maintaining habitat connectivity.

11.305. Measures to reduce the potential impacts of lighting are discussed earlier.

Badger

11.306. The habitat enhancement proposals will enhance badger foraging habitat the maintenance of rough grassland habitats, and additional tree, scrub and hedgerow planting which will increase connectivity through the site. Native fruiting shrub species will be included within mixes, such as blackthorn and crab apple. A number of the woodland blocks will be protected from public access through planting dense thorny shrubs. New planting will similarly protect existing setts (implemented under a NE licence for disturbance of required).

11.307. To reduce the risk of road mortality to badgers, scrub planting should be kept back from the road edge, also a public safety precaution, to maintain visibility. Traffic


11-62

calming measures should be installed along bus and car routes through the Country Park and Southland Corridor, and reflectors should be installed on bollards alongside roads to provide ‘early warning’ to badgers of oncoming traffic.

11.308. Measures to reduce the potential impacts of lighting are discussed above.

Breeding Birds

11.309.Although it is not possible to provide replacement grassland habitat for ground nesting birds, on-site habitat enhancement and management measures will benefit a wide variety of bird species include:

• Improved ecological connectivity through the site.

• Hedgerow, scrub, tree and woodland planting to benefit the majority of bird species recorded on the site (woodland or hedgerow birds).

• Management of the site periphery to maintain and enhance rough grasslands for raptors.

• Provision of new wetland habitats, again improving the habitat mosaic.

• Inclusion of bird nesting opportunities within the Country Park, and specifically nest boxes for barn owl, tawny owl, kestrel, lesser spotted woodpecker, spotted flycatcher and other UKBAP species where appropriate.

• Inclusion of bird nesting opportunities within the built environment, including for house sparrow, swallow, house martin and starling where appropriate.

11.310.In addition, the adjacent Holdhurst Farm (also under the ownership of The Applicant) has been managed to improve its value in part for farmland birds, including ground nesting species. The farm was entered in to an Entry Level Scheme in 2005 which includes the following prescriptions:

• 2300 m enhanced hedgerow management (both sides).

• 740 m hedgerow management (one side).

• 1600 m of 6 m wide buffer strips on cultivated land.

• Areas of field corner management and permanent pasture with very low inputs.

11.311.Once available, the farm will also be entered for the Higher Level Scheme which will include additional enhancements for farmland birds including skylark plots.

Great Crested Newt

11.312. The limiting factor on GCN population growth is currently the poor and declining quality of the aquatic habitat. Waterbody 1 will therefore be subject to enhancement works (see Construction section). A mostly dry pond and ditch (Benbow Rew) in a northern field will also be restored.


11-63

11.313. A number of new interconnected waterbodies are also proposed as part of a SuDS. These include a number of smaller ponds in the south and west of the site (including in the receptor area as construction mitigation works), which will be designed as suitable for GCN breeding, including shelving planted with native marginal species, and sympathetic management of adjacent rough grassland and scrub habitats. Public access to this pond will also be restricted by dense scrub management and grassland management.

11.314. As part of a landscape management plan, waterbodies should be regularly monitored for the presence of fish or invasive marginal species. Waterbodies should be managed on a rotation to maintain a variety of conditions and successional communities. These proposals would benefit other wildlife, such as invertebrates, amphibians and birds.

11.315.Where appropriate and in accordance with health and safety considerations, highways through the Country Park will be designed to reduce the possibility of newt mortality, for example installation of sloping kerb stones, specially designed gully pots, gully pots off set from the kerb edge or associated with indented kerb stones (to be determined at the detailed design stage).

Reptiles

11.316. Proposed grassland management regimes discussed in previous sections (in particular the creation of rough, tussock grassland habitats) will enhance habitats peripheral to the site for reptiles. Enhanced habitats will include transitional habitats adjacent to new and existing woodland, scrub and hedgerows, providing enhanced connectivity through the site. These foraging and opportunities for shelter and basking, with log piles will be created within suitable sheltered and south facing locations to act as refugia and hibernacula.

11.317.Proposals for the protection of reptiles from road mortality are as discussed for Great Crested Newt.

Invertebrates

11.318.The habitat enhancement and creation proposals described above will provide additional or enhanced habitats for invertebrates. Habitat works to benefit invertebrates will include enhanced edge habitats, woodland habitat through management, and the restoration and creation of various wetland habitats.

Landscape Management Plan

11.319.A long-term landscape management plan will be prepared for the site. This will address and integrate nature conservation (including habitats, protected and UKBAP species) with landscape, recreation and amenity objectives, and will incorporate the various requirements of the species utilising the site. It is proposed that the plan will cover a 10 year period after which it will be reviewed and updated.


11-64

Further Survey Requirements 11.320.Further surveys have been suggested above where relevant. These include further

bat roost inspections and emergence surveys, and updated bat activity, badger, GCN, reptile, and barn owl surveys. This will be necessary given the programme of the Proposed Scheme and the potential for changing conditions on site. Mitigation proposals will be revised if appropriate to minimise construction and operation impacts in light of any changes in species abundance / distribution.

11.321.Due to the suitability of the site habitats and good connectivity to adjacent woodland, hedgerow and scrub habitats, it is proposed that the site continue to be monitored for dormouse in case of colonisation. This would enable possible indirect impacts to be mitigated, and appropriate precautions during habitat management to be implemented.

RESIDUAL IMPACTS 11.322.This section provides a summary of residual impacts during both construction and

operation. This assumes that habitat enhancement, creation and management works will commence during the construction phase, but that given the scale of the project, will continue in to, and mature, during the operation phase.

Construction 11.323.During the construction phase the use of best construction practice will avoid most

negative impacts on habitats and species. Specific precautions will be implemented to address particular species impacts, such as the timing of works and translocation/habitat manipulation including those under NE licences where required (bats, badgers, barn owl, great crested newt). In addition, advance landscape works will include planting for the mitigation of landscape impacts (Chapter 10: Landscape and Visual Amenity), and preparation of GCN and reptile receptor areas. These works will continue throughout construction, and sensitive habitat management practices will be implemented. On the whole this will result in impacts of either negligible or minor positive significance, with impacts of major positive significance predicted for GCN with the creation of new breeding ponds and pond restoration likely to have an almost instant benefit.

11.324.Construction and tree planting will result in the gradual loss of the entire grassland area for skylarks and other ground nesting birds. However, other woodland, hedgerow and garden birds will benefit as landscape works are implemented and mature, with additional enhancements are underway on the adjacent Holdhurst Farm. Overall, this will result in a Minor Negative impact in relation to birds,

11.325.Despite disturbance impacts during construction, the maintenance of roost spaces within the buildings, the provision of additional roosts, and the implementation of advance landscape works will result in overall impacts of Minor Positive significance on bats.


11-65

Operation 11.326.As landscape proposals progress and sensitive management (including the

reinstatement of coppicing and woodland management, and grassland management) is implemented throughout the site, and habitats continue to develop, the site will continue to improve for wildlife. A more varied habitat mosaic will develop, with greater ecological connectivity through the site, including via linear wetlands, hedgerows and tree lines. In addition, green infrastructure within the urban setting will develop, allowing colonisation by more generalist species.

11.327.Mitigation measures such as minimisation or sensitive design of lighting, and buffer planting will reduce disturbance of the most vulnerable habitats. However, there will be pressure from the large number of residents and users of the Country Park, and monitoring will be essential to ensure mitigation measures keep pace.

11.328.As a result Moderate and Major Positive impacts on habitats and species will be frequent, with Minor Positive impacts for birds given that the numbers of bird territories is already relatively high. Minor Positive impacts will also be considered for badger as disturbance may discourage the establishment of setts within the Country Park, although foraging habitat will increase.

11.329.The composite effect of the provision of habitat enhancement and management within the site, particularly in the south west of the site, will have an overall Moderate Positive impact on bats. Enhancements to peripheral habitats will have impacts of Major and Moderate positive significance for invertebrates and reptiles respectively. Continued pond management will have Major Positive significance for GCN as new ponds are created and mature.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 11.330. A summary of the residual impacts of the Proposed Scheme following the range of

mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures described in the previous section are provided in Tables 11-21 and Table 11-22. The tables shows that it is feasible to mitigate for most of the negative impacts, with habitat enhancement proposals forming a considerable part of the mitigation proposal, improving the central area of the site for wildlife, and complementing the existing value of the peripheral habitats.

FUTURE SITUATION WITHOUT THE SCHEME 11.331. In the absence of the scheme, it is likely that:

• Grassland management around the runways will be increased in 2010 (on completion of the Environmental Stewardship Scheme) due to the numbers of breeding birds and air safety concerns. This will render the grassland largely unsuitable for nesting birds due to regular disturbance. Peripheral grassland habitats would be likely to continue to be managed by relatively irregular cutting.

• There will be no additional disturbance to other protected species, with no requirements for translocation, unless further options for the expansion of commercial activities are pursued.


11-66

• A continued lack of pond management will result in declining aquatic habitat quality with a resulting decrease in species diversity, and potentially the loss of GCN breeding habitat.

• The absence of woodland management may result in a decline in the quality of some aspects of the woodland habitat over time, through increased shading and the reduction in understorey and ground flora diversity, and structural diversity. Mature, over-mature and dead wood habitats will continue to develop.

• Current levels of recreational disturbance of habitats, SNCIs and the SSSI will continue as at present, with none or minimal access to the woodlands on and adjacent to the site.

• Hedgerow habitats will continue to decline in value for wildlife, as habitats and providing connectivity, becoming outgrown and gappy without management.

• Current levels of noise disturbance will continue and possibly increase, associated with the business park, aircraft flights, vehicle test driving and filming (for the duration of the permissions). Light pollution would continue in the north of the site, and in the south of the site associated with the flood lighting of an area used for haulage and commercial buildings.

Dunsfold Park Chapter 11Environmental Statement Ecology and Nature Conservation

11-67

Table 11-21: Ecology and Nature Conservation – Summary of Impacts from Construction

I=International; N=National; C=County; D=District; Ng= Neighbourhood

St=Short Term; Mt=Medium Term; Lt=Long Term

Geographical LevelEcologicalreceptor

Description ofImpact I N C D Ng

Impact Nature Significance(in absenceofmitigation)

Mitigation/Enhancement ResidualImpactSignificance

ChiddingfoldForest SSSI

Contamination andalterations in hydrology

X Neutral St, Indirect,temporary

Negligible - Adherence to bestconstruction practice.

- Retention of existing surfacewater flow.

Negligible

On-site andadjacentSNCI/ancientwoodland

Contamination andalterations inhydrology; disturbance(e.g. compaction) anddamage

X X Lownegative

Lt/St,Indirect/Indirect,temporary,permanent

MaximumModeratenegative

- Adherence to bestconstruction practice.

- Habitat protection fencing.


Negligible

Off-siteSNCI/ancientwoodland

Contamination andalterations in hydrology

X X Neutral St, Indirect,temporary

Negligible - Adherence to bestconstruction practice.


Negligible

Habitats Disturbance, damageand/or destruction ofhabitats including landtake, disturbance (e.g.soil compaction,hydrology) andcontamination

X X X X MaximumHighnegative

Lt/St, Direct/Indirect,Permanent/temporary



- Habitat creation andenhancement on the site.

- Habitat protection fencing.

- Enhanced habitat managementand protection of existinghabitats.

Minorpositive


11-68





- Grassland translocation.

Bats Damage anddestruction of batforaging habitat by landtake, includingseverance.

Disturbance anddamage of bats andtheir roosts.

X Highnegative

Lt/St,Direct/Indirect,Permanent/temporary

Majornegative

- Works on confirmed roostsundertaken under NE licence.

- Works on confirmed andpotential roosts to be timed tominimise impact.

- Retention of roostingopportunities within existingbuildings.

- Enhancement of retainedforaging habitat, with advancedlandscape works andsympathetic management.


- Incorporation of new roostingopportunities within structuresand trees.

Minorpositive

Badger Loss of single outliersett, disturbance tosetts, loss of foraginghabitat and increasedrisk of road trafficaccidents.

X Lownegative


Moderatenegative

- NE licence for sett closure andlow level disturbance.

- Enhancement and creation offoraging habitat as part ofadvanced works, and sensitivemanagement.

- Inclusion of sympathetic roaddesign and measures to reduceroad mortality.

- Buffer planting at setts.

Minorpositive


11-69





Birds Disturbance, damageand destruction ofbirds and theirbreeding and foraginghabitats by land take,noise and lighting.

X Highnegative


Majornegative

- Timing of works to avoid thebird breeding season, or habitatmanipulation to render habitatunsuitable prior to works, orecological watching brief toensure no breeding activity.

- Advanced landscape works andsensitive management.

- Includes erection of a varietyof bird nest boxes within areasof low disturbance.

- Negative impacts on a skylarkand meadow pipit remain high,but site and neighbouringfarmland (Holdhurst Farm)enhanced for wide variety ofwoodland, hedgerow andfarmland birds.

Minornegative

Great crestednewt

Damage anddestruction of GCNand their terrestrialhabitats by land take,vehicle mortality andcontamination ofaquatic habitat.

X Highnegative


Majornegative

- Translocation and exclusionfrom areas of works.

- Enhancement of receptor areaincluding pond management andcreation, terrestrial habitatenhancement.


- Inclusion of sympathetic roaddesign.

Majorpositive

Reptiles Damage anddestruction of reptiles

X Mediumnegative

Lt/St, Direct/Indirect,

Moderatenegative

- Translocation and exclusionfrom areas of works.

Minorpositive


11-70





and their habitats byland take, vehiclemortality.

Permanent/temporary

- Enhancement of receptor area.

- Wider sympatheticmanagement.


Invertebrates Damage and/ordestruction ofinvertebrates and theirhabitats by land take.

X Lownegative


Minornegative

- Advanced landscape works andsympathetic management.

Minorpositive


11-71

Table 11-22: Ecology and Nature Conservation – Summary of Impacts from Operation

I=International; N=National; C=County; D=District; Ng= Neighbourhood

St=Short Term; Mt=Medium Term; Lt=Long Term


Description of Impact

I N C D Ng



ChiddingfoldForest SSSI

Disturbance fromincreased recreationaluse

X Lownegative

Lt, Indirect,Permanent

Moderatenegative

- Provision of the Country Parkas alternative recreation land tonearby Sites.

Negligible

On-site andadjacentSNCI/ancientwoodland


X X Mediumnegative


Moderatenegative

- Restriction of public access toon-site SNCIs.

- Enhanced long termmanagement of on-site SNCIs,and maturation andmaintenance of buffer planting.

Negligible

Off-siteSNCI/ancientwoodland


X X Lownegative


Moderatenegative

- Provision of the Country Parkas alternative recreation land tonearby Sites.

Negligible

Habitats Disturbance to habitatsfrom recreational use

X X X X MaximumMediumnegative

Lt, Indirect,Permanent/temporary


- Restriction of public accessfrom most sensitive locations

- Enhanced habitat management

- Reinforcement planting andhabitat creation / enhancement(including woodlandmanagement and grasslandseeding and management,wetland creation), includingbuffer planting andenhancement of edge habitats.

Majorpositive


11-72



I N C D Ng



- Maturation of habitats.

Bats Disturbance fromambient light levels.

Collision risk withvehicles.

X Mediumnegative


Majornegative

- Enhancement of retainedforaging habitat throughmanagement.

- Creation of new foraginghabitat, and maturation ofhabitat.

- Appropriate planting/management to reducecollision.

- Lighting to avoid sensitivelocations or be designed tominimise light spill/glare.

Moderatepositive

Badger Increaseddisturbance/damage bypeople and pets,

Disturbance fromambient light levels.

Collision risk withvehicles.

X Lownegative

Lt,Indirect/Direct,Permanent

Moderatenegative

- Management of foraginghabitat.

- Restriction of public access insome woodlands, includingdense planting in the vicinity ofsetts.

- Maturation of new habitat.


- Inclusion of sympathetic roaddesign and traffic calmingmeasures.

Minorpositive

Birds Increaseddisturbance/damage tobirds by people and

X Mediumnegative


Moderatenegative

- Habitat enhancement, creationand management within siteperiphery and Country Park.

Minorpositive


11-73



I N C D Ng



pets,

Disturbance fromambient light levels andnoise.

- Maturation of habitat.

- Provision of additional nestingopportunities including withinthe settlement and CountryPark.


- Continued management of off-site Holdhurst Farm.

Great crestednewt

Increaseddisturbance/damage tonewts by people andpets, and increasedvehicle traffic.

Disturbance to newthabitat e.g. introductionof fish.

Disturbance fromambient light levels.

X Highnegative


Majornegative

- Further creation of newwaterbodies.

- Sympathetic management andmonitoring of waterbodies.

- Enhancement of terrestrialhabitat.



Majorpositive

Reptiles Increaseddisturbance/damage toreptiles by people andpets, and increasedvehicle traffic.

X Mediumnegative


Moderatenegative

- Enhancement and sensitivemanagement of retainedterrestrial habitat.



Moderatepositive


11-74



I N C D Ng



Invertebrates Disturbance ofinvertebrates by alteredambient light levels.

X Lownegative


Minornegative

- Continued habitat creationand enhancement elsewhere onthe site, and sensitive habitatmanagement.



Majorpositive


11-75

REFERENCES

Battersby, J (Ed) and Tracking Mammals Partnership (2005) UK Mammals: Species Status and Population Trends. First Report by the Tracking Mammals Partnership. JNCC/Tracking Partnership, Peterborough

Bat Conservation Trust (BCT). (2007) Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation Trust. London.

Bickmore, C.J. (2002) Hedgerow survey handbook: a standard procedure for local surveys in the UK. CCW/EN

Bratton, J. H. (1991) British Red Data Books: 3. Invertebrates other than insects. NCC

British Standards Institute (2005) BS 5837:2005 Trees in relation to construction. Recommendations. BSI

Connolly, S. and Charles, P. (eds) (2005) Environmental good practice on site (C650),CIRIA

Defra (2006) Local Sites: Guidance on their Identification, Selection and Management. Defra, London.

English Nature (1995) Badgers: Guidelines for developers. EN, Peterborough.

English Nature (1998) Natural Areas: Nature Conservation in Context. EN, Peterborough (CDROM).

English Nature. (2000) Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough.

English Nature (2003) Surveying for dormice with nest tubes. Version August 2001 English Nature. Peterborough

Fenton, M. B. (1970) A technique for monitoring bat activity with results obtained from different environments in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 48: 847-851.

Froglife. (1999) Reptile Survey: An introduction to planning, conducting and interpreting surveys for snake and lizard conservation. Froglife Advice Sheet 10. Peterborough Froglife.

Fuller, R.J. (1980) ‘A method for assessing the ornithological interest of sites for conservation’ Biol. Cons. 17:229-239.

Gent, T., and Gibson. S. (1998) Herpetofauna workers’ manual. JNCC. Cambridge.

Gilbert, G., D.W. Gibbons and J. Evans (1998) ‘Bird Monitoring Methods’. RSPB.

Harris, S., Cresswell, P. & Jefferies, D. (1989) Surveying for Badgers. Occasional Publication of the Mammal Society No. 9. Mammal Society, Bristol.


11-76

Herpetofauna Groups of Britain and Ireland (1998) Evaluating local mitigation/translocation programmes: Maintaining Best Practice and lawful standards. HGBI advisory notes for Amphibian and Reptile Groups (ARGs).

HMSO (1981) The Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981, HMSO.

HMSO (1994) The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &C.) Regulations, 1994, HMSO.

HMSO (1992) Protection of Badgers Act, 1992. London. HMSO

HMSO (2000) The Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000. HMSO.

Joint Nature Conservancy Council (1990) Handbook for Phase I habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit, JNCC.

Macdonald D. W. and Tattersall F. (2001) Britain’s Mammals the Challenge for Conservation. Mammals Trust UK

Reid C.M. (1997) Guidelines for identifying ancient woodland. English Nature booklet

Rodwell, J.S. (ed.) (1991) British plant communities: Volume 1. Woodlands and scrub. Cambridge University Press

Rodwell, J.S. (ed.)(1992) British plant communities: Volume 3. Grasslands and montaine communities. Cambridge University Press

Shirt, D. B. (ed.) (1987) British Red Data Books: 2. Insects. NCC

Waite, A. (2000) Kent Red Data Book. Kent County Council

Waters, D. A. and Jones, G. (1995) Echolocation call structure and intensity in five species of insectivorous bats. The Journal of Experimental Biology 198: 475-489.

Wycherley, J. and Anstis, R (2001) Amphibians and Reptiles of Surrey. Surrey Wildlife Trust.

Documents

11. ECOLOGY AND NATURE CONSERVATION...The key legislation for the protection of nature conservation and biodiversity in the UK is set out under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981,