Croughton Waste Recycling, Brackley

Croughton Waste Recycling, Brackley

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal

Produced for Croughton Renewable Resource Centre Ltd

By Applied Ecology Ltd

August 2021

Document information:

Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by

1.0 17.08.2020 Final RJH DP DP

2.0 26.08.2021 Final with minor amendments

RD DP DP

Prepared for: Croughton Renewable Resources Ltd

Title: Croughton Waste Recycling, Brackley – Preliminary Ecological Appraisal

Project number: AEL1805

Document version: 2.0

Document status: Final with minor amendments

Document date: 26 August 2021

APPLIED ECOLOGY LTD

St John’s Innovation Centre Cowley Road Cambridge CB4 0WS

Tel: 01223 422 116 Email: [email protected]

Applied Ecology Ltd Croughton Waste Recycling - PEA

26 August 2021

Contents

1 Introduction 1

Background 1

Legislation and Planning Policy 1

2 Survey Approach and Findings 5

Pre-existing Information 5

Survey Approach 6

Survey Findings 7

3 Likely Development Effects 10

Development Impacts 10

Recommendations 10

Figures

Figure 1.1: Site location. 4

Figure 2.1: Phase 1 habitat map. 8

Figure 2.2: Selection of habitat survey photographs. 9


26 August 2021

This page is intentionally blank.


1 26 August 2021

1 Introduction

Background

1.1 Applied Ecology Ltd (AEL) was appointed by Croughton Renewable Resource Centre Ltd, in June 2020, to carry out a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) of an area of land located immediately north of an existing waste recycling facility at Croughton, Brackley (referred to hereafter as ‘the Site’). A plan showing the location of the Site is provided in Figure 1.1.

1.2 The study was required in order to determine the likely ecological constraints associated with a proposal to extend the existing waste facility in to an area of adjoining arable land, and to establish the potential scope of further, more detailed ecological surveys which may be needed to support a future planning application.

1.3 Where possible, the report discusses at a high level the likely impacts of the development on ecological receptors based on the findings of the PEA. However, it does not provide, and nor is it intended to provide, a detailed or comprehensive assessment of development impacts in the form of an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA).

Legislation and Planning Policy

Legislation

1.4 The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) provides the main legal framework for nature conservation and species protection in the UK. The Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is the main statutory nature conservation designation in the UK. Such sites are notable for their plants, or animals, or habitats, their geology or landforms, or a combination of these. Natural England is the key statutory agency in England for advising Government, and for acting as the Government’s agent in the delivery of statutory nature conservation designations.

1.5 Designation of a SSSI is a legal process, by which sites are notified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The 1981 Act makes provision for the protection of sites from the effects of changes in land management, and owners and occupiers receive formal notification specifying why the land is of special scientific interest, and listing any operations likely to damage the special interest.

1.6 The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, and The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, provide supplementary protected species legislation. Specific protection for badgers Meles meles is provided by the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

Habitats and Species of Principal Importance in England

1.7 The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act came into force on 1 October 2006. Section 41 (S41) of the Act requires the Secretary of State to publish a list of habitats and species which are of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in


2 26 August 2021

England. The list has been drawn up in consultation with Natural England, as required by the Act.

1.8 The S41 list is used to guide decision-makers such as public bodies, including local and regional authorities, in implementing their duty under section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, to have regard to the conservation of biodiversity in England, when carrying out their normal functions.

Habitats of Principal Importance

1.9 Fifty-six habitats of principal importance are included on the S41 list. These are all the habitats in England that were identified as requiring action in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) and continue to be regarded as conservation priorities in the subsequent UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. They include terrestrial habitats such as upland hay meadows to lowland mixed deciduous woodland, and freshwater and marine habitats such as ponds and sub-tidal sands and gravels.

Species of Principal Importance

1.10 There are 943 species of principal importance included on the S41 list. These are the species found in England which were identified as requiring action under the UK BAP and which continue to be regarded as conservation priorities under the UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. In addition, the hen harrier Circus cyaneus has also been included on the list because without continued conservation action it is unlikely that the hen harrier population will increase from its current very low levels in England.

1.11 In accordance with Section 41(4) the Secretary of State will, in consultation with Natural England, keep this list under review and will publish a revised list if necessary.

National Planning Policy Framework

1.12 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March 2012 (and replaced previous planning policy guidance (PPS 9) on biodiversity. The NPPF was updated in July 2018, February 2019, and in July 2021, and states the following in relation to biodiversity and planning:

“When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should apply the following principles:

• if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused;

• development on land within or outside a Site of Special Scientific Interest, and which is likely to have an adverse effect on it (either individually or in combination with other developments), should not normally be permitted. The only exception is where the benefits of the development in the location proposed clearly outweigh both its likely impact on the features of the site that make it of special scientific interest, and any broader impacts on the national network of Sites of Special Scientific Interest;


3 26 August 2021

• development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats (such as ancient woodland and ancient or veteran trees) should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists; and

• development whose primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity should be supported; while opportunities to improve biodiversity in and around developments should be integrated as part of their design, especially where this can secure measurable net gains for biodiversity or enhance public access to nature where this is appropriate.

The following should be given the same protection as habitats sites:

• potential Special Protection Areas and possible Special Areas of Conservation;

• listed or proposed Ramsar sites; and

• sites identified, or required, as compensatory measures for adverse effects on habitats sites, potential Special Protection Areas, possible Special Areas of Conservation, and listed or proposed Ramsar sites.

1.13 The presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply where the plan or project is likely to have a significant effect on a habitats site (either alone or in combination with other projects), unless an appropriate assessment has concluded that the plan or project will not adversely affect the integrity of the habitats site.”

AEL1805_001-00_20200811 A4 8/11/2020

Map Scale @ A4: 1:35,000

Site location

Figure 1.1

Surveyed by: N/ASurvey date: N/ADrawn by: RJHChecked by: DPStatus: Final

Croughton WasteRecycling

Site boundary

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved.

0 500 1,000 metres´

Applied Ecology Ltd

Croughton Waste Recycling - PEA

5 26 August 2021

2 Survey Approach and Findings

Pre-existing Information

2.1 The Northamptonshire Biodiversity Records Centre (NBRC) was commissioned by AEL to undertake a search for statutory and non-statutory wildlife sites and protected and notable species records within 1 km of the Site’s central point. The data was received on 11 August 2020 (NBRC ref: 20-162).

Designated wildlife sites

2.2 No statutory wildlife sites are located within the NBRC search area. The closest statutory wildlife site of biological importance is Helmdon Disused Railway Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) which is located 6.2 km to the northeast of the Site. It is of note that the Site is not located in a SSSI Impact Risk Zone (IRZ, as defined by Natural England1) that is relevant to the development being proposed, with the only development type considered a SSSI impact risk in this area being the “…discharge of water or liquid waste of more than 20 m³/day to ground or to surface water, such as a beck or stream…”.

2.3 Three non-statutory Local Wildlife Sites (LWSs) are present within the NBRC search area, namely Croughton Spring Copse LWS (160 m to the northwest of the Site), The Moors LWS (205 m to the southwest) and Croughton Spinney LWS (660 m to the northeast). No ancient woodland is present within the search area.

2.4 Other designated sites identified by the NBRC are a Potential Wildlife Site (660 m to the east) and Croughton Pocket Park (680 m to the southwest).

Protected and notable species records

2.5 In total 176 species species records were provided by NBRC for the search area. None of the records appear to be from the Site itself, and most relate to RAF Croughton and Croughton Pit and Quarry. The species data can be summarised as follows:

• 119 records of plants, mainly related to species typically associated with high quality calcareous and neutral grassland, and arable land. Red-listed species from Great Britain2 and/or England3 with post-2010 records include quaking grass Briza media, harebell Campanula rotundifolia, white helleborine Cephalanthera damasonium, chicory Cichorium intybus, crossword Cruciata laevipes, dwarf spurge Euphorbia exigua, corn marigold Glebionis segetum, field scabious Knautia arvensis, sanicle Sanicula europaea, shepherd's-needle Scandix pecten-veneris, ragged-robin Silene flos-cuculi, devil's-bit scabious Succisa pratensis, common valerian Valeriana officinalis, and wild pansy Viola tricolor. Species that are scarce or rare locally include columbine Aquilegia

1 Details of SSSI IRZs are available at https://magic.defra.gov.uk/MagicMap.aspx

2 Cheffings, C.M. & Farrell, L. (Eds), Dines, T.D., Jones, R.A., Leach, S.J., McKean, D.R., Pearman,

D.A., Preston, C.D., Rumsey, F.J., Taylor, I. 2005. The Vascular Plant Red Data List for Great Britain. Species Status 7: 1-116. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. 3 Stroh, P.A., Leach, S.J., August, T.A., Walker, K.J., Pearman, D.A., Rumsey, F.J., Harrower, C.A., Fay, M.F., Martin, J.P., Pankhurst, T.,

Preston, C.D. & Taylor, I. 2014. A Vascular Plant Red List for England. Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland, Bristol.

https://magic.defra.gov.uk/MagicMap.aspx


6 26 August 2021

vulgaris, cornflower Centaurea cyanus, stinking hellebore Helleborus foetidus, and horseshoe vetch Hippocrepis comosa.

• Single records of skylark, yellowhammer, hobby, kestrel, linnet, curlew and dunnock, all from RAF Croughton in 2001.

• 39 records of insects, including 30 butterfly records (of four species namely small heath, dingy skipper, wall and grizzled skipper), eight moth records (five species) and one beetle.

• One 2007 record of roman snail.

• Four pre-1900 records of two notable moss species.

• Two records each of water vole, brown hare and badger.

2.6 It is of note that no records of reptiles or amphibians were provided by the NBRC.

Survey Approach

Phase 1 habitat survey

2.7 A Phase 1 habitat survey of the Site was undertaken by Rob Hutchinson MCIEEM on the 7 July 2020 during fine and dry weather. The survey was undertaken within the recommended habitat survey window, with no significant constraints that constrained or restricted the survey findings.

2.8 Rob is a Principal ecologist at AEL with over 18 years’ experience as a full-time ecological consultant. He holds a Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland (BSBI) Field Identification Skills Certificate (FISC) Level 5, and Natural England survey licences for bats (Level 1), great crested newt (Level 2) and dormice.

2.9 The methodology adopted followed the standard JNCC approach to Phase 1 habitat survey (JNCC, 19934) by which all habitats present within the Site were classified and mapped according to standard categories. Target notes were used to describe areas of both typical and unique botanical character, and where appropriate plant species abundance was noted using the DAFOR5 scale.

2.10 The habitat map was subsequently digitised using a Geographical Information System (ArcGIS).

Protected species walkover

2.11 The standard Phase 1 habitat survey was "extended" to include a search for evidence of or potential for the presence of protected species or species of nature conservation interest within and close to the site. This was not a detailed survey for such species, but included noting the presence of habitats suitable to support specific protected species, and where seen, any evidence of presence such as droppings, mammal tracks and footprints, shelters (or nests/roosts), hair caught on fence-wire, foraging signs, and so on.

4 JNCC (1993) Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey – A technique for Environmental Audit. JNCC, Peterborough.

5 DAFOR: whereby species occurrence may be classified as being dominant, abundant, frequent, occasional or rare. Rare in the

context of a DAFOR score should not be confused with species rarity in the more widely accepted meaning of general scarcity.


7 26 August 2021

Survey Findings

Habitats and plants

2.12 The Phase 1 habitat map is shown in Figure 2.1, and a selection of habitat survey photographs can be found in Figure 2.2.

2.13 The Site comprised part of an arable wheat field with species-poor hedgerows along the southern boundary (dividing the proposed extension area from the existing recycling site to the south) and along the eastern boundary.

2.14 The southern hedgerow supported a mix of blackthorn Prunus spinosa, goat willow Salix caprea, hazel Corylus avellana, hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, ash Fraxinus excelsior, elder Sambucus nigra, oak Quercus robur and wild plum Prunus domestica. The eastern hedgerow supported hawthorn, goat willow, wild plum, elder, ash, blackthorn, crab apple Malus sylvestris and sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus. Neither hedgerow contained any large and mature standard trees, but some old ash stools (cut as part of regular cutting management) were present along the eastern hedgerow.

2.15 A very narrow grass verge occurred along the base of these hedgerows with typical species including lesser burdock Arctium minus, cow-parsley Anthriscus sylvestris, garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata, nipplewort Lapsana communis, hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, cleavers Galium aparine, cut-leaved crane’s-bill Geranium dissectum, red fescue Festuca rubra, bittersweet Solanum dulcamara, Yorkshire-fog Holcus lanatus, welted thistle Carduus crispus and spear thistle Cirsium vulgare.

2.16 Arable weeds included field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis, scentless mayweed Tripleurospermum inodorum, groundsel Senecio vulgaris, blackgrass Alopecurus myosuroides, barren brome Anisantha sterilis and common field speedwell Veronica persica. Two notable arable weeds were noted beyond the Site boundary namely dwarf spurge Euphorbia exigua (Vulnerable in England) and rye brome Bromus secalinus (Vulnerable in GB).

Faunal signs and potential

2.17 The only evidence of protected animal species found during the walkover survey was the presence of a small number of common bird species in the boundary hedgerows with blue tit, robin and blackbird all noted. A male skylark was singing above and probably nesting in the arable field located immediately to the east of the Site (a wheat field in a similar growth stage), and the presence of nesting skylark within the Site cannot be entirely discounted.

2.18 A single fresh badger latrine was found at the hedgerow intersection to the north of the Site, although no badger setts were present on the Site, or in other adjoining off-Site locations.

2.19 A pond is shown to be located around 290 m to the southwest of the Site, but is sufficiently distant to mean that potential impacts on the legally protected amphibian great crested newt Triturus cristatus (GCN) as a result of development-related habitat loss are not predicted. This is supported by a ‘Green: offence very unlikely’ outcome which is generated using the standard Natural England GCN risk assessment calculator.

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

wwww

w www

wwww

wwww

www

AEL1805_002-00_20200811 A4 8/11/2020

Map Scale @ A4: 1:750

Habitat map

Figure 2.1

Surveyed by: RJHSurvey date: 7 July 2020Drawn by: RJHChecked by: DPStatus: Final

Croughton WasteRecycling

Site boundary

AA A arableA Awwww species-rich intact hedgerow

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved.

0 10 20 metres´


9 26 August 2021

Figure 2.2: Selection of habitat survey photographs.

(a) The Site consists of part of an arable wheat field.

(b) Southern boundary hedgerow.

(c) Eastern boundary hedgerow.

(d) Dwarf spurge Euphorbia exigua, a Nationally notable plant of arable land found along arable edge beyond the Site boundary.

Applied Ecology Ltd

Croughton Waste Recycling - PEA

10 26 August 2021

3 Likely Development Effects

Development Impacts

3.1 The proposed development would result in the loss of arable land and a 50 m long section of hedgerow located along the eastern half of the Site’s southern boundary. This hedgerow loss would be compensated through the planting of a new native woody species hedgerows amounting to around 150 m on the western and northern boundaries of the Site.

3.2 The removal of the hedgerow could result in killing and/or injury of a small number of nesting birds, and therefore the clearance should be timed to avoid the sensitive nesting period or be undertaken following appropriate checks (as detailed below).

Recommendations

3.3 The following impact avoidance and mitigation measures should be adopted to ensure potential impacts on ecology are avoided / minimised:

• Ensure hedgerow clearance, and development-related clearance of the arable land, is completed outside of the recognised bird nesting period of March to August, or immediately following a check by an ornithologist that confirms the absence of hedgerow and ground nesting nesting birds and their dependent young at other times.

• Retained hedgerows should be protected from damage by ensuring appropriate tree and root protection.

• If any deep excavations or large bore pipework are required during construction, these should be ramped or covered overnight to prevent badger entrapment.

3.4 The new hedgerows to be planted around the boundary of the extension area should include a mix of native woody species similar to the composition of the existing hedgerows.


11 26 August 2021

This page is intentionally blank.

© Applied Ecology Ltd, 2021

Documents

Croughton Waste Recycling, Brackley