Assessment and Review of the HS2 Ltd approach to the Natural Environment including recommendations for Phase 2
Prepared by The Independent HS2 Ecology Technical Group
© K
il.
2
The HS2 Ecology Technical Group (“the Group”) was set up in May 2013 to provide the means for engagement, consultation and information sharing to achieve the best possible outcome for ecology along the route from the proposed High Speed 2 development. The Group is focused on the Phase 1 Environment Statement (as amended and supplemented) and the Hybrid Bill, and is comprised of non-governmental organisations, local authorities and statutory bodies. The Group’s full Terms of Reference and members can be found at Annex A.
The Group’s comments are made without prejudice to individual member organisation’s own views and opinions which may be expressed in other forms of communication to HS2 Ltd and its consultants or the Department for Transport.
The HS2 Ecology Technical Group
Introduction
Editor in Chief, on behalf of the Ecology Technical Group.
© W
• Chilterns Conservation Board • The Wildlife Trusts (BBOWT, Warwickshire WT, Staffordshire WT) • The Woodland Trust • National Trust • Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) • Plantlife • Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) • Butterfly Conservation • Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Trust
Local Authority Ecology Units • Warwickshire County Council • Staffordshire County Council • Oxfordshire County Council • Buckinghamshire County Council • Lichfield District Council • Aylesbury Vale District Council • Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council
Observers
Note:
Wider expertise is also available through these members including specialist amateur experts and national researchers and their institutes.
Introduction
4
If the HS2 Ecology Technical Group were asked to provide 5 key recommendations for HS2 Ltd and future High Speed phases plus as guidelines for future major infrastructure projects they would in the form of the following commitments:
A Commitment to the Precautionary Principle: Although this principle was adopted by HS2 Ltd it was not enacted. This approach enables a methodology that is transparent and clearly replicable by any professional organisation or individual. It enables the production of methodologies/decision making criteria in line with best practice based on robust baseline data. Where data is lacking the most up-to-date research and thinking is required to design adequate safeguards, mitigation and compensation to avoid/minimise impacts on the natural environment at all reasonable cost.
A Commitment to high quality Data Collection and Management: Not enough time was allocated to acquire reliable ecological species and habitat data. When acquired it was too late to inform mitigation and compensation (e.g. green overpasses and underpasses) in many instances along the route. Survey methodology has not been designed in such a way as to make it repeatable for post impact or during construction monitoring; and no data exchange agreements with Local Record Centres to help verify and validate records generated.
A Commitment to a Net gain for biodiversity: Although HS2 Ltd committed to this objective within their Sustainability Policy it has not pursued biodiversity net gain. This does not support of Government’s position for nature. Net gain, measured through a peer approved Defra metric, should be demonstrably delivered at local levels to ensure that people are not disadvantaged and ecosystem services unbalanced. HS2 Ltd has acknowledged that impacts on irreplaceable habitats (e.g. ancient woodland) cannot be compensated.
ACommitmenttomaintainandenhancetheUK’sEcologicalResilience: By not acquiring government funded national data it has failed to assess how the railway will contribute to or impact on ecological connectivity at a national or regional level. This high quality, reliable data can be interpreted at all spatial levels (national to local) to include ‘connectivity modelling’ and be used to inform compensation within and outside the bill’s limits to contribute to the UK ecological resilience. This strategic approach enables the positioning of green overpasses or underpasses of national importance.
ACommitmenttoworkwithaLine-wideEcologyGroup: HS2 Ltd engaged with stakeholders on a local, piecemeal basis. If this was conducted in conjunction with a line-wide group (an Ecology Technical Group) from an early stage many petition issues could have been resolved, including the above 4 commitments. This line-wide stakeholder group could have continued into the construction and operational monitoring stages through the Ecological Review Group (ERG) to ensure a continuity and consistent approach to the consideration of biodiversity. This would have led to an ERG that has a meaningful remit and not one currently proposed to only monitor compensation.
Top Five Recommendations
5
1
2
3
4
Introduction
5
Throughout the document there are summary recommendations to review whether HS2 or the promoters of the scheme have adopted and enacted said recommendations.
Introduction Introduction
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
1 That HS2 Ltd adopts and fully employs the Precautionary Principle on a reasonable worst case scenario basis. Yes No
2 That HS2 Ltd results in a demonstrable biodiversity net gain whilst acknowledging impacts on irreplaceable habitat. No No
3 That HS2 Ltd adopts data management protocols and principles that conform to National Biodiversity Network Standards. No No
4 That HS2 Ltd collects, acquires and manages all relevant statutory and important habitat and species data necessary to plot and predict presence accurately as it is now and will be in the future.
No No
5 HS2 Ltd maps habitat by value as well as type to determine the line of the route.
No
No
No
No
7 That HS2 Ltd maps habitats and features necessary to maintain species of international, national and regional importance. No No
8 That HS2 Ltd uses published predictive mapping techniques to fill gaps in survey knowledge, until the time surveys are carried out. No No
9 That HS2 Ltd carries out connectivity mapping to identify ecological flows at appropriate species and spatial levels. No No
10 That HS2 Ltd uses the data relating to habitat, species, species habitat feature and ecological flow modelling to place the appropriate pass at the point(s) where existing species cross to enable reasonable continuity of permeability across the railway.
No No
11 That HS2 Ltd commits to construct all passes to UK and International best practice standards; currently Landscape Institute TGN 09/2015. No No
12 That HS2 Ltd allocates habitat type and condition values to all land parcels current and formed during the construction of the railways to measure biodiversity impact.
Yes Yes
13 That HS2 Ltd adopts the principle that compensation can be achieved within and outside the limits of the bill. Yes Yes
14 That compensation is carried out as close to the loss as possible in a strategic location that compliments national, regional and local biodiversity strategies and ensures a not net loss of biodiversity in that local area.
No No
15 That HS2 Ltd attaches financial costs to biodiversity compensation and uses this in all relevant decision making. No No
16 That HS2 Ltd adopts temporal values that relate to functionality of habitat created or enhanced as the minimum monitoring period for that habitat. No No
17 That HS2 Ltd establishes an Ecology Review Group prior to royal assent to assist the promoters in meeting The Group’s recommendations. No No
18 That the Ecology Review Group reports to government and the promoters on biodiversity issues during the construction and operational phases of the railway.
Yes No
6
The purpose of this report is to provide a synthesis of the HS2 Ecology Technical Group’s (The Group) recommendations made to HS2 Ltd, Department of Transport, Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), Environmental Audit Commission and the Select Committee since The Group’s establishment in June 2013.
It is an attempt to offer praise where praise is due and recommendations where The Group believes there is room for improvement. The Group’s recommendations are compliant with the HS2 Ltd Priorities and Government objectives of sustainable development through the promotion of the ecology profession best practice.
Executive Summary
1 The Group will be carrying out a separate review on the No Net Loss in Biodiversity Report (December 2015).
“ Protect natural and cultural resources and enhance the environment: Design Aim 3: protecting natural resources - The project shall seek to avoid direct or indirect harm to valued landscape, water and ecological resources, to mitigate adverse impacts and to enhance such resources where practicable. Measures to achieve this would be commensurate with the sensitivity of the resources and the level of their protection.” ESVol.1,Table1,2013
“ environmental: contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, reduce waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change (including moving to a low carbon economy).” NationalPlanningPolicyFramework,PlanningPractice Guidance,Achievingsustainabledevelopment,2012
“ to achieve sustainable development, the NPPF requires economic, social and environmental gains to be sought jointly and simultaneously” (ES Vol.1, paragraphs 1.5.5 – 1.5.9, 2013). To these ends HS2 Ltd makes the pledge within their Sustainability policy under “What we will do” and “Environmental change: Seek to avoid significant adverse effects on communities, business and the natural, historic and built environment. Minimise impacts where they occur and deliver enhancements as far as practicable to ensure there is no net loss to the natural environment.” Sustainabilitypolicy,2015
HS2 Ltd Design Aims
Government objectives of sustainable development
The Group supported the HS2 Ltd commitment to adopt the Precautionary Principle; however, it is The Group’s opinion that it was not adhered to. If it had, sustainability would have been inherent to all further decisions. Data acquisition and liaison with the majority of Local Record Centres was admirable, especially by the main sub-contractors; however, this data was then not published on the Environment Statement (ES) maps; and confidence in its interpretation was lost. The habitat data gathered was impressive; but the computer mapping released of the ES (2013) proved uninterpretable. It only became interpretable on the publication of the ‘No Net Loss Calculation’ report (January 2016).
HS2 Ltd only surveyed and acquired habitat and species data adjacent to the line of the route; therefore, could not conduct Connectivity Mapping to evaluate nationally or regionally important ecological corridors. If HS2 Ltd had, it could put the appropriate underpasses or green structures (bridges and cut-and- cover) for a range of species at their critical crossing points with the line. It would have also shown that the proposed landscaping does not significantly affect these flows. HS2 Ltd will not act as a significant ecological corridor.
When the “No Net Loss in Biodiversity Report”1 (December 2015) was published the habitat data was well produced. If the data was available to this standard from the onset it could have been used more fully and accurately for decision making. Even at this late stage, it could be used for day-to-day monitoring of the build and into the operational stage. With the acknowledgement that irreplaceable habitat cannot be compensated for, the no net loss calculations could have, and still could be used to deliver an auditable biodiversity net.
HS2 Ltd priorities
Top Five Recommendations 4
13 Underpasses 18
Biodiversity Accountability 20
16 Biodiversity Compensation 20
17 Biodiversity Accounting 21
Caveats 26
Figure1: Stages in producing and using information 11
Figure2: An example of habitat data displayed as parcels (fields) and linear
features (hedgerows, fences) in Phase 1 coding. 12
Figure3: An example of calculated ‘value’ attached to mapped habitat layers 13
Figure 4: An example of depicting parcels as ecological values 13
Figure5: Comparison of HS2 Ecology Map (Vol 5, CFA16) of ponds surveyed
for great crested newts and map showing WBRC records. The 500
metre radii on the lower map show the area which should have been
considered for great crested newts under the Precautionary Principle. 14 - 15
Figure 6: Connectivity mapping which shows ecological flow of woodland species
across the proposed HS2 route at Local and Regional scales. 17
Figure 7: Dimensions of underpasses assessed by Berthinussen and Altringham 18
Figure 8: Landscape Institute Technical Guidance Note 09/2015 19
Figure 9: Indicative habitat changes during pre-construction,
construction and operations stages 22
Figure10: Biodiversity loss and gain during HS2 construction 23
Figures
Table2: Temporal Factors for Habitat Creation and Enhancement 25
Introduction
9
Principles 1 Precautionary Principle
1.1 The Ecology Technical Group (The ETG) agrees with the HS2 Ltd adoption of the Precautionary Principle on a ‘worst case scenario’ that follows the Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) guidelines produced by the Chartered Institute of Ecologist and Environmental Managers (CIEEM).
1.2 By adopting these principles a reader can interpret the Environmental Statement (ES) and Supplementary Environmental Statements (SESs) in confidence; knowing that the ESs will ‘look to promote a scientifically rigorous approach…That relies on ecologists using their professional judgement’. Judgements should be made on the basis of an objective assessment of the best information available…. Where there is reasonable doubt, a precautionary approach should be taken’ (Guidelines for EcIA in the UK, IEEM, 2006).
1.3 As a signatory to these definitions, The UK Government is duty bound to base its decisions on sound ecological evidence and where there are reasonable grounds for concern that serious or irreversible damage will occur then there is no reason for postponing cost effective measures to prevent this damage.
1.4 This principle is supported by the Guidance on Integrating Climate Change and Biodiversity into Environmental Impact Assessment’ (European Union, 2013)2 that states when ‘identifying alternatives and mitigation measures’ considerations should be given to ‘What are the ‘win-win’, ‘no-regret’ or flexible options that would allow for future changes?’
The Precautionary Principle United Nations
‘ In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.’ (Rio Declaration, United Nations 2002)
European Community
‘ The precautionary principle applies where scientific evidence is insufficient, inconclusive or uncertain and preliminary scientific evaluation indicates that there are reasonable grounds for concern that the potentially dangerous effects on the environment, human, animal or plant health may be inconsistent with the high level of protection chosen by the EU’. (EU communication on the Precautionary Principle, 2000)
2 Guidance on Integrating Climate Change and Biodiversity into Environmental Impact Assessment’ (European Union, 2013)
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
1 That HS2 Ltd adopts and fully employs the Precautionary Principle on a reasonable worst case scenario basis Yes No
Principles
10
2 Net Gain 2.1 Government’s position is clear: “We will move from net biodiversity loss to net gain, by supporting
healthy, well-functioning ecosystems and coherent ecological networks … Our 2020 mission is to halt overall biodiversity loss, support healthy well-functioning ecosystems and establish coherent ecological networks, with more and better places for nature for the benefit of wildlife and people.” (Natural Environment White Paper, 2011).
2.2 HS2 Ltd comes into operation by 2026, beyond the 2020 mission, and therefore must:
Mission1. Meet the net gain objective. Mission2. Support healthy, well-functioning ecosystems Mission3. Establish coherent ecological networks Mission4. Have more and better places for nature for the benefit of wildlife and people.
2.3 HS2 Ltd must illustrate clearly and demonstrably to Government that it contributes to its missions by establishing an Environmental Monitoring System that will report on these topics. This can be achieved through developing:
Measure1. Biodiversity Impact Assessment (Offsetting) Measure2. Ecosystem Analysis Tool Measure3. Connectivity Mapping Measure4. Accessible Natural Green Space Standards (AngSt)
Measuring Government Mission Targets
Ecosystem Analysis Tool
Meet the net gain objective
Support healthy, well-fuctioning ecosystems
Establish coherent ecological networks
Have more and better places for nature for the benefit of wildlife and people
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
2 That HS2 Ltd results in a demonstrable biodiversity net gain whilst acknowledging impacts on irreplaceable habitat. No No
Principles
3 Ecological Data
3:1 It is essential that high quality, accurate and current (up-to-date) data is acquired before, during and after the railway is built. This data must be gathered, verified and managed in a manner that is available to all the relevant stakeholders at the appropriate time. These stakeholders could include fellow surveyors, designers, construction personnel and decision makers. Everyone must have confidence in this data.
Office of Statistics (2009) – Data, Interpretation and Decision Making
3.2 Where data does not exist professional judgement is acceptable and ‘where there is reasonable doubt, a precautionary approach should be taken’ (Guidelines for EcIA in the UK, IEEM, 2006).
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
3 That HS2 Ltd adopts data management protocols and principles that conform to National Biodiversity Network Standards. No No
Principles
12
Survey Methodologies 4 Habitat Surveys 4.1 Habitat falls into two categories; areas (e.g. fields
and ponds) and linear features (e.g. hedgerows and ditches). Within the limits of the bill these need to be identified for ‘type’ (what it is) and ‘condition’ (how good it is). This is necessary to determine biodiversity value (Defra, Biodiversity Offsetting). Habitat outside of the bill needs to be collected as ‘type’ only.
4.2 Where habitats cannot be surveyed other data sources (e.g. local record centres) must be sought or acquired. If large areas cannot be surveyed, then ‘remote sensing’ techniques (satellite sources) are a cost-effective measure of acquiring this information. A non-visited habitat’s ‘condition’ must be assessed in accordance with the Precautionary Principle until otherwise confirmed by a site visit.
4.3 LIDAR data (carried out for Archaeological investigation along the entire route) enables effective and accurate linear evaluation of habitat type and condition.
Figure2:An example of habitat data displayed as parcels (fields) and linear features (hedgerows, fences) in Phase 1 coding.
5 Species Surveys 5.1 As parliament is statutorily bound by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act
(NERC Act, 2006) species surveys must cover all the relevant species within Section 41 of the Act. This list includes protected and nationally important species selected by the Secretary of State for the environment.
5.2 However, the Section 41 list does not cover all UK species. All species are entitled to have free movement within or between their habitats. This philosophy will ensure that they can adapt to climate change or continue to flourish or disperse through natural processes. Common species that cannot expand may become endangered species in the future.
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
4 That HS2 Ltd collects, acquires and manages all relevant statutory and important habitat and species data necessary to plot and predict presence accurately as it is now and will be in the future.
No No
SurveyMethodologies
Biodiversity Mapping (Interpretation) 6 Habitat Mapping 6.1 All habitat within the bill’s limits must be mapped, both as ‘type’ and as ‘value’ (Defra Biodiversity
Offsetting metrics). The ‘value’ mapping enables non-ecologists to make a conscious decision where or not to impact upon this habitat. Habitat value is explained in Section 15.
Figure3:An example of calculated ‘value’ attached to mapped habitat layers
Figure 4: An example of depicting parcels as ecological values
7 Species Mapping 7.1 Species must be mapped by presence or absence both assumed and known. Population estimates
or actuals must be acquired and their importance categorised following EcIA guidelines. All habitat and features known or assumed to support international, national or regional important species or assemblages of species need to identified and mapped accordingly.
SurveyMethodologies
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
5 HS2 Ltd maps habitat by value as well as type to determine the line of the route.
No
No
14
W E
LS H
R O
For Continuation Refer to Map NumberEC-04-041
124+000
122+000
123+000
125+000
0 10
0 20
0 30
0 40
25 0m
ra di
us fr
om a
ll w
at er
b od
ie s
w he
re p
re se
nc e
of G
re at
C re
st ed
N ew
ts is
c on
fir m
ed 50
0m ra
di us
fr om
a ll
w at
er b
od ie
s w
he re
p re
se nc
e of
G re
at C
re st
ed N
ew ts
is c
on fir
m ed
A re
as is
ol at
ed b
y si
gn ifi
ca nt
ba rr
ie rs
to a
m ph
ib ia
n m
ov em
en t
Figure5:Comparison of HS2 Ecology Map (Vol 5, CFA16) of ponds surveyed for great crested newts and map showing WBRC records. The 500 metre radii on the lower map show the area which should have been considered for great crested newts under the Precautionary Principle. See page 15.
SurveyMethodologies
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
No
No
7 That HS2 Ltd maps habitats and features necessary to maintain species of international, national and regional importance No No
8 Predictive Mapping 8.1 Spatial modelling enables the use of existing species data to predict presence in the ‘now’ and in the
‘future’. It enables HS2 Ltd to future proof the scheme to account for natural species dispersal and those evoked by climate change. It accounts for Climate Change adaption.
8.2 HS2 Ltd must carry out this mapping as part of the Government’s Climate Change commitments and construct a railway that enables future species to flow across and along its build.
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
8 That HS2 Ltd uses published predictive mapping techniques to fill gaps in survey knowledge, until the time surveys are carried out. No No
9 Connectivity Mapping 9.1 Connectivity modelling is an accepted international mechanism to model species movements across
landscapes often described as ‘ecological flows’. Crudely, a ‘flow’ be can modelled for an individual species, a species group or generic type of species at local to international spatial levels.
9.2 For HS2 Ltd It is appropriate to conduct connectivity modelling at: • an individual species level if there is an existing or a future EU or UK Priority species being
impacted upon by the railway. • a species group level if a number of UK important species that share a similar type of habitat
features are being impacted on by the railway • for generic species groups (woodland, wetland and grassland species) when looking at large
landscape ‘flows’ that may be necessary for climate change adaption; i.e. large population movements or large ranges.
9.3 When considering generic species it is necessary to model such species at different dispersal ranges (how far they will move to find new habitat). These can then be amalgamated to find ‘ecological flows’ that would be used by the majority of species. Again these should be carried out for the current landscape and future landscape. The national and local connectivity mapping for Warwickshire can be found here.
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
9 That HS2 Ltd carries out connectivity mapping to identify ecological flows at appropriate species and spatial levels. No No
SurveyMethodologies
Figure 6: Connectivity mapping which shows ecological flow of woodland species across the proposed HS2 route at Local and Regional scales.
Moilanen A., Nieminen M., (2002). Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology – Ecology 83: 1131-1145 Wallis, D.W., Hodgson, J.A., (2015). Condatis; software to assist with the planning of habitat restoration. www.condatis.org.uk. Thornhill, I., Hale, J. & Clark, R. (2015) Preliminary Connectivity Assessment v1.1. Buckinghamshire County Council, University of Birmingham and the HS2 Ecology Technical Group.
Local Scale Connectivity
Regional Scale Connectivity
Key: The green squares show south-to-north ‘corridors’ or ecological flows for woodland species
Purple shows areas where woodland species movement is less expected
SurveyMethodologies
10 Build Principles 10.1 Where reasonably practical the railway must be built to enable maximum permeability of all
species current and those of the future. All solutions will follow best practice methodology and be in accordance with the Precautionary Principle.
11 Specific Wildlife Tunnels 11.1 Some species will require specially designed solutions and be placed at locations that maintain local
population. For example, populations of great crested newts severed by the railway or new road layouts will require wildlife tunnels within 250m of retained and/or compensation ponds.
12 Overpasses and Underpasses 12.1 All overpasses and underpasses (passes) must conform to the minimum standards outlined in the
2002 Cost Action 431 Best Practice Design principles adopted by Highways England (Highways Authority). This report has been supplemented by a Literary Review and associated documents commissioned by Natural England (2015) plus Defra commissioned reports specifically relating to transport fragmentation and bats (Defra report WC1060).
12.2 These passes must be appropriate to their use, their ecological position and the current and future species that will use them. Passes can be of two types:
A) Multifunctional Passes – used by humans and wildlife B) Dedicated Passes – used only by humans or wildlife
12.3 These overpasses and underpasses must: A) be located on existing and/or future ecological flows, species migration, commuting and
foraging routes, taking account of effects of climate change on these based on ecological data or modelling (Section 9);
B) function as is appropriate to that existing and/or future species needs.
13 Underpasses 13.1 Recent Defra commissioned reports (Berthinussen and Altringham, 2012 & 2015) found that more
species of bat are likely to use underpasses that are larger and located higher up, while only bats that fly in ‘cluttered’ environments used smaller underpasses, and fewer bats overall used underpasses located low down.
Design
Large
16.6m
Note (TGN 09/2015) as commissioned by Natural England.
Figure 8: Landscape Institute Technical Guidance Note 09/2015 (link).
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
10 That HS2 Ltd uses the data relating to habitat, species, species habitat feature and ecological flow modelling to place the appropriate pass at the point(s) where existing species cross to enable reasonable continuity of permeability across the railway.
No No
11 That HS2 Ltd commits to construct all passes to UK and International best practice standards; currently Landscape Institute TGN 09/2015. No No
Example sketch of Natural Bridge Example sketch of Wildlife Bridge
Example sketch of a Mixed Use Bridge Example sketch of Modified Grey Bridge
Biodiversity Accountability 15 Biodiversity Impact Assessment 15.1 The habitat ‘type’ and ‘condition’ surveys are to be used to determine the ecological value of every
parcel in accordance with an approved Defra Offsetting Metrics. This metric enables the evaluation of biodiversity gain or loss as Biodiversity Units.
15.2 This assessment can be carried out at any spatial level; field, parish, Community Forum Area, Local Authority area, region or line-wide.
15.3 This assessment can be carried out for any proposed change (e.g. an Additional Provision).
16 Biodiversity Compensation 16.1 Where there is a Biodiversity Loss this will require compensation. Where and how this compensation
is carried out decides the amount of compensation required. These factors account for the difficulty to create a habitat (Difficulty factor), the time it takes for the habitat to reach its target habitat (Temporal factor) and a multiplier to incentivise the placement of the offset in a strategic location i.e. where it will be most beneficial to the functioning of biodiversity in that area (Spatial Factor). This will be informed though the Connectivity Modelling (Section 9).
16.2 By using these factors the number of hectares of compensation needed to offset any Biodiversity Loss can be calculated. The cost to create, enhance and maintain habitat is known and therefore a cost can be allocated to Biodiversity Loss.
16.3 Costs will depend on the type of habitat to be created and / or enhanced and then maintained, but can be broadly categorised into Woodland, Grassland and Wetland habitat.
16.4 This compensatory habitat can be established either within the limits of the bill or ‘further afield’.
16.5 If the compensation is created close to the place where it is lost then the Spatial factor is to be set at the lowest factor. This ‘rule’ ensures that cultural concerns are considered, i.e. losses of biodiversity important to the local community or the local economy (through the ecosystem services that habitat provides locally) are accountable.
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
12 That HS2 Ltd allocates habitat type and condition values to all land parcels current and formed during the construction of the railways to measure biodiversity impact.
Yes Yes
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
13 That HS2 Ltd adopts the principle that compensation can be achieved within and outside the limits of the bill. Yes Yes
14 That compensation is carried out as close to the loss as possible in a strategic location that compliments national, regional and local biodiversity strategies and ensures a not net loss of biodiversity in that local area.
No No
Biodiversity Accountability
21
17 Biodiversity Accounting 17.1 The application of the Defra metrics enables biodiversity to be monetarily valued.
17.2 Therefore, any biodiversity consequences of any element of the proposed railway can be financially accountable. This could be a monetary saving through either a biodiversity gain or reduced biodiversity loss; or a monetary expenditure through either a biodiversity loss or an increase biodiversity loss.
17.3 This methodology will be used as a decision making tool to decide: • the line (e.g. through the avoidance of high valued habitat); • the layout (e.g. construction compounds); • the physical infrastructure of the route (e.g. green bridges, cut-and-covers); • the future management of the habitat associated with the route (e.g. compensation); and • any changes to any of the above (e.g. Additional Provisions)
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
15 That HS2 Ltd attaches financial costs to biodiversity compensation and uses this in all relevant decision making. No No
Biodiversity Accountability ©
H az
el D
oo rm
ou se
/W ild
lif e
Tr us
Key
Biodiversity Accountability
Potential future gain with appropriate management
Current habitats – value 249.87units
16 7.0
© B
18 Principles
18.1 Monitoring will commence during advance works and continue through the construction, testing and operational stages of the scheme. It will be intrinsically linked to the Environmental Management System and be both real-time and future-time oriented. It will be responsive and reflective. It will be made public for accountability.
19 Species 19.1 Effects on protected species will be licensable and/or follow processes agreed to by Natural England.
Other appropriate NERC Act species will monitored where recorded or predicted along the route; this include those predicted to be present through trend analysis (Predictive Mapping 8).
19.2 This monitoring will enable quick responsive solutions should any construction phase interventions be necessary. It will also enable modifications of habitat enhancement or creation to reduce any impacts or prevent further impacts.
19.3 Solutions may be; • within the limits of the bill as identified as part of the Environmental Statement; • be solutions not currently identified in the Environmental Statement (e.g. additional Overpasses
or Underpasses); • on land within the limits of the bill; or • on land further afield (e.g. voluntary offset provide sites).
20 Habitats 20.1 Habitat monitoring will be carried out at regular intervals depending upon the habitat concerned and
the length of time the habitat will take to reach its target value as identified in the Biodiversity Impact Assessment (Section 15) and indicated in Table 2. This indicative time is the time a habitat will take to start to function in the wider Landscape; its function being determined by the number and make-up of floral and faunal species that habitat supports. Therefore, the time shown in Table 2 is the minimum time for monitoring purposes.
20.2 Species surveys may also influence the regularity of these surveys; for examples great crested newt population surveys or bat roost, foraging and commuting surveys.
Monitoring
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
16 That HS2 Ltd adopts temporal values that relate to functionality of habitat created or enhanced as the minimum monitoring period for that habitat. No No
Monitoring
25
Time to reach the target Habitat as identified in the Biodiversity Impact Assessment Original habitat Targethabitat 1-5
years 6–10 years
Bare ground
Open mosaic habitat
21 Ecology Review Group
21.1 To ensure both national and local specialist advice is available, an Ecology Review Group will be established. The remit of this group will be to:
• provide technical support to HS2 Ltd in the establishing, conducting and reporting of the monitoring programme,
• advise HS2 Ltd on the implementation of compensation as determined by the Biodiversity Impact Assessment and subsequent Biodiversity Compensation (Biodiversity Compensation 16),
• advise and make recommendations to HS2 Ltd on species solutions resulting from species monitoring (Species 19).
21.2 The proposed full remit to aid discussion on the formation of an Ecology Review Group has been enclosed in Annex B of this document
Recommendations Adopted by HS2 Ltd
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
17 That HS2 Ltd establishes an Ecology Review Group prior to royal assent to assist the promoters in meeting The Group’s recommendations. No No
18 That the Ecology Review Group reports to government and the promoters on biodiversity issues during the construction and operational phases of the railway.
Yes No
26
All HS2 Ltd construction design detail and limits of the bill are that of the original Environmental Statement November 2013 unless otherwise stated as this is the only data that is available.
Has The Group’s recommendation been Adopted? Adopted by HS2 Ltd
The recommendation has been adopted by HS2 Ltd
Yes
Yes
No
No
Has The Group’s recommendation been Enacted? Enacted by HS2 Ltd
The recommendation has been enacted by HS2 Ltd
Yes
Yes
Enacted by HS2 Ltd
The recommendation has been referred to by HS2 Ltd but not enacted
No
No
Caveats
Caveats
© S
TERMS OF REFERENCE
Purpose
The purpose of the High Speed Two Ecology Technical Group is to provide the means for engagement, consultation and information sharing in order to achieve the best possible outcome for ecology.
The Group has a focus on the Environment Statement and the Hybrid Bill.
Objectives
The objectives of the Group are to: • Discuss route-wide ecological principles and practices that could be applied at the Project level to
enable the best possible outcome for ecology • Facilitate the integration of ecological matters into other aspects of the design process • Enable engagement with relevant stakeholders, including the HS2 Environment Forum • Through promoting the principles of ‘avoidance, mitigation, compensation and enhancement’ to
secure a net gain for nature • Ensure that lessons learnt and achievements in Phase 1 are applied to Phase 2 • Act as the ecological sector’s focal point for engagement with HS2 Ltd and any other key
stakeholders such as DEFRA and Department for Transport. • Produce a set of ecological principles to inform the Environment Statement • Scrutinise and coordinate responses to the draft Environment Statement to see improvements to
the final Environment Statement • Seek to inform the Hybrid Bill
Membership
Individual roles • Chair – David Lowe, Warwickshire County Council • Deputy Chair – vacant • Secretariat – Warwickshire County Council • Web enabler - National Trust Outputs
• Where minutes are taken, they will be shared and placed on the web enabler’s website • Any letter, reviews or papers will be placed on the web enabler’s website once agreed by
the group.
Terms of Reference Review
These Terms of Reference will be revised at a time as deemed appropriate by the Group HIGHSPEEDTWOECOLOGYTECHNICALGROUP:17thJune2013
ANNEX A AnnexA
Purpose
The purpose of the Independent Biodiversity Group (The Group) is to ensure that the advanced works, construction and operation stages of HS2 Phase 1 will result in a biodiversity net gain.
Geographical Coverage
The Group will cover the land within the Environmental Statement (ES) provisions and any land identified in further additional provisions for the purpose of constructing HS2 Phase 1. It will also cover land outside of these provisions where ecological impacts have been registered within the Environmental Management Systems (EMS) employed by HS2. The Group will also develop a strategy to influence the location of wider compensation measures further afield of the provisions.
Remit
The Group will: • Identify and fill data gaps presented in the Environmental Statement • Model ecological data to inform both the location and engineering solutions necessary to maintain
ecological connectivity all stages of HS2 Phase 1 (confined to the limitations contained within the Bill)
• To assist in the preparation and review of Local Environmental Management Plans • Prepare a Government approved Biodiversity Impact Assessment (BIA) baseline to inform
ecological mitigation and compensation. • To prepare a government approved Mitigation and Compensation Strategy to influence both onsite
and offsite mitigation and compensation (confined to the limitations contained within the Bill) • To measure and monitor biodiversity impact against the approved BIA baseline at all the stages of
HS2 Phase 1 in combination with the EMS employed by the nominated undertaker. • To prepare and arrange compensatory Biodiversity Offset Schemes both inside and outside land
needed to construction HS2 Phase 1 • To operate within an agreed operational budget • To deliver a biodiversity net gain within a Government agreed ring-fenced compensation fund. • To monitor the long term management of the mitigation and compensation and advise on any
remediation necessary.
Governance Structure
The Group will comprise of a Steering Group that oversees and manages a Trust that is enabled to employ officers and contractors to conduct the Group’s objectives. The Steering Group membership will be found from: • The Nominated Undertaker • Ecological Non-governmental organisations • Landowner Non-governmental organisations • Local authorities • Statutory bodies
The members of this Steering Group may change depending upon the professional expertise necessary to inform current and future work remits and programmes.
ANNEX B AnnexB
29
Resources
An annual sum of £tbc (index linked) will be made available to the Group for administration costs
A fixed, capped budget agreed by Defra, Natural England and the Nominated Undertaker that will be ring-fenced within the Nominated Undertaker’s internal control that will be made exclusively available to mitigation and compensation measures to ensure long-term biodiversity gain.
Reporting
The Group will provide a publically accountable qualitative and quantitative report to Government on an annual basis (or as detailed by Government) detailing Biodiversity Impact and Compensation measures. This reporting will also report on current financial compliancy and future implications.
Temporal Remit
The Group will last for 70 years or otherwise agreed by Defra and Natural England or their successors.
AnnexB ©
N ew
W et
la nd