appendix 7.3 red squirrel survey report... · morpeth lies approximately 16.2 miles north of...

AECOM A1-SENSLR: MNB – Environmental Impact Assessment – Part 3: Figures and Appendices

Appendix 7.3 Red Squirrel Survey Report

Morpeth Northern Bypass

Red Squirrel Survey Report

Northumberland County Council

24 October 2007

Prepared by: .................. Approved by: ..................... Lyndsey Yates Emma Suddards Environmental Scientist Principal Environmental Scientist Morpeth Northern Bypass

Rev No Comments Date

0 Draft for internal checking only October ‘07

1 Submission to client November ‘07

5th Floor, 2 City Walk, Leeds, LS11 9AR Telephone: 0113 391 6800 Fax: 0113 391 6899 Website: http://www.fabermaunsell.com Job No 53101 Reference RE05 Date Created 24

th October

This contains confidential and commercially sensitive information, which shall not be disclosed to third parties. f:\projects\53101ilee morpeth northen bypass\04_reports\reports\site_visit_reports\red squirrel\red squirrel survey report_rev0_04.12.07.doc

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2

2 Background ..................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Background to Red Squirrel.................................................................................. 4 2.2 Legal Framework .................................................................................................. 5

3 Methodology.................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Ecological Data Search ........................................................................................ 7 3.2 Field Survey Methodology .................................................................................... 7 3.3 Assessment Method ............................................................................................. 8

4 Results ........................................................................................................................... 13 4.1 Ecological Data Search ...................................................................................... 13 4.2 Red Squirrel Habitat............................................................................................ 13 4.3 Red Squirrel Field Signs ..................................................................................... 14 4.4 Assessment ........................................................................................................ 15

5 Impacts........................................................................................................................... 17 5.1 Impacts ............................................................................................................... 17 5.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................. 18

6 Mitigation ....................................................................................................................... 20 6.1 Red Squirrel Mitigation ....................................................................................... 20 6.2 General Mitigation............................................................................................... 20 6.3 Impact Assessment- Residual Impact ................................................................ 22

7 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 24 7.1 Summary............................................................................................................. 24

References ................................................................................................................................. 26

Figures........................................................................................................................................ 28

Appendix 1: Survey Forms....................................................................................................... 30 Table 1: Determining Nature Conservation Value. Table 2: Determining the Magnitude of the Potential Impact Table 3: Overall Ecological Impact Significance Table 4: Ecological Significance

Table of Contents

Introduction

Faber Maunsell Morpeth Northern Bypass – Red Squirrel Survey Report 2

1.1 Faber Maunsell was commissioned by Northumberland County Council to undertake ecological surveys at the location of the proposed Morpeth Northern Bypass, Morpeth, Northumberland. Morpeth lies approximately 16.2 miles north of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, with the general site location shown on Figure 1.

1.2 The proposed single carriageway bypass will be located to the north of Morpeth town centre and will link the A192 (Pottery Bank) to the B1377 (Whorral Bank). The bypass is required to remove a significant portion of traffic from Morpeth town centre, thereby easing congestion as well as facilitating the regeneration of north Seaton, Camois and Blyth areas. The route is shown on Figure 2, starting at approximate NGR NZ 184872 and finishing at approximate NGR NZ 211873. The proposed bypass runs through an area that comprises improved grassland (grazed) and arable land bounded by primarily species-poor intact hedgerows and fences.

1.3 An initial Ecological Walkover Survey was undertaken in March 2007 as part of an Environmental Assessment (Faber Maunsell, April 2007) of the scheme. This highlighted that the area of the proposed route of the Morpeth Northern Bypass may provide some habitat suitable for red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris). For example, several woodland areas are present adjacent the route which were considered to offer potential habitat for red squirrel. These are;

� Along Kater Dean, south east of Northgate Hospital. � Along Cotting Burn, in the grounds of Cottingburn house. � Surrounding Fulbeck Grange Ambulance Station - Cotting Wood Site of Nature

Conservation Importance (SNCI). � Howburn Wood – Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI), Ancient Replanted

Woodland (ARW) and Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland (ASNW).

1.4 A red squirrel survey is required to determine the presence / absence of red squirrel and the extent of red squirrel activity within the area of the proposed route, referred to as the Survey Area (see Figure 2). An assessment of any potential impacts which may result from the construction of the proposed bypass can then be made, with mitigation recommended to minimise any impacts.

1.5 The report is based on information obtained from an Ecological Data Search and the results of the Red Squirrel Survey commissioned specifically for this Red Squirrel Report.

1.6 The report is arranged as follows:

� Section 2 provides Background information and legislation relating to badger. � Section 3 details the Methodology for the Ecological Data Search and Survey, as well

as the Impact Assessment Methodology. � Section 4 describes the Results of the Ecological Data Search and Survey. � Section 5 discusses the Impacts of the construction of the proposed bypass. � Section 6 discusses Mitigation to minimise any impacts. � Section 7 provides a Summary of the report and its findings.

1 Introduction

Background

Faber Maunsell Morpeth Northern Bypass 4

2.1 Background to Red Squirrel

2.1.1 The red squirrel is Britain’s only native squirrel. Formerly widespread in the UK, the red squirrel is now restricted to Scotland, Northern Ireland and Northern England, with small pockets found elsewhere. 75% of the UK population is found in Scotland, with an estimated population of 120,000.

2.1.2 The future survival of red squirrel in Britain is threatened by disease (squirrel poxvirus), habitat loss (forest destruction) and by the spread of the grey squirrel (Sciurus griseus), a native of North America introduced into Britain in the 1870s (Gurnell et al, 2001).

2.1.3 Red squirrel are most abundant in large areas (50 hectares or more) of mature coniferous forest, and live in population densities of approximately one squirrel per hectare of forest in good habitat, but often densities are lower than this. Red squirrels spend about three quarters of their active time above ground in trees and shrubs. Activity is concentrated in the 3-4 hours after dawn, with sporadic activity during the day followed by less concentrated activity 2-3 hours before dusk (Gurnell et al, 2001).

2.1.4 Their main food source are tree seeds, such as hazelnuts and seeds from conifer cones with the native Scots pine (Pinus sylvistris) providing the most reliable seed crop. Other food sources include tree flowers and shoots, mushrooms and fungi growing under tree bark.

2.1.5 The red squirrel is highly adapted to the Scots pine providing good drey (or nesting) sites and continuous aerial canopy when between 25 and 80 years old, although some introduced conifers are suitable substitutes. Several squirrels may utilise the same drey. In smaller conifer woodland and in mixed woodland the red squirrel is less abundant with immature woodland used for foraging rather than residence.

2.1.6 Breeding can begin in mid-winter and continue through the summer, depending on the weather and food availability. Mating chases occur where several males follow a female who is ready to mate. Females have one or two litters a year, usually of 2-3 young. Juveniles are weaned at around 10 weeks, but do not breed until they are one year old. They survive for up to six years in the wild.

2.1.7 Field signs include:

� Dreys - Constructed of compacted twigs in a tree fork. - Spherical (approx. 30cm in diameter). - Usually located above 6m and exceptionally below 3m. - Usually close to the main trunk of a conifer. - Lined with soft hair, moss and dried grass.

� Feeding remains - Stripped cores and scattered scales of cones. - Hazel shells split neatly in two with a small chip at the apex. - Husks of acorns. - Bark stripping.

� Footprints - Only visible in soft ground or snow. - Distinctive pattern of smaller fore prints (4 toes) behind larger hind prints (5 toes). - Approximately 60mm or smaller in diameter.

2 Background


2.2 Legal Framework

2.2.1 The red squirrel is listed on Appendix 3 of the Bern Convention and is protected under Schedules 5 and 6 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended). Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act it is a criminal offence to:

� Intentionally kill, injure or take (capture) a red squirrel. � Intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy any structure or place a red squirrel uses for

shelter or protection or disturb a red squirrel while it is occupying such a place. � Possess a dead or live wild red squirrel unless you can show that the animal was taken

legally. � Sell, or offer for sale, a wild red squirrel or any part of a wild red squirrel. � Set in place a trap, snare, electrical device for killing or stunning or any poisonous, poisoned

or stupefying substance; use a decoy, gas or smoke, bows or cross bows, explosives, automatic weapons or mechanically propelled vehicles which are of such a nature and so placed as to be calculated to cause bodily injury to a red squirrel.

2.2.2 Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended) there is no provision for licensing the intentional destruction of places of shelter or protection, or the disturbance of squirrels occupying such places, for the purposes of development (JNCC, 2004). Such activities must rely on the defence in the legislation that the act was the ‘incidental result of a lawful operation and could not reasonably have been avoided’. Thus, to rely on this defence a person must demonstrate to the satisfaction of a court that:

1. The act was incidental to the main purpose of the work. 2. The work was legal (e.g. not in contravention of other legislation, such as the planning

legislation). 3. The act could not reasonably have been avoided.

2.2.3 Only a court can decide what is ‘reasonable’, but, agreement between the appropriate conservation agencies, planners and developers is advisable. In order to minimise the risk of prosecution, developers who wish to maintain, build on or alter areas used by red squirrels are advised to ensure that all reasonable steps are taken to avoid or, if that is not possible, minimise damage to places red squirrels use for shelter or protection. This can best be achieved by undertaking a squirrel survey prior to planning any work and ensuring that appropriate mitigation measures are included in the proposals.

2.2.4 The red squirrel has a Species Action Plan (SAP) under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP, 1994) which aims to maintain current populations of red squirrel, enhance current populations of red squirrel and re-establish red squirrel populations, where appropriate.

2.2.5 They are also listed as a priority species in the Northumberland Local BAP (LBAP, 2000). No specific SAP has been formulated for the species; however it is Key Species within the Habitat Action Plan for Upland Oak Woodlands.

Methodology


3.1 Ecological Data Search

3.1.1 Northumberland County Council, Natural England and Environment Agency were contacted to request ecological data records for the Morpeth Northern Bypass project. The data search was undertaken in March 2007 in connection with the Environmental Assessment for the scheme which was produced in April 2007. All consultees were sent a letter requesting ecological data for the site and surrounding area (up to approximately 1km distance) and were given four weeks to respond. A summary of consultee responses regarding red squirrel is presented within Section 4.1 – Results.

3.1.2 The data obtained have been taken into account when assessing the potential ecological impacts of the Morpeth Northern Bypass on red squirrel.

3.2 Field Survey Methodology

3.2.1 The optimum time to undertake red squirrel surveys is during the months of October, February or March, when the squirrels are most active and foliage on the trees is not too dense.

3.2.2 The surveys for the proposed bypass were therefore undertaken during the optimal time, 17th October (Fulbeck Grange, Cotting Burn and Kater Dean) and 19th October 2007 (Howburn Wood). The surveys on the 17th October were conducted during late afternoon, the surveys on the 19th October were conducted during the morning.

3.2.3 Any area of woodland within a 250m corridor either side of the proposed route was surveyed, as shown on Figure 2.

3.2.4 The weather was dry and sunny with temperatures of around 12-15oC on both days.

3.2.5 Two survey methods were employed, Visual Counts and Drey Counts. All surveyors had binoculars.

Visual Counts

3.2.6 Visual surveys involve making standardised time-area counts of squirrels. They involve walking along predetermined transect lines, recording all the squirrels seen. The methodology according to Gurnell et al (2001) requires that between 6 and 12 survey lines at a density of approximately one line per 10-20 ha are marked out. Each line should be between 500m and 1000m long and situated along rides or inspection tracks, or between rows of trees in suitable squirrel habitat.

3.2.7 A total of five transects were surveyed, two within Howburn Wood, one along Kater Dean Stream, one within Fulbeck Grange and one along Cotting Burn Stream. The transect lines are shown on Figures 4, 5 and 6. These transects were chosen to give optimum coverage of the potential red squirrel habitat within the survey area.

3.2.8 Given the small size of the woodland areas within the survey area, the transects varied in length from between approximately 200m and 1km and depending on the size of the woodland. All sites comprised a mixture of broadleaved and coniferous woodland of varying sizes, structural and species diversity.

3 Methodology


3.2.9 The surveyors stopped at 100m intervals along the transects for 5 minutes (indicative locations of stop points are shown on Figures 4, 5 and 6), taking about 5 minutes to walk between each intervening 100m. Working in pairs enabled one person to concentrate on each side of the transect line.

3.2.10 A record was made of all squirrels seen, including species, time, place, how far the squirrel was from the observer and behaviour i.e. was it eating, what species of tree it was in (Gurnell et al, 2001). Any sightings were recorded on a map of the area (Figures 4, 5 and 6).

Drey Counts

3.2.11 The presence of active dreys can be used reliably to indicate the presence of squirrels and the density of dreys can give an indication of squirrel numbers. However there is no obvious difference between a drey built by a red squirrel and a drey built by a grey squirrel.

3.2.12 Dreys tend to be semi-permanent when squirrels are resident, thus the number of dreys tend to reflect squirrel numbers over a season, year or even longer. However if dreys are not found, then this does not mean that squirrels are absent, because dreys in the canopy may be difficult to see in some woodland habitats. This is particularly the case if they are built among thick clumps of climbing plants covering the trees and sometimes squirrels use holes in trees to nest in, called dens.

3.2.13 Dreys were searched for by both surveyors whilst walking along the set transects. Any dreys identified were recorded on a map of the area. The total number of dreys can be related to the area of forest searched. The density of dreys can be used as a crude index of squirrel density and it may useful as a relative measure of habitat use. This assumes that all the dreys in an area of woodland are counted and dreys are not confused with bird nests (Gurnell et al, 2001).

3.3 Assessment Method

3.3.1 The method of evaluation and assessment utilised has been developed using guidance from Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (IEEM, 2006). This gives guidance on the assessment of nature conservation value, magnitude of potential impact and overall impact significance. These guidelines form the basis of the assessment methodologies within this report.

3.3.2 The methodology below summaries the criteria as set out in these guidelines. These criteria are based on determining firstly the value of the receiving site/feature/species, in this case the red squirrel (Table 1) and secondly the magnitude of the potential impact on the species (Table 2), in order to provide an overall impact scoring and therefore the predicted impact significance of the Morpeth Northern Bypass scheme on red squirrel (Tables 3 and 4).

3.3.3 Table 1 provides guidelines in order to determine the nature conservation value of red squirrels in the survey area. The determined value for the red squirrel population at this site is given in the Results Section 4.

Table 1: Determining Nature Conservation Value. Nature

Conservation Value

Selected Examples (Adapted from Biodiversity Evaluation Methods RPS Group Plc and SNH 2005)

Very High (International)

High importance and rarity, international scale and limited potential for substitution. � An internationally designated site or candidate site (Special

Protection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Ramsar Site, Biogenetic reserve).

� Internationally significant and viable areas of a habitat type listed in Annexe 1 of the Habitats Directive.

� Regularly occurring globally threatened species. � Any regularly occurring populations of internationally important

species that are rare or threatened in the UK or of uncertain conservation status.

� A regularly occurring significant population/number of any internationally important species.


High (National)

High importance and rarity, national scale and limited potential for substitution. � A nationally designated site (Site of Special Scientific Interest

(SSSI), National Nature Reserve (NNR)) or a discrete area which meets the published selection criteria for national designation irrespective of whether it has yet to be notified.

� A viable area of a UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) priority habitat or of smaller areas of such habitat that is essential to maintain the viability of a larger whole.

� A regularly occurring significant population/number of any nationally important species i.e. listed on the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act (as amended).

� Any regularly occurring population of a nationally important species that is threatened or rare in the county or region.

� A feature identified as of critical importance in the UK BAP. Medium (Regional/ District)

High or medium importance and rarity, regional scale, limited potential for substitution. � Viable areas of key habitat identified in the Regional/District BAP

or smaller areas of such a habitat which are essential to maintain the viability of the larger whole.

� Regional/District significant and viable areas of key habitat identified as being of regional value in the appropriate Natural England Natural Area.

� Any regularly occurring significant population of a species listed as being nationally scarce, or in the Local BAP or relevant Natural Area on account of its regional rarity or localisation.

� Significant populations of a regionally/county important species. � Sites such as County Wildlife Sites or Sites of Importance for

Nature Conservation, selected on Regional/District criteria. � Any regularly occurring significant population that is listed in a

Local BAP on account of its rarity or localisation. Low (Local)

Low or medium importance and rarity, local scale. � Areas identified in a Local BAP or in the relevant natural area

profile. � Sites/features that are scarce within the locality or which

appreciably enrich the local area’s habitat resource. � A diverse and/or ecologically important valuable hedgerow

network. � A significant population of a local important species i.e. listed in

the Local BAP. � Species populations of local importance.

Negligible Very low importance and rarity, local scale. � Areas of habitat considered to appreciably enrich the habitat

resource within the context of the Parish or Neighbourhood.

3.3.4 Secondly, the magnitude of the potential impact of the Morpeth Northern Bypass scheme is assessed for red squirrel, independently of its nature conservation value or designated status, with guidelines shown in Table 2. The magnitude of the potential impact for the red squirrel population at the site without mitigation is given within the Impacts Section 5, with the magnitude of the potential impact with mitigation given within the Mitigation Section 6. The magnitude of impact can be both adverse and beneficial.


Table 2: Determining the Magnitude of the Potential Impact Magnitude of Impact Typical criteria descriptors

Adverse Loss of resource and/or quality and integrity; severe damage to key characteristic features or elements.

Major

Beneficial Large scale or major improvement of resource quality; extensive restoration or enhancement; major improvement of attribute quality.

Adverse Significant impact on the resource, but not adversely affecting the integrity; partial loss of/damage to key characteristics, features or elements.

Moderate

Beneficial Benefit to, or addition of, key characteristics, features or elements; improvement of attribute quality.

Adverse Some measurable change in attributes quality or vulnerability; minor loss of or alteration to, one (or maybe more) key characteristics, features or elements.

Minor

Beneficial Minor benefit to, or addition of, one (maybe more) key characteristics, features or elements; some beneficial impact on attribute or a reduced risk of negative impact occurring.

Adverse Very minor loss or detrimental alteration to one or more characteristics, features or elements.

Negligible

Beneficial Very minor benefit to or positive addition of one or more characteristics, features or elements.

No change No loss or alteration of characteristics, features or elements; no observable impact in either direction

3.3.5 Based on the nature conservation value of the red squirrel population and the predicted magnitude of the potential impact, the overall significance of the impact of the Morpeth Northern Bypass scheme can then be determined according to Table 3. The impact significance in relation to red squirrels at this site without mitigation is given within the Impacts Section 5, with the impact significance with mitigation given within the Mitigation Section 6.

3.3.6 The overall significance categories described in Table 3 can be applied to beneficial as well as adverse effects.

Table 3: Overall Ecological Impact Significance

Magnitude of Potential Impact Nature

Conservation

Value of Site

Major Moderate Minor Negligible No change

Very high Very Large Large or Very Large

Moderate or Large

Slight Neutral

High Large or Very Large

Moderate or Large

Slight or Moderate

Slight Neutral

Medium Moderate or Large

Moderate Slight Neutral or Slight

Neutral

Low Slight or Moderate

Slight Neutral or Slight

Neutral or Slight

Neutral

Negligible Slight Neutral or Slight

Neutral or Slight

Neutral Neutral


3.3.7 The greater the environmental value or magnitude of impact the more significant the effect. In some cases the significance in Table 3 is shown as being one of two alternatives. In these cases a single description should be assigned with a reasoned judgement for the level chosen. This allows for the application of professional judgement in appraising significance between individual sites which may not have equal significance within their context. Judgement should be based on the significance categories outlined in Table 4.

Table 4: Ecological Significance Significance Category Typical descriptors

Very Large Only adverse effects are normally assigned this level of

significance. They represent key factors in the decision-making process. These effects are generally, but not exclusively, associated with sites or features of international, national or regional importance that are likely to suffer a most damaging impact and loss of resource integrity. However a serious change in a site or feature of district importance may also enter this category.

Large These beneficial or adverse effects are considered to be very important considerations and are likely to be material in the decision-making process.

Moderate These beneficial or adverse effects may be important, but are not likely to be key-decision making factors. The cumulative effects of such issues may become a decision making issue of leading to an increase in the overall adverse effect on a particular resource or receptor.

Slight These beneficial or adverse effects may be raised as local issues. They are unlikely to be critical in the decision making process, but are important in enhancing the subsequent design of the project.

Neutral No effects or those that are beneath levels of perception, within normal bounds of variation or within the margin of forecasting error.

3.3.8 Where impact significance is assessed as Very Large or Large Adverse in accordance with Table 4, this represents a significant effect which would be unacceptable under the Environmental Impact Assessment regulations. A Moderate Adverse effect is also considered to be significant but could be acceptable with design amendments, possible further survey and revised impact specific mitigation.

3.3.9 In terms of protected species, it should be noted that irrespective of the ecological impact significance, mitigation will be required to ensure the law is not contravened.

Results


4.1 Ecological Data Search

4.1.1 Statutory consultees, Northumberland County Council, Natural England and the Environment Agency were contacted and asked to provide data search information.

4.1.2 Natural England and the Environment Agency were unable to provide any information relating to red squirrel.

4.1.3 Northumberland County Council stated that red squirrels are known to be present in the area, although they may be being marginalised by an incoming population of grey squirrels.

4.2 Red Squirrel Habitat

4.2.1 Suitable habitat for red squirrel is present within the survey area, however the areas of woodland surveyed are not extensive (Figure 2) and therefore their value may be limited (refer to Paragraph 4.3.4).

Howburn Wood

4.2.2 The largest area of woodland surveyed was Howburn Wood which comprised a mixture of broadleaved and coniferous woodland, with How Burn stream running through its centre (Figure 4). The total area of Howburn Wood is approximately 28.84 hectares and the area of woodland within the 250 metre Survey Area of the proposed bypass route is approximately 12.65 hectares.

4.2.3 Howburn Wood is classified as ancient semi-natural woodland and ancient replanted woodland (Figure 3). Tree species present within this survey transect included sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus), ash (Fraxinus excelsior), silver birch (Betula pendula), hazel (Corylus avellana), oak (Quercus robur) and larch (Larix decidua) plantation. The woodland had a diverse age and species structure and was quite dense, making access along the transect route difficult in places.

Kater Dean

4.2.4 The transect along Kater Dean stream ran through young plantation woodland in the western section, more mature broadleaved woodland in the central areas and scattered mature trees to the east (Figure 5). The size of this woodland area is approximately 3.17 hectares. Species included oak, silver birch, hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) and alder (Alnus glutinosa).

Fulbeck

4.2.5 The transect through Fulbeck Grange ran through a mixture of broadleaved and coniferous woodland (Figure 6). This area has been classified as a SNCI (Figure 3) and is approximately 3.67 hectares in size. Understory scrub was quite dense where there were broadleaved trees, but totally absent where there were coniferous species. The woodland structure became more open in the eastern part of the wood. Tree species included Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), oak, sycamore, beech (Fagus sylvatica), and wych elm (Ulmus glabra).

Cotting Burn

4.2.6 The short transect along Cotting Burn stream ran through a small open area with scattered mature trees comprising oak, hawthorn, willow (Salix sp.) and Scots pine. This area was part of the garden for the ‘Cottingburn’ property and was approximately 0.93 hectares in size (Figure 6).

4.2.7 Further details of the woodland encountered during the transect surveys is provided on the survey forms (Appendix 1).

4 Results


Connectivity between woodland areas

4.2.8 The woodland sites at present do not have particularly good connectivity between them restricting access for squirrels between the areas. Red squirrels spend about 70% of their active time up trees (compared with 14% for greys) and only descend for short periods; therefore continuous areas of woodland cover are very important for them.

4.2.9 Hedgerows of varying structural quality and age diversity are present between the Kater Dean, Cotting Burn and Fulbeck Grange woodlands and may provide limited migratory corridors for red squirrels between these sites. Only the more mature, dense hedgerows would offer any value to migratory squirrels, the newly planted hedgerows would not offer sufficient cover for red squirrel until they have matured.

4.3 Red Squirrel Field Signs

Visual Counts

4.3.1 No red squirrels were observed along any of the five woodland transects walked during the survey.

4.3.2 One red squirrel was observed whilst undertaking a badger survey along the route of the bypass on the morning of 18th October 2007. The location of the red squirrel is marked on Figure 6. It was observed for several minutes sitting in an oak tree until it was disturbed and jumped away from view. This is along Fulbeck (a small stream), which is lined by a hedgerow, mature trees and occasional patches of scrub, including oak and hawthorn. The watercourse channel is approximately 0.5m wide, with a water depth less than 5cm deep having a slow flow, with banks less than 1m in height.

4.3.3 Incidental records of red squirrel sightings were obtained over the course of the survey. The locations of these are labelled on Figure 7 as follows:

1) Resident reported seeing red squirrels regularly in the garden of their property at the

western end of the proposed bypass route.

2) An employee at the Ambulance Station reported that red squirrels were a common sight in Fulbeck Grange up until last year. None observed this year but greys have been seen.

3) Local gamekeeper reported that red squirrels had been observed in Howburn Wood this year.

4.3.4 The low numbers of red squirrels observed during the surveys may be attributed to several factors, for example quality of habitat and disease:

� The small areas of woodland found within the survey area may not be extensive enough to support large numbers of red squirrels. On average 0.4 to 1.2 red squirrels can be supported in 1 hectare of broadleaved woodland, this reduces to 0.02 to 1.2 in coniferous woodland. By assessing the size of the woodlands, it can be concluded that the maximum number of squirrels that would be expected to be supported by the four sites would be as below. These figures presume that optimal habitat is available; therefore in reality the numbers that could be supported would be much lower. - Howburn Wood (total area): 28 red squirrels. - Howburn Wood (survey area): 12 red squirrels. - Fulbeck Grange: 3 red squirrels. - Kater Dean: 3 red squirrels. - Cotting Burn: 1 red squirrel.

� Red squirrels survive better in coniferous or mixed coniferous/broadleaved forests. The woodland areas surveyed were dominated by broadleaved species that are better suited to supporting grey squirrels.

� Squirrel poxvirus has been reported in this area of Morpeth. This is a disease that can cause illness and death to red squirrels. It can be carried by grey squirrels but it does not affect them or cause illness.


Drey Counts

4.3.5 No dreys were recorded along any of the survey transects.

Other Species

4.3.6 A single grey squirrel was observed along transect A in Howburn Wood at Point 6 (Figure 4). Northumberland County Council highlighted that an incoming population of grey squirrels may be resulting in red squirrels becoming marginalised in this area. As the grey squirrel expands its range, it can lead to displacement of the red squirrel through increased competition for food resources and the spread of squirrel poxvirus. This could be very detrimental to the red squirrel population in this area.

4.3.7 Roe deer were observed in Howburn Wood and along Kater Dean.

4.4 Assessment

4.4.1 Using the guidelines provided in Table 1 (Section 3.2 Assessment Methodology), the Nature Conservation Value of the red squirrel population present can be assessed. The red squirrel is listed on the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended) and is on the UKBAP, however as there is not a ‘significant population’ present within the survey area, the nature conservation value is assessed as ‘Medium’.

Impacts


5.1 Impacts

5.1.1 There are limited areas of woodland considered suitable for red squirrel within the survey area, with no extensive areas of coniferous forest. Much of the woodland is too small in size (three of the woodland areas only have the potential to support a maximum of between 1 and 3 squirrels), isolated or comprises predominantly of broadleaved trees (less favoured habitat). However, small patches of more suitable habitat are found in Howburn Wood and Fulbeck Grange.

5.1.2 In addition to the sub optimal habitat, the apparent declining population of red squirrels in the area is thought to be due to the increased presence of grey squirrels moving into the area. Grey squirrels are known to carry squirrel poxvirus which can be deadly to red squirrels. An outbreak of this virus was reported in the Morpeth area in 2006.

5.1.3 The route of the proposed bypass currently avoids significant disturbance to the woodland areas; therefore there should not be any significant direct impacts on the small red squirrel population present in this area. The bypass will not sever any woodland areas therefore road casualties should not be a significant problem as squirrels will not need to attempt to cross the road to pass through the woodland.

5.1.4 The route of the proposed bypass will however sever some hedgerows of varying quality and age structure. The possibility that the affected hedgerows are used by red squirrels for commuting between the woodlands to the south of the proposed bypass (Fulbeck Grange and Cotting Burn) and to the north of the proposed bypass (Kater Dean) is relatively small. This is due to the fact that red squirrels rarely run along the ground away from dense cover and many of the hedgerows connecting the woods are newly planted and therefore too young to provide suitable cover.

5.1.5 Fulbeck and associated hedgerow, trees and scrub where the red squirrel was seen will be affected by the bypass proposals, with a future road coming off the proposed central roundabout to the south. It is unlikely that this habitat provides a commuting link for red squirrels between Fulbeck Grange and Howburn Wood as the majority of it is too immature to provide extensive cover. However, the hedgerow, scrub and trees may offer some shelter and foraging opportunities, although this is limited.

5.1.6 Indirect impacts could include increased noise and disturbance to red squirrel in the area during construction and operation of the proposed bypass. General mitigation measures to minimise the impacts are outlined in Section 6.0.

5 Impacts


5.2 Impact Assessment

5.2.1 The impact of the proposed Morpeth Northern Bypass has been assessed using the route shown in Figure 1. If this proposed route significantly changes, further survey and assessment may be required.

5.2.2 The impact assessment for the Morpeth Northern Bypass on red squirrels (the ecological receptor) has been obtained according to the standard IEEM Guidelines (2006). The matrices used are provided in Section 3.2 – Assessment Method.

5.2.3 Although no red squirrels were observed along any of the transect routes undertaken, one was observed within the survey area of the proposed bypass route. The mature hedgerow within which the squirrel was observed appears to be being severed by a future road spur off the proposed central roundabout.

5.2.4 Incidental reports from local residents suggest that red squirrels are present in the area but in decreasing numbers. Northumberland County Council also reported their presence in this area during the data search, but they were being marginalised by grey squirrels.

5.2.5 Based on Table 2 within Section 3.2 Assessment Methodology, the magnitude of potential impact of the proposed Morpeth Northern Bypass route without mitigation is assessed as Minor Adverse. Although no significant areas of woodland will be directly affected or lost as a result of the proposed bypass, the increased level of disturbance adjacent the woodland areas may increase their vulnerability. In addition, the potential severance of the hedgerow where a red squirrel was sighted may reduce potential foraging and shelter areas. Therefore with the nature conservation value of the red squirrel population assessed as Medium (Section 4), the Overall Impact Significance without mitigation is assessed as Slight Adverse, based on Table 3 in Section 3.2 Assessment Methodology.

Mitigation


6.1 Red Squirrel Mitigation

6.1.1 The overall impact on the small red squirrel population in this area without mitigation has been assessed as ‘slight adverse’. The following recommendations will help to reduce the overall impact of the proposed scheme on the red squirrel population.

6.1.2 The potential severance of a hedgerow currently used by red squirrel should be compensated for by aiming to improve the quality of the hedgerow links in the area. Gapping up of any defunct existing hedgerows on the south side of the proposed bypass could be undertaken to improve the cover and foraging habitat for red squirrels, as well as connectivity between woodland areas.

6.1.3 Any tree and hedgerow planting proposals should utilise species that are favoured by red squirrel. For example a good mix of conifer and broadleaved species should be used including pine, spruce (Picea sp.) and hazel. Oak and beech (Fagus sylvatica) should be avoided as these provide better food sources for grey squirrels.

6.1.4 Any mature trees that are scheduled for removal or disturbance should be checked by an ecologist for the presence of dreys. It is an offence to damage, destroy or obstruct access to a drey that is actively used by a red squirrel for shelter or protection. Evidence would be required to show that the drey is not longer in use by a red squirrel before commencing with any potentially disturbing works.

6.1.5 Any future developments in this area should consider the presence of red squirrel and aim to retain suitable habitat and the migratory links between habitats.

6.1.6 Mitigation is highly recommended to reduce and minimise the impact of the proposed scheme. General best practice ecological mitigation should also be applied to the site, as detailed within Section 6.2 below and it should be ensured that there are no indirect impacts on the surrounding woodlands.

6.2 General Mitigation

6.2.1 Four common forms of mitigation are recognised as follows:

� Avoidance - Avoidance and prevention of adverse impacts through the design of the development and

sensitive programming of works, for example master plan design to retain key ecological features – avoiding removal of woodland.

� Reduction - Mitigation to reduce the scale and severity of impacts, for example restricting construction

access in areas of ecological interest – buffer zones around woodland areas.

� Compensation - Compensation to offset adverse ecological impacts through habitat creation, for example

creation of species diverse landscaping to replace habitat lost or disturbed by the scheme – planting tree and hedgerow species favoured by red squirrel.

� Enhancement - Enhancement and improvement of existing conditions, for example plant species chosen

to enhance diversity and ecological interest of the area – gapping up existing hedgerows.

6.2.2 Mitigation of potential adverse impacts on habitats during construction and operation of the development should be undertaken. In general, where an impact is unavoidable, localised mitigation measures should be implemented and the greater the predicted impact, the greater the level of mitigation that would be required.

6 Mitigation


6.2.3 During construction, a number of general mitigation principles are usually applied as follows:

� Ecological supervision of operations, particularly during the initial phases of vegetation clearance and any earthworks operations and during any habitat creation operations.

� Restriction of plant and personnel to the working area. Fencing should reduce to a minimum the land take required for vehicular movements and construction activities.

� Identification of sensitive ecological areas in advance of on-site works, and the restriction of the movement of staff and machinery in these areas. Exclusion zones should be established so that these features are not inadvertently damaged during the construction phase.

� Avoidance of unnecessary damage to terrestrial and aquatic habitats, for example movement of heavy plant during construction should avoid areas where trees and hedges are to be retained in order to prevent root compaction and accidental damage.

� Adoption of best practices to avoid pollution and dust.

� Working areas, site compounds and access tracks will be of the minimum size required for safe working. These will be fenced to prevent encroachment of machinery and materials onto adjacent vegetation. Stockpiling of materials will be kept to a bare minimum and restricted to specific sites. Waste materials should be removed from the site and disposed of at the earliest opportunity and should not be stockpiled.

Habitats

6.2.4 Mitigation should ideally include a ‘buffer zone’ where the proposed route runs close to any woodland areas. This would comprise a strip of land left undisturbed between the existing boundaries of the woodland and the proposed bypass route. This ‘buffer zone’ would be designed to protect the existing habitats and wildlife corridors within the survey area. The ‘buffer zone’ would also provide noise and visual screening to the proposed bypass.

6.2.5 There is the potential for contamination of soils and vegetation through spillages of fuel and oils. Best practice mitigation should be followed to avoid such impacts, including:

� Refuel and service vehicles/machinery within designated area with impermeable base. Use trigger delivery nozzle to refuel.

� All machinery maintained in good working order and checked regularly.

� Fuel, oil and other potential pollutants stored in bunded tanks.

� Store minimum required amount on site.

� Store oil absorbent material on site and clear up spillages immediately.

� Fence working areas and tracks to prevent encroachment on to vegetation.

� Minimise stockpiling of materials and restrict this to designated, fenced areas.

� Remove and dispose of waste materials at the earliest opportunity

Woodland, Trees and Scrub

6.2.6 The current plans show that no significant areas of woodland will be lost or directly affected by the proposed works. The route does however pass quite closely to Howburn Wood at a couple of points (within a few metres) and some removal of vegetation may be required, therefore care should be taken to protect any trees adjacent or which overhang the working area. Trees should be protected by the means of post and ‘Netlon’ fluorescent mesh fence or similar to demark protected areas. The fence should be placed at the minimum of the radius of the crown of the tree. The protective fencing should be maintained during the period of the site works and no machinery or materials should be stored within the fenced area. Materials and machinery should only be stored within a designated site compound. Fencing should be left until all machinery and materials have been removed from the site.

6.2.7 If roots of any trees are damaged during the construction works, they should be treated with an appropriate fungicide to prevent the spread of disease.


6.2.8 If tree or scrub clearance becomes necessary as part of the works, it should be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season (which is between March and August). If this is not possible, and the clearance is to be undertaken during the breeding season, affected trees/scrub should be checked by an ecologist for nesting birds. If found, the trees should not be felled/removed until after the breeding season or when the nest is no longer in use. Checks for active dreys will also be made on any trees that are to be disturbed.

6.2.9 Any broadleaved or coniferous trees which are to be removed as part of the proposed works should be replaced with native tree species along the proposed bypass route.

6.2.10 Any new planting along the bypass route should aim to use a good mixture of native, locally occurring species. The planting should be planned to provide the greatest possible ecological diversity and naturalness. Species already growing in the surrounding landscape should guide the tree and shrub planting, ideally those favoured by red squirrel should be selected.

Hedgerows

6.2.11 The majority of the hedgerows within the survey area are species poor and degraded or recently planted and immature. It was observed that new hedgerows have been recently planted to create new field boundaries within the site. The planting largely comprised of a low species diversity mixture, mainly hawthorn and blackthorn (Prunus spinosa). It is important that any clearance of mature hedges is undertaken outside of the bird breeding season (as outlined above).

6.2.12 It is important that the minimum quantity of hedgerow possible is removed and new hedgerow planting should be implemented as compensation for any sections of hedgerow removed. This would maintain and enhance the habitat connectivity and continuity and form new links between existing hedgerows, woodland and scrub. Compensatory hedgerows should be planted with a diverse selection of native woody species with the aim of creating species-diverse hedgerows with mature trees. Wherever possible, planting should be undertaken at the earliest opportunity.

6.3 Impact Assessment- Residual Impact

6.3.1 Based on Table 2 within Section 3.4 Assessment Methodology, the magnitude of potential impact of the proposed Morpeth Northern Bypass route with mitigation is assessed as Negligible. Therefore with the nature conservation value of the red squirrel population assessed as Medium (Section 4), the Overall Impact Significance with mitigation is assessed as Neutral to Slight Adverse, based on Tables 3 and 4 in Section 3.4 Assessment Methodology. It is not possible to reduce this score completely to Neutral as the bypass will still have some negative long term residual impact for red squirrel, e.g. causing severance for expansion.

Summary


7.1 Summary

7.1.1 No red squirrels were observed along any of the woodland transect routes surveyed. However a red squirrel was observed in a mature hedgerow that would be severed as part of the proposed bypass scheme.

7.1.2 This sighting, in addition to incidental records from local residents and data from the Northumberland County Council confirms that red squirrels are present in this area, albeit in very small and apparently declining numbers.

7.1.3 Factors appearing to restrict their numbers in this area are the sub optimal habitat, comprising relatively small areas of largely broadleaved tree species, and the increase in grey squirrel numbers into the area spreading disease and out-competing the less generalist red squirrels.

7.1.4 The current proposals for the Morpeth Northern bypass show that no significant areas of woodland will be directly affected by the works. However there will be an impact on hedgerow habitat which may currently provide corridors, shelter and foraging habitat for red squirrel. There may also be increased disturbance during and following construction of the proposed bypass which could result in red squirrels becoming more vulnerable.

7.1.5 Mitigation measures that aim to reduce the overall impact of the proposed scheme on the red squirrel population have been detailed in Section 6.1. These include the planting of tree and hedgerow species favoured by red squirrels and the gapping up of existing hedgerows to improve the availability of shelter and foraging habitat. General mitigation measures detailed in Section 6.2 should be followed to reduce the overall impact of the proposed works on the general ecology of the area. It is assessed that the overall ecological impact on red squirrels as a result of the Morpeth Northern Bypass with mitigation is Neutral to Slight Adverse.

7 Summary

References


Department of the Environment (1981) Wildlife and Countryside Act- Chapter 69. HMSO.

Faber Maunsell (2007) Morpeth Northern Bypass, Phase 1 Habitat Survey. Unpublished report.

Friends of the Red Squirrel. Squirrel Information Pack. Red Alert North England Project.

Gurnell, J., Peter, L. & Pepper, H. (2001) Practical Techniques for Surveying and Monitoring Squirrels. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh.

Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment. IEEM.

JNCC: Advice Note – Red Squirrels and the Law. UK Red Squirrel Group, August 2004.

http://www.jncc.gov.uk/PDF/rs_law_ewn.pdf

JNCC (1994) UK Biodiversity Action Plan.

Northumberland Biodiversity Steering Group (2000) Northumberland Biodiversity Action Plan: Working for Wildlife.

References

Figures


Figure 1: Location of Morpeth Northern Bypass Route.

Figure 2: Location of Survey Areas.

Figure 3: Designated Sites.

Figure 4: Howburn Wood Transects.

Figure 5: Kater Dean Transect.

Figure 6: Fulbeck Grange and Cotting Burn Transects.

Figure 7: Incidental Records of Red Squirrel Sightings.

Figures

DRAWN BY CHECKED BY APPR. BY DATE

SCALE

REV AMENDMENT DATE

DW

N

CH

KD

AP

PR

CLIENT

PROJECT

TITLE

PROJ. NO. FIGURE NO. REV

NNNNNNNNN

DAM LY LMK NOV '07

1:10,000 53101

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL

MORPETH NORTHERN BYPASS

PROPOSED MORPETH NORTHERN BYPASS ROUTE

REPRODUCED FROM/BASED UPON THE ORDNANCE SURVEY MAPPING WITH PERMISSION OF THE CONTROLLER OF HER MAJESTY'S STATIONARY OFFICE. © CROWN COPYRIGHT. UNAUTHORISED REPRODUCTION INFRINGES CROWN COPYRIGHT AND MAY LEAD TO PROSECUTION OR CIVIL PROCEEDINGS.NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL - O.S. LICENSE NO. LA076775

5th Floor, 2 City Walk, Leeds, LS11 9ARTel: 0113 391 6800 Fax: 0113 391 6899

Website: www.fabermaunsell.com

KEY

PROPOSED ROUTE

ECOLOGICAL SURVEY AREA

01


SCALE

REV AMENDMENT DATE

DW

N

CH

KD

AP

PR

CLIENT

PROJECT

TITLE

HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)HOWBURN WOOD (ASNW, ARW & SNCI)

TWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTSTWO TRANSECTS 10 + 9 POINTS

COTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONECOTTING BURN ONE

TRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTSTRANSECT 2 POINTS

FULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCIFULBECK GRANGE SNCI

ONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTSONE TRANSECT 6 POINTS

KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE KATER DEAN ONE

TRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTSTRANSECT 8 POINTS


NNNNNNNNN

DAM LY LMK NOV '07

1:10,000 53101



SURVEY AREAS




KEY

PROPOSED ROUTE

ECOLOGICAL SURVEYAREA

02


SCALE

REV AMENDMENT DATE

DW

N

CH

KD

AP

PR

CLIENT

PROJECT

TITLE

ARW

SNCI

COTTING WOOD SNCI

SNCI

ASNW

ASNW


NNNNNNNNN

DAM LY LMK NOV '07

1:10,000 53101



DESIGNATED SITES




KEY

ECOLOGICAL SURVEYAREA

03

ANCIENT SEMI-NATURALWOODLAND

ANCIENT REPLANTEDWOODLAND

SITE OF NATURE CONSERVATION INTEREST


SCALE

REV AMENDMENT DATE

DW

N

CH

KD

AP

PR

CLIENT

PROJECT

TITLE



PEGSWOOD CPWANSBECK CO CONST

Issues

Opencast Workings

NORTHUMBRIA EURO CONST

Issues

Amble House

Issues

Spring

RH

ED

and

Wa

rd B

dy

2997

De

f

Issues

Cottingwood Common

65.8m

Howburn Wood

How Burn

Spring

ED and W

ard Bdy

5644

CS

Sinks

Issues

Path (um)

LB

Track

CS

0069

FB

0072

9074

Def

ED and

Ward Bdy

Posts

Howburn Wood

How

Burn

Track

Bowling Green

7774

(a)

(a)

700700

NE

TH

ER

WIT

TO

N E

DH

EB

RO

N C

P

POINT 6 -

GREY SQUIRREL

OBSERVED6

78

9

10

9

8

PROPOSED BYPASS ROUTE

34

5

TRANSECT A

POINT 1 -

3 ROE DEER

OBSERVED

1

3 2

4

5

7

6

TRANSECT B

1

2



RED SQUIRREL SURVEY MAP HOWBURN WOOD TRANSECTS


NNNNNNNNN

SURVEY TRANSECT WITH STOPPAGE POINTS


KEY


DAM LY LMK NOV '07

1:3,000 53101 04


SCALE

REV AMENDMENT DATE

DW

N

CH

KD

AP

PR

CLIENT

PROJECT

TITLE



68.3m

Sheep Pen

FFRH

Rose

Cottage

66.4m

FF

FF

Dene

Kater BM

RH

68.91m

0453

76.9m

1616

BM 75.26m

CASTLE MORPETH DISTRICTNORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY

MO

RP

ET

H N

OR

TH

ED

419000HEBRON, HEPSCOTT AND MITFORD WARDNETHERWITTON EDHEBRON CP

Track

Works

8460

Sewage

Kate

r D

ean

Kate

r D

ean

Chy

Nursery

8042

Def

RH

65527853

Northgate Hospital

Cot

ting

Bu

rn

Drain

Water

Tower

BM 84.48m

Kenneth

Day Centre

16 to 26

Mortuary

15

14

Drain

West View

12

The Lodge

6

A 6

97

A 1

1

83.8m

RH

Def

Shi

eldh

illBur

n

4

The Bungalows

1

3

2

WANSBECK CO CONST

Tweed Unit

Bu

r n

Shi

eldh

ill

NORTHUMBRIA EURO CONST

A 1

Middle

LB

TCB

Rigg

Sports Ground

FS

A 192

PW

Drain

Depot

Northgate Hospital

Wakefields

5542

5156

4251

3153

CASTLE MORPETH DISTRICT

7

2

3

4

5

6

8

1



RED SQUIRREL SURVEY MAP KATER DEAN TRANSECT


NNNNNNNNN


KEY

DAM LY LMK NOV '07

1:3,000 53101 05




SCALE

REV AMENDMENT DATE

DW

N

CH

KD

AP

PR

CLIENT

PROJECT

TITLE



Cottingwood Common

MORPETH CP

65.2m

61.3m

Spring

ED and Ward Bdy

2765

6

Path (um)

THE DELL

7

Cotting

El

Burn

Sub Sta

Sheep Pen

FFRH

Fulbeck Grange

Pond

60.0m

1

Lowbank

Conewood

8

Tree Tops

Strathaird

Lodge

Holly

Rose

Cottage

66.4m

FF

FF

Dene

Kater BM

RH

68.91m

0453

46.9m

Thistledene

BM 47.43m

Cottingburn

Bank

Dene

Glendene

House

Brewood

WANSBECK CO CONSTNORTHUMBRIA EURO CONST MORPETH CP

LB

Path (u

m)

1000

2495

59.7m


TH

E D

ELL

A 192

BM 65.01m

The Chimes

Heatherlea

The Crest

Fulbeck

House

10

12

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY

9496

0083

MO

RP

ET

H N

OR

TH

ED

(a)

Va

len tin

e L

od

ge

Green

Hedges

MORPETH CP

Glendene House

Cottingburn

MO

RP

ET

H N

OR

TH

WA

RD

(a)

900

62.8m

A 192


900

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY

Weir

9715

Dene Cottage

Dalegarth

Glencroft

Farneholme

FBSluice

Track

Works

8460

Sewage

Kate

r D

ean

8042

Def

RH

Valentine

Weir

Lodge

Rosebank

Fa

rneh

olm

e

Garage

The

Chimes

Lodge

WANSBECK CO CONST MORPETH CP

8728

5924

Dene

Bank

65527853

6617

6411

ED

and

Ward

Bdy

CS

Issues

Pump

BM 60.55m

6509

East Lane

End

CR

Cot

ting

Bu

rn

A 192

NO

RT

HU

MB

RIA

EU

RO

CO

NS

T

A 192

(a)

RH

Def

RED SQUIRREL SIGHTED

IN OAK TREE 10:30AM 18/10/07

6

FULBECK GRANGE

TRANSECT

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

5

12

12

3

4

COTTING BURN

TRANSECT



RED SQUIRREL SURVEY MAP FULBECK GRANGE & COTTING BURN TRANSECTS


NNNNNNNNN


KEY

DAM LY LMK NOV '07

1:3,000 53101 06




SCALE

REV AMENDMENT DATE

DW

N

CH

KD

AP

PR

CLIENT

PROJECT

TITLE

333333333

222222222

111111111


NNNNNNNNN

DAM LY LMK NOV '07

1:10,000 53101



ECOLOGY SURVEYS BASE MAPINCIDENTAL RED SQUIRREL INFORMATION(SECTION 4.3.3)




KEY

PROPOSED ROUTE


07

Faber Maunsell Morpeth Northern Bypass

Appendices


Appendix 1: Survey Forms


Red Squirrel Survey Form Wood: Fulbeck Grange, Morpeth (see Figure 6) Date: 17th October 2007 Time: 15.20 Weather: Dry, mild, light wind Surveyors: L.Yates & C. Wenn Transect Location

Species (plus

number seen)

Distance from

Transect (m)

Tree Species

Activity & Comments

Stop 1 – 0m None

N/A Scots pine, holly, sycamore, birch, oak, rhododendron

Close to roadside

Section 1

None

N/A Scots pine, holly, sycamore, birch, oak, rhododendron

Dense ground cover

Stop 2 - 100m

None

N/A Hazel, birch. Ruderals

Open area, less trees and dense ground cover leading down to stream.

Section 2

None

N/A Oak, birch, hazel

More canopy cover.

Stop 3 - 200m

None

N/A Hazel, birch Just before bridge over stream. Limited ground cover

Section 3

None

N/A Birch, ash, Scots pine, Douglas fir

Other side of stream. More coniferous species.

Stop 4 – 300m

None

N/A Scots pine, Douglas Fir More coniferous trees species in this area. No ground cover.

Section 4

None

N/A Horse chestnut, holly

Scrubby, limited ground flora

Stop 5 – 400m

None

N/A Beech, holly, rhododendron

Pond – 100% duckweed cover, deep leaf litter

Section 5

None

N/A Laurel, holly More scrubby trees. Denser ground cover.

Stop 6 – 500m

None

N/A Sycamore, grey poplar Younger trees. More open and denser ground cover.


Red Squirrel Survey Form Wood: Kater Dean, Morpeth (see Figure 5) Date: 17th October 2007 Time: 14.40 Weather: Dry, sunny, light breeze Surveyors: G. Parkinson & M. Horrocks Transect Location

Species (plus

number seen)

Distance from

Transect (m)

Tree Species

Activity & Comments

Section 1

None N/A Hawthorn, sycamore Coppice and mature trees

Stop 1 - 100m

None

N/A Sycamore, hazel, ash

Section 2

None

N/A Yew, birch, rowan Young plantation

Stop 2 - 200m

None

N/A Beech, pine

Section 3

None

N/A Ash, sycamore, pine

Stop 3 – 300m

None

N/A Alder, hawthorn, ash, oak Older plantation

Section 4

None

N/A Alder, hawthorn, ash, oak Mature bank side vegetation and trees

Stop 4 – 400m

None

N/A Oak, birch, willow, hazel, ash

1 roe deer

Section 5

None


Stop 5 – 500m

None


Section 6

None

N/A Oak Scattered trees and wooded banks

Stop 6 – 600m

None

N/A Oak, hawthorn, alder, holly

Wooded banks

Section 7

None


Wooded banks

Stop 7 – 700m

None


Wooded banks

Section 8

None


Wooded banks

Stop 8 – 800m

None


Wooded banks


Red Squirrel Survey Form

Wood: Cotting Burn, Morpeth (see Figure 6) Date: 17th October 2007 Time: 16.30 Weather: Dry, mild, light wind Surveyors: L.Yates & C. Wenn Transect Location

Species (plus

number seen)

Distance from

Transect (m)

Tree Species

Activity & Comments

Stop 1 – 100m None

N/A Oak, hawthorn Adjacent stream, quite open, scattered trees. Steep bank along southern side of stream

Section 1

None

N/A Willow, ash, hazel, hawthorn

Stream running through scattered trees and scrub

Stop 2 - 200m

None

N/A Scots pine At top of steep southern bank. Coniferous tree species, no ground cover.


Red Squirrel Survey Form Wood: Howburn Wood, Morpeth – Transect A (see Figure 4) Date: 19th October 2007 Time: 09.20 Weather: Dry, mild, light wind Surveyors: L.Yates & C. Wenn Transect Location

Species (plus

number seen)

Distance from

Transect (m)

Tree Species

Activity & Comments

Stop 1 – 0m None

N/A Hazel, sycamore Woodland edge. Limited ground flora. 3 roe deer.

Section 1

None

N/A Hazel, sycamore Small tributary stream (practically dry) running down to How Burn

Stop 2 - 100m

None

N/A Sycamore, hazel, ash Steep slopes

Section 2

None

N/A Hazel, sycamore Dense ground cover

Stop 3 - 200m

None

N/A Larch, hazel More coniferous tree species

Section 3

None

N/A Larch, hazel More coniferous tree species

Stop 4 – 300m

None

N/A Beech, silver birch, hazel, holly, oak

More diverse species structure

Section 4

None

N/A Beech, silver birch, hazel, holly, oak

Large badger sett

Stop 5 – 400m

None

N/A Larch, hazel, silver birch Dominated by larch and birch

Section 5

None

N/A Larch, hazel, silver birch Larch plantation

Stop 6 – 500m

Grey 10m Larch, hazel, silver birch 1 grey squirrel (on ground near larch trees) 1 roe deer

Section 6

None

N/A Larch, hazel, silver birch Less dense ground cover

Stop 7 – 600m

None

N/A Larch, hazel, silver birch Less dense ground cover

Section 7

None

N/A Larch, hazel, silver birch Becoming more dense

Stop 8 – 700m

None

N/A Larch, hazel, holly Quite dense trees and scrub

Section 8

None

N/A Larch, hazel, holly Quite dense trees and scrub

Stop 9 – 800m

None

N/A Hawthorn, silver birch, oak, holly, sycamore, ash

More diverse tree structure, but quite open canopy. Near ponds.

Section 9

None

N/A Hawthorn, silver birch, oak, holly, sycamore, ash

More diverse tree structure, but quite open canopy.

Stop 10 – 900m

None

N/A Hawthorn, holly, hazel, three very mature oak trees

Dense ground cover


Red Squirrel Survey Form Wood: Howburn Wood, Morpeth – Transect B (see Figure 4) Date: 19th October 2007 Time: 09.20 Weather: Dry, mild, light wind Surveyors: G. Parkinson & M. Horrocks Transect Location

Species (plus

number seen)

Distance from

Transect (m)

Tree Species

Activity & Comments

Section 1

None N/A Hazel, oak, ash Dense woodland. All broadleaved species

Stop 1 - 100m

None

N/A Hazel, oak, ash, birch Dense woodland

Section 2

None

N/A Hazel, oak, ash, birch, sycamore

More open. Limited ground and understory flora

Stop 2 - 200m

None

N/A Sycamore - dominant More open. Limited ground and understory flora

Section 3

None


Stop 3 – 300m

None


Section 4

None

N/A Ash, hazel, birch Some younger trees present but still very open understory flora

Stop 4 – 400m

None

N/A Ash, hazel, birch Younger trees, limited ground cover

Section 5

None

N/A Sycamore, hazel, birch, larch

Younger trees, limited ground cover

Stop 5 – 500m

None

N/A Sycamore, ash, hazel Younger trees, limited ground cover

Section 6

None

N/A Ash, hazel, sycamore, oak, hawthorn, larch

Areas of larch plantation on northern bank of stream

Stop 6 – 600m

None



Section 7

None



Stop 7 – 700m

None



Section 8

None

N/A Oak, ash, holly, hazel, sycamore, larch

Denser understory cover. Larch still present on northern bank

Stop 8 – 800m

None

N/A Sycamore, ash, beech, oak, birch

Denser understory cover. Larch still present on northern bank

Section 9

None

N/A Hazel, oak, sycamore Dense hazel thicket. Very steep sided valley. No conifers present

Stop 9 – 900m

None

N/A Hazel, oak, sycamore Dense hazel thicket. Very steep sided valley. No conifers present

appendix 7.3 red squirrel survey report... · morpeth lies approximately 16.2 miles north of...

Documents