One hundred years of nature conservation in North Lancashire

Vascular plants. How well have we done?© E.F. Greenwood

January 2015

IntroductionIn 1911 Charles Rothschild founded the Society for the Promotion of Nature Reserves (SPNR). This heralded the first national survey in England, Wales and Scotland aimed at locating breeding places of scarce creatures, localities of scarce plants and areas of geological interest.. After three years a list of 284 sites was compiled including one in north Lancashire. The card index supporting the selection of sites (web reference) provides little information on the reasons why the site was selected. The site is described as ‘Fleet-wood Lancashire, Ansdell Rossal to Fleetwood Barracks. Open sand hills foreshore, a few scarce plants com-piled by Wm Yates, Burnt House, 16 Lime Grove’ (Sands, 2013).

For the next 34 years there appears to have been little further activity for plant conservation in the region. However, nationally progress was being made if at times painfully slowly and in 1949 the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act was passed. This led to the creation of the Nature Conservancy Council with powers to schedule Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and create National Nature Reserves (NNR). Provi-sion for creating Local Nature Reserves as well as National Parks was also made in the 1949 Act.

Little time was lost in scheduling a number of sites including several in North Lancashire. Some of the sites were scheduled for their geological interest whilst others were primarily ornithological. North Lancashire SSSIs included two large areas covering the Bowland Fells. Unfortunately beyond notifying that the sites were of in-terest there was little that could be done to manage them for conservation or to safeguard them from destruc-tion. The ability to provide financial incentives to landowners and tenants to carry out positive conservation measures or instigate penalties for inappropriate use was not forthcoming until much later major revisions of the Act.

These major revisions included the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1989, amended 1985 and 1991 and the Coun-tryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. These provided increasing protection for designated sites including provi-sions for making management agreements with landowners. Also Countryside Stewardship schemes started in 1991 and at the Higher Level of funding provided significant finance recognising that managing for wildlife might decrease income.

From 1951 until 2000 41 sites with at least some botanical interest (34 with major plant interest) were sched-uled in North Lancashire and three became wholly or partly National Nature Reserves whilst others became Local Nature Reserves (Table 1). In the north of the region Hawes Water and Gait Barrows SSSIs and in the south the Ribble Estuary became NNRs. Local Nature Reserves were created at Warton Crag and Warton Crag Quarry, Trowbarrow Quarry, Marton Mere and Lytham St Anne’s with four or five more recently designated in Preston and elsewhere

Although the SPNR was established to create nature reserves progress was slow and it was only in the 1960s with the creation of several County Naturalists’ Trusts that progress was made at the local level. The Lan-cashire Naturalists’ Trust was founded in 1962 and after a difficult few years and with the help of the Nature Conservancy Council, gradually raised the profile and need for nature conservation in the county. Over the

1

years the voluntary sector was also involved in acquiring and managing nature reserves. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) acquired or had agreements to manage Leighton Moss SSSI and other areas in the vicinity as well as parts of Warton Crag, the Ribble Estuary and Newton Marsh SSSIs. The Lancashire Wildlife Trust also acquired significant sites including Heysham and most of Cockerham/Winmarleigh Mosses and had agreements to manage parts of Warton Crag and Barnaby’s Sands and Burrows Marsh, parts of the Wyre Estuary SSSI.

The early protagonists for nature conservation had a major problem in defining which sites were worthy of preservation. Charles Rothschild simply asked his friends. In the mid 1960s I was asked by the then Assistant Regional Officer for the Nature Conservancy Council if I knew why the large Bowland SSSIs were designated as there was little on file. Again word-of-mouth may have led to an initial selection and for Bowland the knowl-edge of W.H. Pearsall (1891 – 1964), a specialist ecologist in mountains and moorlands and whose father had retired to Bare, knew the area well and his opinion would have been influential

Similarly the then Lancashire Naturalists Trust faced the same problem: which sites were worthy of conserva-tion and acquiring as nature reserves. The solution was again to ask around but this time using the knowledge of local naturalists.

To some extent these were self-imposed difficulties as in 1907 Wheldon and Wilson in their Flora of West Lan-cashire clearly described the significant features of many of the sites worthy of conservation. It seems proba-ble that Rothschild knew none of these and it is not clear if those who designated the first North Lancashire SS-SIs were sufficiently aware of this source.

Nevertheless by 1970 the technique of word-of-mouth followed by site visit had elucidated most of what was botanically significant. Also by this time the Atlas of the British Flora was published (Perring and Walters, 1962) and a new botanical survey of part of North Lancashire (VC 60) was well under way. For the first time more ob-jective assessment of sites could be made and nationally the publication of a Nature Conservation Review (Rat-cliffe, 1977) enabled comparative evaluation. Unfortunately in North Lancashire the situation became more complicated with the transfer of eastern Bowland from Yorkshire (part of VC 64) to Lancashire in 1973 as part of local government re-organisation. Botanists had rarely visited the area and it was largely unknown, a situa-tion that was to persist until 1985 when Phyll Abbott started work on her Plant Atlas of Mid-west Yorkshire (Abbott, 2005).

Nationally, significant work describing various habitats at the country and county level was initiated. This led to a number of unpublished reports, e.g. A botanical survey of limestone grassland in Lancashire (Newman, 1988) or Sand dune vegetation survey of Great Britain. Part 1 England (Radley, 1994). Also in the 1970s Phase 1 Habi-tat Classification was introduced and developed in the 1980s. This scheme recognised ten habitat groups and to help surveyors the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) published an A4 Phase 1 Handbook sup-ported by an A5 Field Manual. Phase 1 surveys became an important process in initial recognition of sites of conservation importance and in planning work.

The publication of British Plant Communities (Rodwell, 1991 – 2000) enabled the accurate description, and therefore evaluation, of sites and the plant communities they contained. The process of identifying sites wor-thy of conservation and designation of sites of scientific interest became a priority to secure them before they were lost to development or agricultural improvement. By 2005 34 primarily habitat and botanically based SS-SIs had been designated in North Lancashire and these represented most of the important sites in the region. However one site had already been lost to nutrient enrichment and subsequent physical destruction. A further geological site was de-scheduled in 1987 although by that time it was recognised that its botanical interest was significant but not at SSSI level. A small number of additional sites have been identified subsequently as possi-bly of SSSI status but not yet designated (J. Hickling, pers. comm.). Ironically one of these, a heath and mire site, was missed through inadequate survey made in late autumn. Some sites were originally designated for

2

geological or ornithological interest and only later were the vegetation and plant interests recognised and site boundaries often extended significantly.

In 2000 nature conservation was often seen as site based. It was generally agreed that sites needed to be large to be sustainable yet the boundaries of some sites were far too tightly drawn. For example in North Lancashire Coldwell Farm Pasture SSSI is very small and whilst containing the most important features of the site it did not recognise the importance of a mineral spring and ditch irrigating it or the periodic flooding of the Leighton Beck bordering one side of the SSSI. This latter became nutrient enriched losing its own distinctive macro-phytes and inevitably affecting the SSSI. Identifying sites worthy of conservation was a necessary first step to management. However little positive management could be achieved unless the site was a nature reserve managed by a statutory or voluntary body established in part for this purpose.

Since the Nature Conservancy Council was established shortly before the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act of 1949 was enacted the ‘National Guardian’ and government advisory body has seen numer-ous changes to its status, function and organisation and its name has also changed to reflect these changes. One of the more important changes was the devolving of nature conservation to the countries (Scotland and Wales) with English Nature covering only England. A small JNCC continued for national and international is-sues. Yet despite these changes with at least some of them driven by political motives, rather than for better-ment of nature conservation much has been achieved (Marren, 2002). At the same time the growing public in-terest in wildlife and conservation has strengthened the voluntary bodies. Thus by 2000 the state and status of nature conservation in Britain and Lancashire was well perceived.

At an international level the UK signed a Convention on Biodiversity at the ‘Earth Summit’ at Rio de Janeiro in 1992. This led to the launch of Biodiversity: the UK Action Plan (Anon., 1994). This set a government goal ‘to conserve and enhance biological diversity within the UK and to contribute to the conservation of global biodi-versity through all appropriate mechanisms’. For the first time there was recognition that ‘biodiversity’ was not just within designated sites but was everywhere and that the possible impact of a changing climate was signifi-cant. This in turn led to the development nationally and locally of Biodiversity Action Plans (BAP) with separate Habitat and Species (HAP and SAP) Action Plans. These required the definition of habitat and species and then to quantify how much and how many. Furthermore they were to recognise who was involved in implementing the plans and to set targets for improving or increasing the extent of habitats and maintaining the number of sites and number of individuals of SAP species. An immense amount of work by paid and voluntary workers was involved in preparing these plans and it was probably a surprise for some stakeholders to discover their responsibilities. In North Lancashire the process was led by the Lancashire Wildlife Trust, now known as the Wildlife Trust for Lancashire, Manchester and North Merseyside, under the auspices of the Lancashire Biodi-versity Partnership. By 2011 eleven HAPs were published for Lancashire together with 11 plant SAPs. Whilst the process focussed on what was of importance lack of funding prevented much positive conservation. Fur-thermore the realisation that perhaps a third (or 300+ species) of the native vascular flora was endangered meant that it was impossible to prepare a SAP for every endangered vascular plant species. This prompted the compilation of the ‘Long List’ to be viewed as an omnibus SAP.

Meanwhile major changes were taking place at the national level. Yet another change to the national body covering nature conservation took place with the merging of English Nature, the Countryside Agency and the Rural Development Service in 2006 to form Natural England and enacted by the Natural Environment and Ru-ral Communities (NERC) Act 2006. This Act also listed in Section 41 (S41) some of the most endangered species; Species of Principal Importance. Nature conservation was now seen as part of a wider service not just about the conservation of wildlife but also about access to it and the countryside by the general public and about the people who live and work in rural environments. But policy was to have an even greater shift with the publication in 2010 of Making Space for Nature. A review of England’s wildlife sites and ecological Network chaired by Professor Sir John Lawton CBE, FRS. This report accepted that the creation of SSSIs as the primary focus for nature conservation was an important and successful process but it was not enough in itself. It left

3

high value sites isolated and unconnected and to remedy this, a system of ecological networks was required. It needed a ‘step-change’ in thinking for large-scale habitat restoration and re-creation underpinned by re-estab-lishment of ecological processes and ecosystem services for both people and wildlife. For the first time it also clearly linked wildlife conservation to people and the need to engage the public in the process. Government accepted these ideas as did the voluntary sector. In fact the Wildlife Trusts had anticipated this change of thinking by launching their policy of A Living Landscape in 2006. This was a call to restore the UK’s battered ecosystems for wildlife and people. The report covered the science behind landscape-scale conservation and its links to Biodiversity Action Planning. It also linked the ideas to plan for climate change and the need to re-duce carbon dioxide emissions.

Following the ‘Lawton Report’ the BAP programme was terminated and the international obligations imbed-ded within it following the ‘Rio Summit’ were succeeded by the UK Post – 2010 Biodiversity Framework launched in 2012 (Anon., 2012a) and administered by JNCC.

Today nature conservation policy is implemented under the terms of Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for Eng-land’s wildlife and ecosystem services published by Defra in 2011. This is a strategic document that sets targets for safeguarding and improving priority habitats and species of Principal Importance that had been established in the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 and updated in 2010.

In the UK following the Natural Environment White Paper in 2012 Local Nature Partnerships were to be estab-lished, more or less on a county basis. These have a very broad remit and involve all those who might have an interest in the outdoors. At the same time limited funding was to be offered to selected Nature Improvement Areas, a new name for Ecological Restoration Zones proposed by Lawton. The approved Morecambe Bay Im-provement Area covers the coast in Lancashire from the Lune Estuary to the Cumbrian border and beyond. A paper was also published explaining the concept of Habitat Networks and encouragement given to stakehold-ers to establish these. These ideas recognise that most wildlife is outside designated sites and that policies need to be developed so that isolated sites are connected enabling wildlife in high value sites to be connected to each other along wildlife corridors.

The Lawton Report contained a great deal of new thinking and recognised at a national level that nature con-servation must involve the wider picture. Perhaps this was recognition by Government what British naturalists in the voluntary sector had long understood.

It is of course much too early to know if this new thinking and initiatives will halt the continuing decline of species acknowledged on a world scale by Rio + 20, a United Nations conference in sustainable development (Anon.,2012b).

Local GovernmentThe 1949 National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act gave powers to local authorities to desig-nate Local Nature Reserves (LNR). This power was not exercised in North Lancashire until the Lytham St Anne’s LNR (now part of the Lytham St Anne’s SSSI) was declared in 1968. This not only safe-guarded the dunes on the inland side of Clifton Drive but it also maintained an undeveloped strip of land between the built areas of St Anne’s and Blackpool. It was many years before further Local Na-ture Reserves were declared in North Lancashire.

Arguably more important than this power of local authorities was their increasing awareness of the importance of wildlife and biodiversity and the need to consider these issues in their planning work, usually following guidance notes issued by central government. Amongst the most important Acts governing this work was the 1968 Town and Country Planning Act requiring local authorities to pre-pare Structure Plans. The lead for these in North Lancashire was taken by Lancashire County Council.

4

Structure Plans were strategic documents providing policies for planning in the area. They were re-vised from time to time but the Landscape and Heritage section of the Joint Lancashire Structure Plan 2001/2016 covering Lancashire, Blackburn with Darwen and Blackpool provides considerable detail for these policies. However, structure planning ceased in 2004 and was replaced by Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents. In October 2006 the National Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act came into force requiring all public bodies to have regard to bio-diversity conservation (biodiversity duty) when carrying out their functions. The public bodies cov-ered by the Act included, government departments and agencies, National Health Trusts and utilities amongst others. However, planning regulations and guidance are in a continuing state of change as government ideas and policies change.

Over the years Lancashire County Council has co-operated with many different organisations, includ-ing the Lancashire Wildlife Trust, in developing and implementing biodiversity policies. During the 1970s and 1980s when the Nature Conservancy and successor bodies were producing documents describing Lancashire’s vegetation the County Council published Lancashire’s Woodland Heritage (Morries, 1986). This was a seminal work describing the history and ecology of one of the most im-portant Lancashire habitats. In 1999 they collaborated with many other organisations within the Re-gional Biodiversity Steering Group for North West England (1999) to produce Wild about the North West. A biodiversity Audit of North West England. This covered a large area but included North Lan-cashire and comprised the first authoritative account of the region’s vegetation, fauna and flora. At the same time following the ‘Rio Summit’ they were an active partner in the BAP process.

Thus through their strategic planning role the County Council was a major influencing force in nature conservation. At times they have been able to act more directly as, for example, halting limestone removal at Gait Barrows and paving the way for it to become a National Nature Reserve.

Voluntary BodiesIn addition to National and Local Nature Reserves a number of voluntary organisations have ac-quired or manage nature reserves in North Lancashire. Although they were often founded many years ago it is only in the last 30 years or so that they have acquired reserves. The Wildlife Trust for Lancashire, Manchester and North Merseyside is the only organisation that covers the conservation of all wildlife; plants and animals. It has a network of more than twelve reserves that it manages in North Lancashire. These include natural and semi-natural vegetation at Heysham Moss, Cockerham/Winmarleigh Mosses, Burrows Marsh and Barnaby’s Sands (part of the Wyre Estuary SSSI), Warton Crag, Moor Piece, Aughton Woods, Boilton, Nab Redscar and Tunbrook Woods and Lord’s Lot Bog. In addition the post-industrial sites of Heysham, Middleton and Brockholes reserves are of major importance as refuges for rare and endangered species.

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) has a major reserve at Leighton Moss renowned for its extensive reed beds and the conservation of a number of rare birds. The organisation has also acquired nearby salt marshes, woodlands, old mossland and parts of Warton Crag. Although the RSPB is primarily concerned with birds their holdings around Morecambe Bay are important for con-serving important habitats, vegetation and endangered plant species.

5

Both the Wildlife Trust and the RSPB have a significant advisory role in the region and the RSPB in particular has an important input into the management of the United Utilities Bowland Estate and the Ribble Estuary where they have another reserve on the south side of the Estuary.

The National Trust although initially concerned with the conservation of wildlife was mostly a body that acquired and managed important historic properties. However Enterprise Neptune launched in 1965 provided a programme for acquiring significant coastal areas, primarily for their landscape sig-nificance. In North Lancashire they hold property around Morecambe Bay at Heysham Head, Jack Scout, the Lots, Silverdale, Eaves Wood and elsewhere. All are important wildlife sites and several are SSSIs.

The Woodland Trust manages a few woodlands in Preston, some of which are relic ancient woods and Hyning Wood, Warton.

Finally Wyre Borough Council manages Fleetwood Marsh Nature Park, an important post-industrial site and part of the Wyre Estuary SSSI.

AgricultureSince 1949 government has recognised the need to conserve wildlife and has provided funding to carry out positive conservation measures nationally. It has also, at the same time, provided funding to finance schemes that unfortunately had the opposite effect, e.g. moor gripping and drainage.

The Napoleonic Wars over 200 years ago highlighted the vulnerability of the UK food supply to over-seas problems. Ever since then food production in the UK has been subsidised by the tax payer. The amounts and methodology has varied over the years but until recently subsidies were based on pro-ductivity in order to increase supplies of home produced food. Along with subsidies improved tech-nology has transformed the farming business over the last 180 years and especially in the last 40 years.

Some of the more important developments included the following changes.

1. In the early years of the 20th century the widespread use of basic slag, a phosphate rich fertilizer arising as a waste product from steel making, and sulphate of ammonia, a nitrogen rich fertilizer arising as waste product from town gas manufacture improved both arable and pastoral farmland. Also used from the 19th century was night soil, guano and offal from slaughter houses but the extent of their use is unknown. Lime and farm yard manure had been used for years and continued to be used. As a con-sequence herb rich grasslands started to disappear from the early 20th century.

2. The seed acts in the 1920s ensured that grain seed, mostly oats at this time, was sown without weed impurities. Many attractive archaeophyte (introductions before 1500) weeds had already become rare following im-proved arable farming techniques (drilling and weeding) but clean seed eliminated several weeds including corncockle, cornflower etc.

3. In the 1950s onwards lowland farms were able to use increasingly tar-geted fertilizer regimes to improve productivity and herbicides to elimi-nate weeds. Weeds in grain crops were progressively lost during the

6

1970s and 80s although it took a few more years to kill Chenopodiaceae and other weeds in potato crops.

4. In the uplands subsidies for drainage (gripping in bogs and elsewhere) to-gether with heavy applications of fertilizer converted most of the bogs sur-rounding the Bowland Fells in the 1980s and 90s into pasture and dried out higher level bogs. Even at higher altitudes productivity increases could be demonstrated.

5. Plant breeding research produced many new varieties that could benefit from the enriched soils and strains of Lolium spp in particular transformed grasslands into Rye grass monocultures. Through the work of Sir George Stapledon at Aberystwyth and others elsewhere grassland productivity was greatly increased (Moore, 1966) and more recent changes were dis-cussed by Greenwood (2000).

6. With the changes in farming methods run-off from fields seriously en-riched streams and rivers causing eutrophication of many lowland water courses. Such polluted water courses could support little wildlife.

7. The combination of productivity based subsidies and the availability of new technologies led to overgrazing in most upland areas. This was unsus-tainable and by the 2000s subsidy payments changed recognizing that lower stocking levels and protecting the landscape were required.

8. Elsewhere in the country productivity drivers led to widespread hedge re-moval but this was never a big issue in North Lancashire. Similarly wide-spread coniferous tree planting in the post war period did not occur. The forests at Quernmore and especially at Stocks were planted after the First World War.

9. In lowland parts of North Lancashire winter flooding was a serious prob-lem but this threat was significantly reduced with large scale drainage schemes and the building or improvement of coastal pumping stations. This lowered the water table over large areas reducing water levels in ditches thus causing the loss of several species including Hottonia palustris and Baldellia ranunculoides etc from most lowland areas. Furthermore over the years many rivers were canalised and the natural meanders and oxbows lost.

However it was not just subsidies aimed at increasing food production that caused major changes. Infra-structure works have profoundly changed many areas. During the 19th century the expanding coastal conurbations of Lytham St Anne’s, Fleetwood and Morecambe destroyed large areas of sand dune and heath, which continued throughout the 20th century. To protect some of these new urban areas sea defence works were necessary. From 1895 to 1936 a massive series of sea walls were erected for seven miles from South Shore, Blackpool to north of Bispham. After the Second World War sea defences were extended almost to Fleetwood. These works effectively destroyed the shin-gle banks, heaths and sandy areas on the north Fylde coast and removed most of the features identi-fied as of national importance by Rothschild in 1913.

Nevertheless not all infrastructure works were necessarily harmful to the native flora. Ever since marl pits were dug in the 18th century various ‘holes’ and ‘heaps’ have provided a refuge for some

7

plants. Inevitably the holes and heaps have caused losses but on abandonment following their for-mation they have given a new lease of life to some species.

Thus the long abandoned grit quarries in Bowland have provided a refuge for Gymnocarpium dryopteris, Cryptogramma crispa etc, whilst abandoned limestone quarries at Silverdale and Warton have likewise provided a refuge for some calcicole species, e.g. Ophrys insectifera and Gentianella amarella. The iron slag heaps on the salt marshes at Warton, together with abandoned iron work-ings in Carnforth, have provided a refuge for some species, e.g Clinopodium acinos. Even the motor-way network, particularly at large interchanges, has provided a refuge for some species, especially marsh orchids. It may also come as a surprise to many that 100 years ago Cochlearia danica, now such a feature of motorway verges and other salt treated roads, was a very rare coastal species. Abandoned gravel and brick pits and former industrial areas have similarly provided refuges for some rare species. Some of these have developed such a rich diversity of habitat and flora that they have become nature reserves, eg. Heysham, Middleton and Brockholes.

Most reservoirs would appear to have little positive botanical interest. Yet the Grimsargh and Alston reservoir banks provided a reservoir for herb-rich mesotrophic grasslands but the cessation of man-agement threatens their future. However the draw-down zones of other reservoirs, notably Stocks, provides a refuge for another group of species that would otherwise be extinct. Furthermore the forestry development in the surrounding estate at Stocks Reservoir left areas free from planting in-cluding a valley woodland providing a refuge for species of unimproved grassland as well as wood-land.

So after 100 years of nature conservation have positive conservation efforts saved native plants from decline or extinction in the face of huge changes in the environment? Alternatively have native species survived in spite of these developments or irrespective of nature conservation efforts?

The Conservation or biodiversity auditWheldon and Wilson’s Flora of West Lancashire published in 1907 provided a bench mark describing the vegetation and plants that grew in much of North Lancashire. In the next 50 years only Roth-schild’s proposed sites of importance at Ansdell and Fleetwood hinted at any need for positive na-ture conservation. During this period little work was done to document vegetation or floristic change and no nature conservation action took place.

HabitatsMost of the more important habitats were protected by SSSI designation by 2010 although a few more, mostly recently discovered sites, merit designation. Some sites have been recognised as of wildlife importance by other organisations. Under the EC Habitats Directive Morecambe Bay, More-cambe Bay Pavements, Calf Hill and Cragg Woods and The North Pennine Dales Meadows, all of which include sites in North Lancashire, are designated as Special Areas of Conservation Importance (SAC). These designations require that sites be maintained in ‘favourable conservation status’ and protected against harmful development except in cases of ‘overriding public interest’. All sites are SSSIs. In addition Plant Life has designated Stocks Reservoir as an Important Plant Area. This recog-nises that the site is of international conservation importance although Stocks Reservoir is neither an SSSI nor SAC. Many more sites of perhaps lesser, local significance have been assigned Biological Heritage (BHS) status. These are none statutory sites of biological significance some of which may be

8

of SSSI status. They are selected by a Biological Heritage Site review panel comprising officers from Lancashire County Council, the Wildlife Trust for Lancashire, Greater Manchester and Merseyside and Natural England.

Table 1 lists the SSSIs in North Lancashire

(https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/natural_england) with botanical interest. A few were originally designated for their geological or bird interest only. One, Arbour Quarry, had signifi-cant botanical interest but was de-scheduled in 1987. Leck Fell Head Catchment was initially desig-nated for its geological interest but boundaries were later considerably extended in part to recognise the natural history and botanical interest of the area.

Table 1. North Lancashire sites of special scientific interest 2013 with botanical significance.

SSSI Name Primary interest

Date de-clared

Date of last survey % in good condition January 2013

Comment

Arbour Quarry (SD61.40.)

Geology 1951 De-scheduled 1987 A significant botanical site

Artle Dale (SD54.62.)

Plants 1989 2013 100 Some detri-mental nutri-ent enrichment

Barn Gill Mead-ows (SD73.54.)

Plants 1996 2009 100

Bell Sykes Mead-ows (SD71.52.)

Plants 1999 2009 84.5

Bowland Fells (Parts of SD55, 56, 65 & 66 etc)

Plants, geology

1988 2009 5.28 (22.7 un-favourable declining, 71.99 un-favourable re-covering)

A single large site incorpo-rating two sites declared 1951

Burton Wood(SD54.66.)

Plants 1976 2008 100 Comment sug-gests partly un-favourable re-covering

Calf Hill & Cragg Woods (SD54.61)

Plants 2000 2011 100

Clear Beck Meadow (SD51.67.)

Plants 1988 2009 100 Comment sug-gests un-favourable re-covering

9

Coldwell Farm Pasture (SD47.78.)

Plants 1992 2011 0 All un-favourable

Crag Bank (SD48.69.)

Plants 1979 2010 0 All un-favourable

Cringlebarrow & Deepdale (SD49.75.)

Plants 1979 2012 94 Either un-favourable re-covering or un-favourable

Eaves Wood (SD46.76.)

Plants 1963 2012 51.2 Unfavourable recovering

Far Holme Meadow (SD64.65.)

Plants 1994 2009 100

Field Head Meadow (SD72.52.)

Plants 1999 2009 100

Gait Barrows, in-cluding Thrang Wood (SD48.77.)

Plants, geology

1975 2005 81.5 Unfavourable recovering

Hawes Water (SD47.70.)

Plants 1951 2011 18.2 80.9 un-favourable re-covering, 0.82 unfavourable

Heysham Moss (SD46.60.)

Plants 1992 2010 100

Jack Scout (SD45.73.)

Plants 1991 2009 100

Langcliff Cross Meadow (SD72.51.)

Plants 1989 2009 100

Leck Beck Head Catchment Area (SD66.79.)

Geology,plants

19591979

2000 49.4 45.5 un-favourable re-covering, 5 un-favourable

Leighton Moss (SD48.74.)

Birds 1951 2010 100

Lytham St Anne’s Dunes (SD31.30.)

Plants 1968 2009 0 All un-favourable

Marton Mere, Blackpool

Birds 1979 2010 100

10

(SD34.35.)

Morecambe Bay, including Lune Estuary (SD Part of SD46 & 47)

Birds 1976 2008 - 2012 94.2

Myttons Mead-ows (SD70.53.)

Plants 1985 2009 97.5 recovering

New Ing Meadow(SD78.50.)

Plants 1992 2012 0 Unfavourable recovering

Newton Marsh (SD45.29.)

Birds 1979 2012 0 Unfavourable recovering

Outfield Moss(SD58.75.)

Plants ? De-scheduled 1970s Nutrient en-richment fol-lowed by being blown up

Red Scar & Tun Brook Woods (SD59.32.)

Plants 1979 2008 87.7 Unfavourable part recovering

Ribble Estuary (SD39.26.)

Birds 1976 2008 - 2010 99.1

Robert Hall Moor (SD63.68.)

Plants 1979 2010 0 All recovering

Roeburndale woods (SD60.65.)

Plants 1976 2009 - 2010 84.8 Unfavourable element due to Rhododendron

Silverdale Golf Course (SD47.75.)

Plants 1998 2012 0 Unfavourable, declining

Standridge Farm Pasture (SD73.53.)

Plants 1998 2011 100

Tarnbrook Meadows (SD58.55.)

Plants 1989 2009 75.2 2 meadows un-favourable re-covering

Thrang End & Yealand Hall Al-lotment (SD49.76.)

Plants 1979 2009 0 Unfavourable recovering

Thwaite House Moss (SD49.68.)

Plants 2004 2009 100

11

Warton Crag (SD49.73.)

Plants 1976 2006 - 2010 72.2 Problem of scrub invasion

White Moss (SD79.54.)

Plants 1979 2012 0 Signs of recov-ery as agricul-tural run-off di-verted.

Winmarleigh Moss (SD44.48.)

Plants 1979 2012 0 Continued dry-ing

Wyre Estuary, incorporates Barnaby’s Sands and Burrows Marsh (Parts of SD34

Various 1968, 1995

100

Using the listings ‘on-line’ at Natural England’s website the condition as at January 2013 is available. There are 39 sites with botanical interest but in addition two former sites were de-scheduled. Ar-bour Quarry was a geological site but had developed a calcareous mire with a deep pool in one cor-ner. The mire supported Carex diandra in one of only two extant sites in North Lancashire and the rare and declining Potamogeton alpinus in the pool. The other site that was de-scheduled was a basin mire, Outfield Moss, near Docker. A full species list was never compiled but amongst the species formerly recorded included Parnassia palustris, Andromeda polifolia, Menyanthes trifoliata, Salix repens, Dactylorhiza incarnata, Carex dioica, Carex diandra, Narthecium ossifragum, Genista tinctoria, Genista anglica* and Utricularia minor*. All are rare or endangered but those marked with an * are extinct in North Lancashire. By the late 1960s the surrounding hillsides had been ‘improved’ with the bog suffering from considerable nutrient enrichment. Shortly afterwards the bog was ‘blown up’ to create open water for wildfowl but in the process completely destroying the site. As a consequence the site was de-scheduled.

Of the 41 sites designated in 2013 21 or 51% were to some extent in unfavourable condition whilst 16 were improving or recovering. Hawes Water and Gait Barrows National Nature Reserve and the Lytham St Anne’s Local Nature Reserve were amongst those that were to some extent in un-favourable condition. On the other hand some sites, e.g. Robert Hall Moor, were showing marked re-covery although it is doubtful if all the lost species will ever return.

This analysis suggests that at the habitat level only 39% of SSSIs are in good condition although there are signs of recent improvement in sites where parts are in unfavourable condition and where it has been possible to implement positive management. Nevertheless simply putting a ‘fence’ around a site has undoubtedly saved some important ones, e.g. Gait Barrows, Lytham St Anne’s, Robert Hall Moor etc. However this is not enough and appropriate management must occur in most cases if im-portant natural and semi natural habitats as well as endangered species are to be saved. Saving the habitat may not be enough unless the specific requirements of sensitive species are met.

12

SpeciesTable 2 lists native and archaeophyte taxa, which are considered rare or endangered in North Lan-cashire. It is compiled from a list prepared for Wild about the North West (Regional Biodiversity steering Group for North West England, 1999), the BAP Long List

(www.lancspartners.org/lbap/bap_longlist.asp) and rare species identified in the Flora of North Lan-cashire (Greenwood, 2012) or recently discovered species but not included in the other publications. The total number of native and naturalised archaeophyte species and sub-species included is 415 but does not include species in the critical apomictic genera of Hieracium, Rubus and Taraxacum or hybrids. Nor does it include 33 native and archaeophyte species identified by Stroh et al., 2014 as near threatened or endangered in North Lancashire (Table 2a). A total of 946 (approx.) native and naturalised archaeophyte species were identified as occurring in North Lancashire in the Flora of North Lancashire so that approximately 44% of the native and naturalised archaeophyte flora is con-sidered rare and/or endangered. Of these 415 taxa 134 (32%) are to some degree endangered na-tionally.

Table 2. North Lancashire Extinct, Rare and /or endangered species Recorded since 1900 Table compiled from Wild about the North West, BAP Long List, rare and very rare species listed in the Flora of North Lancashire. 19th century and earlier extinctions not included.

GB status from Cheffings and Farrell, 2005; EN status from Stroh et al., 2014; * Section 41 species

Native species and sub-species

Species National status

GB EN

N. Lancs Flora sta-tus, No. tetrads (2012 status)

Broad Habitat Present in SSSI +& comment

Actaea spicata Very rare 2 16 +

Agrimonia pro-cera

Rare 8 or Extinct (2007)

1, 3, 6

Alchemilla fili-caulis ssp. fili-caulis

DD Very rare 2 7, 15, 16 + Rarely distin-guished from ssp. vestita, which is not endangered

Alchemilla min-ima

* Very rare 1 7 Part of A. fili-caulis?

Alchemilla wichu-rae

EN VU Very rare 1 7 + Further sites found in 2013

13

Allium oleraceum VU Rare 7 7 ?

Allium scoro-daprasum

Occasional 20 1, 3, 6 +

Alopecurus ae-qualis

Very rare 1 13

Anacamptis morio NT VU Rare 7 (Very rare 2)

6, 7 +

Anacamptis pyra-midalis

Rare 6 7 +

Anagallis tenella Occasional 33 11 +

Andromeda po-lifolia

NT Occasional 49 12 +

Antennaria dioica VU Extinct (1907) 7, 10

Anthriscus cau-calis

Very rare 1 3

Aphanes australis Rare 10 8

Apium graveolens Occasional 29 13, 11 ?

Apium inundatum VU Occasional 22 11, 13

Aquilegia vulgaris Occasional 53 1, 3 + Confused with garden cultivars

Arabis hirsuta NT Occasional 38 7, 16 ?

Arenaria leptocla-dos

Rare 11 16

Artemissia ab-sinthum

Occasional 39 3, 16, 17 Doubtfully native

Artemissia mar-itima

NT Occasional 15 21 +

Asperula cy-nanchica

Rare 9 7 +

Asplenium mar-inum

Very rare 1 18 +

Asplenium tri-chomanes ss

Very rare 5 16 +

Asplenium viride Rare8 (Rare 9) 16 +

Atriplex laciniata Rare 12 19 +

14

Atriplex longipes Rare 6 21 +

Atropa belladona Rare 11 7, 3, 16 +

Avenula pratensis Occasional 21 7 +

Avenula pubescens

Frequent 84 6 +

Baldellia ranuncu-loides

NT VU Rare 10 13 +

Berberis vulgaris Rare 14 1, 3

Blackstonia perfo-liata

Rare 9 7. 19 +

Blysmus compres-sus

VU * VU Very rare 3 11

Blysmus rufus NT Rare 14 21 +

Botrychium lu-naria

VU Rare 14 (Very rare 2 or extinct 2008)

7 +

Brassica oler-aceae

Rare 10 17, 18 + Confused with garden cultivars

Bromus commu-tatus

Rare 11 3

Bromus hordea-cus ssp. longipedi-cillatus

Very rare 5 3, 6

Bromus racemo-sus

Very rare 4 3, 6 +

Bromopsis benekenii

Very rare 1 1 +

Bromopsis erecta Rare 7 7 +

Callitriche brutia ssp. hamata

Occasional 60 13 Possibly now rare

Callitriche brutia ss

Rare 13 13

Callitriche hermaphroditica

Occasional 24 13

Callitriche obtu-sangula

Occasional 17 13

15

Calystegia sol-danella

VU Rare 7 (Very rare 5)

19 +

Calystegia sepium ssp. roseata

Rare 11 3

Cakile maritima Occasional 38 19 +

Cardamine impa-tiens

NT Rare 6 (Very rare 1)

1, 3 +

Carduus tenui-florus

Occasional 19 3, 6 ?

Carex acuta Occasional 14 11 +

Carex bigelowii Very rare 3 15

Carex diandra NT VU Very rare 5 (Very rare 2)

11

Carex digitata Very rare 5 1, 16 +

Carex dioica VU Occasional 26 11 +

Carex disticha Occasional 57 11 +

Carex divisa VU * Very rare 1 6 +

Carex elata NT Rare 11 11 +

Carex ericetorum VU * VU Rare 7 7 +

Carex extensa Occasional 23 21 +

Carex hostiana Occasional 35 11 +

Carex lasiocarpa VU Very rare 2 (Ex-tinct 1987)

11

Carex lepidocarpa Occasional 41 11, 14 +

Carex muricata Rare 7 3, 7, 8 ?

Carex oederi Very rare 4 (Very rare 2)

7, 11 +

Carex pseudo-cyperus

Occasional 29 11 ?

Carex punctata Very rare 1 18 ?

Carex riparia Rare 10 11 ?

Carex spicata Occasional 35 3, 6, 7 +

Carex strigosa Very rare 3 1 +

Carex vesicaria VU Rare 8 11 +

16

Carlina vulgaris NT Occasional 22 7 +

Catabrosia aquat-ica

VU Rare 13 13 Perhaps now very rare

Catapodium mar-inum

Occasional 24 18

Centaurium lit-torale

Rare 9 19, 21

Centaurium pul-chellum

Occasional 15 21 ?

Centunculus min-imus

EN Very rare 2 (or ex-tinct 1988)

3 +

Cephalanthera longifolia

VU * EN Extinct (1958?) 1

Cerastium ar-vense

NT Rare 7 8, 19 ?

Ceratophyllum demersum

Occasional 30 13

Ceratophyllum submersum

Rare 6 13

Chenopodium rubrum

Occasional 66 4, 11

Cirsium acaule Very rare 1 7 + Introduced ?

Cirsium hetero-phyllum

NT Occasional 19 (Rare 11)

6, 3 +

Cladium mariscus Very rare 3 11 +

Clinopodium aci-nos

VU * VU Very rare 5 16 +

Clinopodium as-cendens

Very rare 2 3, 16 + Identification error ?

Clinopodium vul-gare

Occasional 34 16 +

Cochlearia danica Frequent 107 3 + Recent spread inland on road-sides

Cochlearia pyre-naica

Rare 8 11, 16

Coeloglossum viride

VU * VU Very rare 2 (Ex-tinct 1965)

7

17

Coincya monensis Rare 9 19 +

Colchicum autum-nalis

NT Very rare 1 6

Convallaria ma-jalis

Occasional 19 1, 7, 16 +

Crambe maritima Rare 11 19 ?

Crataegus laevi-gata

Rare 13 1, 3

Crepis biennis Very rare 4 3, 6 Introduced ?

Crithmum mariti-mum

Rare 11 18 ?

Cryptogramma crispa

VU Very rare 4 16 +

Cynoglossum of-ficinale

NT Very rare 4 7, 19

Cypripedium cal-ceolus

CR * CR Very rare 1 7 + Introduced

Dactylorhiza in-carnata sl

Occasional 23 11 +

Dactylorhiza in-carnata ssp coc-cinea

NT 19 +

Dactylorhiza in-carnata ss

11 +

Dactylorhiza in-carnata ssp. pul-chella

WL Very rare 1 or 2 or extinct (2008)

11 ?

Dactylorhiza mac-ulata

Occasional 28 (Very rare 5)

8, 11 +

Dactylorhiza praetermissa

Occasional 17 11 +

Dactylorhiza pur-purella

Occasional 25 11 +

Daphne laureola Rare 7 1 +

Daphne mez-ereum

VU VU Very rare 2 1 +

Diphasiastrum alpinum

Very rare 1 15, 16

18

Draba incana Very rare 3 16 +

Draba muralis Very rare 2 (Ex-tinct 1983)

16

Drosera anglica EN Extinct 1902 12

Drosera interme-dia

VU Extinct 1950s? 12

Dryopteris aem-ula

Very rare 1 16 +

Dryopteris cam-brensis

Very rare 3 16

Dryopteris ore-ades

Very rare 4 16 +

Dryopteris sub-montana

Rare 10 16 +

Echium vulgare Occasional 24 7 ?

Eleocharis multi-caulis

Very rare 1 (Ex-tinct 1988 )

11 +

Eleocharis quin-quiflora

Occasional 27 11 +

Eleocharis uniglu-mis

Occasional 23 11 +

Eleogiton fluitans Extinct 1925 11

Epilobium alsini-folium

Very rare 1 (Ex-tinct 1972)

11

Epipactis atrorubens

Rare 9 16 +

Epipactis dunensis DD Very rare 4 19 +

Epipactis palustris NT Rare 10 11 +

Epipactis phyllan-thes

Very rare 1 19 +

Equisetum hye-male

Rare 8 1

Equisetum varie-gatum

Rare 7 (Very rare 3)

11, 19 +

Eriophorum lati-folium

Very rare 2 (Very rare 1)

11 +

Erodium lebelii Very rare 2 19 +

19

Erodium moscha-tum

Very rare 1 3, 4

Erophila glabrescens

Rare 10 7, 19

Eryngium mariti-mum

NT Occasional 17 19 +

Euphorbia exigua NT VU Rare 6 (extinct? 2008)

4, 16 +

Euphorbia par-alias

19 +

Euphorbia port-landica

Rare 8 19

Euphrasia arctica DD VU Occasional 17 6, 11 +

Euphrasia micran-tha

DD EN Extinct 1907 or 1965?

8, 10 Recent loss?

Euphrasia scotica Rare 9 11 +

Euphrasia praten-sis ss

* Very rare 4 (Ex-tinct 2000)

6

Euphrasia praten-sis ssp anglica

EN * EN Very rare 1 (Ex-tinct 1975)

6 Only known from herbarium mate-rial

Euphrasia tetra-quetra

NT Rare 8 6, 10 +

Festuca altissima Occasional 25 1 +

Festuca filiformis Very rare 3 8

Festuca rubra ssp. junceae

Occasional 19 18

Festuca rubra ssp. litoralis

Very rare 5 21 + Abundant on grazed salt marshes, under recorded

Filago minima NT Very rare 2 16

Filago vulgaris NT NT Rare 8 3

Filipendula vul-garis

Occasional 19 7 +

Frangula alnus Rare 13 1 +

Fumaria bastardii Rare 13 4

20

Fumaria capreo-lata

Occasional 20 (Very rare 3)

3, 4

Fumaria purpurea * VU Occasional 41 3, 4

Gagea lutea Rare 6 (Very rare 2)

1, 3 +

Galium boreale Very rare 1 16 +

Galium sterneri Occasional 22 7, 16 +

Genista anglica NT VU Very rare 2 (Ex-tinct 1990)

10 +

Genista tinctoria NT VU Occasional 30 (Very rare 2)

6 +

Gentiana pneu-monanthe

NT Extinct 1941 8, 10

Gentianella amarella

NT Occasional 20 ( Very rare 3)

7 +

Gentianella campestris

VU * EN Very rare 5 (Ex-tinct 2002)

7 +

Geranium columbinum

Rare 14 3, 7 +

Geranium pusil-lum

Rare 9 3 +

Geranium san-guineum

NT Occasional 21 6, 16, 19 +

Geranium syl-vaticum

NT Very rare 4 (Very rare 1)

6, 16 +

Glaucium flavum NT Occasional 17 19 +

Glyceria maxima Rare 12 +

Gnaphalium syl-vaticum

EN EN Very rare 4 (Ex-tinct 1986)

3, 10 +

Groenlandia densa

VU VU Rare 7 (Very rare 1 or Extinct 2010)

13

Gymnodenia bo-realis

Very rare 2 7, 11 +

Gymnodenia conopsea

Very rare 2 7, 11 +

Gymnodenia den-siflora

Very rare 1 11 +

21

Gymnocarpium dryopteris

NT Occasional 28 1, 16 +

Gymnocarpium robertianum

Rare 7 16 +

Helianthum num-mularium

NT Occasional 18 7 +

Helleborus foetidus

Rare 10 1, 3 +

Helleborus viridis Rare 8 1, 3

Hippocrepis co-mosa

Rare 6 7 +

Hippuris vulgaris Occasional 32 11, 13 +

Hordelymus eu-ropaeus

Very rare 3 1

Hordeum secal-inum

Very rare 2 6

Hottonia palustris VU Rare 10 (Very rare 4)

13

Huperzia selago Occasional 18 16 +

Hyacinthoides non-scripta

Common 330 1 + Over recorded for H. x massar-tiana

Hydrocharis mor-sus-ranae

VU VU Very rare 4 (Very rare 2)

13

Hymenophyllum tunbrigense

Very rare 3 16 +

Hymenophyllum wilsonii

NT Very rare 1 16 +

Hypericum an-drosaemum

Occasional 50 1, 3 +

Hypericum elodes NT Extinct 1931 11

Hypericum humi-fusum

Occasional 51 3 ?

Hypericum mon-tanum

NT Rare 9 1, 3 +

Hypopitys monotropa

EN * EN Very rare 3 (Ex-tinct 2004)

1, 19 +

22

Impatiens noli-tangere

Rare 7 1

Inula conyzae Occasional 23 7, 16 +

Jasione montana VU Rare 14 8, 10 Some sites lost re-cently

Juncus balticus VU Extinct 1965 19

Juncus filiformis Very rare 1 13

Juncus maritimus Occasional 40 21 +

Juncus ranarius Occasional 21 21 +

Juncus subnodu-losus

Rare 13 11 +

Juniperus com-munis

* NT Occasional 19 1, 7, 10 + Most sites with old bushes and not regenerating

Koeleria macran-tha

Occasional 17 7 +

Lamiastrum gale-obdolon ssp. montanum

Rare 9 1 +

Lathraea squa-maria

Occasional 32 1, 3 +

Lathyrus linifolius NT Frequent 72 3, 8 +

Lemna gibba Occasional 37 13

Lepidium campestre

NT Occasional 23 3, 4, 17

Lepidium hetero-phyllum

Rare 10 3

Lepidium lati-folium

Very rare 1 6 + Introduced

Limonium britan-nicum

WL WL Very rare 2 (Very rare 1)

18, 21 +

Limonium humile Occasional 22 21 +

Limosella aquat-ica

Very rare 4 13

Lithospermum officinale

Rare 9 1, 3, 7 +

23

Littorella uniflora Rare 6 13

Lotus tenuis Very rare 1 (Ex-tinct 1974)

3

Luronium natans * NT Very rare 1 13 Recent spread or introduction

Lycopodium clavatum

VU Rare 10 10

Lythrum portula Occasional 16 11

Lysimachia thyrsi-folia

CR Very rare 1 11, 13 +

Marrubium vul-gare

Very rare (or ex-tinct 1966)

7 Doubtful status

Melica nutans Very rare 4 1, 16 +

Menyanthes trifo-liata

Occasional 56 11 +

Mertensia mar-itima

NT RE Extinct 1941 19 Casual

Mibora minima NT Very rare 1 19 + Casual

Minuartia verna NT Occasional 15 7, 16 +

Montia fontana ssp. amporitana

WL WL Very rare 4 (or ex-tinct 1987)

11

Montia fontana ssp. chondros-perma

Rare 9 11?

Myosoton aquaticum

Very rare 1 11 Casual

Myosotis ramosis-sima

Occasional 15 8, 16, 19 +

Myosotis stolonifera

Occasional 23 11, 14 +

Myrica gale NT Rare 14 12 + Slow decline with old bushes on reclaimed mosses not re-generating

Myriophyllum al-terniflorum

Occasional 21 13, 14 ?

Myriophyllum VU NT Very rare 1 13

24

verticillatum

Narcissus pseudonarcissus

Occasional 38 1 +

Neotinea ustulata EN * NT Extinct 1930s 7

Neottia cordata Very rare 2 10, 12 +

Neottia nidus-avis NT VU Very rare4 (or Ex-tinct 1996)

1 +

Oenanthe aquat-ica

Rare 9 11

Oenanthe fistu-losa

VU * VU Occasional 18 11

Oenanthe lachenalii

NT Occasional 50 11, 21 +

Ononis spinosa NT Rare 14 6, 7 ?

Ophioglossum vulgatum

Frequent 71 6 + Possibly now only rare

Ophrys apifera Occasional 34 7, 19 +

Ophrys insectifera VU * VU Rare 8 (Very rare 2)

7 +

Origanum vulgare Occasional 30 7, 16 +

Ornithopus per-pusillus

Rare 11 8

Orobanche minor Rare 12 6

Osmunda regalis Rare 12 1, 11 +

Parapholis strigosa

Occasional 41 21 +

Parentucellia vis-cosa

Rare 6 3, 19

Parietaria judaica Occasional 32 16, 17

Paris quadrifolia Occasional 21 1 +

Parnassia palus-tris

VU Occasional 33 (Rare 6)

11 +

Pedicularis palus-tris

VU Rare 12 (Very rare 3)

11 ?

Persicaria minor VU Very rare 4 13

25

Persicaria mitis VU VU Very rare 5 13

Phegopteris con-nectilis

Occasional 56 1, 16 +

Phleum arenar-ium

NT Rare 7 19 +

Pimpinella major Frequent 86 6 Recent losses from Ribble valley roadsides ?

Pinguicula vul-garis

VU Occasional 26 (Rare 14)

11, 12 +

Platanthera bifo-lia

VU * EN Rare 7 (Extinct 1999)

1, 10 +

Platanthera chlo-rantha

NT Very rare 4 (Very rare 1)

1, 6

Poa angustifolia Rare 8 7, 8

Poa compressa Occasional 36 3

Polygala vulgare ssp. colina

Very rare 2 19

Polygonatum multiflorum

Occasional 23 1

Polygonatum odoratum

Rare 6 1, 16 +

Polygonum oxyspermum

Occasional 23 19 +

Polypodium cam-bricum

Rare 7 3, 16 +

Polystichum setiferum

Occasional 46 1 + Considerable in-crease over 100 years

Populus nigra ss Rare 12 3

Potamogeton alpinus

VU Occasional 24 13 Probably rare or very rare having been lost from most of the Lan-caster Canal.

Potamogeton berchtoldii

Frequent 78 13 Believed to be much less fre-quent

Potamogeton col- Rare 6 13 +

26

oratus

Potamogeton lu-cens

Very rare 1 13 +

Potamogeton ob-tusifolius

Occasional 45 13 Believed to be much less fre-quent

Potamogeton per-foliatus

Occasional 37 13 Believed to be much less fre-quent

Potamogeton polygonifolius

Frequent 85 11, 12, 13 +

Potamogeton pusillus

Occasional 35 13 Probably increas-ing

Potamogeton tri-choides

Rare 6 13

Potentilla argen-tea

NT NT Very rare 2 3, 8

Potentilla taber-naemontani

Rare 10 7, 16 +

Primula farinosa VU NT Rare 8 (Very rare 5)

7, 11 +

Pseudorchis al-bida

VU * VU Extinct 1912 7, 8

Puccinellia distans Occasional 16 3, 21 + May be spread-ing on to salted roadsides

Pyrola rotundifo-lia

Very rare 1 (Very rare 2)

19, 11 +

Radiola linoides NT VU Extinct 1900 10

Ranunculus bau-dotii

Rare 11 13 +

Ranunculus circi-natus

Very rare 4 (Very rare 1)

13

Ranunculus hed-eraceus

Frequent 111 11, 13 Not endangered

Ranunculus lingua Occasional 18 11

Ranunculus pelta-tus

Rare 6 (Very rare1)

13

27

Ranunculus peni-cillatus sl

Occasional 20 14 All plants believed to be R. x bacchii. Spreading

Ranunculus sar-dous

Rare 13 3, 6

Ranunculus tri-chophyllus

Occasional 24 11, 13

Rhamnus cathar-tica

Occasional 27 1, 3 +

Raphanus raphanistrum ssp. maritimus

Occasional 49 19 +

Rhinanthus minor ssp. stenophyllus

Rare? 6 +

Rhododendron groenlandicum

Very rare 2 10 + Recent natural spread

Rhynchospora alba

NT Very rare 2 (Very rare 1)

12 +

Ribes alpinum Rare 7 1, 3

Ribes spicatum Very rare 1 3

Rorippa islandica Rare 6 13 Recent spread

Rosa obtusifolia Very rare 5 1, 3

Rosa spinosissima Occasional 17 10, 16, 19 +

Rubus chamae-morus

Occasional 15 10, 12 +

Rubus saxatilis Occasional 20 1, 7, 16 +

Rumex hydrolap-athum

Occasional 15 11 + Recent losses ?

Rumex longifolius Rare 6 3, 13 +

Rumex maritimus Rare 7 13, 14 +

Ruppia maritima NT Rare 12 (Very rare 1 or extinct 2006)

21 +

Salicornia emerici Rare 6 21 +

Salicornia fragilis Rare 10 21 +

Salicornia obscura Very rare 3 21 +

28

Salix myrsinifolia Very rare 2 (Ex-tinct 1968)

14

Salix phylicifolia Very rare 4 (Very rare 2)

14 Isolated bushes

Salix repens ssp. repens

N.T. (sl) Probably rare 10 Ssp argentea not endangered on coastal or inland sites

Salix triandra Rare 6 11, 13, 14

Salsola kali VU * Rare 11 19 +

Salvia verbenaca NT Very rare 2 3, 7 Possibly casual

Samolus valerandii

Occasional 17 11 +

Saxifraga hyp-noides

VU Very rare 5 7, 16 +

Scabiosa colum-baria

Occasional 25 7 +

Schoenoplectus lacustris

Rare 11 13 +

Schoenus nigri-cans

Very rare 5 ( Very rare 3)

11 +

Scrophularia um-brosa

Occasional 18 1, 14

Scutellaria minor Very rare 3 (Very rare 2)

11

Sedum anglicum Very rare 1 18 Recent new record

Selaginella selagi-noides

Rare 6 7, 11 +

Serratula tinctoria Rare 11 7 +

Sesleria caerulea Occasional 15 7, 16 +

Silaum silaus Very rare 1 (Ex-tinct 2003)

6

Silene uniflora Occasional 42 18 +

Sorbus lancas-triensis

NT NT Rare 7 16 +

Sorbus rupicola Very rare 2 16 +

29

Sorbus torminalis Very rare 4 1 +

Sparganium erec-tum ss

? 11, 13

Sparganium natans

VU Very rare 1 13 +

Spergula arvensis VU VU Frequent 160 4 Recent major na-tional decline

Spiranthes spiralis NT NT Rare 7 (Very rare 2)

7 +

Spirodella polyrhiza

Occasional 21 13

Stellaria neglecta Rare 11 1, 3 +

Stellaria palustris VU * VU Extinct 1974 11

Stratioites aloides NT Occasional 19 13 Introduced. Lost from Lancaster Canal its major stronghold, now rare?

Symphytum offici-nale

Frequent 78 11

Symphytum tuberosum

Rare 8 1, 3 Introduced?

Tamus communis Frequent 110 1,3 +

Thalictrum flavum Occasional 32 11 +

Thalictrum minus Occasional 21 16, 19 +Confused with garden cultivars, probably very rare as native species

Thlaspi arvense Frequent 111 3, 4

Tilia cordata Occasional 28 1 +

Torilus nodosa Very rare 2 3, 6

Trichomanes speciosum

Very rare 3 16 + As gametophyte only

Trientalis eu-ropaea

Very rare 3 10, 9 +

Trifolium frag-iferum

VU Occasional 28 6 +

30

Trifolium micran-thum

Occasional 18 8, 17

Trifolium or-nithopodioides

Very rare 1 8 Casual?

Trifolium striatum Rare 12 8 +

Triglochin palus-tris

NT Frequent 136 11 +

Trisetum flavescens

Frequent 142 6, 7 +

Trollius eu-ropaeus

Rare 12 11, 16 +

Ulex gallii Occasional 33 10 ?

Umbilicus ru-pestris

Very rare 2 16 Recent spread

Urtica dioica ssp. galeopsifolia

Extinct 1901 1 Only known from herbarium mate-rial

Utricularia aus-tralis

Very rare 1 13 +

Utricularia minor VU Extinct 1971? 12 +

Utricularia vul-garis

Very rare 3 ( Very rare 2)

11 + May be only present at 1 site.

Vaccinium vitis-idaea

Occasional 49 10, 16 +

Valeriana dioica NT Frequent94 11 +

Valerianella lo-custa ss

Occasional 41 3, 19

Valerianella lo-custa ssp. dunen-sis

Extinct 1965 19

Veronica anagal-lis-aquatica

Occasional 38 13, 14 +

Vicia lathyroides Rare 7 8, 19 +

Vicia tetrasperma Rare 11 3, 4, 6

Viola canina NT VU Very rare 3 (Very rare 2)

10, 19 +

Viola hirta Occasional 18 7 +

31

Viola palustris Frequent 150 11, 14 +

Viola tricolor ss NT NT Occasional 64 4, 8 Recent major na-tional decline

Viola tricolor ssp curtisii

NT Very rare 4 (Very rare 3)

19 +

Vulpia fasciculata Very rare 5 19 +

Wahlenbergia hederaceae

NT NT Rare 6 11

Zannichellia palustris

Occasional 29 13 Probable recent decline to Rare ?

Archaeophytes

Anthemis arvensis EN EN 12 3, 4

Ballota nigra Rare 11 (or ex-tinct 1990)

3 Casual?

Centaurea cyan-nus

* Rare 7 3, 4, 17 Only found as a recent introduc-tion

Descurainia sophia

Rare 11 4, 19

Erysimum cheiri Rare 12 3, 16, 17

Galeopsis angusti-folia

CR * CR Extinct 1959 4, 16 +

Galeopsis speciosa

VU VU Occasional 61 or 2

4 Rapid decline since 1980,

Glebionis sege-tum

VU VU Frequent 96 (Very rare 2?)

4 Massive recent decline

Helminthotheca echioides

Occasional 18 3, 4

Hyoscymus niger VU VU Very rare 4 (or ex-tinct 1993)

4

Imperatoria os-truthium

NT Very rare 2 3

Inula helenium NT Very rare 5 3, 17

Lamium confer-tum

EN Very rare 1 4

Lithospermum ar- EN EN Extinct 1967 4

32

vense

Lolium temulen-tum

CR CR Rare 7 (or extinct 1968)

4

Malva neglecta Rare 6 3

Nepeta cataria VU VU Rare 7 (Very rare 1)

3, 7 +

Papaver arge-mone

VU EN Very rare 2 4

Papaver lecoqii Rare 13 Very rare 2)

3, 4

Ranunculus ar-vensis

CR * EN Very rare 4 (Very rare 1 or extinct 1992)

4 Casual

Scandix pectin-veneris

* EN Extinct 1983 4

Scleranthus an-nuus

EN * EN Extinct 1970 4, 8

Stachys arvensis NT NT Occasional 43 3, 4

Valerianella cari-nata

Very rare 4 3, 17

Valerianella den-tata

EN EN Extinct 1957 4

Verbena offici-nalis

Very rare 4 3, 16

Veronica hederi-folia ss

? 1, 3, 4, 17 Ssp. is frequent and not endan-gered

Vulpia myuros Rare 13 3, 17 Neophyte in N. Lancs

Table 2a Species included in England Red Data List 2014 but not included in table 2 as not endangered in North Lancashire

Native species England status Broad habitat

33

Briza media NT 7

Calluna vulgaris NT 10, 12

Campanula rotundifolia NT 7

Carex echinata NT 11, 12, 14

Carex pulicaris NT 11, 16

Cruciata laevipes NT 6

Drosera rotundifolia NT 12

Erica cinerea NT 10, 12

Erica tetralix NT 12

Eriophorum angusti-folium

VU 12

Euphrasia confusa VU 7, 8, 16

Euphrasia nemorosa NT 7, 10

Fragaria vesca NT 1, 7

Hydrocotyle vulgaris NT 11

Knautia arvensis NT 6, 7

Limonium vulgare NT 21

Melampyrum pratense NT 1, 2

Nardus stricta NT 8

Oxalis acetosella NT 1, 2, 16

Pedicularis sylvatica VU 10, 12, 14

Plantago media NT 7

Potentilla erecta NT 8

Ranunculus flammula VU 11

Sagina nodosa VU 11, 19

Sanicula europaea NT 1

Silene flos-cuculi NT 11

Solidago virgaurea NT 1, 16

Succissa pratensis NT 6

Valeriana officinalis NT 3, 16

Veronica scutellata NT 11, 13

34

Archaeophytes

Chenopodium bonus-henricus

VU 3

Cichorum intybus VU 3

Prunus cerasus NT 1, 3

Notes: IUCN categories (Cheffings and Farrell, 2005). EX = extinct, RE = recently extinct CR = critically endangered, EN = endangered, VU = vulnerable, NT + near threatened, LC (where indicated) = least concern, DD = data deficient, WL = status being assessed.

+ = present.

* = Section 41 species of Principal Importance

A = Archeophyte.

Nevertheless analysis of table 2 using data in the Flora suggests that 244 taxa show no change in their status and are not rare, are of casual occurrence or are of doubtful identity. They are therefore not endangered at the present time. This leaves 172 taxa or 18% of the native and archaeophyte flora that is extinct, endangered and/or rare. However the species may be increasing in abundance and/or distribution but may still be rare and endangered. Of the 172 taxa 90 appear to be declining whilst there appear to be 40 post 1900 extinctions and 27 of these are post 1964 (table 5), i.e. the rate of extinction is accelerating. It should be pointed out that determining whether or not a species is extinct is an inexact art. In Greenwood (2012), referred to as the Flora, Actaea spicata was thought to be extinct but subsequent to publication it was found that two robust colonies were growing on Leck Fell. Similarly there had been no reports of Anthriscus caucalis at St Anne’s for over 100 years when it was re-discovered in 1999. It is found in a well botanised area but had been over-looked or seed had remained dormant for many years. Nevertheless the trend is clear; loss of native species is increasing.

Table 3 lists 90 declining species. It also shows that it is believed 28 (31%) marked with an * are de-clining rapidly. 42 (47%) are near threatened or endangered at either the Great Britain (Cheffings and Farrell, 2005) or England level (Stroh et al., 2014). An effort has also been made to indicate the SSSIs in which they occur suggesting that at least 62 (69%) are found in SSSIs. However this is an ap-proximation because many records are from boundary situations, some species may have been lost in SSSIs where they formerly occurred (marked with #) and not all records are known to the author. The remaining 28 taxa are found in the countryside at large with no statutory protection although they may occur in BHSs or undesignated nature reserves.

Table 3. Declining species

Species (* species thought to be declining rapidly)

England status SSSI (# species believed lost)

35

Anacamptys morio* Jack Scout

Anagallis tenella* Bowland Fells, Hawes Water#

Asplenium viride Leck Beck Head Catchment Area, Ar-tle Dale, Bowland Fells

Atropa belladona Gait Barrows

Avenula pubescens* Hawes Water, Clear Beck Meadow, Tarnbrook Meadows

Baldellia ranunculoides VU Crag Bank

Botrychium lunaria VU Warton Crag, Gait Barrows etc

Callitriche brutia ssp. hamata*

Calystegia soldanella VU Wyre Estuary

Carex diandra VU

Carex elata NT Gait Barrows

Carex ericetorum VU Jack Scout, Hawes Water#

Carex oederi Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Carlina vulgaris NT Lytham St Anne’s Dunes, Gait Barrows etc

Catabrosia aquatica VU

Centaurium pulchellum

Cirsium heterophyllum Myttons Meadows, Bell Sykes Mead-ows

Cochlearia pyrenaica* Leck Beck Head Catchment Area

Cryptogramma crispa Bowland Fells

Cynoglossum officinale NT (GB) Warton Crag, Morecambe Bay

Dactylorhiza maculata Clear Beck Meadow, Bowland Fells

Diphasiastrum alpinum

Epipactis dunensis Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Equisetum hyemale

Equisetum variegatum Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Eriophorum latifolium Bowland Fells

Euphorbia exigua VU Gait Barrows

Euphorbia portlandica

36

Euphrasia arctica VU Clear Beck Meadow, Far Holme Meadow

Fumaria bastardii*

Fumaria capreolata*

Gagea lutea Cringlebarrow and Deepdale

Galeopsis speciosa* VU

Genista tinctoria* VU Standridge Farm Pasture, Robert Hall Moor#

Gentianella amarella* NT Jack Scout# Gait Barrows

Geranium sylvaticum* NT Leck Beck Head Catchment Area#, Field Head Meadow#

Glebionis segetum* VU

Groenlandia densa* VU

Gymnadenia conopsea s.l. Hawes Water, Standridge Farm Pas-ture, Crag Bank#, Myttons Meadows#

Gymnocarpium dryopteris* NT Bowland Fells

Hippuris vulgaris* Hawes Water

Hottonia palustris VU

Hydrocaris morus-ranae VU

Hyoscymus niger VU

Jasione montana*

Juniperus communis NT Eaves Wood, Calf Hill and Cragg Woods, Bowland Fells, Gait Barrows etc

Lathraea squamaria* Eaves Wood, Gait Barrows etc

Lemna gibba*

Limonium britannicum Wyre Estuary

Lithospermum officinale EN Gait Barrows, Crag Bank

Menyanthes trifoliata* White Moss#

Myrica gale NT Heysham Moss, Winmarleigh Moss, White Moss

Neottia cordata Bowland Fells

Nepeta cataria VU

Oenanthe aquatica

37

Ophioglossum vulgatum* Lytham St Anne’s Sand Dunes, Clear Beck Meadow, Far Holme Meadow

Ophrys insectifera VU Gait Barrows

Paris quadrifolia Gait Barrows. Eaves Wood, Warton Crag, Leighton Moss etc

Parnassia palustris* VU Lytham St Anne’s Dunes, Hawes Wa-ter, Robert Hall Moor, Standridge Farm Pasture etc

Pedicularis palustris VU Crag Bank

Pimpinella major*

Pinguicula vulgaris* Hawes Water, Leck Beck Head Catch-ment Area, Crag Bank etc

Potamogeton alpinus* VU

Potamogeton berchtoldii* Hawes Water

Potamogeton obtusifolius Hawes Water

Potamogeton perfoliatus*

Primula farinosa NT Hawes Water, Standridge Farm Pas-ture, Robert Hall Moor

Ranunculus baudotii Wyre Estuary

Ranunculus circinatus

Ranunculus peltatus Leighton Moss#

Ranunculus sardous Wyre Estuary

Rhynchosporus alba NT Heysham Moss

Rumex hydrolapathum Hawes Water, Marton Mere, Black-pool, Leighton Moss

Ruppia maritima NT Morecambe Bay

Salix phylicifolia

Schoenus nigricans Hawes Water

Scutellaria minor

Selaginella selaginoides Hawes Water, Leck Beck Head Catch-ment Area

Serratula tinctoria Gait Barrows, Robert Hall Moor, Stan-dridge Farm Pasture

Spiranthes spiralis NT Jack Scout, Thrang End & Yealand Hall Allotment

38

Statioites aloides* NT (GB)

Trollius europaeus Standridge Farm Pasture, Myttons Meadows

Ulex gallii Robert Hall Moor

Valerianella locusta Gait Barrows

Viola canina VU Lytham St Anne’s Dunes, Hawes Wa-ter#

Viola hirta Hawes Water, Gait Barrows

Viola tricolor ssp. curtisii NT Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Viola tricolor ssp. tricolor NT

Wahlenbergia hederaceae NT

Zannichellia palustris* Wyre Estuary, Leighton Moss

In terms of species conservation it is suggested that priority needs to be given to these species.

Of the 39 botanical SSSIs 29 contain one or more declining species (Table 4). Worryingly most declin-ing species are found in the Hawes Water (11) and Gait Barrows(8) SSSIs and National Nature Re-serve. This is followed by Lytham St Anne’s Dunes SSSI, Standridge Farm Pasture SSSI and Bowland FellsSSSI with seven species in each. Perhaps significantly Lytham St Anne’s Dunes and Bowland Fells are at least partly in unfavourable condition with Lytham St Anne’s Dunes SSSI in especially un-favourable condition.

Table 4. Number of declining species in SSSIs

SSSI No. of declining species

Artle Dale 2

Bell Sykes 1

Bowland Fells 7

Clear Beck Meadow 5

Coldwell 1

Crag Bank 5

Crag Wood 1

Cringlebarrow 1

Eaves Wood 3

Far Holme Meadow 1

39

Field Head Meadow 1

Gait Barrows 8

Hawes Water 11

Heysham Moss 2

Jack Scout 4

Leck Beck Head Catchment Area 5

Leighton Moss 5

Lytham St Anne’s Dunes 7

Marton Mere, Blackpool 2

Morecambe Bay 3

Myttons Meadow 3

Robert Hall Moor 6

Standridge Farm Pasture 7

Tarnbrook 1

Thrang End & Yealand Hall Allotment 1

Warton Crag 4

White Moss 2

Winmarleigh Moss 1

Wyre Estuary 5

Species lost since 1900 are divided into two groups. Prior to 1964 13 species became extinct, includ-ing one archaeophyte, since their last records in the early years of the 20 th century (Table 5). A few native species appear to have only been casuals in North Lancashire whilst others may have been misidentified. In addition Actaea spicata was re-discovered after the Flora of North Lancashire was published. As a consequence none of these apparently extinct species are included in table 5. Find-ing reasons for the extinction of most species is difficult to ascertain and for only a few is the reason known. For the remaining species generalised nutrient enrichment and drainage are likely to be the main causal agents.

Table 5. Extinct Species

A. Species lost post 1964 Present in an SSSI

Carex lasiocarpa

Centunculus minimus Cringlebarrow & Deepdale

40

Coeloglossum viride Warton Crag

Draba muralis

Drosera intermedia

Eleocharis multicaulis Bowland Fells

Epilobium alsinifolium

Euphrasia micrantha

Euphrasia officinalis ssp. anglica

Euphrasia officinalis ssp. pratensis

Genista anglica Outfield Moss, Robert Hall Moor

Gentianella campestris Jack Scout

Gnaphalium sylvaticum Gait Barrows

Hypopitys monotropa Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Lithospermum arvense A

Lotus tenuis

Neottia nidus-avis Gait Barrow

Papaver argemone A

Platanthera bifolia Thrang End & Yealand Hall Allot-ment, Robert Hall Moor

Salix myrsinifolia

Scandix pectin-veneris A

Scleranthus annuus A

Silaum silaus

Stellaria palustris

Utricularia minor Outfield Moss

Valerianella dentata A

Valerianella locusts ssp. dunensis

B. Species lost pre 1964

Antennaria dioica

Cephalanthera longifolia

Drosera anglica

Eleogitan fluitans

41

Galeopsis angustifolia A

Gentiana pneumonanthe

Hypericum elodes

Juncus balticus

Neotinea ustulata

Potamogeton gramineus

Pseudordorchis albida

Radiola linoides

Urtica dioica ssp. angustifolia

A = Archaeophyte

A much larger number of losses have occurred since 1964. At the present time 27 taxa, including five archaeophytes, appear to have become extinct in this period but previous experience demonstrates that at least some will be re-discovered or re-appear after a long dormancy. In addition four species occurred probably as casuals. Of the 27 lost taxa 10 were found in SSSIs. Two species were lost from each of Gait Barrows, Outfield Moss and Robert Hall Moor whilst one species was lost from each of Warton Crag, Bowland Fells, Jack Scout, Lytham St Annes’s Dunes, Thrang End & Yealand Hall Allot-ment and Cringlebarrow & Deepdale. Specific reasons for loss are not known but drainage, gener-alised nutrient enrichment and agricultural improvements involving herbicides and fertilizers are probably to blame.

In addition to the post 1900 losses there were eight known losses in the 19th century. These, with the last year they were recorded in parenthesis, were Potentilla crantzii (1897), Carex limosa (1887), Veronica spicata (1881), Rosa micrantha (1881), Bupleurum tenuissimum (1841), Peucedanum offici-nale (1837), Pilularia globularia (1825) and Pyrola minor (1878).

It was pointed out above that most of the rare and/or endangered species identified in Wild about the North West , Long List and Flora have not changed their status and are neither rare nor endan-gered. However 42 species show signs of increasing in abundance or are extending their distribu-tional range (table 6). Of these 22 formerly rare species are no longer rare and eight are found in SS-SIs. Of the remaining 20 species nine are found in SSSIs. Thus of 42 increasing species 21 are found in eight SSSIs with Wyre Estuary with six, Morecambe Bay and Lytham St Anne’s Dunes with five each, two at Hawes Water and one each in Bowland Fells, Marton Mere, Ribble esturary and Jack Scout SSSIs. Nevertheless a number are still rare if no longer endangered, e.g. Blackstonia perfoliata

Table 6. Formerly rare species but currently increasing

Species SSSI

Allium scorodaprasum Morecambe Bay

Anacamptis pyramidalis Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

42

Aquilegia vulgaris Gait Barrows

Artemissia absinthium

Blackstonia perfoliatus Lytham St Anne’s Dunes, Wyre Estuary

Blysmus rufus Wyre Estuary, Morecambe Bay

Callitriche hermaphroditica

Care riparia

Carex disticha Lytham St Anne’s Dunes, Myttons Meadows

Cochlearia danica Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Crambe maritima Morecambe Bay

Crataegus laevigata

Crithmum maritimum Wyre Estuary

Dactylorhiza incarnata s.l. Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Dryopteris aemula Bowland Fells

Festuca altissima Roeburndale Woods

Frangula alnus Hawes Water

Glyceria maxima Morecambe Bay, Wyre Estuary, Ribble Estuary

Limonium humile Morecambe Bay, Wyre Estuary

Luronium natans

Lysimachia thyrsifolia Marton Mere, Blackpool

Lythrum portula

Myriophyllum alterniflorum

Oenanthe fistulosa

Ophrys apifera Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Ornithopus perpusillus

Polystichum setiferum Roeburndale Woods, Ribble Estuary, Burton Wood etc

Potamogeton coloratus Hawes Water

Potamogeton pusillus

Potentilla argentea

Ranunculus lingua

Ranunculus penicillatus s.l. (R. x bacchii)

43

Rorippa islandica

Salvia verbenaca

Samolus valerandii Wyre Estuary, Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Spirodella polyrhiza

Trifolium micranthum

Trifolium striatum Jack Scout

Umbilicus rupestris

Valerianella carinata

Vicia tetrasperma

Vulpia myuros Lytham St Anne’s Dunes

Habitats and species declineThe habitats in which rare and/or endangered species occur (Table 7) largely follows the proportions of all species described in the Flora. Nevertheless only 30% of woodland and woodland edge rare and endangered species are listed whilst in the Flora the figure for all species is 45%. On the other hand 36% of rare and/or endangered wetland species are listed as opposed to 28% for all species. These figures reflect the relative stability of semi-natural woodlands and woodland edge habitats whilst wetlands have suffered from drainage and nutrient enrichment. Surprisingly grasslands have the same percentage of rare and/or endangered species as all species (28%). Similarly coastal habi-tats have similar percentages of rare and/or endangered species (15%) as all species in the Flora (17%).

In a few cases recent data and perceptions suggest that in more recent years some species have de-clined catastrophically. These include the arable weed species of Fumaria bastardii, Fumaria capreolata, Galeopsis speciosa and Glebionis segetum. This reflects the efficiency of modern herbi-cides. Recent losses may have occurred with a decline in wetland species perhaps most notably Callitriche brutia ssp. hamata, Potamogeton berchtoldii, Potamogeton alpinus, Potamogeton obtusifolius, Potamogeton perfoliatus, Zannichellia palustris and Stratioites aloides. The decline of these species may reflect the nutrient enrichment of water courses, including the Lancaster Canal, which was the stronghold for most of them. More recent observations suggest that the decline of Genista tinctoria is due to physical disturbance (excessive plodding by cattle on the Ribble estuary) or nutrient enrichment. One colony was destroyed by treatment with farm slurry.

Table 7. Habitat preferences

Broad Habitat % of total native flora (Table 4.8 of Flora)

% of rare and/or endan-gered species (Table 2)

Habitat preferences (% of species) for ex-tinct species(Table 5)

44

1. Woodland 18 14 11

3. Boundary (hedges & woodland edge)

27 17 9

4. Arable 9 6 11

6. Neutral grassland 12 8 6

7. Calcareous grassland 12 16 9

8. Acid grassland 4 5 7.5

9. Bracken 1 < 1 0

10. Dwarf shrub heath 4 4 13

11. Fen, marsh, swamp, flushes

17 18 11

12. Bog 3 2 6

13. Standing water 8 13 2

14. Rivers 7 3 2

15. Montane 1 < 1 0

16. Inland rock (basic & Acid)

11 15 6

17. Built 11 2 0

18. Coastal rock 2 2 0

19. Sand dune 10 9 6

21. Salt marsh 5 5 0

Note: totals add up to more than 100% as some species occur in more than one habitat.

Conclusions1. There are 172 out of a total of 946 North Lancashire native and natu-

ralised archaeophyte taxa or 18% of the flora that are extinct, rare and/or endangered. The total includes 90 declining species, 42 extinct species and 41 are increasing and 21 of these are no longer rare. (Note the Flora listed 136 very rare species found in 5 or fewer tetrads.) A further 90 – 100 species occur in 6 to 14 tetrads so that 30% or more of the native and nat-uralised archaeophyte flora is extinct, rare, very rare or endangered). The Flora suggested that declining and extinct species prefer nutrient poor soils whether or not they were calcareous and increasing species generally pre-fer nutrient rich calcareous soils.

2. The reasons for species declining or becoming extinct are generally not known. However nutrient enrichment, drainage and changes in agricul-tural practice are thought to be largely responsible.

45

3. The rate of extinction is accelerating with nearly twice as many species lost after 1964 (27) as between 1900 and 1964 (13).

4. Recent rapid decline is noted for 28 (31%) declining species.5. In terms of biodiversity conservation, whether or not a species occurs in

an SSSI seems to make little difference. With 37% of post 1964 extinct species, 69% of declining species and 50% of increasing species occurring in SSSIs

6. Extinct taxa were found in a variety of places, including SSSIs, throughout northern Lancashire. Two species were lost at each of Outfield Moss, Gait Barrows and Robert Hall Moor but other SSSIs lost only one each. Outfield Moss was lost completely.

7. 29 SSSIs have declining species; Hawes Water (11) and Gait Barrows (8) and Lytham St Anne’s dunes and Bowland Fells seven each.

8. Most declining species are found in the most floristically diverse areas of Silverdale and Lytham St Anne’s. Both areas have statutory and other pro-tection measures but it appears current management policies are failing to halt biodiversity loss.

9. The habitat preferences of rare and/or endangered and extinct taxa differ. In the former most taxa prefer fens, marshes and swamps and flushes (18%), boundary and linear habitats (17%) and calcareous grasslands (15%) whereas the comparable figures for extinctions are 11%, 9% and 9%. On the other hand the habitat preference for most extinct species is dwarf shrub heath (13%). Whilst extensive dwarf shrub heath remains in the form of heather moor in Bowland and Leck most of the lowland heaths have gone and with them their characteristic species, e.g. Antennaria dioica. Despite the loss of sand dunes the decline of coastal species has been lim-ited. The latest figures for endangered species (Stroh, et al., 2014) suggest that in England heaths including wet heaths are under renewed threat with species such as Calluna vulgaris regarded as near threatened

The rate of extinction in North Lancashire is consistent with figures elsewhere. Between 1900 and 1964 the rate of loss of native species was c. 0.18 per annum but since 1964 this has accelerated to 0.44 species per annum, or 0.6 including archaeophytes, with an overall average of 0.37 of native species per annum since 1900. Including a further eight extinctions in the 19th century this average becomes only 0.21 species per annum. This compares with a British average of 0.5 native species per annum (Walker, 2003) but with a lower rate of extinctions in northern and western counties. Thus, Preston (2000) reported a rate of 0.76 native species in Middlesex and 0.66 for Cambridgeshire whilst Braithwaite (2013) reported a loss rate of only 0.25species per annum in Berwickshire. Am-phlett (2013) recorded a loss rate for native species of 0.39 per annum in Banff-shire but if archaeophytes were included this rose to 0.51 species per annum. However these rates of extinction are calculated over variable lengths of time. Thus for native species only, annual extinction rates over 200 years in North Lan-cashire are comparable with Berwickshire but much lower than for Middlesex or Cambridgeshire. Over 100 years or so the rate of extinction in Banffshire and

46

North Lancashire are comparable. This analysis suggests rates of extinction in the largely rural North Lancashire are similar to other largely rural northern areas but that the rates of extinction are accelerating.

Unfortunately it has notbeen possible to analyse changes in the 19th century. The rate of extinction was apparently only 0.06 per annum but this ignores, except in a few places, e.g. Lancaster and Ribbleton Moors, the probable losses, at least lo-cally, following Parliamentary Enclosure Acts of the 18th and early 19th centuries. These brought into cultivation for the first time Common lands of the ‘waste’ or ‘wild’ areas transforming the North Lancashire landscape. However, there is no data recording the floristic changes that must have occurred.

Case studies at the landscape levelThe Flora of North Lancashire (Greenwood, 2012) pointed out that ‘hot spots’ for both rare species and botanical richness were centred on the limestones of Silverdale & Warton and the sand dunes of Lytham St Anne’s. Important centres were also located at Leck, Over Wyresdale and the Upper Hod-der valley in the vicinity of Slaidburn. Data going back over 100 years is available for Leck, Silverdale, Lytham St Anne’s and the mid and upper reaches of the Hodder valley. Thus for these four areas it is possible to document the success or otherwise of botanical conservation for rare and endangered species characteristic of these areas. All the landscapes are protected by SSSIs covering all or part of the areas and Hawes Water & Gait Barrows and the meadows in the Upper Hodder catchment are also SACs .

LeckLeck is a remote parish in the north east corner of Lancashire. Most of the parish is moorland but near the village there is a pastoral landscape and Springs Wood (SD652785) bordering the Leck Beck is a fine semi-natural deciduous woodland.

This section concerns the moorland and mostly open access areas above Springs Wood at c. 150m, Fell End Crag (SD653792), Leck Fell, Gragareth, Green Hill ( SD701820; the highest part of Lancashire at 628m) and the banks of the Ease Gill. Much of the area is a proposed extension to the Yorkshire Dales National Park and is designated either as SSSI or BHS.

The area is well known for its association of rare and endangered vascular plant species. This was recognised by Wheldon and Wilson (1907) and Map 4.1 in the Flora of North Lancashire (Green-wood, 2012) shows that it is one of five areas where there is a concentration of very rare species (species found in three or fewer tetrads in northern Lancashire).

Leck Beck Head Catchment Area SSSITable 8 lists 19 endangered species found in the Lancashire part of the Leck Beck Head Catchment Area SSSI. It is an area of open moor with pot holes and embraces the carboniferous limestone gorge of Ease Gill. Here there are sparsely wooded cliffs extending in places to scree and pavement above the gorge. Five species are nationally scarce (Stewart, Pearman and Preston, 1994) but only Sax-ifraga hypnoides (vulnerable; Cheffings and Farrell, 2005) and Alchemilla wichurae (endangered) are to some degree nationally threatened. Two species appear to have been lost over the last 100 years

47

although Cardamine impatiens was seen on only one occasion. Geranium sylvaticum is present in the Cumbrian, part of the SSSI but it has not been found recently in Lancashire. It seems to be a declining species in Lancashire. Gentianella amarella was found beside the road in the SSSI in 1980 but not since. Suitable habitats seem to be available for Anagallis tenella that formerly occurred in the SSSI but it seems to have been replaced by Epilobium bruneescens in many places. It still grows below Fell End Crag. Cochlearia pyrenaica may occur from time to time from secure populations higher up the catchment but the most recent searches have failed to find it..

Recent measures to fence off the pot holes and the Ease Gill gorge appear to have had beneficial re-sults and the vegetation is in generally excellent condition. The presence of Alchemilla wichurae and fine populations of Actaea spicata, Dryopteris submontana and Gymnocarpium robertianum, particu-larly characteristic of the Craven area, are especially pleasing.

The flushes above Leck Fell House appear to be in good condition but Myosotis stolonifera seems to have gone although a single plant was found by the waterfalls near Anneside, possibly washed down from colonies higher up the valley.

This part of Leck is apparently in good condition with only three endangered species (15%) lost over the last 100 years.

Upper Ease Gill and Fells This is a moorland area dominated by upland grasslands and blanket bog. However in the upper part of Ease Gill limestone outcrops to form a gorge and the same limestone formation outcrops on Green Hill where calcareous flushes and limestone grassland also occur. There are numerous out-crops of grit scree.

Twenty endangered Lancashire species were found in the area with four losses (Table 8). Cochlearia pyrenaica was seen in 2002 both on Green Hill and in Ease Gill but in 2012 it was not seen in the Gill. Epilobium alsinifolium was found in a flush on Green Hill in 1972 but by 2000 the flush had dried out with the loss of the Epilobium. Selaginella selaginoides was seen in upper Ease Gill in 1966 and whilst the habitat remains suitable it was not found in 2012. Antennaria dioica, Diphasiastrum alpinum and Lycopodium clavatum have not been seen for 100 years. Of particular interest is the presence of Alchemilla minima, a British endemic, Red Data Book species and a species of Principal Importance, found only in the Craven area. However its taxonomic status is debatable and it is often considered only a form of A. filicaulis.

The loss of four (20%) of the endangered North Lancashire species in this area indicates considerable changes over the last 100 years. Being outside the SSSI no conservation measures are operational and possible over grazing at various times and moorland drainage schemes may have been detri-mental. Nevertheless several populations of Rubus chamaemorus suggest the presence of undis-turbed bog surfaces whilst Huperzia selago seems to regenerate in the grit screes. The presence of Trichophorum x foersteri (as a hybrid it is not included in the statistical analysis) and Carex bigelowii also indicate the survival of ancient habitats.

Lower Ease Gill and Fell End Crag Table 8 indicates that 23 endangered North Lancashire species have occured in the area. All the rocks and soils are acid or neutral but base-rich flushes occur, especially draining Fell End Crag. None

48

of the species are threatened nationally but in Lancashire several species are declining or popula-tions are unsustainable. Of the five losses Antennaria dioica, Primula farinosa, Salix myrsinifolia and Salix phylicifolia have not been seen for over 100 years. Similarly Viola hirta has not been seen for 100 years but its locality has not been ascertained and it is assumed that it was in the lower part of the valley. There is one locality for Antennaria dioica in South Lancashire whilst Salix phylicifolia oc-curs as isolated, widely separated bushes in North Lancashire. Salix myrsinifolia may be a recent loss. Primula farinosa is declining generally in the county. The population of Cryptogramma crispa on Fell End Crag has declined substantially over the last 100 years from being very fine to 12 plants in 2000 and only 6 plants in 2006. In 2013 two other clumps were found on crags below Fell End Crag.

As with the other areas in Leck loss of 22% of the endangered species indicates adverse conditions for the survival of many of them. However the importance of the flushes for several of the remaining species is significant.

Although Leck Beck Head Catchment Area was declared as an SSSI in 1979 it was declared primarily for its geological interest. Later revisions extended the SSSI to include botanically important areas. However it is only recently that positive conservation measures to prevent grazing with the fencing of the carboniferous limestone gorge have occurred. This is proving beneficial whilst the pot holes have always been fenced. Unfortunately most of upland Leck is not part of the SSSI and has been subjected to grazing, mostly by sheep, at varying grazing intensities. It is in these non SSSI areas that eight out of eleven of the endangered species in Leck have been lost, seven prior to 1964.

In addition to losses a few species appear to be declining. These include Cryptogramma crispa on Fell End Crag, Cochlearia pyrenaica, Selaginella selaginoides and Scabiosa columbaria formerly seen in Upper Ease Gill but not noted in 2012. As further species appear to be declining more losses may be expected. Nevertheless despite the losses Leck Fell remains an important biodiversity ‘hot spot’. Some of the lost species may be re-found or even re-colonize the area. Furthermore new taxa may be discovered. Recent discoveries include Myosotis stolonifera , Gymnocarpium dryopteris, Dryopteris oreades, Alchemilla minima, Alchemilla wichurae and Asplenium trichomanes ssp trichomanes. Improved conservation measures will prove beneficial as is already apparent in middle Ease Gill. Recent views recognising that conservation should be at a landscape scale implies that pos-itive measures should be taken to cover the whole area.

Critical speciesOf the critical genera Hieracium and Taraxacum only the former has been studied. Four Hieracium species characteristic of northern England are found but none are threatened nationally. They are all rare in Lancashire and in Leck are confined to Ease Gill and pot holes. They are Hieracium lisolepium, H. cravoniense, H. duriceps and H. pellucidum.

One other species, Alchemilla glaucescens, has been recorded from Leck but it is believed to be an error for a form of A. filicaulis and no voucher specimens have been seen. It could occur and is found nearby in Yorkshire.

Table 8. Leck Fell Rare and/or endangered speciesSpecies Last date seen England status

* = Species of Principal Impor-

Presence in: SSSI +, upper Ease Gill *, lower Ease Gill

49

tance & crags #

Actaea spicata 2013 +

Alchemilla minima 2002 * *

Alchemilla wichu-rae

2013 VU *#

Anagallis tenella 2013 #

Antennaria dioica 1907 E VU *#

Asplenium tri-chomonas ss

2012 *

Asplenium viride 2013 + *

Avenula pubescens

1987 +

Carex bigelowii 2000 *

Carex dioica 2012 +#

Cardamine impa-tiens

1966 E NT +#

Carlina vulgaris 2013 #

Cochlearia pyre-naica

2002 *

Cryptogramma crispa

2013 VU *#

Diphasiastrum alpinum

1900 E *

Draba incana 2013 + *

Dryopteris ore-ades

2013 #

Dryopteris sub-montana

2013 +

Eleocharis quin-quiflora

2000 #

Epilobium alsini-folium

1972 E *

Euphrasia scotica 2013 # +

Festuca altissima 2000 +

Galium sterneri 2012 +

50

Gentianella amarella

1980 E NT +

Geranium syl-vaticum

1967 E NT +

Gymnocarpium dryopteris

2000 NT #

Gymnocarpium robertianum

2013 +

Huperzia selago 2012 *

Hyacinthoides non-scipta

2013 +*#

Lycopodium clava-tum

1883 E VU *

Myosotis stolonifera

1913 +#

Parnassia palustris 2013 VU #

Phegopteris con-nectilis

2013 #

Pinguicula vulgaris 2013 VU *#

Primula farinosa 1907 E NT #

Rubus chamae-morus

2012 *

Salix myrsinifolia 1907E #

Salix phylicifolia 1907E #

Saxifraga hyp-noides

2013 VU + *

Scabiosa colum-baria

2013 + * #

Selaginella selagi-noides

2013 + * #

Triglochin palus-tris

1987 NT +*#

Viola hirta 1907 E ? Locality not known

51

Gait Barrows and Hawes WaterThis site comprises the whole of Gait Barrows SSSI (including Thrang Wood SSSI) and Hawes Water SSSI. Together they comprise a National Nature Reserve (NNR) and include a wide range of calcare-ous habitats ranging from woodland, limestone pavement and cliffs to grasslands, fens and open wa-ter. As such they form a discrete and distinct landscape feature within the Arnside and Silverdale AONB; an area of undulating, often wooded, limestone hills, lakes, fens, coastal marshes and cliffs. .

The Flora (Greenwood, 2012) suggests that the area (tetrads SD47 T and Y) is one of the most botan-ically diverse areas of Lancashire with over 600 species recorded from each tetrad. It is also the loca-tion for many rare and endangered species. Of the 415 species in Table 2 listed as rare and/ or en-dangered in North Lancashire 101 or 25% (table 9) occur or have occurred in the Hawes Water and Gait Barrows SSSIs since 1900. Of these 34 are threatened nationally (Stroh, et al., 2014). Six species are identified as of Principal Importance but three of these are extinct.

However a number of the species listed in Table 9 have been lost since 1900. In the period 1900 – 1964 five species were lost. Since 1964 a further 25 species have not been seen. Since 2000, despite recent searches, 13 of these apparent losses have not been recorded. That leaves 12 species that were lost between 1964 and 1999. Of more recent losses both Lathyrus linifolius and Ophrys insecti-fera are believed extant in 2014 but were not actually noted. Of other recently lost species it is diffi-cult to know which have really been lost but it is likely that some at least have disappeared.

Thus in summary in the first 64 years of the 20th century five species were lost but in the next 39 years a further 12 were lost. Clearly during the 20th century the rate of loss accelerated and if the post 2000 figures are correct the rate of loss is accelerating still further.

The changes in the early 20th century may relate to much earlier human influences. The Wetlands Survey (Middleton, Wells and Huckerby, 1995) surveyed Hawes Water SSSI and found evidence of early peat digging at Little Hawes Water (SD479769) and later, perhaps mid-19 th century, exploita-tion of Hawes Water Moss (SD48.76.). Unfortunately no detailed palaenological or archaeological work was undertaken. Manor Court records (Mourholme Local History Society Book Group, 2005) suggest that modest drainage works in the 18th century lowered the water levels a few feet. Also a cut in the limestone connecting the two lakes suggests that attempts at draining Little Hawes Water were made at some time although a sluice to retain water in Little Hawes Water is now in place. Fur-thermore the ‘step’ down between the shell marl and the present fluctuating but generally lower water level indicates that it was indeed lowered in Hawes Water and that this may date to the drainage works in the 18th century and peat removal from the Moss. Nevertheless the species com-position changes surrounding Little Hawes Water with the loss of Myrica gale and Drosera rotundifo-lia, not a rare or endangered North Lancashire species but recorded here in 1856, may suggest some of the drainage works were done in the 19th century.

Also by the end of the 19th century basic slag and sulphate of ammonia became readily available and few fields in Lancashire escaped treatment. These fertilizers and other agricultural improvements re-duced species diversity and probably caused the loss of Platanthera chlorantha and P. bifolia

52

This early period ends c. 1964 but finishes with the destruction of most of the floristic interest in the pasture between Trowbarrow and Hawes Water Moss. Somehow this field escaped fertilizer treat-ment but in about 1960 it was used for free-range pigs. This effectively dug up the field and enriched the soil with nitrogen.

The value of the Hawes Water and Gait Barrows area was well known and Hawes Water was desig-nated as an SSSI in 1951. The whole area was then in private ownership and it was not possible to implement positive conservation management. Further problems arose in the early 1970s when ex-ploitation of the limestone at Gait Barrows occurred. Eventually Gait Barrows was acquired as a Na-tional Nature Reserve in 1977 and Hawes Water a few years later. Since then the grasslands have been managed organically and the woodlands managed in a traditional way. Nevertheless scrub en-croachment is a continuing problem most noticeably where the landmark white cliff separates Little Hawes Water from Hawes Water. Carex ericetorum, Asplenium viride and Gymnocarpium rober-tianum once grew here. Furthermore drying of the shell marl continues with further shrub encroach-ment.

Thus whilst reasons can be advanced for losses before 1964 it is less clear why losses are continuing at an increased rate despite the implementation of positive conservation measures. Perhaps the key lies in the lowered water table. The post 1964 losses include Asplenium viride, Gnaphalium sylvaticum, Dactylorhiza incarnata, Cardamine impatiens, Gentianella campestris and Anacamptis morio.

All require nutrient poor soils and fairly open habitats lacking competion from vigorous species. Re-duced water levels, encroaching scrub and generalised atmospheric nitrogen pollution may consti-tute a suite of interrelated factors. Mitigating the effects of atmospheric deposition may be difficult in which case further losses will occur in the next few years. A further possibility is that the removal of limestone from parts of Gait Barrows pavement affected the remaining intact parts.

Critical speciesRare and/ or endangered critical species include Hieracium tricolorans, formerly included within H. decolor, H. silvaticoides and a plant originally thought to be H. glanduliceps but now thought to be something else not yet positively identified. Rubus spp and Taraxacum spp. have not been re-searched and those that have been recorded are not thought to be particularly noteworthy.

Table 9. Gait Barrows & Hawes Water rare and/or endangered species

Species Date last seen England Status

Alchemilla filicaulis ssp. filicaulis

2014

Allium oleraceum 2013 VU

Anacamptis morio 1980 E VU

Anagallis tenella 1907 E

Aquilegia vulgaris 2013

53

Arabis hirsuta 2014 NT

Asplenium viride 1983 E

Atropa belladona 2005

Avenula pratensis 2013

Avenula pubescens 2013

Blackstonia perfoliata 2014

Botrychium lunaria 1992 VU

Cardamine impatiens 1967 E NT

Carex digitata 2013

Carex disticha 2000

Carex elata 2013 NT

Carex ericetorum 2000 VU*

Carex hostiana 2013

Carex lepidocarpa 2014

Carex pseudocyperus 2014

Carex oederi 1983

Carex strigosa 1987 E

Carex vesicaria 2014 VU

Carlina vulgaris 2014 NT

Cladium mariscus 2014

Clinopodium vulgare 2013

Coeloglossum viride 1959 E VU*

Convallaria majalis 2014

Dactylorhiza incarnata s.l.

1973 E

Dactylorhiza purpurella 2014

Daphne laureola 2014

Dryopteris submontana 2014

Epipactis atrorubens 2014

Epipactis palustris 2005 NT

Euphorbia exigua 2008 VU

54

Frangula alnus 2013

Galium boreale 2014

Galium sterneri 2014

Gentianella amarella 2000 NT

Gentianella campestris 1983 E EN*

Geranium columbinum 2014

Geranium sanguineum 2013 NT

Gnaphalium sylvaticum 2000 E EN

Gymnadenia conopsea) 2014

Gymnadenia densiflora 2014

Gymnocarpium rober-tianum

2014

Helianthemum nummu-larium

2014 NT

Helleborus foetidus 2013

Hippuris vulgaris 2014

Hyacinthoides non-scripta

2014

Hypericum androsae-mum

2014

Hypericum montanum 2013

Inula conyzae 2014

Juncus subnodulosus 2013

Juniperus communis 2014 NT*

Koeleria macrantha 2000

Lathraea squamaria 2013

Lathyrus linifolius 2008 NT

Lithospermum offici-nale

2014

Melica nutans 2014

Minuartia verna 2014 NT

Myrica gale 1902 E NT

55

Neottia nidus-avis 2000 E VU

Ophioglossum vulga-tum

2004

Ophrys insectifera 2009 VU*

Paris quadrifolia 2014

Parnassia palustris 2014 VU

Pinguicula vulgaris 2013 VU

Platanthera bifolia 1905 E EN*

Platanthera chlorantha 1907 E NT

Poa compressa 1992

Polygonatum odoratum 2014

Polystichum setiferum 2013

Potamogeton berch-toldii

2014

Potamogeton coloratus 2014

Potamogeton lucens 2014

Potamogeton obtusi-folius

1915 E

Potentilla tabernae-montani

2014

Primula farinosa 2014 NT

Rhamnus cathartica 2014

Rosa spinosissima 2014

Rumex hydrolapathum 2014

Rumex longifolius 1987

Scabiosa columbaria 1992

Schoenoplectus lacus-tris

2014

Schoenus nigricans 2014

Selaginella selaginoides 2013

Serratula tinctoria 2014

Sesleria caerulea 2014

56

Sorbus lancastriensis 2014 NT

Sparganium natans 2011 VU

Spiranthes spiralis 1912 E NT

Thalictrum flavum 2014

Tilia cordata 2014

Triglochin palustris 2014 NT

Trisetum flavescens 2014

Utricularia vulgaris s.s. 2014

Valerianella locusta 2000

Veronica anagallis-aquatica

2011

Viola canina 1907 E VU

Viola tricolor 2000 NT

Viola hirta 2014

Some of the older records not marked E may be extinct as some areas of the NNR have not been ex-plored recently otherwise E = extinct in the NNR, * = species of Principal Importance.

Lytham St Anne’s sand dunesFormerly sand dunes stretched from Lytham Mill to South Shore, Blackpool. By the middle of the 19 th

century Lytham was an established resort and the dunes had been flattened to form Lytham Green. It was not until 1874 that work started on building St Anne’s. A little later in 1893 the double stan-ner, which was a shingle ridge extending from St Anne’s to Granny’s Bay and enclosing a tidal creek, was enclosed. This formed Fairhaven Lake (SD34.27.), which was filled with water in August 1893 (Haley, 1995). On the landward side of the dunes sand was blown over former mossland before fi-nally reaching Lytham and Marton Mosses. On this ‘link’ sand shallow lakes or pools (the Leaches) formed. The mosslands were largely drained by the early years of the 19th century although peat cutting continued for another 100 years. The link sand was common land but this was enclosed at Lytham in the 17th century and elsewhere early in the 19th century. Drainage works probably drained the leaches during the late 18th and early 19th centuries although they were still marked on the 1st edition of the O S maps of 1840. The whole area provided rough grazing and proved ideal for the cre-ation of golf courses in the late 19th century. The Lytham and St Anne’s Golf Club opened in 1886 but in 1897 moved from a site near Fairhaven Lake to their present premises further inland. The Old Links and Royal Lytham & St Anne’s were established a few years later. However despite their cre-ation significant wild areas remain within the golf course boundaries including some wet parts. From the end of the 19th century the coastal towns were gradually enlarged but even by the early 20 th cen-tury the Fylde coast sand dunes were an important natural feature.

57

In this analysis the present day sand dunes, in a much modified form, comprise five isolated por-tions; at Lytham between the promenade and houses (SD350270), Fairhaven on the seaward side of the coast road (SD334274), inland of Clifton Drive known as the ‘Hospital site’ (SD336278), coastal dunes (SSSI) seaward of Clifton Drive north and south of nursing homes and flats (SD30.30.) and Lytham St Anne’s Local Nature Reserve between Clifton Drive and the railway (SD31.30.). In addition dune heath and acidic grasslands occur on the Royal Lytham & St Anne’s and the St Anne’s Old Links golf courses and these have been included in the analysis. However the developing dune system at Fleetwood, mostly within the Wyre Estuary SSSI, is not included.

Despite their small size, fragmented and much modified state, a surprising number of the rare and endangered species found on the dunes 100 years ago survive. Also the species diversity of the area, particularly in tetrad SD33A, is remarkable with nearly 600 taxa recorded.

Within the surveyed areas 79 taxa or 19% of the total number of North Lancashire rare and endan-gered species have been recorded. Of these 23 are threatened or near threatened nationally (Stroh, et al., 2014) 13 of which occur within an SSSI. However of these threatened or near threatened species at least six have been lost. Of the 79 taxa 46 were recorded from SSSIs. Five species were identified as of Principal Importance; two occur in SSSIs, two outside and two, Gentianella campestris and Hypopitys monotropa are extinct. Since 1900 there have been 15 losses or 10% of the rare and endangered sand dune taxa with five of these lost between 1900 and 1963 and ten species lost after 1964. Since 2000 Hipopitys monotropa and possibly Equisetum variegatum have been lost whilst Juncus maritimus may have gone from sand dunes but remains on adjacent salt marshes. Prior to 1900 only Ranunculus baudotii (1899), Trifolium suffocatum (1866) and Clinopodium vulgare (1860) appear to have been lost (last year recorded in parenthesis).

These figures show that over the 20th century there was an accelerating loss of taxa, which may be continuing. The few losses before 1900 is consistent with the dunes remaining undeveloped until the late 19th century.

The huge changes to the sand dune system are all too obvious. The most important of these was the development of the built landscape of Lytham St Anne’s. The surviving fragments maintained their interest through massive physical disturbance to the dunes during and after the second world war, including the removal of large amounts of sand seaward of Clifton Drive in the 1950s. The develop-ment of golf courses on link sand has probably been beneficial with the preservation of fragments of dune heath and the excavation of a few ponds.

However the dune fragments are too small to be self-sustaining. Beach cleaning prevents the devel-opment of new dunes and without the formation of new wind-blown hollows (blow-outs) to create dune slacks the dunes are gradually maturing with a consequent loss of species diversity. The condi-tion of the SSSI is considered poor (on-line SSSI assessment, January 2013; https://www.gov.uk/gov-ernment/organisation/natural_england) and without positive management there can be no recov-ery. Management plans have been written but without finance they cannot be implemented. Never-theless early in 2013 finance for a five year programme of works to the SSSI was obtained.

58

Critical speciesWithin the critical genera of Hieracium, Rubus and Taraxacum only Hieracium umbellatum is known to be especially associated with the sand dunes. It is found in 12 tetrads in North Lancashire and is confined to the Fylde coast.

Table 10. Lytham St Anne’s rare and/or endangered sand dune species

Species Date last seen National Status SSSI

Anacamptis pyra-midalis

2008 VU +

Anagallis tenella 1964 E

Anthriscus cau-calis

2012

Aphanes australis 2002

Atriplex laciniata 2014

Blackstonia perfo-liata

2014 +

Blysmus compres-sus

2008 VU*

Botrichium lunaria 1983 E VU +

Cakile maritima 2014 +

Calystegia sol-danella

1991 E VU

Carex disticha 2007 +

Carex oederi 2008 +

Carlina vulgaris 2014 NT +

Catapodium mar-inum

2011

Centaurium lit-torale

2008 +

Centaurium pul-chellum

1907 E

Centunculus min-imus

1988 E EN

Cerastium arvense 2010 NT +

Cochleria danica 2013

Coincya monensis 2014 +

59

Crambe maritima 1999

Cynoglossum offic-inale

2014 NT

Dactylorhiza incar-nata ss

2011 +

Dactylorhiza incar-nate ssp. cocinea

2004 +

Dactylorhiza praetermissa

2011 +

Dactylorhiza pur-purella

2011 +

Echium vulgare 2014 +

Eleocharis quin-queiflora

2014 +

Eleocharis uniglu-mis

2002 +

Epipactis dunense 2014 +

Epipactis palustris 2014 NT +

Epipactis phyllan-thes

2011 +

Equisetum varie-gatum

2008E? +

Erodium lebeli 2010 +

Erophila glabrescens

2003 +

Eryngium mariti-mum

2014 NT +

Euphorbia paralias 2014 +

Euphorbia port-landica

2008

Euphrasia tetra-quetra

2014 NT +?

Festuca filiformis 2010

Fumaria purpurea 2010 VU*

Gentianella amarella

1915 E NT

60

Gentianella campestris

1959 E VU*

Geranium san-guineum

2014 NT +

Glaucium flavum 1993 NT

Hypopitys monotropa

2004E EN* +

Inula conyza 2004 +

Juncus balticus 1965 E VU

Juncus maritimus 1999 +

Koeleria macran-tha

2010

Montia fontana ssp. chondros-perma

2010

Myosotis ramosis-sima

2010 +

Ophioglossum vul-gatum

2009 +

Ophrys apifera 2011 +

Ornithopus pur-pusillus

2002

Orobanche minor 2008

Osmunda regalis 1977 E

Parentucella vis-cosa

2004 + introduced

Parnassia palustris 2014 VU +

Phleum arenarium 2009 NT +

Polygalla vulgaris ssp. collina

2014 +

Polygonum oxyspermum

2014 +

Pyrola rotundifolia ssp. maritima

2014 +

Ranunculus tri-chophyllus

1974 E? +

61

Raphanus raphanistrum ssp. maritima

2014 +

Rosa spinosissima 1907 E

Ruppia maritima 1996 E NT

Salsoli kali 2008 VU* +?

Samolus valerandii 2014 +

Selaginella selagi-noides

1900 E

Thalictrum minus 2014 +

Trifolium striatum 2003

Trisetum flavescens

2014

Valerianella lo-custa ss

2010

Valerianella lo-custa ssp. dunense

1965 E

Vicia lathyroides 2010 +

Viola canina 2014 NT +

Viola tricolor ssp. curtisii

2009

Vulpia fasciculata 2009 +

E = extinct, * = species of Principal Importance

The Mid and Upper Hodder ValleyThis large area includes the Hodder catchment from Dunsop Bridge (SD659500) to the source of the river in the moors above Stocks Reservoir (SD72.55.). It is an upland area rising from 110m at Dun-sop Bridge to 544m on White Hill (SD674587) north east of Slaidburn (SD71.52.). The hills are cov-ered in blanket bog and their sides with upland grassland and dwarf shrub heath but punctuated in a few places with grit stone cliffs, e.g. Brennand Stones (SD640533). In the valley pastoral farming dominates the landscape with small woodlands, often on steep valley sides. There are numerous wetlands mostly in the form of flushes but a feature of the landscape is numerous outcrops of lime-stone giving rise to calcareous rocks and springs in a landscape otherwise dominated by acidic rocks and soils. Most of the Hodder catchment is within the Forest of Bowland AONB. Most of the moors to the north west of Slaidburn are in the Bowland Fells SSSI whilst to the east of the village there are several grassland SSSIs many of which are part of the North Pennine Dales Meadows SAC.

62

In this study the area is divided into two zones. The first zone includes the mid zone of the Hodder catchment from Dunsop Bridge to Slaidburn but not including the Langden Brook catchment (Trough of Bowland) and the second zone covers the catchment above Slaidburn. Until 1920 the two zones were similar but during the 1920s and 1930s Stocks Reservoir was built and Gisburn Forest (SD74.56.) was planted with evergreen spruce species etc. The works associated with these develop-ments were considerable but also involved the abandonment of farms and most farming in the vicin-ity of the reservoir and forest. Thus where land was left free of reservoir and forest works it was ef-fectively abandoned and left to ‘nature’. Several small limestone and grit quarries were opened and later abandoned. Elsewhere farming and moor management continued and developed unaffected by these works. Nevertheless there were works associated with water abstraction from rivers, particu-larly in the Dunsop valley and Croasdale with consequential changes to river flow. Following these developments there were considerable differences in the landscape between the mid and upper zones of the Hodder catchment.

In making the following analysis most of the pre 1964 records rely on the work of J.F. Pickard and his friends from about 1880 to 1913 but mostly during a few years around 1900. There are few records between 1913 and 1985 when Phyl Abbott started to collect records for her ‘Plant Atlas’ (Abbott, 2005). Possibly most records were made between 2000 and 2010. A total of 103 of the rare and/or endangered species and sub-species listed in Table 2 were recorded in the mid and upper zones of the Hodder catchment. This represents 25% of the total recorded in North Lancashire. Of these 103 taxa 73 were found in the mid zone and 75 in the Upper Hodder catchment so that each zone had similar numbers of rare and endangered taxa.

Of the 103 taxa found in the mid and upper zones of the Hodder catchment c. 20 appear to have be-come extinct. However, as Table 11a indicates, there is a considerable difference between the mid and upper zones.

Mid Hodder CatchmentIn the mid Hodder catchment 29 taxa are apparently lost and two of these became extinct after 1964. Of these 20 are nationally endangered with 11 nationally endangered species still extant. All four Section 41 species of Principal Importance were lost. On the other hand 15 taxa were recorded for the first time after 1964. Most of these were probably present before then but were overlooked or not regarded as noteworthy 100 years ago. Some were not recognised as species or sub-species in 1900. Nevertheless it is surprising that the conspicuous Ulex gallii was not seen in the Whitendale valley. Equisetum variegatum was arguably overlooked 100 years ago but it seems more likely it was introduced with sand in connection with water abstraction works in the Whitendale valley along with Carex arenaria and Salix repens ssp. argentea, which were also recorded for the first time after 1964. Ophrys apifera is probably only a casual. Thus, it seems that no new taxa, apart from Ophrys apifera, have spread naturally into the mid zone of the Hodder catchment since 1964.

None of the species recorded post 1964 are either nationally endangered or species of Principal Im-portance. In the early 1900s two sites were of outstanding significance. Between Newton and Dun-sop Bridge the south facing limestone cliffs on the north side of the R. Hodder provided a a refuge for a number of calcicole species including rarities such as Potentilla crantzii. Even in 1900 botanists were reporting the gradual deterioration of the site through scrub encroachment and the recent

63

planting of pine trees to the edge of the cliff top. These changes have continued over the last 100 years.

Another exceptional botanical site was known as the ‘Heaning bog’. This is still present and crossed by a public right of way but key species, e.g. Primula farinosa and Parnassia palustris are today ab-sent. It is difficult to understand why some species have been lost but the presence of rusting water tanks might suggest that attempts were made to abstract water from the springs in the wetland. If this is the case it would have altered the hydrology of the site.

More generalised agricultural improvements and increasing soil fertility have probably caused other losses but this seems to have been especially marked on the north facing slopes of the Newton Fells, particularly in the area draining Browsholme Moor (SD70.47.). Some of the valley woodlands were also lost to coniferous plantings. Thus, these changes have eradicated almost all the species that for-merly made the mid Hodder zone an area of exceptional interest.

In the mid Hodder zone there were many areas of botanical significance that had they survived would have been of SSSI status.

Upper Hodder CatchmentThe situation in the Upper Hodder catchment is almost an exact reversal of the situation in the Mid Hodder catchment.

Seventy five rare and/or endangered species and sub-species were recorded in the Upper Hodder catchment and apparently 55 were newly recorded after 1964. However, this is misleading as there is no reason to believe that most of these were not previously present but were not seen 100 years ago. The primary reason for this apparent increase is due to under recording in this remote area of Bowland whilst a few taxa were not recognised as species or sub species at that time.

Nevertheless there has been a real increase in the number of rare and/or endangered taxa. The main reason for the increase is the creation of new habitats provided by the building of Stocks Reser-voir. The fluctuating water levels provided a low nutrient drawdown habitat not seen previously in the valley and eight species colonised these shores of the reservoir. These were Alopecurus aequalis, Juncus filiformis, Limosella aquatic, Litorella uniflora, Lythrum portula, Persicaria minor, Rumex mari-timus and most recently Rorippa islandica. Constructing the reservoir also required stone and quar-ries were opened and later abandoned. Whilst providing habitats for species that might otherwise have been lost, especially Lycopodiaceae, the only new species to arrive was Diphasiastrum alpinum. Some of the species may owe their origin to localities many miles from Bowland, e.g. the Lake Dis-trict, North Wales or perhaps the Yorkshire Pennines.

Other colonists included Alchemilla wichurae, Bromus commutatus, Frangula alnus and Osmunda re-galis. The first two would not have been recognised 100 years ago. A. wichurae was probably intro-duced with limestone chips used to surface tracks in Gisburn Forest whilst B. commutatus was found in a farmyard, probably introduced with hay or halage. Frangula alnus was found in a number of places in Gisburn Forest and was probably introduced as was Geranium sylvaticum in a hay meadow near Slaidburn although this was recorded as native 100 years earlier. However Osmunda regalis was found as young plants in the high fells and must have spread naturally, perhaps from sources further west near the coast.

64

Whilst there have been thirteen newly recorded taxa in the Upper Hodder catchment there have also been seven losses making a net gain of six as opposed to a net loss of 26 in the mid Hodder zone.

As has already been explained the building of Stocks Reservoir created new habitats providing a refuge for species previously recorded. Nevertheless building the reservoir and planting the forest destroyed hay meadows and other habitats but overall the relatively low level of farming intensity left habitats in the Upper Hodder zone that were lost lower down the valley. In particular flush, woodland and hay meadow habitats have remained and many have been designated SSSIs and SACs thus preventing further agricultural improvement detrimental to their survival. Others should be designated to protect their continued significance for conservation. Stocks Reservoir was designated at a European level, mainly for its bryophytes, as an Important Plant Area but this does not imply any statutory protection.

Although the area was remote and difficult to access 100 years ago few if any of the species in the region became extinct as a result of their flooding. However the reservoir itself created a new habi-tat of a stony ‘draw down’ zone during the summer and early autumn. The reservoir attracted many bird species and probably through them, or possibly anglers, propegules of plants characteristic of fluctuating water levels colonised the banks.

In Gisburn Forest the plantations avoided deciduous woodlands in the often steep sided valleys of Bottoms (SD75.57.) and Dob Dale (SD75.59.) Becks. In these and other wooded valleys a characteris-tic northern woodland flora remained undisturbed. Similarly base-rich flushes within Gisburn Forest and beyond, e.g. Copped Hill Clough pasture (SD71.57.), Bottom Laithe (SD742554) and Standridge Farm Pasture (SD73.53.) remained free of agricultural improvement.

There can be no doubt that the effective encapsulation of an upland area for water catchment pur-poses and forestry, some 50sq km, the creation of new habitats and absence of agricultural improve-ment has benefited the native flora enormously.

In both zones large areas of the moorland are part of the large Bowland Fells SSSI.

Table 11. Mid and Upper Hodder rare and/or endangered species(Records from the Hodder catchment above Dunsop Bridge including the Dunsop Valley)

Taxon National status

Mid HodderPre 1964

Mid Hod-derPost 1964

Upper Hod-derPre 1964

Upper HodderPost 1964

Alchemilla wichureae

VU 2010

Allium oleraceum VU 1899E

Alopecurus ae-qualis

1978

Anagallis tenella # 1985-2005 # 1985-2005

65

Andromeda polifo-lia

NT 1901 2011* 1901 2011*

Antennaria dioica VU 1909E

Arabis hirsuta NT 1895 1985-2005 1985-2005

Asplenium tri-chomanes ssp. tri-chomanes

# 2013*

Asplenium viride 1902*E? # 2012*

Avenula pubescens

# 2010 # 2007

Botrychium lu-naria

VU 1909E # 1988E?

Bromus commuta-tus

2000

Carex dioica 1899 1899 2007

Carex disticha 1899 2010 # 2009

Carex hostiana 1899 1985-2005 # 2013

Cirsium hetero-phyllum

NT 1895 2012 # 2011*

Clinopodium vul-gare

2007 1899 2011

Coeloglossum viride

VU+ 1907E

Convallaria majalis 1898 2008 1898E

Cryptogramma crispa

VU 1893E 1882E

Dactylorhiza incar-nata s.l.

1913E # 2006*

Dactylorhiza mac-ulata

1913 1996 # 2013*

Dactylorhiza pur-purella

1901E 1899 2013*

Daphne mez-ereum

VU 1897E

Diphasiastrum alpinum

2013

Dryopteris cam- # 2012*

66

brensis

Dryopteris ore-ades

# 2007*

Eleocharis quin-queflora

1933 1985-2005 # 2007

Epipactis palustris NT 1893 2013

Equisetum varie-gatum

1985-2005

Euphrasia arctica VU # 2007*

Euphrasia micran-tha

EN 1909E # 2005

Frangula alnus 2008(planted?)

Galium sterneri # 2013*

Genista anglica VU 1893E

Genista tinctoria VU 1903 2001 # 2014*

Gentianella amarella

NT 1896 # 2014

Geranium syl-vaticum

NT 1912 2009*(introduced?)

Gymnocarpium dryopteris

NT 1913E 1901 2006*

Gymnodenia conopsea s.l.

1913 #? 2014*

Helianthemum nummularia

NT 1927E

Helleborus viride 1880E

Huperzia selago 1893 2011* # 2013*

Hyacinthoides non-scripta

# 1985-2005 # 2008

Hypericum humi-fusum

# 1985-2005

Jasione montana VU 1888E

Juncus filiformis 1985-2005

Juniperus commu-nis

NT+ 1909 1985E

Koeleria macran- 1909 2010

67

tha

Lathraea squa-maria

# 1977

Lathyrus linifolius NT # 1985-2005 # 2007

Limosella aquatica 2014

Litorella uniflora 2008

Lycopodium clava-tum

VU 1899 2006 # 2013*

Lythrum portula 2008

Menyanthes trifo-liata

1893 2010 # 1985-2005

Minuartia verna NT 1901E

Myosotis stolonifera

# 2007 # 1985-2005

Neottia cordata 1908E

Ophioglossum vul-gatum

1904 2006 1899 1985-2005

Ophrys apifera 2000 (ca-sual?)

Origanum vulgare # 1985-2005

Osmunda regalis 2012*

Paris quadrifolia 1895 2007

Parnassia palustris VU 1893E # 2014*

Pedicularis palus-tris

VU # 1985-2005 # 1985-2005

Persicaria minor VU 2008

Phegopteris con-nectilis

1892 2008* # 2013*

Pimpinella major 1909 1985-2005 # 2007

Pinguicula vulgaris VU 1893E # 2014*

Platanthera bifolia EN+ 1912E 1881E

Platanthera chlo-rantha

NT 1913E

Poa compressa 1909E

68

Potamogeton alpi-nus

VU 1909E

Potamogeton polygonifolius

# 2008* # 2007*

Polygonatum mul-tiflorum

1898E

Potentilla crantzii 1897E

Primula farinosa NT 1893E # 2014*

Pseudorchis albida VU+ 1912E

Rhamnus catharti-cus

1961E # 2008

Rhinanthus minor ssp. stenophyllus

# 2007*

Ribes alpinum 1895E

Rorippa islandica 2008

Rubus chamae-morus

1908 2006* 1882 1985-2005*

Rubus saxatilis 1901E # 1985-2005

Rumex maritimus 2006

Salix phylicifolia 1909 2013

Salix repens ssp. repens

NT 1909 2007

Scabiosa colum-baria

1901 2007

Serratula tinctoria # 2014*

Thalictrum flavum 1909E

Tilia cordata 1926E

Triglochin palustris NT # 2010 # 2010*

Trisetum flavescens

# 1985-2005 # 2009

Trollius europaeus 1901 1986E # 2014*

Ulex gallii # 2005

Vaccinium vitis-idaea

1901 1985-2005* # 1985-2005*

69

Valeriana dioica NT # 2007 # 2009*

Veronica anagallis=aquatica

1901 1985-2005

Viola hirta 1901 2008

Viola palustris # 2012 # 2009*

Wahlenbergia hederaceae

NT 1909 2006

E = Extinct

* = present in SSSI

# Presumed present but no definite records.

+ = Species of Principal Importance

Table 11a. Mid and Upper Hodder rare and/ or endangered species summary

Mid Hodder Upper Hodder Total

No. of species 73 75 103 (25% of total Table 2)

No. extinct 29 (2 post 1964) 7 20

No. of species pre 1964 68 62

No. of species post 1964

42 68

No. species in SSSIs 7 (1E) 31

No. nationally endan-gered

31 (31 extinct) 23 (6 extinct) 38 (15 extinct)

No. species of Principal Importance

4 extinct 1 extinct

No. first recorded post 1964

15 55

Discussion

Case studies at the landscape levelThe four landscapes chosen for this analysis reflect four contrasting areas. Leck is an upland rich in northern species but with a less diverse flora than areas at lower altitudes. Tetrads SD68Q and 67U have up to 250 taxa whereas at Hawes Water/Gait Barrows and Lytham St Anne’s total numbers of taxa per tetrad are approximately 650 and 600 respectively. Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows is a mosaic

70

of basic woodland, limestone pavement, grassland and wetland habitats whereas at Lytham St Anne’s the sand dunes vary from fore dunes to dune heath with wet and damp slacks. The mid and Upper Hodder is also an upland area but with extensive grasslands in the valleys. Species totals vary with around 400 per tetrad.

All the landscapes embrace areas designated as SSSIs with the whole of Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows designated and forming a National Nature Reserve. It is also a Special Area of Conservation Impor-tance (SAC). Part of the Lytham St Anne’s SSSI is a Local Nature Reserve. There are a number of SSSIs designated in the Upper Hodder valley; mostly hay meadows and some of these are also SACs. Parts of both the mid and Upper Hodder catchment are within the large Bowland Fells SSSI. The Hodder valley, Leck and Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows have been subject to agricultural influences but these have been minimised in recent years for Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows and parts of the Leck Beck Head Catchment Area SSSI. At Lytham St Anne’s common rights of pasture disappeared with enclo-sure 200 or more years ago but agricultural improvements were minimal in subsequent years. How-ever by the end of the 19th century building development had started but the sand dune system was then still in a more or less natural state. After the First World War development proceeded rapidly until the 1960s. Building development was not an issue for Leck or Hawes Water / Gait Barrows but involved major works in the Upper Hodder valley. Nevertheless all have been subject to atmospheric pollution although with the prevailing westerly winds this is reduced at Lytham St Anne’s.

All the rare and endangered species found at Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows were within the SSSI but only 58% at Lytham St Anne’s and 44% at Leck were found within an SSSI. In the Hodder valley only 10% were in an SSSI in the mid zone but 41% in the upper zone.

Of the numbers of taxa lost a smaller percentage were lost at Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows (16%), all within an SSSI, than at Leck (25%) and Lytham St Anne’s (19%) and most of these were outside SSSIs. However losses at Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows and Lytham St Anne’s were more than twice as many after 1964 (12/13%) as before (5/6%). At Leck most losses were prior to 1964 and outside the future SSSI. In the Hodder valley 40% were lost in the mid zone but only 9% in the upper zone

These figures suggest that powerful environmental factors are influencing the survival of rare and endangered species, which presumably have demanding ecological requirements. No positive con-servation measures were possible until recently in SSSIs generally but in Local and National Nature reserves this was possible from the mid-1970s. Yet at both Lytham St Anne’s and Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows losses accelerated after 1964. The problems at Lytham St Anne’s are recognised but at Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows they are less well understood and should be cause for concern. In the Hodder valley most losses were prior to 1964 and outside of SSSIs. Only Botrychium lunaria seems to have been lost since 1964 and was last seen in 1988.

Whilst some of the causes for loss can be attributed to building development and agricultural prac-tices other causes are less readily discernible. Most rare and endangered species require nutrient poor conditions and the generalised atmospheric nitrogen deposition at inland landscapes is proba-bly detrimental. At Lytham St Anne’s the fragmented dune system is unsustainable without human intervention.

In Table 12 an attempt has been made to assess the status of species recorded as new mostly since 1964. All the landscape areas recorded new species particularly in the Upper Hodder catchment.

71

However the figures are misleading for two reasons. Firstly a number of taxa were not recognised as distinct 100 years ago, e.g. Myosotis stolonifera or Dactylorhiza purpurella and D. praetermissa then recognised as one species of marsh orchid. Secondly other species were probably present but over-looked. Thus making an assessment of which species are newly arrived in an area is subjective. Nev-ertheless a clear pattern emerges. In the relatively stable and unchanging habitats of Leck there is no new colonisation by native species. Similarly few new habitats were created in the Lower Hodder catchment although there were limited opportunities for colonisation as a consequence of water ab-straction works. The sand dune habitats are, by their nature, unstable and this is reflected by a few new species colonising the dunes at Lytham St Anne’s, e.g. Ophrys apifera first found in 1943. It might be assumed that Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows provided a series of fairly stable and unchanging habitats. However the removal of limestone pavement in the early 1970s created a new open stony limestone habitat. At least some of the new colonists favoured this habitat, e.g. Euphorbia exigua. Only in the Upper Hodder was there a larger increase of colonising species.

This analysis shows that whilst there is a general decline of rare and endangered species in most of the study areas this can be halted or even reversed where new habitats are created. Long-term sur-vival of rare and endangered species in mature habitats is more difficult to achieve.

Table 12. Summary of landscape statistics: plants recorded since 1900

Value LeckSD67.80.

Mid Hod-derSD67.50.

Upper Hod-derSD72.54.

Hawes Water/ Gait BarrowsSD47.76.

Lytham St Anne’sSD31.30.

Total No of species

43 73 75 101 79

% of N. Lancs rare/ endangered

10% 18% 18% 25% 19%

No in SSSIs (%) 19 (44%) 7 (1E) 10% 31 (41%) 101 (100%) 46 (58%)

No of species lost (%)

11 (25%) 29 (40%) 7 (9%) 16 (16%) 15 (19%)*

No of species lost in SSSIs (%)

3 (7%) 1 (1%) 0 16 (16%) 3 (4%)*

No lost not in SS-SIs (%)

8 (19%) 28 (38%) 7 (9%) 0 12 (19%)

No of species lost before 1964 (%)

7 (16%) 27 (37%) 7 (9%) 5 (5%) 5 (6%)

No of species lost after 1964 (%)

4 (9%) 2 (3%) 0 12 (12%)(to 2000)

10 (13%)

No of species na-tionally endan-gered (%)

13 (30%), 6E 31 (All E) (42%)

23 (6 E) (31%)

34 (34%) 23 (29%)

72

No. of section 41 species

1 4 all E 1 E 6 (3E) 5 (2E)

No Taxa recorded as new mostly after 1964

9 (21%) 16 (1 ca-sual) (22%)

55 (73%) 10 (10%) 14 (18%)

No. of taxa recorded as new mostly after 1964 excluding those not known in 1900, or pre-sumed present in 1900

0 c.2 (3%) c.13 (17%) c. 5 (5%) c.3 (4%)

E = Extinct

* Includes a record of 1899

+ includes records published by Pickard (1901, 1902) but may have been last seen before 1900

General DiscussionThe studies of these contrasting landscapes are mostly in agreement with the more generalised anal-ysis of rare and endangered species.

Most rare and endangered species are showing no change in status but both extinct and declining species favour nutrient poor soils. However the rate at which losses are occurring (Table 5) is accel-erating with twice as many taxa lost (27) in the second half of the 20th century as in the first half (13). Similarly in the case study areas there is an accelerating loss of taxa at Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows and St Anne’s whilst at Leck there were fewer losses in the second half of the century but they were within the SSSI. In the Hodder valley many losses were pre 1964 and mostly outside SSSIs. There is no doubt that the designation of SSSIs prevented the loss of important sites, e.g. Gait Barrows, and therefore species. Unfortunately it was some time before positive management could occur. In this period Outfield Moss was lost. Yet some of the largest number of losses have been within SSSIs, e.g. Hawes Water/ Gait Barrows.

The causes of decline generally and at specific sites are often difficult to understand. At coastal sites building developments along the Fylde coast and at Heysham are responsible for many losses. Else-where physical destruction of sites has occurred but more significantly changes in agricultural prac-tice increasing productivity are likely to be the most important causal agents. Drainage, fertilizer and herbicide treatments have been the most important of these and their use in the last 50 years has probably been particularly harmful. The effects have extended to run off from fields and more gener-alised atmospheric nitrogen deposition has exacerbated the problem.

This analysis of decline and loss of native species in North Lancashire is in line with similar analyses elsewhere (Preston, 2000; Walker, 2003; Braithwaite, 2013; Amphlett, 2013).

73

Overall in North Lancashire 0.4 taxa were lost each year in the 20th century as against a national av-erage of 0.5 (Walker, 2003). However in southern counties of England this may be 0.6 whilst in the north it is 0.4. On the other hand Braithwaite (2013) recorded 0.26 losses per annum in Berwickshire and Preston et al. (2000) recorded 1.7 species per annum in urbanised Middlesex but only 0.5 species in the intensively cultivated county of Cambridge. Perhaps surprisingly Amphlett recorded an extinction rate of 0.51 per annum for archaeophytes and native species combined (0.41 for native species only) in Banffshire in north east Scotland. These figures are all, to some extent, based on ap-proximations but Preston (2000) and Walker (2003) agree that the rate of loss is accelerating. The problems and variables involved in compiling figures for the loss or decline of species are discussed by all the authors.

Many of the issues concerning plant conservation are complicated with management solutions diffi-cult to formulate. Whilst designating Sites of Special Scientific Interest was important boundaries were often too tightly drawn and the legislation and financial constraints prevented positive man-agement to be implemented until recently, unless the land was owned or managed by a conserva-tion organisation. Stewardship grants for farmers and landowners are potentially beneficial but it has not been possible to determine their impact. In several cases, especially in the Upper Hodder catchment, SSSI designations were comparatively recent and it is still too early to quantify benefits. The landscape approach to nature conservation must be beneficial but it remains to be seen if meaningful measures for plant conservation within this approach can be implemented.

It is important to recognise the specific requirements of individual species as it is possible to con-serve the landscape and broad habitats but not necessarily the most endangered species. Dolman, et al. (2012) discussed this issue further in respect of two areas in East Anglia. They pointed out that a focus on vegetation composition rather than the ecological requirements of priority species under-pinned a failure to conserve a majority of priority species in their study areas. They suggested that conservation policies should be based on the ecological requirements of priority species but, in order to avoid a mass of possibly competing strategies, formulated an evidence based methodology to construct a conservation framework for any area.

Despite all the changes in the landscape as a whole it is remarkable how much of the native flora survives and flourishes. In particular the role of humans in creating habitats is important in safe-guarding the future of species that can take advantage of new opportunities. These range from marl pits and canals dug in the 18th century to reservoirs, motorway verges and junctions and post- indus-trial sites created in the 19th and 20th centuries. Most of the declining and extinct species have not been able to take advantage of these opportunities. The lessons of how the ‘freezing’ of the land-scape and creation of new habitats in the Upper Hodder catchment has not only prevented many losses but created opportunities for new species colonisation. No part of the of the Stocks Reservoir/ Gisburn Forest is an SSSI although Plant Life designated Stocks Reservoir in an international context as an Important Plant Area for its bryophytes. Yet in North Lancashire this estate is arguably the most positive area for plant conservation in the region despite the apparently detrimental reservoir works and afforestation. Thus the importance of post-industrial sites for botanical conservation can-not be over emphasised. Furthermore concepts of connectivity by terrestrial or aquatic corridors do not apply. The new arrivals have come by long distance dispersal probably by wind and birds as vec-tors but possibly also by humans (anglers?). It is therefore important to understand plant dispersal

74

mechanisms and colonisation systems in the context of connectivity proposals, which form such an important feature of the Lawton Report and Wildlife Trust policies.

Change will continue and with the changes the composition of the flora will also change but how much of the native flora and semi-natural vegetation will survive is another matter. The challenge for government and conservation organisations is to devise and implement measures that will combat further decline and loss.

ReferencesAbbott, P.P. (2005). Plant Atlas of Mid-west Yorkshire. Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union. Kendal.

Amphlett, A. (2013). Plant extinction rate in Banffshire (V.C. 94). BSBI News, 124: 27 – 29.

Anon. (1994). Biodiversity: the UK Action Plan. HMSO. London.

Anon. (2009). A living landscape. The Wildlife Trusts.

Anon. (2012a). UK post – 2010 Biodiversity Framework. JNCC & Defra. Peterborough.

Anon. (2012b). Rio + 20. United Nations Conference on sustainable development.

Braithwaite, M. (2013). Extinctions in rare or scarce species – what do they tell us about change in the flora? BSBI News, 123: 44 – 48.

Cheffings, C.M. and Farrell, L., eds. (2005). Species status No. 9. The Vascular Plant Red Data list for Great Britain. JNCC. Peterborough.

Defra (2011). Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for England’s wildlife and ecosystem services. Defra.

Dolman, P.M., Panter, C.J. and Mossman, H. (2012). The biodiversity audit approach challenges re-gional priorities and identifies a mismatch in conservation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49: 986 – 997.

Greenwood, E. (2012). Flora of North Lancashire. Carnegie Publishing Ltd. Lancaster.

Greenwood, J.J.D. (2000). Biodiversity and environment in Tinker, P.B., ed., Shades of green – A re-view of UK farming systems. Royal Agricultural Society of England.

Haley, R.A. (1995). Lytham St – Anne’s. A pictorial history. Phillimore. Guildford.

Lawton, J., Chair. (2010). Making Space for Nature. A review of England’s wildlife sites and ecological network. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Marren, P. (2002). Nature Conservation. The New Naturalist. HarperCollins Publishers. London.

Middleton, R., Wells, C.E. and Huckerby, E. (1995). The wetlands of North Lancashire. North West Wetlands Survey 3. Lancaster Archaeological Unit. Lancaster.

Moore, I. (1866). Grass and grasslands. The New Naturalist. Collins. London.

Morries, G. (1986). Lancashire’s woodland heritage. Lancashire County Council. Preston.

75

Mourholme Local History Society Book Group. (2005). Warton 1800 – 1850. Mourholme Local His-tory Society.

Newman, J.R. (1988). A botanical survey of limestone grassland in Lancashire. Nature Conservancy Council. A typescript.

Perring, F.H. and Walters, S.M., eds. (1962). Atlas of the British Flora. Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd. London and Edinburgh.

Pickard, J.F. (1901). Some rarer plants of Bowland. The Naturalist, 1901: 37 – 41.

Pickard, J.F. (1902). Additions to the Bowland flora. The Naturalist, 1902: 289 – 291.

Preston, C.D. (2000). Engulfed by suburbia or destroyed by the plough: the ecology of extinction in Middlesex and Cambridgeshire. Watsonia, 23: 59 – 81.

Radley, G.P. (1994). Sand dune vegetation survey of Great Britain: A national inventory. Part 1. Eng-land. Joint Nature Conservancy Committee.

Ratcliffe, D., ed. (1977). A Nature Conservation Review. 2 vols. Cambridge University Press. Cam-bridge.

Regional Biodiversity Steering Group for North West England. (1999). Wild about the North West. A biodiversity audit of North West England. 2 vols. No publisher cited.

Rodwell, J.S., ed. (1991 – 2000). British Plant Communities. 5 vols. Cambridge University Press. Cam-bridge.

Sands, T. (2013). Wildlife in Trust. The Wildife Trusts. Newark.

Stewart, A., Pearman, D.A. and Preston, C.D. (1994). Scarce Plants in Britain. JNCC. Peterborough.

Stroh, P.H., Leach, S.J., August, T.A., Walker, K.J., Pearman, D.A., Rumsey, F.J., Harrower, C.A., Fay, M.F., Martin, J.P., Pankhurst, T, Preston, C.D. and Taylor, I. (2014). A vascular Plant Red Data List for England. Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland. Bristol.

Walker, K.J. (2003). One species lost every year? An evaluation of plant extinctions in selected British vice-counties since 1900. Watsonia, 24: 359 – 374.

Wheldon, J.A. and Wilson, A. (1907). The Flora of West Lancashire. Henry Young & Sons. Liverpool.

76