Gladman Developments Ltd. Land North of Church Street, Bocking. Ecological Appraisal

Transcription

1 Gladman Developments Ltd Land North of Church Street, Bocking Ecological Appraisal November 2017

2 FPCR Environment and Design Ltd Registered Office: Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby DE74 2RH Company No [T] [F] [E] [W] This report is the property of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd and is issued on the condition it is not reproduced, retained or disclosed to any unauthorised person, either wholly or in part without the written consent of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd. Ordnance Survey material is used with permission of The Controller of HMSO, Crown copyright Rev Issue Status Prepared / Date Approved/Date - Draft KAW / DAH / Final KAW / DAH / A Draft PJP / DAH / A Final PJP / KAW /

3 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY...66 TABLES Table 1: Bat Roosting Potential Categories for Trees Table 2: Nocturnal Survey Timings and Weather Conditions Table 3: Static Detector Survey Dates Table 4: Breeding Bird Survey Dates and Weather Conditions Table 5: Evaluation Criteria Table 6: Habitat Suitability Index Scores and Waterbody Suitability Table 7: GCN Survey Dates and Weather Conditions 2017 Table 8: Determining GCN Population Size Class Table 9: Index of Probability for Recording Dormice in Nesting Tubes (50 Tubes) Table 10: Reptile Survey Date and Weather Conditions Table 11: Key Reptile Site Survey Assessment Categories (Froglife Advice Sheet 10) Table 12: Non-Statutory Sites of Local Conservation Value within 1km Table 13: Protected and Notable Species Records Table 14: Summary of Hedgerow Survey Table 15: Details of Trees with Bat Potential Table 16: Bat Transect Summary of Results 2017 Table 17: Automated Activity Summary 2017 Table 18: Data Collected from the Static Bat Detectors Table 19: NERC, LBAP and/or BoCC Red- and Amber-Listed Bird Species Recorded at Land North of Church Street, Bocking, during Breeding Bird Surveys 2017 and Their Recent Status in Essex Table 20: Habitat Suitability Index Assessment Table 21: Pond Survey Data Summary Table 22: Reptiles Recorded During Each Survey J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

4 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr FIGURES Figure 1: Consultation Plan Figure 2: Phase 1 Habitat Plan Figure 3: Waterbodies Plan Figure 4: Bat Transect May 2017 Figure 5: Bat Transect June 2017 Figure 6: Bat Transect July 2017 Figure 7: Bat Transect August 2017 Figure 8: Bat Transect September (Dusk) 2017 Figure 9: Bat Transect September (Dawn) 2017 Figure 10: Bat Transect October 2017 Figure 11: Breeding Bird Survey Plan Figure 12: Dormouse Tube Location Plan Figure 13: Reptile Refugia Location Plan Figure 14: Riparian Mammal Plan APPENDICES Appendix A: Essex Field Club Raw Data Appendix B: Bird Data J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

5 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The following Ecological Appraisal has been prepared by FPCR Environment and Design Ltd on behalf of Gladman Developments Ltd for land north of Church Street, Bocking, Essex (central OS Grid Reference TL ). 1.2 It provides the results of an Extended Phase 1 Habitat and Preliminary Protected Species survey undertaken during April 2017 and subsequent specific protected species surveys undertaken in The objective of the initial survey was to gain an understanding of the baseline ecology of the application site and immediate surrounding area and to determine whether the Application Site and immediate surrounding area supports or has the potential to support protected, rare or otherwise notable species. 1.3 This preliminary assessment was followed by subsequent targeted surveys for protected, rare or otherwise notable species or groups. Site Context 1.4 The site, approximately 15.8 ha, comprises a large arable field and four species-poor semiimproved fields, the majority of which are grazed by horses which were bisected by electric and wooden fencing, hedgerows and a broad-leaved woodland edge. The peripheries of the site were bound by broad-leaved woodland, a stream, hedgerows, access track and residential gardens. 1.5 The site is situated on the north-eastern periphery of Bocking. The surrounding landscape to the east and south-west comprised of residential housing and gardens. Arable fields were bisected by hedgerows and ditches lie to the north and west. Church Street runs along the southern boundary of the site with Braintree Hockey Club, residential dwellings and gardens further to the south. High Garrett A131 road runs along a section of the eastern boundary, with residential housing and gardens further to the east. Development Proposals 1.6 The proposals comprise a residential development of up to 265 units with associated infrastructure. Approximately 8.19ha of green infrastructure (GI) will be incorporated along existing woodland strips, stream and hedgerows, with a large buffer along the western boundary. Habitat loss will be predominantly restricted to arable and some small sections of species-poor semi-improved grassland. The majority of hedgerows, woodland strips and the scrub belt are to be retained, with the exception of a small loss to facilitate vehicular and pedestrian access. Additional habitats will be created including a community orchard, hedgerows, grassland, shrub and native tree ing. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

6 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Intentionally Blank J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

7 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 2.0 METHODOLOGY Background 2.1 In order to compile existing baseline information, relevant ecological information was requested from both statutory and non-statutory nature conservation organisations including Essex Field Club Essex Wildlife Trust Multi Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) website ( 2.2 Further inspection of colour 1:25,000 OS base maps ( and aerial photographs from Google Earth ( was also undertaken in order to provide additional context and identify any features of potential importance for nature conservation in the wider countryside. 2.3 The search area for biodiversity information was related to the significance of sites and species and potential zones of influence, as follows: 15km around the application area for sites of International Importance (e.g. Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Ramsar sites); 2km around the application area for sites of National or Regional Importance (e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs).; 1km around the application site for sites of County Importance (e.g. Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) / Local Wildlife Sites (LWS). 1km around the application site for species (e.g.: protected, species of principal importance as listed on Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006) 1 or other notable species) Flora 2.4 The initial survey was undertaken in April 2017, and was subsequently updated throughout the survey season during other ecological surveys. These surveys were based on the standard Extended Phase I Habitat Survey Methodology as recommended by Natural England 2, to identify specific habitats and features of ecological interest. Habitats were marked on a base plan and where appropriate, target notes were made. An inspection of the site for the presence of any invasive weed species was also carried out. Features such as trees were considered with regard to their ecological value and potential to provide suitable habitats for protected species. 2.5 Consideration was given to the presence of invasive species listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) (WCA) 3 and under the Weed Act Any rare or notable flora including those listed as priorities in the Post 2010 UK Biodiversity Framework 5, species listed under the NERC Act (2006), Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) Priority 1 The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act [Online]. Available from: w w.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/16/contents [Accessed 11/11/2017] 2 JNCC. (1990). Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey a technique for environmental audit. Peterborough: JNCC 3 Act of Parliament, (1981). The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), London: HMSO 4 Act of Parliament. (1959). The Weed Act London: HMSO 5 JNCC and Defra (on behalf of the Four Countries' Biodiversity Group) UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. July 2012 J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

8 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Species/Habitats, any IUCN Red listed 6, Red Data Book (RDB) 7 and any national, regional, county or vice county rarities were duly noted. Hedgerows 2.6 Hedgerows were surveyed individually using the Hedgerow Evaluation and Grading System (HEGS) 8. This method of assessment includes noting down canopy species composition, associated ground flora and climbers, structure of the hedgerow including height, width and gaps, number and species of mature trees, and associated features such banks, ditches and grass verges. 2.7 Each hedgerow is given a grade using HEGS with the suffixes + and -, representing the upper and lower limits of each grade respectively. These grades represent a continuum on a scale from 1+ (the highest score and denoting hedges of the greatest nature conservation priority) to 4- (representing the lowest score and hedges of the least nature conservation priority) as follows: Grade 1- high to very high value Grade 2 - moderately high to high value Grade 3 - moderate value Grade 4 - low value 2.8 Hedgerows graded 1 or 2 are considered to be a priority for nature conservation. 2.9 Hedgerows were also assessed under the wildlife and landscape criteria of the Hedgerow Regulations 1997, Statutory Instrument No: (REGS), which identifies any hedgerow that is important for nature conservation. This broadly follows the above methodology, although an average canopy species per 30 metres is calculated, dependant on the length of hedgerow. Additional features which enhance hedgerows, when found in association with the hedge, such as mature trees, ditches, hedge banks and connections are also considered. This methodology is broadly consistent with that outlined in The Hedgerow Survey Handbook (DEFRA, 2007) The REGS assessment will result in the hedgerow being either statutory protected or not, which may have implications for their future management and any requirement for removal to facilitate the scheme It should be noted that hedgerows may also qualify as important under the Archaeological criteria of this Act, which is beyond the scope of this assessment. Fauna 2.12 During the surveys of the site, observations, signs of or suitable habitat for any species protected under Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the Conservation of 6 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Red List The Vascular Plant Red Data List for Great Britain (2005), Cheffings, C. and Farrell, L. (Eds) 8 Clements, D. & Toft, R. (1992). Hedgerow Evaluation and Grading System (HEGS) a methodology for the ecological survey, evaluation and grading of hedgerow s. Countryside Planning and Management 9 The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 Statutory Instrument 1997 No [Online]. London: HMSO. Available from: w w.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/1160/contents/made. 10 DEFRA (2007). Hedgerow Survey Handbook: A standard procedure for local surveys in the UK J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

9 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) 11 and the Protection of Badgers Act were noted with particular attention being given to the potential presence of bats, hazel dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius, great crested newt Triturus cristatus, otter Lutra lutra, water vole Arvicola amphibious and badger Meles meles. Throughout the survey consideration was also given to the existence and use of the site by other protected species or locally notable fauna such as species of principal importance as listed on Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006), Bird of Conservation Concern (BoCC) red & amber listed bird species 13 and any Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) or Red Data Book (RDB) species The standard survey methodology was extended to assess the potential presence of protected species within features such as buildings and trees or specific habitats considered for their ecological value and potential to provide suitable habitats for protected species. Badgers 2.14 Due to confidential reasons the results of the badger surveys have not been included within this document, but in a separate FPCR Badger Report, which will not be released into the public domain, but available on request. Bats Tree Roost Assessments 2.15 Tree assessments were undertaken from ground level, with the aid of a torch and binoculars (where appropriate). These surveys were undertaken in April 2017 by an experienced ecologist from FPCR. During the survey Potential Roosting Features (PRF) for bats such as the following were sought (Based on p.16, British Standard 8596:2015 Surveying for bats in trees and woodland, October 2015): Natural holes (e.g. knot holes) arising from naturally shed branches or branches previously pruned back to a branch collar; Man-made holes that have developed from flush cuts or cavities created by branches tearing out from parent stems; Woodpecker holes; Cracks/splits in stems or branches (horizontal and vertical); Partially detached, loose or bark plates; Cankers (caused by localised bark death) in which cavities have developed; Other hollows or cavities, including butt rots; Compression of forks with included bark, forming potential cavities; Crossing stems or branches with suitable roosting space between; 11 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (as amended 2012). [Online]. Available from: w w.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/490/contents/made [Accessed 11/11/2013] 12 The Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (as amended). London: HMSO [Online]. Available from: w w.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/51/contents [Accessed 03/05/2013]. 13 Birds of Conservation Concern 4 (2015). British Trust for Ornithology {Online}. Available from: w w.bto.org/science/monitoring/psob J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

10 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Ivy stems with diameters in excess of 50mm with suitable roosting space behind (or where roosting space can be seen where a mat of thinner stems has left a gap between the mat and the trunk); Bat or bird boxes; and Other suitable places of rest or shelter Certain factors such as orientation of the feature, its height from the ground, the direct surroundings and its location in respect to other features may enhance or reduce the potential value Trees were classified into general bat roost potential groups based upon the presence of these features. Table 1 (below) broadly classifies the potential categories as accurately as possible as well as discussing the relevance of the features. This table is based upon Table 4.1 and Chapter 6 in the Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) guidance Although the British Standard 8596:2015 document groups trees with moderate and high potential, these have been separated below (as per Table 4.1 in BCT Guidelines) to allow more specific survey criteria to be applied, particularly with reference to the definition of a breeding site or resting place as described in the Habitat Regulations. Table 1. Bat Roosting Potential Categories for Trees Classification of Tree Confirmed Roost High Potential Description of Category and Associated Features (based on Potential Roosting Features listed above) Evidence of roosting bats in the form of live / dead bats, droppings, urine staining, ian fur oil staining, etc. A tree w ith one or more Potential Roosting Features that are obviously suitable for larger numbers of bats on a more regular basis and potentially for longer periods of time due to their size, shelter protection, conditions (height above ground level, light levels, etc) and surrounding habitat. Examples include (but are not limited to); w oodpecker holes, larger cavities, hollow trunks, hazard beams, etc. Likely Further Survey Work / Actions A Natural England derogation licence application w ill be required if the tree or roost site is affected by the development or proposed arboricultural works. This w ill require a combination of aerial assessment by roped access bat w orkers (where possible, health and safety constraints allow ing) and nocturnal survey during appropriate periods (e.g. nocturnal survey - May to August) to inform on the licence. Works to tree undertaken under supervision in accordance with the approved good practice method statement provided w ithin the licence. However, where confirmed roost site(s) are not affected by works, work under a precautionary good practice method statement may be possible. Aerial assessment by roped access bat workers (if appropriate) and / or nocturnal survey during appropriate period (May to August). Follow ing additional assessments, tree may be upgraded or dow ngraded based on findings. If roost sites are confirmed and the tree or roost is to be affected by proposals a licence from Natural England w ill be required. After completion of survey work (and the presence of a bat roost is discounted), a precautionary working method statement may still be appropriate. 14 Collins, J. (2016) Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (3 rd edn). The Bat Conservation Trust, London. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

11 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Classification of Tree Moderate Potential Low Potential Negligible / No potential Description of Category and Associated Features (based on Potential Roosting Features listed above) A tree w ith Potential Roosting Features w hich could support one or more potential roost sites due to their size, shelter protection, conditions (height above ground level, light levels, etc) and surrounding habitat but unlikely to support a roost of high conservation status (i.e. larger roost, irrespective of wider conservation status). Examples include (but are not limited to); w oodpecker holes, rot cavities, branch socket cavities, etc. A tree of sufficient size and age to contain Potential Roosting Features but w ith none seen from ground or features seen only very limited potential. Examples include (but are not limited to); loose/lifted bark, shallow splits exposed to elements or upw ard facing holes. Negligible/no habitat features likely to be used by roosting bats Likely Further Survey Work / Actions A combination of aerial assessment by roped access bat w orkers and / or nocturnal survey during appropriate period (May to August). Follow ing additional assessments, tree may be upgraded or dow ngraded based on findings. After completion of survey work (and the presence of a bat roost is discounted), a precautionary working method statement may still be appropriate. If a roost site/s is confirmed a licence from Natural England w ill be required. No further survey required but a precautionary working method statement may be appropriate. * The Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) affords protection to breeding sites and resting places of bats. The EU Commission s Guidance document on the strict protection of animal species of Community interest under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, February 2007 states that these are places where there is a reasonably high probability that the species concerned will return. None. Aerial Tree Inspections 2.19 Aerial inspections were completed (where required and access was possible) on trees identified as containing bat roosting potential which were identified during the ground level assessments. Features that may warrant aerial survey include; cracks, fissures, cavities, woodpecker/rot holes or missing limbs. Evidence of use sought comprised live or dead bats, droppings, urine staining, internal smoothing and grease/scratch marks on wood. Presence of dense ivy cover was also noted as this can obscure the aforementioned features Each feature suitable for roosting bats was visually inspected using torches and/or endoscopes as appropriate. The characteristic of each feature was considered to assess its suitability to support roosting bats in order to determine a suitable course of action to accommodate tree removal, if required, in line with Table 1. The size and exposure to the elements of each was additionally taken into account, as were features such as dense cobwebs or the habitation of a feature by other species (e.g. woodpeckers, squirrels, wasps etc.) The aerial tree inspections were undertaken by Kate Barnes (Natural England bat licence number: CLS-CLS) on 20 th September All FPCR tree climbers are NPTC Certified to Climb Trees (J/101/2449) and Perform Aerial Rescue (A/101/2450) Level 2. The climbing methodology used follows that detailed within the Arboriculture and Forestry Advisory Group (AFAG) Tree Climbing Operations Leaflet (AFAG401). Climbing equipment was inspected following guidelines outlined in the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

12 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Bat Manual Activity Surveys 2.23 The Bat Conservation Trust guidance (2016) recommends that any site, regardless of its size, should be subject to activity assessments where suitable habitats or roosting habitats are present. Under this guidance, the site was considered to be of moderate habitat which would require monthly surveys; however due to habitat assessments and the retention of hedgerows and woodland strips, the survey effort was downgraded to seasonal. During the May survey, Annex II species were identified and so the survey effort was increased to monthly surveys from June, which is accordance with the BCT guidance The primary objective of the activity surveys were to identify foraging areas, commuting routes and species utilisation of the site. The transect route was predetermined prior to survey in order to comprehensively cover all areas of the site and included 5 minute point count stops, during which time all bat activity was recorded. The point counts were strategically located throughout the site to account for any habitat loss or potential impacts from the proposed development, and to ensure a comprehensive coverage of habitats Dusk transect commenced at sunset and continued for approximately 2-3 hours. Surveys were undertaken in conditions that were close to optimal as described within the BCT guidance, where sunset temperatures were 10 o C or above with no rain or strong winds. commenced 2 hours before sunrise and ended at sunrise or later if bat active continues. Dawn surveys 2.26 The surveys were undertaken by appropriately experienced/licenced ecologists from FPCR. Each transect was walked at a steady pace using Wildlife Acoustic Inc. Echo Meter Touch bat detectors in conjunction with Echo Meter Touch app and Apple Inc. ipad to provide back-up information and enable identification of bat encountered. When a bat passed by, the species, time and behaviour was recorded on a site plan Post-survey, bat calls will be analysed using BatSound (Petterssons Elektronik, Version 4.1.4) and AnalookW (Titley Electronics, Version 4.1), by taking measurements of the peak frequency, inter-pulse interval, call duration and end frequency. Analysis was undertaken by experienced ecologists from FPCR. From this, the level of bat activity across the application site in relation to the number of foraging and commuting contacts was assessed The timings and weather conditions for the activity surveys are shown in Table 2. Table 2. Nocturnal Survey Timings and Weather Conditions Survey Ref/ Date Survey Type Sunset/ Sunrise Time Activity Transects Transect 1 08 th May 2017 Transect 2 14 th June 2017 Transect 3 19 th July 2017 Transect 2 22 nd August 2017 Transect 2 20 th September 2017 Transect - Dusk Transect - Dusk Transect - Dusk Transect - Dusk Transect - Dusk Start Time Finish Time Weather Conditions (temp C; cloud cover %; wind; and rain) 20:33 20:33 22:50 11 C, 0% Cloud, Gentle breeze and no rain. 21:18 21:18 00:19 17 C, 30% Cloud, Gentle breeze and no rain. 21:07 21:07 00:09 20 C, 50% Cloud, no breeze and no rain. 20:08 20:08 23:08 18 C, 90% Cloud, Gentle breeze and no rain. 19:02 19:02 22:02 15 C, 20% Cloud, Gentle breeze and no rain. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

13 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Survey Ref/ Date Survey Type Sunset/ Sunrise Time Transect 2 21 st September 2017 Transect 2 12 th October 2017 Transect - Dawn Transect - Dusk Start Time Finish Time Weather Conditions (temp C; cloud cover %; wind; and rain) 06:41 03:41 06:41 13 C, 20% Cloud, Gentle breeze and no rain. 18:10 18:10 21:10 15 C, 50% Cloud, Gentle breeze and no rain. Automated Activity Surveys 2.29 Static passive recording broadband detectors were deployed onsite during 2017 to supplement the manual activity surveys. These automated logging systems Wildlife Acoustics Inc. Song Meter SM4BAT FS detectors, herein referred to as SM4BAT detectors, save all recordings onto an internal storage device for analysis. These were positioned at locations where habitats would be impacted as a result of development, and at locations considered to be suitable as bat navigational / foraging routes As with the manual activity surveys above, less survey effort was undertaken in May, which was upgraded in June due to the presence of Annex II species, where two SM4BAT detectors were positioned monthly between June to October. All detectors were left on site for a minimum of five nights of suitable and / or typical weather conditions. The detector was programmed to activate 30 minutes before dusk and recorded continuously until 30 minutes following sunrise. The output from this detector was subjected to analysis using the software packages AnalookW and BatSound The SM4BAT sound files of up to 12 seconds in length before a new file is created. Analysis of the SM4BAT files recorded can highlight the presence of more than one bat if they are recorded simultaneously on the same sound file. However, it is not possible to determine whether consecutive sound files have been recorded as the result of a single bat passing the detector, as it commutes across the landscape, or by one bat repeatedly triggering the detector as it forages in close proximately for an extended period (unlike the transect section above where the number of bats can often be visually identified). Therefore, each sound file is counted as a single bat pass, or registration, and the number of registrations provides an indication of the relative importance of the site / the detector location for bats The timings of the automated activity surveys completed and the description of unit locations are detailed in Table 3 below with the location also shown on Figure 2. Table 3. Static Detector Survey Dates Position Periods Recorded Area Covered A B C 08 th - 13 th May 2017, five nights 14 th -19 th June 2017, five nights Within hedgerow H4, close to offsite woodland Within the centre of hedgerow H5 Within the centre of hedgerow H3 D 19 th - 24 th July 2017, five nights Within the western end of hedgerow H2, parallel to Church Street J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

14 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Position Periods Recorded Area Covered E Within the centre of hedgerow H1 F G H I J K 23 rd - 28 th August 2017, five nights 20 th - 25 th September 2017, five nights 12 th - 17 th October 2017, five nights Within the centre of hedgerow H8, Within the eastern end of hedgerow H2, parallel to Church Street Within the centre of hedgerow H3 Within the western end of hedgerow H4, on the field corner Within the eastern end of hedgerow H5 Within the northern end of hedgerow H3, nearby the offsite woodland Breeding Bird Surveys 2.33 The survey methodology employed was broadly based on that of territory mapping (Bibby et al., 2000) 15, as developed by the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO). Standard BTO species codes and symbols for bird activities were used to identify birds and denote activity, sex and age where appropriate The criteria used in the assessment of breeding birds has been adapted from the standard criteria proposed by the European Ornithological Atlas Committee (EOAC 1979) 16 and are grouped into four categories: Non-breeder e.g. flyover or observed in unsuitable habitat; Possible breeder e.g. birds observed in suitable habitat or singing male recorded; Probable breeder e.g. pair in suitable habitat, territory defended, agitated behaviour or nest building; and Confirmed breeder e.g. recently fledged young observed, adult birds carrying food for young The survey was conducted to ascertain the sites potential to support bird species with an associated conservation status as WCA Schedule I, NERC Act (2006) S41 species and / or BoCC Red or Amber list species. These species are likely to be of the greatest threat in relation to further decline, and are commonly referred to as notable species Three breeding bird surveys were undertaken during the hours after dawn in April, May and June 2017 (Table 4). A route was planned prior to the survey being undertaken, paying particular attention to any linear features, such as hedgerows and tree lines, and natural features such as scrub. The survey was not undertaken in unfavourable conditions such as heavy rain or strong wind, which may negatively affect the results. Weather conditions are provided in Table 4 below. 15 Bibby, C.J., N.D. Burgess, D.A. Hill & S.H. Mustoe (2000): Bird Census Techniques. Second Addition. Academic Press, London. 16 EOAC (1979) Categories of Breeding Bird Evidence. European Ornithological Atlas Committee. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

15 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Table 4. Breeding Bird Survey Dates and Weather Conditions Date Sunrise Cloud Cover (%) Rain Wind (Beaufort Scale) Visibility : Good : Very Good : Excellent Assessment Methodology for Breeding Bird Surveys 2.37 The conservation value of bird populations has been measured using two separate approaches; nature conservation value and conservation status. The CIEEM guidance on ecological impact assessment assesses nature conservation value within a geographical context 17. To attain each level of value, an ornithological resource, or one of the features (species population or assemblage of species), should meet the criteria set out in Table 5 below. In some cases, professional judgement may be required to increase or decrease the allocation of specific value, based upon local knowledge The most recent county annual bird report, The Essex Bird Report 2013, as published by the was consulted to inform the assessment. Table 5. Evaluation Criteria Nature Conservation Value Selection Criteria International National Regional County A species which is part of the cited interest of an SPA and which regularly occurs in internationally or nationally important numbers. A species present in internationally important numbers (>1% of international population). A species which is part of the cited interest of a SSSI and which regularly occurs in nationally or regionally important numbers. A nationally important assemblage of breeding or over-wintering species. A species present in nationally important numbers (>1% UK population). Rare breeding species (<300 breeding pairs in the UK). Species listed as priority species under Schedule 41 of the NERC Act (2006), which are not covered above, and which regularly occurs in regionally important numbers. Species present in regionally important numbers (>1% of regional population). Sustainable populations of species that are rare or scarce within a region. Species on the BoCC Red List and which regularly occurs in regionally important numbers. Species listed as priority species under Schedule 41 of the NERC Act (2006), which are not covered above and which regularly occurs in county important numbers Species present in county important numbers (>1% of county population). Sustainable populations of species that are rare or scarce within a county, or listed as priority species for nature conservation under S41 of the NERC Act (2006). A site designated for its county important assemblage of birds (e.g. a SINC Site). Species on the BoCC Red List and which regularly occur in county important numbers. 17 CIEEM (2016). Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshw ater and Coastal, 2 nd Edition. Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

16 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Nature Conservation Value Local Selection Criteria Other species of conservation interest (e.g. all other species on the BoCC Red and Amber List or listed as priority species under Schedule 41 of the NERC Act (2006) which are not covered above) regularly occurring in locally sustainable populations. Sustainable populations of species which are rare or scarce within the locality. Site Species that are common and widespread Great Crested Newts Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) 2.39 Where access was granted and where there were no barriers to dispersal, waterbodies within a 500m radius of the site (Figure 3) were assessed, using the Habitat Suitability Index (HSI), for their potential suitability for great crested newts (GCNs). The HSI provides a measure of the likely suitability that a waterbody will support newts 18. In general, waterbodies with a higher score are more likely to support GCNs than those with a lower score and there is a positive correlation between HSI scores and waterbodies with newts recorded. Ten separate attributes are assessed for each waterbody: Geographic location Pond area Pond drying Water quality Shade Presence of waterfowl Presence of fish Number of linked ponds Terrestrial habitat Macrophytic coverage 2.40 A score is assigned according to the most appropriate criteria level set within each attribute and a total score calculated of between 0 and 1. Waterbody suitability is then determined according to the following scale: Table 6. Habitat Suitability Index Scores and Waterbody Suitability HSI Score Waterbody Suitability <0.5 Poor 18 Oldham R.S., Keeble J., Swan M.J.S. & Jeffcote M. (2000). Evaluating the suitability of habitat for the Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus). Herpetological Journal 10 (4), J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

17 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr HSI Score Waterbody Suitability Below average Average Good >0.8 Excellent 2.41 An assessment of the suitability of the habitats to support GCNs was completed with each waterbody. Suitable habitat includes refuge opportunities such as scrub and rank vegetation, as well as habitat that could provide suitable hibernation sites, such as rubble piles or tussock grassland. Aquatic Surveys 2.42 Survey methods follow those recommended by Natural England as detailed in the Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines (2001) 19. To determine the presence or absence of GCNs, four survey visits were undertaken between April and June On each survey occasion three of a possible four survey techniques were employed (egg searches, sweep netting, bottle trapping and torching). A summary of these techniques is detailed below: Bottle Trapping: 2.43 Bottle traps are set within the waterbody in the evening at densities of one trap per two meters of shoreline (where feasible) and left overnight for inspection in the morning. Traps are partially submerged in the water leaving an air bubble in the bottle and secured by a cane. Care is taken to ensure that trapping does not occur during excessively warm weather, when the temperature inside the trap could rise considerably, reducing oxygen levels and potentially suffocating the newts. Sweep Netting: 2.44 Long handled sweep-nets are used to sample the margins of the waterbody for GCNs with approximately 15 minutes of netting per 50m of shoreline. Torching: 2.45 Torching involves searching the waterbody after dusk using high-powered torches to scan the margins and potential display areas for newts. The perimeters of the waterbody are walked slowly, spending approximately 15 minutes torching for each 50m of shoreline, with made of any newts observed. Torch surveys are unsuitable within heavily vegetated and/or turbid waterbodies, or after periods of heavy rain, as visibility is diminished. Egg Searching: 2.46 Newts lay single eggs on leaves of aquatic s or other suitable pliable material, after which the material is folded over the egg to protect it. GCN eggs can be distinguished from those of 19 English Nature (2001) Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

18 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr other newts by their size, shape and colour. Submerged vegetation was examined for newt eggs by opening folded leaves gently to check for eggs. Once a GCN egg is identified, no further leaves were examined, minimising any further potential disturbance All surveys were conducted by at least one licensed/accredited ecologist from FPCR Environment and Design Ltd. All surveys were completed during suitable conditions i.e. when the ambient air temperature exceeds 5 o C, with little / no wind and no rain. Below are the survey dates and the weather conditions in which field surveys were undertaken. Table 7. GCN Survey Dates and Weather Conditions 2017 Survey Dates Weather Conditions 8 th May 2017 No rain or wind. Evening air temperature of 14 C. 15 th May 2017 No rain with a light wind. Evening air temperature of 15 C. 22 nd May 2017 No rain or wind. Evening air temperature of 19 C. 15 th June 2017 No rain or wind. Evening air temperature of 15 C. Population Size Class Assessment 2.48 Population size class assessments are based on the highest maximum, (peak) count of adult GCNs observed on any one survey occasion. The below table details the population size class assessment. Table 8. Determining GCN Population Size Class Population Size Class Low Population Medium Population High Population Peak Counts 0 10 animals animals > 101 animals Hazel Dormouse Nesting Tubes 2.49 Dormouse surveys have been undertaken in accordance with current good practice guidelines The Dormouse Conservation Handbook (2006) 20. Surveys involved placing standard dormouse nest tubes every 20m in the suitable habitats, approximately 1.5m above ground. A total of 100 tubes were installed during April 2017 (Figure 12) with subsequent surveys undertaken between May to October 2017, inclusive The survey results will be used in conjunction with an index of probability, which indicates the likelihood of finding dormice during this period (see Table 9). The survey will be scored for effort 20 Bright P., Morris P. & Mitchell-Jones, T The Dormouse Conservation Handbook. English Nature, Peterborough. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

19 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr according to the method developed from the South West Dormouse Project 21. The scoring system provides an overall index of effort, by multiplying the sum of the months that the tubes were checked, by the number of tubes used. A score of 20 (or above) is deemed a thorough survey. Table 9. Index of Probability for Recording Dormice in Nesting Tubes (50 tubes) Month Index of Probability April 1 May 4 June 2 July 2 August 5 September 7 October 2 November 2 Reptiles 2.51 A set of strategic reptile presence / likely absence surveys were undertaken within the site at specific locations identified as offering potential habitat suitability for the species. The surveys were undertaken based on the methodology detailed in the Herpetofauna Workers Manual 22, the Froglife Advice Sheet 10 - Reptile Survey 23 and Reptiles: Guidance for Developers 24. Methods involved a search for basking reptiles on/under naturally occurring and strategically positioned artificial refugia. These were placed in locations that offered the most suitable habitat for common reptiles, i.e. structurally diverse grassland habitats with areas of bare ground/short vegetation and wetland features. Approximately 95 artificial refugia were spread throughout the site on 27 th April 2017 (Figure 13) The surveys within the site were based on the guidelines within the Froglife Advice Sheet 10, which recommend surveys are undertaken: At temperatures of between 9 o C-18 o C; On sunny / cloudy days with little or no wind; and Between 08:30 & 11:00 and between 16:00 & 18:30 hrs In addition, guidance also recommends: Using regularly spaced corrugated tin sheeting / similar (0.5m²) as artificial refugia with a black upper side; 21 Chanin and Woods Surveying dormice using nest tubes: results and experiences from the South West Dormouse Project. English Nature Research Report No 524. Peterborough: English Nature. 22 Gent, T & Gibson, S (2003) Herpetofauna Worker s Manual. JNCC, Peterborough. 23 Froglife (1999) Reptile Survey; an introduction to planning, conducting and interpreting surveys for snake and lizard conservation. Froglife Advice Sheet 10. Froglife, Halesw orth. 24 English Nature (2004) Reptiles: guidance for developers. English Nature, Peterborough. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

20 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Approaching refugia from downwind, casting no shadow and with care so as to not disturb basking animals when checking; That lifting and replacing tins, to check for the presence of reptiles underneath in hot weather is undertaken with care, to avoid potential harm to any animals underneath; and That the location and number of tins are mapped to aid survey and avoid the possibility of leaving tins in situ after completion of the survey In some circumstances conditions may be more suitable, but fall outside of the guidelines; for example, sunny periods after rainfall but after 11am. Such conditions would be more favourable to reptiles and likely increase the likelihood of positive encounters. Therefore, the guideline are only suggestive periods, surveyors experience and weather assessment can prove to be fruitful outside guidance periods, but only where conditions are suitable To confirm the presence / likely absence of reptiles within the application site and inform the population assessment the refugia should be checked on seven suitable occasions, the dates of these surveys can be seen below: Table 10. Reptile Survey Date and Weather Conditions Survey Occasion Date & Time Weather 1 23/05/17 09:00 Sunny conditions, light breeze, partial cloud cover, 15ºC 2 15/06/17 07:00 Sunny conditions, light breeze, 15ºC 3 23/06/17 09:00 Sunny conditions, light breeze, 17ºC 4 30/06/17 09:00 Sunny conditions, light breeze, 17ºC 5 21/09/17 08:20 Sunny conditions, light breeze, partial cloud 15ºC 6 25/09/17 19:50 Rain earlier in the day, cloud, light breeze, 15 ºC 7 28/09/17 12:00 Sunny conditions, light breeze, partial cloud cover 16ºC 2.56 Reptile populations were assessed in accordance with population level criteria as stated in the Key Reptile Site Register. This system classifies populations of individual reptile species into three population categories, assessing the importance of the population (Table 11). These categories are based on the peak number of adult animals observed during individual survey occasions. Table 11. Key Reptile Site Survey Assessment Categories (Froglife Advice Sheet 10) Species Low Population (Number of Individuals) Good Population (Number of Individuals) Adder < >10 lizard < >20 Grass snake < >10 Slow worm < >20 Exceptional Population (Number of Individuals) J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

21 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Riparian Mammals Water Voles 2.57 A scoping survey of the habitats were undertaken in April 2017, this was followed up by specific presence / likely absence survey for water vole and otters (Figure 14). Water vole surveys were based on the standard methodology as described in the Water Vole Mitigation Handbook (2016) 25 and the Water Vole Conservation Handbook (3 rd Edition 2011) 26. This involved identification of water vole activity within the survey areas, using field evidence such as: Faeces - these are 8-12mm long and 4-5 mm wide, cylindrical with blunt ends. The colour is variable, though often green, and they are generally odourless or have a faint musky smell. Latrines - the majority of droppings are deposited at latrine sites, used to mark range boundaries, favoured spots close to nests and where they leave and enter water. Latrines often consist of a flattened mass of old droppings topped with fresh ones. Feeding stations - water voles often bring pieces of cut vegetation to favoured feeding stations close to the water s edge and leave remains in neat piles. The cut vegetation is typically 100mm long and is cut at a perfect 45 angle. Burrows - many burrows can be found in riverbanks, but those constructed by water voles are typically wider than they are high, with a diameter of 4-8cm. The holes are generally closer to the waters edge than those made by another species. Around these holes, wellgrazed lawns can often be found, where the water voles have chewed the vegetation short. Footprints identifiable prints in soft margins of the watercourse Runways low tunnels that are pushed through the vegetation often leading to burrows or feeding stations The Water Vole Mitigation Handbook recommends that surveys are undertaken through the season, this is to account for the change in habitats, which could affect distribution and population sizes. Two surveys should be undertaken, the first during mid-april to end of June and the second between July and September inclusive, with surveys undertaken at least two months apart. Otter 2.59 In order to determine presence / absence and status of otters which may be using the site, signs of otter activity were searched for following the methodologies detailed within the New Rivers and Wildlife Handbook (RSPB/NRA 1995). Potential signs include: Spraints characteristic sweet-smelling, black tar-like (where fresh/relatively recent i.e. within a few weeks) or grey crumbly (when old) faecal deposits usually containing fish scales, bones and occasionally invertebrate exoskeleton and bird feathers; Footprints In good substrate typically asymmetrical and showing five toes arched around a large pad and, depending on substrate, webbing and claw marks. Poorer, generally coarser substrates do not often enable the identification of otter footprints. 25 Dean, M., Strachan, R., Gow, D. and Andrew s, R. (2016). The Water Vole Mitigation Handbook (Mammal Society Mitigation Guidance Series). Eds Fiona Mathew s and Paul Chanin. Mammal Society, London. 26 Strachan, Moorhouse & Gelling (2011) Water Vole Conservation Handbook 3rd. Edition. WildCRU, Oxford. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

22 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 2.60 Additional signs of otter presence may occur, although without additional evidence these signs are usually inconclusive proof of current otter presence: Feeding remains Remains of fish; Slides/haul-outs Routes into and out of the water, which are usually associated with routes such as short cuts around meanders or along traditionally, used otter paths/routes; Couches/hovers above ground resting place. Usually associated with cover such as dense scrub, rushes or reed, flood debris or fallen trees. Many couches are rarely used whilst others more so. Difficult to prove use without radio or camera tracking; Holts below ground resting site usually associated with sprainting. Sometimes used with greater frequency than couches and can be important for breeding (natal holts) where other signs are usually absent. Notoriously difficult to find or prove without radio or camera tracking. Constraints 2.61 Due to the variable properties of bat echolocation calls it is not always possible to identify a series of echolocation calls down to species level. In the majority of cases it was possible to identify to genus level which was suitable to allow potential affects to be assessed and appropriate mitigation designed. The lower amplitude of calls from species such as brown longeared species Plecotus auritus and barbastelle Barbastella barbastellus, or the higher-pitched calls of species such as the horseshoe bats Rhinolophus sp. are more difficult to detect and thus calls may not have been received by the directional microphone at the time of recording The static automated detectors do not discern between individual bats or a single bat passing the microphone several times, and therefore the data recorded can only provide an indication of bat activity as bat registrations per unit time It is considered that the overall dataset obtained were representative of the level of bat activity within the site during the survey period completed. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the above limitations have resulted in a significant detrimental impact upon the quality of the data, and will have minimal effect on the subsequent conclusions and recommendations provided within the ecological assessment made here Where calls could not be identified to species level, for example due to the lower quality of those recordings, or where there are similarities between species echolocation calls (particularly for Myotis and Nyctalus genus bats) that make definite identification difficult, a likely species identification is provided. This is based on the features displayed by the calls when analysed using the software package AnalookW and taking in to account the geographical location of the site and the habitats present. It was therefore considered that: Pipistrellus species bats were either common Pipistrellus pipistrellus, soprano Pipistrellus pygmaeus or Nathusius pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii; Nyctalus species bats were either noctule Nyctalus noctula or Leisler s Nyctalus leisleri bats; Plecotus species bats were likely brown long-eared; Myotis species bats were likely whiskered / Brandt s Myotis mystacinus / brandti or Daubenton s Myotis daubentonii bats. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

23 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 2.65 Due to a recording error with the ipad during the manual activity survey on the 21 st September, no contact data from bats were recorded after 5am, consequently identification of the bats registered by the detector after this point could not be confirmed through further analysis. Surveyor experiences and the continued operational capacity of the software, meant that bat identification was possible and recorded on paper form. Given these contacts were few, and from easily recognisable species i.e. common pipistrelle and Nyctalus sp., this was not considered to be a constraint One of the reptile surveys was undertaken outside the recommended period (15th June 2017). However, the weather conditions during this period were still suitable for survey to be conducted, as temperatures were below 18 o C. Therefore, this is not considered to be a constraint to the survey effort Pond P4 was on third party land and the pond had not been viewed until the first presence / likely absence survey, during which it was discovered that the pond was lined. Therefore, only two survey methods (netting and torching) were used during the first survey due to a lack of string bottles during this initial visit. However, three methods (including string bottles) were used on the following three surveys, with no evidence of GCNs identified. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

24 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Intentionally Blank J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

25 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 3.0 RESULTS Desk Study Statutory and Non-Statutory Sites of Nature Conservation Importance Statutory Sites of International Conservation Value 3.1 There are no statutory sites of international conservation importance, including Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), or RAMSAR sites, within 15km of the site boundary. Statutory Sites of National Conservation Value 3.2 Within the 2km search area there is one nationally important statutory designated site, Bovingdon Hall Woods (SSSI), located approximately 1.3km to the north east of the site. The SSSI consists of eight ancient coppice woods that total 69.4ha. It is the largest example of small-leaved lime Tilia cordata woodland in Essex, and the only known example of sessile oak Quercus pertrealime type woodland in the county. Plateau alder Alnus glutinosa woodland is also present, notable for being an uncommon woodland type in Essex, and thus is of conservation interest. Shoulder of Mutton Wood, the nearest component of the woodland complex to site, contains sweet chestnut Castanea sativa, with wild cherry Prunus avium. The complex as a whole is known to support a rich and diverse fauna. Non-Statutory Sites of Local Conservation Interest 3.3 There are two Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) present within 1km of the site, the closest of which is Clapgate Wood Complex, 0.6km to the east of the site at the southernmost extent of the associated green corridor. The woodland complex is comprised of a 7.3ha of neighbouring stands of ancient woodland, including Clapgate, Pond Croft and Braintree, connected via a green corridor running in a south-westerly direction between them. All LWS within 1km of the site are listed along with a description of their defining attributes in Table 12 below. Table 12. Non-Statutory Sites of Local Conservation Value within 1km Site Name Designation Approximate Distance & Direction from Site Summary Description Statutory Clapgate Wood Complex including Pond Croft LWS 0.60km E 0.99km E Clapgate w ood comprises a coppice and standards structure. Ash Fraxinus excelsior, sw eet chestnut Castanea sativa and silver birch Betula pendula form the primary structure of the w ood, with a hazel Corylus avellana understorey. Ground flora is bramble Rubus fruticosus agg dominated, except in a cleared area, w here rosebay w illow herb Chamaenerion angustufolium co-dominates. Pond Croft is predominately standards of pedunculate oak Quercus rober, w ith a scattered understorey of hazel and blackthorn Prunus spinosa. Braintree Wood differs in composition again, w ith ash, sw eet chestnut, w ild service Sorbus torminalis, field maple Acer campestre, pedunculate oak and birches Betula sp. all present. Limited ground flora includes J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

26 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Site Name Designation Approximate Distance & Direction from Site Summary Description pendulous sedge Carex pendula and Dog s mercury Mercurialis perennis. The three w oods are connected by a green corridor, consisting of thick hedges composed of field maple, hornbeam Carpinus betulus, hazel, haw thorn Crataegus monogyna, blackthorn, and pedunculate oak. Flora is composed of a mix of w oodland and grassland species such as w ood false brome Brachypodium sylvaticum, pendulous sedge, hairy St. John s w ort Hypericum hirsutum, meadow vetchling Lathyrus pratensis and tufted vetch Vicia cracca. Oak Wood LWS 0.91km NW An ancient w oodland w ith a canopy of pedunculate oak, ash and field maple. The understorey is comprised largely of hazel, w ith a poor ground flora of Dog s mercury and bramble. Protected / Notable Species Records 3.4 Records of protected or otherwise notable taxa provided by the Essex Wildlife Trust and Essex Field Club, within 1km of the site boundary, are listed in Table 13 below. Locations of these are presented in Figure 1: Consultation Plan. 3.5 Only dating back since 2007 were included. Only birds on the Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC) Amber or Red lists or on the Wildlife and Countryside Act Schedule 1 are included, unless otherwise considered a notable species. 3.6 The data provided by the Essex Field Club was only specified to within 1km grid squares that overlapped with the 1km search area from the site boundary. Consequently the resolution of these is not detailed enough to enable them to be plotted accurately on the consultation plan, nevertheless the species to which they concern are referenced in Table 13 below, with an indication of their distance from site. 3.7 There were also multiple of unidentified Pipistrellus species, the closest of which was located 0.81km to the south west of the site. Table 13. Protected and Notable Species Records Species Dates Relevant Legislation Approximate Location Relative to Site Birds Barn Ow l Tyto alba Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Black-headed Gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus Tern Sterna hirundo 2016 WCA1 Multiple, closest 0.29km E 2016 BoCC Amb Multiple, 0.88km NW 2016 BoCC Amb Single record, 0.88km NW 2016 BoCC Amb Single record, 0.88km NW Yellow hammer Emberiza citrinella Terrestrial Mammals 2013 NERC, UKBAP Single record, low resolution grid reference, w ithin 1km Western European Hedgehog 2016 NERC, UKBAP Single record, low resolution grid reference, J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

27 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Species Dates Relevant Legislation Approximate Location Relative to Site Erinaceus europaeus Harvest Mouse Micromys minutus Western Polecat Mustela putorius Mammals (Bats) pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus Soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus Brow n long-eared species Plecotus auritus Natterer s Bat Myotis nattereri 2015 NERC, UKBAP 2013 NERC, UKBAP WCA5 WCA5, UKBAP WCA5, NERC, UKBAP WCA5, WCA9, LBAP w ithin 0.8km Tw o, low resolution grid reference, w ithin 1km Tw o, low resolution grid reference, w ithin 0.9km Tw o, closest 0.13km NE Tw o, closest 0.84km NW Multiple, closest 0.70km SW Classified data, exact grid reference not provided Key: NERC41 Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006; HabsDirA2 Habitats Directive Annex II species, HRegs The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010; UKBAP UK Biodiversity Action Plan Species; LBAP Local Biodiversity Action Plan; WCA1/ WCA5 species listed on Schedule 1 and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 respectively; BoCC4:Red/ BoCC4:Amber Species of High or Medium Conservation Concern respectively, PoBA Protection of Badgers Act 1992 Field Results- Habitats and Flora 3.8 Habitat descriptions of the site are provided below. The locations of the habitats described below can be found on Figure 2: Phase 1 Habitat Plan. Arable The northern half of the site comprised of intensively managed arable land which at the time of surveys was sown with corn. As is typical of this habitat type, floral diversity was low due to intensive management practices. Photos 1 and 2. Arable field within the northern half of the site during initial walkover. Arable Headland/Field Margins 3.9 Field margins and headlands were present and supported species-poor semi-improved grassland. The majority of margins were between 3m - 7m in width, with a larger headland present adjacent to the offsite broadleaved woodland at the south-eastern extent of the arable field, measuring approximately 10m in width. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

28 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 3.10 The margins were dominated by species which formed a tussocky sward and included dominant false-oat grass Arrhenatherum elatius with frequent cock s-foot Dactylis glomerata, common bent Agrostis capillaris and perennial rye-grass Lolium perenne. A low diversity of herbs was limited to common and widespread species such as cow parsley Anthriscus sylvestris, dog s mercury Mercurialis perennis, ground ivy Glechoma hederacea, common hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, common nettle Urtica dioca, and creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens. During subsequent visits to the site during 2017 the vegetation within headlands had established into tall swards, maintaining a species poor composition. Species-Poor Semi-Improved Grassland 3.11 The southern half of the site all comprised species-poor semi-improved grassland, indicative of the current horse grazing. This area was characterised by a sward dominated by grass species such as cocks foot, perennial rye, false oat grass, tiy Phleum pratense and crested dog s-tail Cynosurus cristatus and a low diversity of herbs limited to common and widespread species such as common nettle, creeping buttercup, creeping thistle Cirsium arvense and broad leaved dock Rumex obtusifolius The fields within the western extent of the site were largely un-grazed but contained remnants of the herb species mentioned above. The field in the western corner of the site, adjacent to the arable field was not being managed at the time of the survey and had formed a tussock structure with false oat grass and cock s foot. Hedgerows 3.13 Fourteen mixed species and residential hedgerows were present along all boundaries of the site. Four of these hedgerows (H4, H6, H7 and H8) were found to provide high conservation value and three hedgerows (H3, H5 and H14) had moderately high to very high conservation value in accordance with HEGS, largely due to supporting a large number of mature trees and forming intact structures with no gaps Hedgerows H2 and H11 had moderate conservation value due to their limited connectivity to the wider environment, and containing a low number of mature standards. The remaining hedgerows were all classified as low conservation value. Hawthorn, blackthorn and elder Sambucus nigra largely dominated these hedgerows. Table 14 provides a summary of hedgerow results The majority of hedgerows within the site contained over 80% native species and were therefore identified as habitats of principal Importance under NERC Act (2006). J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

29 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Table 14. Summary of Hedgerow Survey Results Ref. Canopy Sp. Length (m) Notes HEGS Value and Score Important Under REGS / Average Species per 30m H1 Til sp, Ps, Ca, Cm 105 Tall field boundary hedgerow adjacent to High Garrett A131 Road; 2 mature standards, 2 4 Not important 1 sp/30m young trees, 0 10% gaps, 2 connections, 1 native dominant species. Low value H2 Ps, Ca, Fe, Rc, Rf, Sn 115 Tall field boundary hedgerow adjacent to Church Street; 5 3 Not important mature standards, 2 young trees, no gaps, 2 connections, dry ditch, mixed composition Moderate value 3 sp/30m H3 Cm, Rf, Fe, Sn, Ps, Ia 120 Tall field boundary linking to broadleaved woodland; 3 mature standards, no gaps, 4 connections, 1 native dominance 2 - Moderately high to high value Not important 1 sp/30m H4 Sn, Rf, Cm, Fe, Ac, Rc, Ps, Qr, Rf 92 Tall field boundary hedgerow; 71, no gaps, 4 connections, dry ditch, mixed composition. 1 High value Important 6 sp/30m and 3 associated features H5 Ps, Rf, Cm, Fe, Sn, Ac, Rc, 192 Field boundary hedgerow; 3 mature standards, 7 young standards, 0 10% gaps, 3 connections, dry ditch, mixed composition 2 + Moderately high to high value Not important 3 sp/30m H6 Ps, Cm, Fe, 86 Field boundary hedgerow; 6 Sn, Ac, Ca, Ap, Qr, Rf, Ah mature standards, 10 30% gaps, 3 connections, mixed composition. 1 - High value Not important 5 sp/30m H7 Sn, Ca, Cm, Rf, Qr, Laurel 70 Residential boundary hedgerow; 3 mature trees, 0 10% gaps, 3 connections, mixed composition 1 - High value N/A Residential hedgerow H8 Ag, Sx sp, Ps, Cm, Ca, Sn, Qr, Rf, 240 Tall field boundary hedgerow adjacent to stream; numerous mature and young trees, 0 10% gaps, 4 connections, mixed composition 1 - High value Not important 4 sp/30m H9 Cm 18 Residential boundary hedgerow; young trees. H10 Cm, Ac, Rf 30 Residential garden boundary hedgerow. Heavily managed. 4 Low value 4 - Low value N/A Residential hedgerow N/A Residential hedgerow J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

30 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Ref. Canopy Sp. Length (m) Notes HEGS Value and Score Important Under REGS / Average Species per 30m H11 Fe, Ia, Sn, Cm, Ley, Rf 152 Residential garden boundary hedgerow. Heavily managed; low number of mature trees; 30% + gaps. 3 Moderate value N/A Residential hedgerow H12 Cm, Rf, Sn, Ley, Ps, Ia, Fe 95 Residential garden boundary hedgerow. Heavily managed; two mature trees; 30% + gaps. 4 Low value N/A Residential hedgerow H13 Ley 116 Tall Residential garden boundary hedgerow. Heavily managed. 4 - Low value N/A Residential hedgerow H14 Ps, Rf, Ca, Til sp 96 Tall field boundary hedgerow; numerous mature and young trees, 0 10% gaps, 3 connections, 1 2 sp dominant. 2 - Moderately high value Not important 4 sp/30m Key to hedgerow species: Cm Crataegus monogyna Haw thorn, Ag Alder Alnus glutinosa Ps Prunus spinosa Blackthorn, Fe Fraxinus excelsior Ash, Rc Rosa canina agg Dog-rose, Qr Quercus robur English oak, Qr sp. Quercus species Oak species Sn Sambucus nigra Elder, Ca Corylus avellana Hazel, Ia Ilex aquifolium Holly, Ap Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore, Sx sp. Salix sp Willow species oleifolia, Ac Acer campestre Field maple,ah Horse Chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum, Qc Quercus cerris Turkey oak, Rf Rubus fruiticosus ag. Bramble aggregate, Qu Quercus sp. Oak species. Cs Cornus sanguinea dogw ood Si Sorbus intermedia Sw edish Whitebeam Jr Juglans regia w alnut, Ra Rosa arvensis Field rose, Lime sp Til sp, Fs Beech Fagus sylvatica, Ley Cupressus leylandii Leyland Cypress. Tall Ruderal 3.16 Small patches of tall ruderal vegetation were present in the western extent of the site. These areas were dominated by common nettle and common hogweed Heracleum sphondylium. Ditch 3.17 Three dry ditches (D1, D2 and D3) were present within the site. Two ditches ran along the southern boundary of the arable field adjacent to the offsite woodland and hedgerow H4 (D1) and hedgerow H5 (D2). The third ditch (D3) was located along the southern boundary of the site, adjacent to hedgerow H14. Figure 2 shows the locations of these ditches in relation to the site Ditch D1 measured approximately 1m in width and up to 1m in depth, with gently sloping banks. The ditch had a high degree of leaf litter with no aquatic vegetation present. Ruderal species dominated the banksides. This ditch remained dry throughout the survey period and lead to P Ditch D2 ran in a north-westerly direction from P1, adjacent to hedgerow H5. The channel was approximately 1m in width and 1.5m in height and was also filled with leaf litter and scrub. No aquatic vegetation was found in the channel or on the banksides D3 measured approximately 1m in width and up to 1m in depth, with gently sloping banks, and was dry throughout the survey period. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

31 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Fauna Badger 3.21 Due to the sensitive nature of badgers, a separate confidential FPCR Badger Report has been produced, which will not be made available in the public domain. Bats Trees 3.22 A large number of mature trees are situated throughout site. Ten trees were identified as having bat roosting potential, these were positioned within habitats along hedgerows H4, H6 and H11; as well as the woodland strip along the western boundary, which will be retained and suitably buffered within the proposals. Table 15 provides full details of features and level of bat potential. Table 15. Details of Trees with Bat Potential Tree T1 Species Crack Willow Bat Potential (Ground Assessment) Moderate T3 English Oak Moderate T4 Alder Low T7 Ash Moderate T12 Holly Low Features A branch tear out with an upward cavity on the main trunk Offsite on adjacent stream bank. A single woodpecker hole on the main stem. Offsite on adjacent stream bank. A branch tear out on main stem. Offsite within residential garden. A single woodpecker hole on stem overhanging the fence. Offsite within residential garden. T15 Sycamore Low Hazard beam on main stem. Two branch socket cavities were identified on the main trunk. T16 Field Maple Moderate A branch tear out with an upward cavity on the main trunk T17 English Oak (Veteran tree) T25 English Oak Low Moderate A branch socket cavity was identified on the main trunk. A branch socket cavity was identified on the western aspect of the tree. T27 Ash Low A branch socket cavity was identified on the main trunk An aerial inspection was undertaken on two trees that will be directly and/or indirectly impacted under the proposals (T25 and T27). Upon closer inspection both trees were reduced to negligible potential as the features were too shallow to provide suitable features. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

32 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Buildings 3.24 A horse shelter (B1) was situated in the south of the site and comprised a timber structure supported by machine manufactured timber beams. The open access provided a well-lit internal space with no features suitable to support roosting bats. No bat evidence was seen during the survey. Photo 3 and 4. Horse Shelter (B1) Manual Activity Transects 3.25 Over the course of manual activity surveys undertaken between May 2017 and October 2017, activity levels were observed to peak during the September 2017 survey with a total of 38 contacts; thirteen of which occurred during the point counts and twenty-five during the transect. During this survey, the majority of the calls were from common and soprano pipistrelles (17 and 10 occurrences respectively) with a range of other species occurring less frequently, including noctule (5), Myotis species (2), and Nyctalus species (2), as well as single passes from a serotine and a Plecotus sp In May 2017, activity was the lowest recorded over the survey period, with a total of five contacts recorded, comprised of three soprano pipistrelles, one common pipistrelle and a single serotine pass The majority of the activity occurred along the southern boundaries of the horse grazed fields, the edges of the broad-leaved woodland compartment to the south-east, as well as the alongside the stream and hedgerow on the north-western site boundary. See Table 16 for a descriptive summary and Figures 4 to 10. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

33 Table 16. Bat Transect Summary of Results 2017 Month May 2017 Figure 4 Total Contacts (Point Count Number in Bracket) Species Recorded (in abundance order, most to least) 5 (2) Transect 2 soprano pipistrelles and 1 serotine. Point Count 1 soprano pipistrelle and common pipistrelles. Activity Summary Transect Activity was focused around the northern section of the site. A serotine contact was recorded near to pond P2, also in the north of the site. Point Count Contacts were concentrated at PCG, located in the centre of the large arable field. These included two single passes by common and soprano pipistrelles. June 2017 Figure 5 July 2017 Figure 6 21 (6) Transect 7 common pipistrelle, 6 soprano pipistrelle, 1 Nyctalus sp. and 1 Serotine. Point Count 3 common pipistrelle, 1 Nyctalus sp. and 2 Plecotus sp. 28 (9) Transect 14 common pipistrelle, 4 soprano pipistrelle and 1 Nyctalus sp. Transect The majority of activity was associated with south west corner of the site. In addition, activity was also noted along the stream that borders the north-west boundary of the site. The majority of the behaviour recorded was observed to be of passing and commuting bats. Point Counts Activity varied between the point counts, with one common pipistrelle and one Nyctalus species sighting observed at PCE, located along hedgerow H5, in the southern section of the site. The remaining contacts were associated with point counts adjacent to the stream as well as the northern boundary of the site. Transect The majority of activity was again associated with the south west corner of the site. In addition, activity was also detected from the north-west boundary of the site, on the edge of the large arable field, and around pond P2. The majority of the contacts on the northwest corner were from passing common pipistrelles. The remaining contacts were from passing or foraging common and soprano pipistrelles, identified around the boundaries of the horse fields, with two passes from a Nyctalus species detected from H1, on the south easternmost corner of the site. Point Count 4 common pipistrelle, 4 soprano pipistrelle and 1 Pipistrellus sp. Point Counts Passes from a soprano pipistrelle and a common pipistrelle were recorded from PCD, at hedgerow H11 on the southwest boundary of the site. Further contacts from passing common and soprano pipistrelles were detected from PCI on the western edge of site. Foraging activity from common pipistrelle and an unknown pipistrelle species were identified from PCC on hedgerow H4, close to the edge of the offsite woodland. Additional foraging was noted from a common pipistrelle at PCE on hedgerow H14, located on the southern boundary of the site with Church Street.

34 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Month August 2017 Figure 7 September 2017 Dusk Figure 8 September 2017 Total Contacts (Point Count Number in Bracket) Species Recorded (in abundance order, most to least) 24 (12) Transect 4 soprano pipistrelle, 3 common pipistrelle, 2 Myotis sp., 1 serotine, 1 Plecotus sp. and 1 barbastelle. Point Count 6 soprano pipistrelle, 5 common pipistrelle and 1 Plecotus sp. 38 (13) Transect 13 common pipistrelle, 6 soprano pipistrelle, 3 noctule, 1 serotine, 1 Plecotus sp. and 1 Nyctalus sp. Point Count 4 soprano pipistrelle, 4 common pipistrelle, 2 Myotis sp., 2 noctule, and 1 Nyctalus sp. 15 (6) Transect 6 common pipistrelle, 1 Activity Summary Transect Activity was widely distributed across the site, including a relatively diverse range of species. Two instances of passing Myotis species were recorded, one from the northernmost tip of H5, on the southwest edge of the arable field, and another at the northeast comer of the same large arable field. A passing serotine was also recorded from the northeast corner of the arable field. Passes from a barbastelle and a Plecotus species were both detected from the northern edge of the offsite woodland, at its boundary with the arable field. pipistrelle activity was predominantly from foraging bats, located along hedgerow H8, on the western site boundary.. Point Counts Three soprano pipistrelles were observed from PCB commuting east along the southern edge of the offsite woodland. Passing soprano pipistrelles were detected from point counts D, G and J. Those at PCD and G, on the periphery of the arable field were also identified as socialising. A single pass from a Plecotus species was also detected from the western edge of the offsite woodland at PCI. Transect The majority of the bats recorded were common pipistrelles, all but two of which was passing along the hedgerows bordering the site. One was recorded foraging on the south boundary on hedgerow H14, the other was identified on the corner of hedgerows H6 and H11 at the southwest edge of the site. Contacts from noctules were identified on hedgerow H14 parallel to Church Street. Single passes from serotine, Plecotus species and Nyctalus species were also recorded at various points around the site. The serotine was detected adjacent to pond P1 between hedgerows H4 and H5, the Plecotus species bat along hedgerow H13 on the southwest boundary of the site, and the Nyctalus species on eastern side of H3 close to the off-site woodland. Point Counts Contacts from soprano pipistrelles were made from point counts A, G, H and K in the southern half of the site on hedgerows H5, H8, H12 and H11 that border the semi-improved horse paddocks. Passes from common pipistrelles were also made at point counts D, F, G, and H, again in the southern half of the site. Two contacts from passing Myotis species were recorded, one from PCH on the southern boundary of the site with Church Street, and one from PCK situated half way along H5. Contacts from noctules were also noted, one foraging at PCH on hedgerow H14 and the other passing along H11 on the southwest site boundary at PCG. Two passes from a Nyctalus species were recorded from PCJ on hedgerow H3, close to the woodland. Transect Activity was sparse and limited to a few contacts recorded at the southwest site boundaries, J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

35 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Month Dawn Figure 9 Total Contacts (Point Count Number in Bracket) Species Recorded (in abundance order, most to least) soprano pipistrelle, 1 Plecotus sp. and 1 Nyctalus sp. Activity Summary along hedgerows H11 and H14, with further contacts recorded around the peripheries of the large arable field. Contacts from pipistrelles were one or two passes only, and from various parts of the site. Passes from a Nyctalus species and soprano pipistrelle were recorded from the eastern edge of the arable field, and the intersection of H6 and H11, on the southwest site boundary, respectively. A Plecotus species bat was also identified foraging along the southern side of H5, over the horse paddocks. Point Count 5 pipistrelle and 1 Plecotus sp. Point Counts Activity varied between the point counts, with one or two bat contacts recorded from point counts C, D, G and J. A single pass from a Plecotus species was also detected from PCC on the southern site boundary at hedgerow H14. October 2017 Figure (9) Transect 7 common pipistrelle, 6 soprano pipistrelle, 4 Nyctalus sp., 2 Myotis sp., 1 noctule, and 1 unidentified bat sp. Point Count 4 common pipistrelle, 2 Nyctalus sp., 1 soprano pipistrelle, 1 Myotis sp., and 1 Pipistrellus sp. Transect Four common pipistrelles were identified passing along H8 on the eastern site boundary, one of which was foraging. Four contacts from soprano pipistrelles were also noted from the northwest corner of the arable field, two of which were foraging around the woodland surrounding P2, while the other two were passing along hedgerow H8. All four of Nyctalus species were located on the south eastern edge of the site, along hedgerows H14 and H2, with one of these noted as foraging. A single passing Myotis species was detected on the southern edge of the offsite woodland. An additional bat was observed from a distance foraging around a mature tree, in the area of tall ruderal habitat to the south west of the arable field. However, it could not be distinguished to species level. Point Counts Passes from common pipistrelles observed circling overhead were recorded from point counts B and C on the western periphery of the large arable field. One other common pipistrelle, as well as a Nyctalus species were both recorded on the southern edge of the woodland from PCJ. A single passing Myotis species was registered from PCH on the eastern site boundary, along hedgerow H11. A single pass from a Pipistrellus species was also observed at PCB, in the ruderal habitat bordering the southwest edge of the arable field. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

36 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Intentionally Blank J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

37 Land off Church Street, Bocking - Ecological Appraisal fpcr Automated Activity Surveys 3.28 The following paragraphs detail the findings of the automated activity surveys. In this context, the term registration refers to a unique sound file created over the course of a number of seconds. Based on this, numerous registrations does not necessarily refer to multiple bats (unlike the manual activity survey section above where the number of bats can often be visually identified), as one bat can create a number of registrations, for example a bat which is foraging in the area surrounding the microphone for a sustained period of time. Overall Summary (Table 17 & Figure 2) 3.29 During the automated survey in May 2017 a single barbastelle contact was recorded, prompting two static units to be installed successfully from June 2017 onwards. A total of 4414 registrations were recorded over the course of the surveys between May and October inclusive, with common pipistrelle the most frequently detected bat (approximately 45.8% of total data), with soprano pipistrelle (29.3%), noctule (13.7%), Pipistrellus sp (5.8%), Nyctalus sp (2.5%), barbastelle (1.2%), Plecotus sp (<0.01%), Myotis sp (<0.01%), and Nathusius pipistrelle (<0.01%) Table 18 summarises the activity levels recorded and the locations of the units; these surveys indicate that hedgerows H3, H4 and H5 had the highest numbers of registrations in comparison to other locations, as well as the greater diversity of bat species. These hedgerows are connected to the off-site woodland to the southeast The most notable species recorded during surveys was barbastelle which is an Annex II species, which was recorded from nine of the eleven survey locations sampled, with a peak of sixteen registrations in October, from a static situated on hedgerow H5. Registrations from barbastelle were greatest on static detectors on hedgerows with high connectivity to the off-site woodland. The barbastelle activity only made up 1.2% of the total dataset Please see Figure 2 for static (passive) detector unit locations and Tables 17 and 18 for full results. 36

38 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Intentionally Blank J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

39 Land off Church Street, Bocking - Ecological Appraisal fpcr Table 17. Automated Activity Survey Summary 2017 Survey Period Unit Reference Total Species Recorded (in order Summary of Activity Barbastelle Activity / Location Registrations Over 5 nights of Abundance and Total Number of Registrations) 08 th 13 th May 2017 Unit A: Hedgerow H4 close to species: common pipistrelle (329), soprano pipistrelle (199), Pipistrellus sp (4), Soprano and common pipistrelle activity occurred each night, increasing in registrations nightly. Nyctalus sp registrations occurred from the 10 th 12 th May with 13 There was a single registration of a barbastelle registered on Figure 2 intersect with woodland Nyctalus sp (10) and barbastelle (1). registrations occurring on the 12 th May. the 8 th May between 22:01-23: th 19 th June 2017 Unit B: Hedgerow H species: soprano pipistrelle (142), common pipistrelle (66), Unknown Pipistrellus registrations had a peak of 36 and 39 registrations on 15 th and 16 th June, respectively. Barbastelle were recorded on four out of the five Figure 2 Pipistrellus sp. (90), barbastelle (12), Nyctalus sp. (5), noctule (4), Plecotus sp. Nyctalus and Noctule registrations were recorded on 14 th, 16 th and 17 th June. A single registration of Plecotus species was recorded each day from 15 th -17 th June. survey days, with the 6 registrations the 15 th June. Registrations were spread (3), Myotis sp. (1). While a single recording of a Myotis species was recorded on the 16 th June. evenly throughout the evening, with a peak of 4 recordings between 03:01-04:00. Unit C: Hedgerow H3 East side species: common pipistrelle (236), soprano pipistrelle (187), Pipistrellus sp. (127), Soprano and common pipistrelle registrations were evenly spread out throughout the survey period. All Nyctalus species were recorded between 02:01-04:00 on Barbastelle were recorded on the 14 th and 17 th June only, with registrations Nyctalus sp. (22), barbastelle (3), Myotis sp. (2), Plecotus sp. (1). the 18 th June. Two Myotis species calls were recorded 15 th June, as well as a single Plecotus species call recorded only on the 18 th June. occurring between 02:01 04:00. 38

40 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Survey Period Unit Reference Total Species Recorded (in order Summary of Activity Barbastelle Activity / Location Registrations Over 5 nights of Abundance and Total Number of Registrations) 19 th 24 th July 2017 Unit D: Western end of species: common pipistrelle (189), soprano pipistrelle pipistrelle activity was greatest on the 20 th July, and declined steadily each day, with most of the None recorded Figure 2 hedgerow H2 - parallel to Church Street (173), Pipistrellus sp. (20), Nyctalus sp. (9). registrations occurring in the evenings between 21:00 and 01:00. Soprano pipistrelle registrations were more evenly distributed by time, but peaked with 78 registrations on the 22 nd July, with a low of 6 on the 24 th July. Unknown Pipistrellus registrations were only recorded on the 20 th and 22 nd July, mainly between 00:01 and 01:00. All Nyctalus species registrations were recorded between 22:01 and 23:00 every night except the 24 th and 25 th. Unit E: species: common pipistrelle pipistrelle activity was greatest on the 22 nd July None recorded Hedgerow H1 (240), soprano pipistrelle (54), Nyctalus sp. (8), Pipistrellus sp. (4), noctule (4), Plecotus (99 registrations), with a low of 14 registrations recorded on the 21 st July. Most of these registrations occurred in the evenings between 22:00 and 00:00. Soprano sp. (2). pipistrelle registrations were fewer, but distributed similarly to common pipistrelles, with most occurring between 22:00 and 00:00 hours. Noctule, Nyctalus and Pipistrellus species registrations were detected sporadically in low numbers across the survey period. Plecotus species were only recorded on the 21 st July between 01:01 and 02:00. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

41 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Survey Period Unit Reference Total Species Recorded (in order Summary of Activity Barbastelle Activity / Location Registrations Over 5 nights of Abundance and Total Number of Registrations) 23 rd 28 th August 2017 Unit F: Hedgerow H species: soprano pipistrelle (132), common pipistrelle (81), Soprano pipistrelle were recorded consistently throughout the survey period, the vast majority of which Barbastelle were recorded on all five survey days. Figure 2 Myotis sp. (10), Nyctalus sp. (6), noctule (5), barbastelle (5), Plecotus sp. (1), tended to occur in the very early evening between 20:01 and 21:00. pipistrelles differed as registrations from this species were well distributed over time, but had Pipistrellus sp. (1). clear peaks on the 24 th (36 registrations) and 27 th August (31 registrations). Noctule, Nyctalus and Myotis species were detected sporadically in low numbers across the survey period. Plecotus and Pipistrellus species calls were only recorded on the 27 th August between 20:00 and 22:00. Unit G: Eastern species: common pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle were recorded relatively There was a single end of hedgerow H2 - parallel to (69), soprano pipistrelle (26), noctule (22), Myotis sp. (5), Nyctalus sp. (4), Plecotus sp. evenly across time and across the days surveyed. Noctule calls were well distributed across survey days, their activity was predominantly in the early evening registration of a barbastelle registered on the 27 th August. Church Street (2), barbastelle (1), Nathusius pipistrelle (1), Pipistrellus sp. (1). between 20:01 and 21:00. Myotis, Nyctalus and Plecotus species registrations were detected sporadically in relatively low numbers across the survey period. Single registrations from Nathusius pipistrelle and Pipistrellus species were recorded on the 25 th and 26 th August respectively. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

42 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Survey Period Unit Reference Total Species Recorded (in order Summary of Activity Barbastelle Activity / Location Registrations Over 5 nights of Abundance and Total Number of Registrations) 20 th 25 th September Unit H: Hedgerow H species: noctule (509), common pipistrelle (420), Noctule, common and soprano pipistrelles were recorded on every day surveyed. pipistrelle activity Barbastelle were recorded on three survey days (23 rd, 2017 Figure 2 West side soprano pipistrelle (72), Myotis sp. (11), Nyctalus sp. (11), barbastelle (5), Plecotus increased greatly over the last two days surveyed, peaking on the 25 th with 227 registrations. Soprano pipistrelle activity showed a similar trend (with fewer 24 th and 25 th ), peaking with 3 on the 24 th. sp. (4). registrations overall), also peaking on the 25 th with 38 registrations. Noctule activity differed, with greater numbers of registrations earlier in the survey period (228 registrations on 22 nd ). Myotis, Nyctalus and Plecotus species were detected sporadically in low numbers across the survey period. Unit I: Western species: soprano pipistrelle and soprano pipistrelle registrations were at Barbastelle were recorded end of hedgerow H4 - field corner (203), common pipistrelle (191), noctule (46), Plecotus sp. (23), Nyctalus sp. (22), recorded consistently across the days surveyed, with activity levels differing greatly between days. Both species peaked on the 24 th with 67 and 88 registrations on all but one of the survey days, with a peak of three registrations on barbastelle (8), Myotis sp. (3), Pipistrellus sp. (2), Nathusius pipistrelle (1). respectively. Nyctalus species peaking on the 21 st with eight registrations. Noctule were recorded on each survey day. Most noctule activity occurred in the early the 24 th. evening between 19:01 and 21:00. Myotis and Pipistrellus species registrations were detected sporadically in low numbers across the survey period. A Nathusius pipistrelle registration occurred on the 24 th September. 13 th 18 th October 2017 Unit J: Eastern end of species: common pipistrelle (192), soprano pipistrelle (64), and soprano pipistrelle were recorded relatively evenly across the survey period, with common Barbastelle were recorded on four out of the five Figure 2 hedgerow H5 barbastelle (16), noctule (6), Nyctalus sp. (6), Myotis sp. (4), Pipistrellus sp. (4). pipistrelles 66 registrations peaking on the 14 th October. Noctule and Myotis species were only detected on the first three survey nights at low levels. survey days, with 10 registrations on the 14 th October. Registrations were predominantly between 22:01 and 04:00. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

43 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Survey Period Unit Reference Total Species Recorded (in order Summary of Activity Barbastelle Activity / Location Registrations Over 5 nights of Abundance and Total Number of Registrations) Unit K: Northern end of 73 6 species: soprano pipistrelle (40), common pipistrelle (13), Noctule were only detected on three survey nights (14 th, 15 th and 16 th October), at sporadic intervals through the There was a single registration of a hedgerow H3 - nearby the offsite woodland Nyctalus sp. (9), noctule (9), barbastelle (1), Pipistrellus sp. (1). evening and into the morning. Nyctalus species were evenly spread across the first four days of recording. Additionally, a single registration from an unknown barbastelle registered on the 16 th October between 00:01-01:00. Pipistrellus species was recorded on the evening of 13 th October. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

44 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Table 18. Data Collected from the Static Bat Detectors Recording Period Unit Label Survey Dates Survey Hours Total Avg. per hour Total Registrations Avg. per hour Pipistrelle Peak Count Period Total Avg. per hour Soprano Pipistrelle Peak Count Period Total Avg. per hour Pipistrelle Species Peak Count Period Total Avg. per hour Nyctalus Species Peak Count Period Total Barbastelle Avg. per hour Peak Count Period Total Avg. per hour Noctule Peak Count Period Total May Jun Jun Jul Jul Aug Aug Sept Sept Oct Oct A B C D E F G H I J K 08/05/ /05/ /06/ /06/ /06/ /06/ /07/17-24/07/17 19/07/17-24/07/17 23/08/17-28/08/17 23/08/17-28/08/17 20/09/17-25/09/17 20/09/17-25/09/17 12/10/17 17/10/17 12/10/17 17/10/ Long Eared Species Nathusius Myotis Species J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

45 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Pipistrelle Period Total Peak Count Avg. per hour Period Total Peak Count Avg. per hour Period Total Peak Count Avg. per hour J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

46 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Intentionally Blank J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

47 Land off Church Street, Bocking - Ecological Appraisal fpcr Breeding Birds 3.33 The site provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat for urban, woodland edge and farmland birds in the form of hedgerows, scrub and arable land. The arable fields provide habitat for ground nesting birds such as skylark Alauda arvensis, and due to the mosaic of habitats within the Application Site A total of 41 bird species were recorded. Of the 41 observed bird species, eleven have some conservation status as either NERC (2006) S41 species and / or BoCC red or amber list species. Of the eleven notable species, three species (skylark, house sparrow and yellowhammer) were recorded as probable breeders. Three species (starling, song thrush and dunnock) were recorded as possible breeders, and five species (black-headed gull, lesser black-backed gull, mallard, stock dove and linnet) were recorded as non-breeders. These are shown in Table 19 below along with their breeding status on the application site and within Essex, and a full table of results that includes breeding status is provided in Appendix B No WCA Schedule I species were recorded, and no significant numbers of individuals or breeding pairs were recorded on the application site. Table 19. NERC, LBAP and/or BoCC Red- and Amber-Listed Bird Species Recorded at Land North of Church Street, Bocking, during Breeding Bird Surveys 2017 and Their Recent Status in Essex Species Scientific Name Conservation Status Survey Area Breeding Status Breeding Status in Essex and Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Amber list Non-breeder widespread resident, winter visitor and passage migrant Black-headed gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus Amber list Non-breeder Abundant resident and passage migrant Lesser blackbacked gull Larus fuscus Amber list Non-breeder passage migrant. Present all year. Breeds in increasing numbers Stock dove Columba oenas Amber list Non-breeder Resident and passage migrant Skylark Alauda arvensis Red list NERC Probable resident, passage migrant and LBAP winter visitor Starling Sturnus vulgaris Red list NERC Possible Abundant but declining resident, passage migrant and winter visitor Song thrush Turdus philomelos Red list NERC LBAP Possible resident, passage migrant and winter visitor Dunnock Prunella modularis Amber list NERC Possible Abundant and widespread resident House sparrow Passer domesticus Red list NERC Probable Abundant resident 46

48 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Species Scientific Name Conservation Status Survey Area Breeding Status Breeding Status in Essex Linnet Carduelis cannabina Red list NERC Non-breeder but declining resident and passage migrant Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella Red list NERC Probable but declining resident The Essex Bird Report 2013 The. Great Crested Newt 3.36 No of GCN were returned from the consultations, and searches for licence applications found no such works. There are two waterbodies onsite; Pond P1 was considered suitable to support GCN, due to water quality; and the second pond P2 was almost dry, so not considered suitable for breeding. Terrestrial habitats consist of scrub, hedgerow bases, tussock semiimproved grassland, field margins and dry ditches. The arable habitat was considered to provide sub-optimal foraging and commuting habitat for GCN Fifteen waterbodies were identified within a 500m radius (Figure 3), only five of these (P3, P4, P5, P6 and P7) were within 250m of the site, the accepted maximum commuting distance for GCN. Research published by Natural England 27, suggests that although a maximum routine migratory range has been estimated to be 500m, the majority of movements for GCN are approximately 250m from a breeding pond, with much reduced distances where adjacent habitats are of good quality. During the survey season presence/likely absence surveys were carried out on P1 and P4, as P6 had dried out and the remaining were in third party ownership (P3, P5 and P7), where access had been denied Pond P1 was located in a depression where hedgerow H4 meets hedgerow H5 in the southern half of the site. The pond contained large levels of leaf litter and was surrounded by broad-leaved trees with the banks comprising bare earth with scattered common nettle. The depth was approximately 15cm with no aquatic vegetation present. Photo 5 and 6. Pond P1 (left) and pond P2 (right) had dried up and so no further surveys were undertaken Pond P2 was located in the west of the site, within a willow dominated woodland area, which was linked to the stream along the western boundary. The water levels never exceeded 1cm, during 27 Cresswell, W. & Whitw orth, R An assessment of the efficiency of capture techniques and the value of different habitats for great crested newts. English Nature Research Reports 576. English Nature, Peterborough. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

49 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr the survey period. The presence of rushes Juncus sp in the area would indicated that this area remains damp Pond P3 was situated approximately 10m west of the site, within a residential garden. After initial correspondence with the landowner, access was later denied due to the objections over possible development. The limited view from the site boundary indicated that the garden had been managed for wildlife with good habitat linking this pond to the site Pond P4 comprised an ornamental pond, situated approximately 60m east in land associated with a residential dwelling. The pond was lined and bordered by overhanging concrete slabs, ornamental ing and a brick wall. Goldfish were present in the pond. The pond was separated from site via residential dwellings and associated gardens. Photos 7 and 8. Pond P4 (left) and Pond P3 (right) on third party land (view from site boundary) Ponds P5 and P7 were located approximately 70m south-west and 182m west from the site, respectively. Access was denied to both ponds. P5 was separated from the site by Church Street and residential dwellings, which were considered a barrier to dispersal. P7 was a spring and was requested for access to check that there was no pooling which might have provided suitable breeding habitat for GCN, however, access was denied. Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) 3.43 An HSI assessment was undertaken on all surveyed waterbodies. The HSI scores are summarised in the table below. Table 20. Summary of HSI Assessment Pond HSI Score Predicted Presence HSI Category P % Poor P % Poor Field Surveys 3.44 Presence/absence surveys were completed on ponds P1 and P4; where no GCN were recorded. A low and medium population of smooth newts Lissotriton vulgaris were recorded in P1 and P4, respectively. A breakdown of the surveys can be seen in Table 21. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

50 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Table 21. Pond Survey Data Summary Survey Date Weather Conditions / Evening Air Temperature Pond Number Survey Techniques Employed Results Peak Counts Breeding Evidence 8 th May 2017 No rain or w ind. Evening air temperature of 14 C. P1 B, T, N 1 sm None P4 N, T - None 15 th May 2017 No rain w ith a light w ind. Evening air P1 B, T, N 2 sm 1 sm None temperature of 15 C. P4 B, T, N 22 sm 22 sm None 22 nd May th May 2017 No rain or w ind. Evening air temperature of 19 C. No rain or w ind. Evening air temperature of 15 C. P1 B, T, N 1 sm None P4 B, T, N 13 sm 14 sm None P1 B, T, N 2 sm None P4 B, T, N 15 sm None 24 sm Key to symbols: - female; - male; sm - smooth newt; pm palmate newt; B - bottling; T - torching; E - Egg searching; N - netting. Hazel Dormice 3.45 No of dormice were returned by the Essex Field Club or Wildlife Trust. The hedgerows and treelines onsite were suitable for dormice, they were structurally dense, with species that could be utilised for foraging, including hazel, hawthorn and bramble. The onsite linear features provide linkages to offsite habitats which also have opportunities to support dormice Dormouse checks undertaken between May and October have recorded no evidence of this species, as all nesting tubes were absent of any material that could be associated with dormice. Many of the tubes were found to contain breeding wood mice and their nests however. Figure 12 shows the placement of the tubes around the periphery of the site and in the hedgerows with suitable habitat and connectivity. Reptiles 3.47 Areas of tussocky grassland, tall ruderal, scrub, and boundary hedgerows provide a mosaic of habitats suitable for foraging, basking and refugia for reptiles Reptile surveys have been undertaken to during the months of May, June and September Table 22 below shows peak counts of reptiles recorded during these surveys, Figure 13 shows the distribution of artificial refugia over the site, and the location of reptile sightings. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

51 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Table 22: Reptiles Recorded During Each Survey Survey Date Reptiles Recorded 23/05/ /06/17 1 unknown adult grass snake 23/06/ /06/ /09/ /09/ /09/17 0 Riparian Mammals 3.49 Records of otter were returned from the Essex Wildlife Trust and Field Club outside of the 1km boundary. However, the stream situated along the western boundary of the site links to the River Pant, where an otter record was returned A riparian survey was undertaken that focussed on the stream corridor that runs along the western boundary. An old otter spraint was identified on an old pipe within the stream, with footprints found further downstream. Figure 13 shows the exact locations of these signs. The structure of the banks, and the vegetation present, were confirmed to provide suitable burrowing and foraging opportunities for water vole, however no evidence of water vole was identified. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

52 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Intentionally Blank J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

53 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 The following section provides an evaluation of the site and identifies the likely ecological constraints associated with the proposed development. Where appropriate, measures for the avoidance, mitigation and compensation of any likely potential impacts together with any enhancements are discussed. Statutory and Non-Statutory Designated Sites 4.2 There are no statutory sites of international conservation importance, including SPAs, SACs, or RAMSAR sites, within 15km of the site boundary. A single SSSI, known as Bovingdon Hall Woods is situated approximately 1.3km north-east of the site. The Application Site does not fall within Natural England s SSSI impact risk zone for residential development. 4.3 The site is linked to Bovingdon Hall Woods SSSI via a public right of way and roads, which would involve an approximate 2km walk (one way), which, if used as a circular route would cover approximately 4km, and is considered to be in excess of the average daily walking distance undertaken by the majority of people. Research published by Natural England for the Thames Basin Heaths SPA 28 found that average walking route length of a local visitor with a dog was 2.63km, with 75% of dog walkers covering up to 3.23km. Local visitors who were walking without a dog on average covered a slightly longer distance of 2.51km, with 75% covering up to 3.80km. Furthermore, there are no public rights of way through the woodland only around the peripheries along existing tracks, further reducing the likelihood of new residents having a detrimental impact to the woodland. The majority of the SSSI units are in a favourable condition, the only unit that is unfavourable was due to insufficient regeneration of oak and ash. There is no mention of any effect from recreational activities from local developments. 4.4 The 8.19ha of GI will provide a large area of open space to the west of the site and smaller areas to the north and centre, some of which will be fenced off allowing for off lead exercise areas for dogs. Dog and litter bins will be positioned at the entry to the GI and where proposed footpaths within the site meet existing footpaths, this will minimise the nutrient effects to the wider area, which could affect flora diversity. 4.5 Due to the distances involved in travelling to Bovingdon Hall Woods and the recreational opportunities on site, it is not considered that the SSSI would be visited on a regular basis, therefore public pressures upon the designated habitats would remain negligible. 4.6 Two non-statutory LWS are situated within 1km of the site; the closest being Clapgate Wood Complex LWS located approximately 0.6km east of the site. The second comprises Oak Wood LWS, situated approximately 0.9km north-west of the application site. 4.7 Clapgate Wood Complex LWS includes a green corridor/byway which connects three ancient woodland parcels. This site can be accessed via an approximate 790m walk, which would involve the crossing of the busy A131 then going through a residential road (Lyons Hall Road) before walking down Willoughby s Lane which only has an partial footpath along the a road that has a national speed limit of 60mph; this makes public access dangerous and unsuitable for dog walking. Once in proximity to the LWS the paths only run around the perimeter of the woodland 28 Natural England (2014) Results of the 2012/13 visitor survey on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA). [Online]. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

54 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr parcels. Due to the absence of public footpaths, accessibility and distance, it is considered that the new residents would have a limited impact on the site. 4.8 Oak Wood LWS, also designated for supporting ancient woodland, can be reached via a series of roads, pedestrian pathways and tracks which pass near to Oak Wood LWS but none of these paths go directly along or through the wood. This LWS is approximately a 3km round trip from the site, and due to the distance and lack of direct access into the LWS, recreational increases from the proposed development are unlikely to affect the habitats for its designation. 4.9 In order to further minimise any potential risks of recreational pressure on the LWS, the proposed GI and open space will be designed to provide focal points, with a circular walk provided, with dog bins implemented at key points. Through creation of open space within the proposed development and means to exercise dogs safely and providing areas of safe play for local families; it is considered that negligible impacts will arise as a result of the proposals on surrounding LWSs. Habitats/Flora 4.10 The degree to which habitats receive consideration within the planning system relies on a number of mechanisms, including: Inclusion within specific policy (e.g. veteran trees, ancient woodland and linear habitats in NPPF, or non-statutory site designation), Identification as a habitat of principal importance for biodiversity under NERC (2006) and consequently identification as a Priority Habitat within England and the local area Under NPPF the development should seek to contribute a net gain in biodiversity with an emphasis on improving ecological networks and linkages where possible. It is recommended that hedgerows, where possible, are to be retained, buffered and enhanced to ensure the site s connectivity into the wider area is maintained. The hedgerows bordering the site were found to contain native species and, as such, qualify as habitats of principal importance under NERC (2006). All hedgerows are important in their functions as corridors, as well as foraging and nesting habitats for wildlife and as such are identified as priority habitats. In addition, hedgerows are listed as Essex BAP Habitats The cultivated arable habitat and horse grazed paddocks were of low intrinsic and conservation importance, with no rare or notable species recorded. Being more than 2m in width, the arable margins have potential to qualify as habitats of principal importance (Arable Field Margins) and priority habitats within Essex, however due to the species-poor character of these, the lack of regular management and their widespread and common occurrence, these are considered to be of negligible conservation value. Marginal habitats will be retained, and where lost, compensated for through incorporation of species-rich and tussock-forming grassland throughout the proposed development, specifically around water features (attenuation facilities and ditches) in the western extent of the site Fourteen hedgerows were recorded along field boundaries, one of which (H4) was assessed as important under the Hedgerow Regulations Under HEGS assessments of conservation value; five hedgerows were classified as low (H1, H9, H10, H12 and H13), two as moderate (H2, H11), three moderately high to high (H3, H5 and H14) or four high (H4, H6, H7 and H8). All J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

55 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr (except for H13) are classed as habitats of principal importance under the NERC Act (2006) due to the dominance of native species, and therefore require consideration under the NPPF The hedgerows, scrub and broad-leaved woodland within the proposed development provide connectivity into the wider landscape. A small section of hedgerows H3, H4 and H5 will be removed for pedestrian and vehicular access, however the majority will be enhanced with additional ing and buffered, with hedgerow ing improving connectivity to the north and east of the site Existing broad-leaved woodland strips and hedgerow will be strengthened by additional ing, with new such habitats created that provide green corridors through the site, which will consist of native species that provide refuge and foraging opportunities. Hedgerows will be managed to maximise their nature conservation potential, with traditional hedge laying used or trimming on a three year rotational basis once established, with any gaps ed up with native berry or nut bearing tree and shrub species. Hedgerows will benefit from the creation of wide headlands to promote the establishment of flora species, which are currently absent or poorly represented; these will be of at least 2m in width and have a diverse tussock grassland which would increase the value of the hedgerows as a wildlife corridor All of the mature trees present within the Application Site will be retained and protected by fencing off the Root Protection Areas (RPAs); these will protect specimens from damage and soil compaction during construction works Preference will be given to native species, with an emphasis on species bearing nectar, berries, fruit and nuts, as these enhance the foraging opportunities for local wild fauna including birds and invertebrates. Suitable small tree species for inclusion in hedgerows and garden ing schemes could include field maple Acer campestre, silver birch Betula pendula, wild cherry Prunus avium, bird cherry P. padus, holly Ilex aquifolium, crab apple Malus sylvestris and rowan Sorbus aucuparia. Other shrub species suitable for inclusion within the soft landscaping design include hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, hazel Corylus avellana, blackthorn Prunus. spinosa, dog rose Rosa canina, honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum and wild privet Ligustrum vulgare Where possible ing within the proposed development will seek to provide additional habitat for urban and suburban wildlife. While native species are often of value to biodiversity generally, it is now clear that many cultivated varieties and exotic s are also good for wildlife, provided that their flowers are not too complex, or that hybrid varieties, which may produce little or no pollen, or nectar, and so are not of interest to bees, butterflies or other pollinating insects. The ing strategy, both within private and public areas, will therefore combine a range of native species and where appropriate, such as in gardens and more formal areas, with a range of ornamental species with an accepted value for biodiversity. A range of small shrubs, low growing woody species, grasses and perennials, would provide a range of forms, sizes and finer scale variation to enhance the future structural and three-dimensional complexity of the site. Fauna 4.19 Principal pieces of legislation protecting wild species are Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) (WCA) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations Some species, for example badgers, also have their own protective legislation (Protection of Badgers Act 1992 as amended). The impact that this legislation has on the planning system is J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

56 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr outlined in ODPM 06/2005 Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation Statutory obligations and their impact within the Planning System This guidance states that as the presence of protected species is a material consideration in any planning decision, it is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species, and the extent to which they are affected by proposals is established prior to planning permission being granted. Furthermore, where protected species are present, and proposals may result in harm to the species or its habitat, steps should be taken to ensure the long-term protection of the species, such as through attaching appropriate planning conditions for example In addition to protected species, there are those that are of other conservation merit, such as species of principal importance for the purpose of conserving biodiversity under the NERC Act (2006). These are recognised in the NPPF which advises that when determining planning applications, LPA s should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying a set of principles including: If significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided, adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused; Development proposals where the primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity should be encouraged The implications that various identified species, or those that are thought reasonably likely to occur, may have for the developmental design and programming considerations are outlined below. Badger 4.23 Badger data is confidential, so are not provided in this document but within a standalone FPCR Badger Report (2017). Bats 4.24 All bat species and their habitats are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations In summary, these make it an offence to damage, destroy or obstruct any place used by bats for breeding and shelter, disturb a bat, or kill, injure or take a bat. Trees 4.25 Ten trees were identified as having bat roosting potential, these were positioned within habitats along hedgerows H4, H6 and H11 as well as the woodland strip along the western boundary, which will be retained and suitably buffered. The exceptions are a mature ash (T27) and a mature oak (T25) positioned along H4, these being classified as having low potential to support roosting bats, the current framework plan identifies that these will be removed to facilitate access between development parcels. Following an aerial assessment undertaken on these trees the bat roosting potential was downgraded to negligible. As no bats were found to be roosting within these trees, there will be no ecological constraint to their removal Bat boxes will be installed in accordance with National and Local Planning Policy, helping to enhance biodiversity within the local area. A range of boxes will be installed, including Ibstock bat J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

57 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr bricks or Schwegler 1FR bat tubes, which can easily be incorporated into the walls of the new buildings and Schwegler 1F and 2FN bat boxes for installation on trees.. Manual Activity Surveys 4.27 The activity transects recorded ten bat species (order of abundance) common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, Nyctalus species, brown long-eared, Myotis species, noctule, serotine, Pipistrellus species, barbastelle and an observed bat that couldn t otherwise by identified. The contacts ranged from three (May 2017) to 25 (September 2017), which over the survey period averaged fifteen contacts per transect (excluding point counts) The majority of the activity occurred along the hedgerows immediately connected to or nearby the broad-leaved woodland compartments to the south-east (hedgerows H3, H4, H5, H10), as well as alongside the stream that borders the large arable field, on the north-western boundary of the site (that includes hedgerow H8). Automated Activity Surveys 4.29 The registration numbers were the lowest in October 2017 within the northern extent of hedgerow H3, with a total of 73, with the highest level of registrations occurring in September 2017 with 1032 registrations, occurring along hedgerow H3 in the southern section of the site. The total number of registrations over the eleven static periods was There were 52 registrations from barbastelle bats recorded by the eleven statics deployed. The peak of barbastelle activity occurred in October and June with 16 and 12 respectively. Both statics were placed along hedgerow H5. These species are Annex II listed on the Habitats Directive and are species of principal importance under S41 of the NERC Act (2006). The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) 29 UK status and Trends distribution information for barbastelles shows that there are of these species in the area, although it is not in sufficient detail to accurately assess precise locations, and specific consultations requests recorded no barbastelles within 2km of the site; JNCC note that: The barbastelle is widely distributed across southern England and across Wales but is likely to have been significantly under-recorded within its range Barbastelle bats are known to utilise woodland and streams, which the immediate habitats around the development provide. The current framework plan provides buffers around such habitats, which will be kept dark, where lighting is needed this should ideally be kept below 1 lux, which will maintain corridors of movement for barbastelles, and other bat species Where gaps are required through existing or new linear features, such as hedgerows, it is recommended that these are kept as small as possible, if they are larger than 7m in width then it is advised that habitat hop-overs are provided. Through ing/management taller s/trees either side of the gap, this effectively pushes the flight lines of bats (and birds) over any roads, avoiding vehicle collisions and lighting. 29 The Joint Nature Conservation Committee UK Status & Trends: Barbastelle. Assessed J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

58 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Mitigation and Enhancements for the Local Bat Population 4.33 The retention of the hedgerows around the peripheries will ensure connectivity is maintained; and the inclusion of approximately 8.19ha of GI will have a beneficial effect on the local bat assemblages, particularly in the north, south and west where new foraging and commuting opportunities will be provided with the structural ing, open grassland areas, orchards and attenuation To minimise impacts on bats, proposals will adopt a sensitive external lighting scheme which will be designed to minimise light spill on retained and proposed habitats of value to commuting and foraging bats. The lighting scheme would be designed with regard to current guidance provided by the Bat Conservation Trust 30 and the Institution of Lighting Professionals 31 and adopt the following principles: The avoidance of direct lighting of existing trees, hedgerows, scrub, woodland, or proposed areas of habitat creation/landscape ing; Buffer zones and GI are not to be illuminated; The implementation of hop-overs adjacent to any hedgerow gaps greater than 7m wide will allow continued echolocation across the break thereby allowing continued usage of the hedgerow as a foraging/commuting area. It will also reduce the potential for road traffic accidents to bats (and also for birds); During the construction period, no lighting should be used in proximity to boundary features, if needed lights will be directionally focused/shrouded, such measures would be detailed within a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP); Lighting that is incorporated into the development design should comprise low pressure sodium lights, as they emit at one wavelength so attract less insects or LED lighting; Directional lighting and avoidance of upward lighting and/or light spillage; Lighting columns to be as short as possible, although in some locations taller columns would allow reduced horizontal spill; and Security lighting on properties backing on to sensitive hedgerows and woodland will be low wattage LED, which will be installed on properties at the construction stage to forestall a future homeowner installing unsuitable lighting which could impact on bats The GI buffer along the western boundary will distance the residential units away from more natural habitats, where dark corridors will be easily maintained. These areas will benefit all bat species, but particularly barbastelle bats that could utilise the corridors as linkages to surrounding areas. The creation of the attenuation basin will attract a variety of prey items, which potentially could increase the foraging potential and value of the site to the local bat population Roads and buildings in close proximity to the new GI and existing boundary habitats will have lighting sensitively positioned, so as to avoid illumination of canopies, which could reduce bat suitability. Details of measures that will be inherent to the design in limiting light disturbance during the construction and operational phase have been listed above. 30 Bat Conservation Trust (2011) Statement of the impact and design of artificial light on bats 31 Institution of Lighting Professionals (2011) Guidance Notes for Reduction of Obtrusive Light J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

59 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 4.37 The bat assemblages recorded consisted of common and widespread species, with exception of low numbers of barbastelle bats. The number of bat registrations throughout the survey season would suggest that the site currently does not form an important resource for the local bat population. The proposed enhancements and habitat creation will enhance features that will be utilised by bats; which will have a minor / moderate beneficial effect at a site / local level to the local bat population. Breeding Birds 4.38 The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) is the principal legislation affording protection to UK wild birds. Under this legislation all birds, their nests and eggs are protected by law and it is an offence, with certain exceptions to recklessly or intentionally: Kill, injure or take any wild bird; Take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while in use or being built; Take or destroy the egg of any wild bird Additional conservation status is given to birds in the UK through being listed as Species of Principle Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) and listed as Amber (greater than 25% decline over 25 years) or Red (greater than 50% decline over 25 years) on the Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC) traffic light system Consultation with Essex Wildlife Trust and Essex Field Club identified of barn owl Tyto alba (WCA Schedule I species), mallard Anas platyrhynchos (BoCC Amber listed species), blackheaded gull Chroicocephalus ridibundus (BoCC Amber listed species), common tern Sterna hirundo (BoCC Amber listed species), and yellowhammer Emberiza citronella (BoCC Red listed / NERC) within 1km of the application boundary. Evaluation 4.41 The overall breeding bird assemblage recorded was typical of edge-of-settlement farmland, with common and widespread generalist woodland / garden species present. The site provides suitable nesting and foraging habitat in the form of hedgerows, scrub, and arable land, with the majority of species recorded in association with these features Six notable species were recorded on site. These included; probable breeders skylark, house sparrows, and yellowhammer. Starling, song thrush, and dunnock were classified as possible breeders and were recorded in association with the boundary hedgerows and semi-improved grassland. Black-headed gull, lesser black-backed gull, linnet, mallard and stock dove were observed flying over the site and are considered non-breeding species While NERC (2006) S41 and BoCC Red and Amber species such as skylark, house sparrow and yellowhammer have been classified as probable breeders on site, the species observed are all common and widespread both nationally and within Essex, and their presence was expected due to habitats present Species recorded that are arguably the most vulnerable to impacts of development are the probable and possible breeding notable species which were limited to skylark, yellowhammer, house sparrow, starling, dunnock, and song thrush. The notable non-breeders are considered unlikely to be negatively impacted by proposals. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

60 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 4.45 Within the arable field compartment, a maximum number of eight individual skylark were recorded during the June survey, and the likely number of probable breeding males was five - six based on a count of singing / displaying males. Although the number of skylark territories have declined within the county in recent years, it is likely that the actual number of territories reported during 2013 (503 territories) would be higher if more information had been submitted with the county reports 32. This species occurs regularly, or is widely distributed in suitable habitat within the county, and it is therefore considered that the small number of skylark recorded within the site is unremarkable and is thought to be no greater than local value. It is likely that this species will be displaced from the application site post-development due to the land use change from farmland to residential. However, the site is situated amongst large expanses of arable land and it is probable that the current population of breeding skylark will disperse into the neighbouring arable fields. To compensate for the effect on skylark, a nest box scheme that targets similarly valued NERC (2006) and BoCC Red / Amber species that co-habit with humans is proposed During the surveys undertaken female yellowhammer were observed in low numbers, though no singing males have been recorded; it is considered that this species is at least a probable breeder in some years within the site. Farmland yellowhammer have a nesting preference for thick hedgerows with ditches, or wide margins for nesting. Owing to loss of arable habitat it is likely that this species will be temporarily displaced from the majority of the proposed development, however the newly created hedgerows to the north and west of the site, could be utilised by this species The probable breeding house sparrow were recorded during the May and June survey in association with hedgerow H5 on the southern boundary of the arable field, and hedgerow H10 on the eastern boundary, respectively. House sparrows mainly nest within holes and crevices of man-made structures and nest-boxes, with a strong preference for houses and gardens, which provides both nesting and foraging habitat for this species 33. Due to this species close association with human dominated landscapes, it is likely the increase in residential dwellings and gardens will have a minor positive impact on this species, where nesting provisions can be made A small flock of 40 starlings were recorded foraging within the semi-improved grassland situated in the south-western extent of the site in May, with smaller flocks recorded flying over (May and April). Starlings nest within trees and buildings, utilising any suitably sized cavity present, and will readily nest within nest boxes provided. They tend to be opportunistic, generalist feeders and forage within open grassland, including garden lawns, playing fields and amenity grassland; their flexible and resourceful nature enabling them to thrive within residential areas. Due to the provision of nest boxes, GI and residential gardens, it is considered that this species will continue to utilise the site after development Dunnock utilise a wide range of habitats including woodlands, farmland, hedgerows, scrub, parks and residential gardens, usually nesting within dense shrubs and hedges. They are a ground feeding bird and due to their shy nature usually prefer to reside in areas of cover. A peak count of nine singing males were recorded, suggesting that they are holding territory a behaviour closely associated with breeding. The majority of such habitats will be retained, enhanced and buffered, and the creation of new hedgerows will provide additional nesting and foraging opportunities. 32 The Essex Bird Report 2013 The Essex Birdw atching Society. 33 Shaw, L. M., Chamberlain, D., Conw ay, G. J., and Toms, M. (2011) Spatial Distribution and Habitat Preferences of the House Sparrow, Passer domesticus, in urbanised landscapes. BTO Research Report No. 599 J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

61 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 4.50 Two singing male song thrushes were recorded within the boundary hedgerows in the western extent of the site, and a pair were observed flying out of the semi-improved grassland towards the western boundary. Owing to this evidence it is possible that this species is nesting within the site. Song thrush nesting requirements consist of woodland with a thick understorey of shrubs and bramble, and within tall thick hedgerows. Under appropriate management, retained and newly created hedgerows onsite will provide additional suitable nesting habitat for this species. The proposed GI in the western extent of the site, and supplementary ing will provide additional foraging resources in the form of fruiting bodies. Mitigation and Enhancement 4.51 The most likely negative effects from a residential development of this type on the assemblage recorded would be as a result of: Direct loss / change of breeding habitat; and Disturbance during construction and / or operation Habitats to be lost include arable and compartments of semi-improved grassland in the southern extent of the site, which will accommodate the proposed residential area. Small sections of hedgerows H3, H4 and H5 will also be lost in order to facilitate access around the site. Skylark and yellowhammer are the only notable species likely to be effected by the change in land use The retention of the majority of features present within the site that are suitable for breeding birds will ensure continued use of the site as a whole by local bird populations. Hedgerow enhancements, through supplementary standard native tree ing will increase the foraging and nesting resources available for local bird populations, while appropriate management (see below) will help protect nesting birds from predation. In addition, creation of new hedgerows, an attenuation basin, residential gardens and the provision of a range of nest boxes within appropriate locations across the site will provide further enhancements. A mixture of nest box types can be sited within retained habitats or designed into the built environment, and may include: A mixture of small hole (26mm and 32mm) boxes placed throughout the site on suitable trees and buildings will provide nesting opportunities for blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus and great tit Parus major. These boxes generally have a high uptake rate; Larger nest boxes with a 45mm hole should be placed under the eaves of buildings, or approximately 2.5m above ground in trees in order to provide nesting opportunities for starling; and larger terraced style or multiple single holed 32mm nest boxes should be placed on buildings to attract house sparrows; Small open fronted nest boxes again should be placed throughout the site, especially on trees which support climbers such as ivy Hedera helix, which provide a degree of concealment. These boxes typically attract robin, blackbird and spotted flycatcher Muscicapa striata; and A mixture of more specialised nest boxes should be placed on retained trees and new buildings particularly in the western extent of the site and should include boxes for stock dove, kestrel, swallow, house sparrow and swift Appropriate enhancement and management of hedgerows will create thick structures with dense bases to help protect nesting birds from predation. Structural diversity of hedgerows will be J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

62 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr encouraged through ing of standard trees and implementation of a management regime (hedge laying or cutting) in order to increase the diversity of nesting birds. The buffered areas adjacent to hedgerows and areas of grassland under informal management should be ed with a species rich grassland mix, as these provide necessary seeds for seed specialists such as linnet and stock dove The construction work most likely to disturb and impact on nesting birds is the initial ground works, vegetation clearance and activities which result in noise and vibration. The following is recommended to be included within a CEMP: Removal of any vegetation suitable to support nesting birds will take place outside of the bird breeding season (March to August/September inclusive) to protect nesting birds and prevent an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; If vegetation is proposed for removal during the bird breeding season (March to August/September inclusive), it should first be inspected by a suitably qualified ecologist to ensure an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 is not committed. If an active nest is discovered, the vegetation containing the nest will remain in situ and an appropriate buffer stipulated by the ecologist adopted until the young have fledged; and The retained hedgerows and other woody nesting habitat should be buffered and protected with Heras fencing during construction to protect it from accidental damage or disturbance The proposed scheme will lead to a negligible short-term effect on the breeding bird assemblage with an overall minor positive effect in the medium to long term as the new habitat provision mature. Great Crested Newts 4.57 The GCN is fully protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Schedule 2 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) making it a European Protected Species It is an offence to: capture, kill, disturb or injure great crested newts (intentionally or recklessly); damage or destroy a breeding or resting place (intentionally or recklessly); disturb a great crested newt while it s in a structure or place of shelter or protection (intentionally or recklessly); obstruct access to their resting or sheltering places (intentionally or recklessly); and possess, sell, control or transport live or dead great crested newts, or parts of great crested newts They are also a species of principal importance in England under Section 41 NERC Act (2006) and a European Protected Species. In addition, GCN is a Priority Species within the Essex BAP. The lifecycle of GCN means they spend a considerable amount of their time on land foraging, commuting and hibernating No of GCN have been identified within 1km of the site, and the only suitable breeding habitat (P1) onsite was found to be absent of GCN during presence/likely absence surveys. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

63 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 4.61 Five ponds (P3, P4, P5, P6 and P7) have been identified within 250m of the site, however, access was only permitted to ponds P4 and P6, where presence/likely absence surveys were undertaken on P4, with no GCN recorded. A low population and moderate population of smooth newts were found in ponds P1 and P4, respectively. These species are afforded protection from sale only under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) 34. As such, there is no statutory constraint to development in relation to this species Discussions were initially held with the owner of pond P3, where it was mentioned that they had some newt species but were not aware of GCNs being present, they also mentioned that their land was managed as a nature reserve. Access to the pond was later refused, so no surveys were undertaken. This pond is approximately 10m from the Application Site. There were no of GCN within the local area; and during surveys of pond P1 and during the habitats surveys for reptiles, where it would be expected if GCN were present in their life stages that they might utilise the artificial refugia, no GCN were recorded. Based on the evidence available it is, suggested that GCN are absent from the area In the unlikely event that GCN are present in Pond P3, then the majority of the immediate suitable habitat with the Application Site near the possible commuting distance for GCN, will be retained and enhanced. The immediate 100m radius of the pond will result in minimal losses in accordance with the latest framework plan; areas over 250m would include areas of arable land, which are suboptimal habitats for the life-stage of this species. Research published by Natural England 35 suggests that GCNs rarely move further than m from ponds/waterbodies, this research also suggests: at distances greater than m, capture and exclusion operations will hardly ever be appropriate. These recommendations are broadly consistent with findings in literature, since although a maximum routine migratory range has been estimated at approximately 250m from a breeding pond (Franklin, 1993: Oldham and Nicholson, 1986; Jehle, 2000), Jehle (2000) determined a zone of 63m, within which 95% of summer refuges were located. In addition, following the breeding season, (Jehle and Arntzen, 2000) recorded 64% of newts within 20m of the pond edge As the habitats around the Pond P3, have been classified by the owner as a nature reserve this would suggest that they are optimal for GCN should they be present. Also the immediate habitats within the Application Site that back onto Pond P3 also contain more suitable grassland habitats, thus if GCN were present they would potentially be unlikely to commute between the 20-63m recorded during the Natural England research, where suitable habitat is present. This therefore means that if GCN are present they would not be significantly affected by the loss of the habitats outside of these known commuting distances Ponds P5 and P7 were located approximately 70m south-west and 182m west from the site, respectively. P5 was separated from the site by Church Street and both ponds appear to be surrounded by scrub and hedgerows, providing optimal habitat within close vicinity, which are likely to be used during life stages, if newts were present. Therefore, if GCN were present within these ponds, it is considered unlikely that they would cross areas of hardstanding and amenity grassland to access the site, particularly as there is limited breeding habitat and 34 Act of Parliament, (1981). The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), London: HMSO 35 Cresswell, W. & Whitw orth, R An assessment of the efficiency of capture techniques and the value of different habitats for great crested newts. English Nature Research Reports 576. English Nature, Peterborough. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

64 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr habitats. With the above literature in mind, if GCNs are present in ponds P5 and/or P7, it is considered unlikely that they would commute to the site Owing to the suitability of the ponds and/ or presence of barriers separating the site from the ponds, it is considered that GCN do not pose a statutory constraint to the proposed development. Hazel Dormice 4.67 No hazel dormouse have been provided by Essex Field Club or Essex Wildlife Trust within 1km of the application boundary. During surveys there was no evidence to suggest that this species was present. Reptiles 4.68 All common reptile species, including slow worm, common lizard and grass snake are partially protected under Section 9(1) and 9(5) of Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). This legislation protects these animals from: Intentional killing and injury; and Selling, offering for sale, possessing or transporting for the purpose of sale or publishing advertisements to buy or sell a protected species This partial protection does not directly protect the habitat of these reptile species. Where these animals are present on land that is to be affected by development, the implications of legislation are that providing that killing can reasonably be avoided then an operation is legal. This requires that: the animals must be protected from injury or killing; mitigation should be provided to maintain the conservation status of the species; and following operations the population should be monitored All common reptile species, including common lizard, are species of principal importance under section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) and a UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) priority species for England Presence/likely absence surveys recorded a single adult grass snake on the western boundary. In order to avoid injury to reptiles during site clearance and construction, it is recommended that a period of supervised passive displacement will be undertaken, which pushes reptiles into surrounding habitat, further details will be provided in the CEMP, but this will involve two cuts; the first to 200mm and the second 1-2 hours later to 50mm in a westerly direction pushing any reptiles into surrounding habitats, away from the construction area. The western areas of the proposed development will form the largest extend of GI, so the reptile population can be retained in this area with only temporary removal to facilitate GI creation Passive displacement will be undertaken during the active period for reptiles, between late-march to early-october, during suitable weather conditions, when the daytime temperatures are above 10 C. All suitable habitats that are to be retained will be fenced off, to prevent machinery or materials being moved within this area which may cause injury or death to reptiles The proposals will provide enhanced opportunities for reptiles, particularly with incorporation of unmanaged hedgerow buffers, new hedgerow ing and creation of new features such as J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

65 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr species-rich tussock grassland and attenuation. Additional native shrub and tree ing as well as sympathetic management of the grassland will ensure the mosaic of vegetative structures provides basking and foraging opportunities. Wood/scrub piles would also be created to provide cover and hibernation features. In addition, a habitat buffer is proposed along each boundary, with a large buffer along the western boundary, which will consist of wide strips of tussock grassland and scrub habitats, maintaining linkages. Riparian Mammals 4.74 Otters are fully protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Schedule 2 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) making it a European Protected Species It is an offence to: capture, kill, disturb or injure otters (intentionally or recklessly) damage or destroy a breeding or resting place (intentionally or recklessly) disturb an otter while it s in a structure or place of shelter or protection (intentionally or recklessly) obstruct access to their resting or sheltering places (intentionally or recklessly) possess, sell, control or transport live or dead otters, or parts of otters 4.76 The water vole receives full legal protection through inclusion in Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (19810 as amended). Legal protection makes it an offence to intentionally kill, injure or take a water vole; possess or control alive or dead water vole, or any part of a water vole; intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any structure or place which water voles use for shelter or protection or disturb water voles while they are using such a place; and sell, offer for sale or advertise for live or dead water voles Otter and water vole are both listed as species of principal importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006). In addition, Otters are a priority species within the Essex BAP A riparian survey identified an old otter spraint on a pipe within the stream on the western boundary (S1 on Figure 2, Phase 1 Plan), with footprints found further downstream. As a part of the mitigation and habitat enhancement measures within the site, the stream will be buffered, with the adjacent vegetation managed and enhanced to provide conditions suitable for use by riparian s, so that the existing population can be supported and sustained. A wooden post and rail fence and structural shrub ing will be installed along the western boundary to provide protection from resident and dog encroachment/disturbance There was no evidence of water voles within the site or within the stream. Therefore, it is not considered that water vole or otter will cause a constraint to the proposals as the favourable conservation status of these species will be maintained. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

66 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr Other Species West European Hedgehog 4.80 The West European Hedgehog is partially protected under Schedule 6 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) and the Wild Mammals Protection Act (1996), and is listed as a species of principal importance under NERC (2006). This makes it an offence to: deliberately or intentionally kill a hedgehog without a licence; or trap a hedgehog without a licence During the desk study, a single record of west European hedgehog was returned within 1km of the site Hedgehogs are a generalist species and require large areas of contiguous habitat. Threats to hedgehog include loss of habitat, reduced habitat quality, and habitat fragmentation. Hedgerows can provide food, shelter from predators and can be important for nesting sites during hibernation. They are also vital corridors facilitating movement The loss of small sections of hedgerows H3, H4 and H5 will have a negligible impact on hedgehogs as the matrix of gardens and green spaces in towns and cities can support the highest densities of hedgehogs 37. Residential garden fences should have small holes cut at the bottom (approximately 13cm x 13cm 38 ) in order to keep connectivity and enable free movement for this species. Hedgerow highway signs can be purchased from the People s Trust for Endangered Species which will advise residents why there are holes present and will help encourage them to keep them open. 36 Henry Johnson, (2015) Conservation Strategy for West-European Hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) in the United Kingdom ( ) People s Trust for Endangered Species (PTES) 37 Hubert, P., Julliard, R., Biagianti, S. & Marie-Lazarine, P. (2011) Ecological factors driving the higher hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus) density in an urban area compared to the adjacent rural area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 103, Hedgehog Street [ONLINE] Available at w w.hedgehogstreet.org/pages/link-your-garden.html J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

67 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 5.0 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 5.1 The application site comprises a large arable field and semi-improved grassland fields, the majority of which were horse grazed, bound by hedgerows, a stream, broad-leaved woodland and scrub; with dry ditches along the boundaries of the site. 5.2 Fourteen hedgerows were present throughout the site, one of which (H4) was classified as important under the Hedgerow Regulations, with the majority of the remaining hedgerows being habitats of principle importance under NERC Act (2006). A small section of this hedgerow will be removed to facilitate access to separate development parcels. An application to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) will be required prior to any removal. The arable field, heavily grazed horse paddocks and associated field margins were found to be of low intrinsic and conservation importance, with no rare or notable species recorded. 5.3 Ten trees with bat potential were recorded in site, all of which will be adequately buffered by GI, with the exception of two trees (T25 and T27) within hedgerow H4. An aerial inspection was undertaken on these trees and found the features to offer negligible potential to support roosting bats. Monthly bat surveys have identified low numbers common and widespread bat species using the proposed site, with the majority of activity recorded being that of common and soprano pipistrelle bats around the peripheries. Barbastelle bats (Annex II species) have been recorded in low numbers, total of 52 over eleven surveys, these were utilising the hedgerows bisecting the southern half of the site, which link to offsite woodlands. Barbastelles are known to be in the wider area and with the presence of broadleaved woodland and a stream within the vicinity of the site, it is not surprising that they were recorded. It is envisaged that the GI proposals will retain dark corridors to ensure continued and future navigational and foraging routes to maintain the favourable conservation status of this species, and provide benefits for the local bat population. 5.4 Six probable or possible breeding notable NERC S41, BoCC Red and BoCC Amber listed species were recorded on site, which included skylark, house sparrows, yellowhammer, starling, song thrush and dunnock. The retention and enhancements of hedgerows, and creation of new breeding habitat, along with provision of nest boxes will ensure continued use of the site by local bird populations. 5.5 There were two ponds onsite, one was dry and the other had no GCN present. Five waterbodies were identified within a 250m radius of the site; however these were considered to either be sufficiently isolated from the site or surrounded by optimal habitat suggesting it would be unlikely that GCN would commute to site. Surveys undertaken on Pond P1 within the site and pond P4 approximately 60m east of site, found no GCN were present, but smooth newts were. It is concluded that there are no constraints to the development concerning amphibians. 5.6 The hedgerow, scrub and woodland habitats provide suitable habitat to support hazel dormice, although there were no provided in the local area. No evidence of dormice was found over the course of the survey period between April and October inclusive. 5.7 Suitable reptile habitat onsite was isolated to a few patches around the peripheries; during surveys a single adult grass snake was recorded in the west. A passive displacement exercise will be completed prior to the commencement of construction activities, where suitable habitats are to be lost. Where such habitats are to be retained these will be fenced off to avoid interference and damage. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

68 Ecological Appraisal - Land North of Church Street, Bocking fpcr 5.8 Otter evidence was confirmed along the stream adjacent to the western boundary, with a number of spraints recorded. No evidence of water vole was found. The stream will be retained, buffered and protected by the proposals, so riparian s are not considered to be a constraint to development. 5.9 Small sections of habitat loss will be required to facilitate vehicle and pedestrian access; these minor losses will be compensated for through the creation of new indigenous hedgerow and structural scrub/woodland ing. This will be supplemented by gapping up and appropriate management of existing, retained features. The existing green corridors will be enhanced through inclusion of landscape buffers designed to maintain discreet dark corridors for bat species, reptiles and invertebrates. In addition to focussing on the existing features of ecological importance, the overall landscaping scheme will include new tree, shrub and hedge ing, as well as attenuation designed with the intention of maximising biodiversity benefits that will be managed sensitively. The creation, enrichment and retention of habitats will have a minor/moderate beneficial effect at a site/local level in the long term, providing that future management is secured within an Ecological Management Strategy, which will be written once the final application is confirmed and submitted. J\\7700\7754\ECO\Eco App\Ecological Appraisal

69

70 Intentionally Blank

71 SI A This drawing is the property of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd and is issued on the condition it is not reproduced, retained or disclosed to any unauthorised person, either wholly or in part without written consent of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd. Ordnance Survey material - Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence Number: Key Site Boundary Scrub - scattered Tree with bat potential Broadleaved tree Broadleaved trees Stream Intact hedge - species-poor Fence Dry ditch Scrub - scattered line Buildings Broadleaved woodland - semi-natural Bare ground Standing water Scrub - dense/continuous SI SI A Other tall herb and fern - ruderal Poor semi-improved grassland Cultivated/disturbed land - arable SI SI A Static Detectors Static detector locations A - May 2017 B & C - June 2017 D & E - July 2017 F & G - August 2017 H & I - September 2017 J & K - October 2017 Gladman Developments Ltd. Land North of Church Street Bocking PHASE 1 HABITAT PLAN FPCR Environment and Design Ltd, Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby, DE74 2RH t: f: e: mail@fpcr.co.uk w: masterplanning environmental assessment landscape design urban design ecology architecture arboriculture B:\GIS Projects\7754 Bocking\QGIS 2.14\Plans\Phase 1 plans\7754- E-02 Phase 1 Habitat Plan scale 1:2,250 drawing / figure number Figure 2 issue LV/PJP 24/11/2017 date 7754-E-01

72 Intentionally Blank

73

74 Intentionally Blank

75

76 Intentionally Blank

77

78 Intentionally Blank

79

80 Intentionally Blank

81

82 Intentionally Blank

83

84 Intentionally Blank

85

86 Intentionally Blank

87

88 Intentionally Blank

89