Health & Management / Industries Managing Wetlands for Wildlife / List of hyperlinked Techniques & Protocols:
< > Evaluating a site proposed for integrating sound conservation into the development or management of a site

Introduction and General Information

The following is taken directly from "Wetlands, Industry and Wildlife - a manual of principles and practice" with the kind permission of The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust. (Chapter 3 - Deciding what to do).

"[The stage after investigation] is to evaluate the site. What, for instance, is the significance of the wildlife that has been found using the site? Species and habitats which are rare in a local, regional or national context need to be identified.

The implications of the various potential constraints that have come to light also need to be considered. What, for instance, is the potential of the site for attracting wildlife? Such questions need to be given careful consideration before any proposals are pursued. The following paragraphs outline some of the factors that can have a great bearing on wetland creation and enhancement, but which are all too often given insufficient consideration.

1) The physical and chemical environment. Assessment of the soils, water supply, hydrology and water quality will be necessary in order to determine:

a) the ease with which areas of wetland can be created on a site;
b) the nutrient levels likely to be found in a wetland;
c) other characteristics, such as salinity, of the water.

This information will indicate what wildlife a wetland is likely to support and/or what measures might be required to make the water quality and regime suitable for a particular group of wildlife. See Chapter 5 (Chapter 5 - Water: chemistry and quality).

2) Geographical location. Perhaps not surprisingly, all conservation objectives are not applicable to all parts of the UK. For example, the species assemblages associated with wetlands in northwest Scotland, such as bog pools, are significantly different from comparable habitats in southeast England. One should, therefore, expect different management objectives for this habitat in these two locations. While some species may be absent from an area simply because of lack of suitable habitat, the distribution of many species is dictated by climate and/or their dispersal ability. It is, therefore, important to consider the location of a particular site and the species that realistically could occur there.

An industrial example is provided by the sugar factories at Allscott in Shropshire and Cantley in Norfolk which both employ large areas of lagoons with reedbeds. Cantley regularly attracts nesting Bearded Tits and hunting Marsh Harriers, owing to the fact that it lies within the main breeding range for these species. By contrast, the most important reedbed bird species found at Allscott is the far more ubiquitous Reed Warbler. In nature conservation terms the reedbeds at Cantley are, therefore, of greater significance than those at Allscott owing, ultimately, to their location.

3) Proximity to other sites and habitats. There are a number of questions that should be answered when considering a site in the context of both its immediate and local areas.

a) Is the local area of importance for a particular wetland community or species? If so, is it possible to accommodate this interest on the site and, therefore, strengthen that local value? The closer two similar habitats are to one another, the greater the likelihood of species colonising from one to the other.
b) Are there adjoining habitats of particular conservation value? Is it possible to use the site to enhance this value? In general, the larger the area of a particular habitat, the more likely it is to support specialist species associated with that habitat, and the more viable the populations of a particular species are likely to be. It may therefore be appropriate to encourage the important habitat to spread, or to encourage habitats that are complementary to that habitat, including non-wetland habitats such as woodland or grassland.
c) Does the surrounding area offer habitats that complement those on or proposed for the site? Many largely aquatic animals are dependent upon, or at least influenced by, the adjacent terrestrial habitats: scrub provides perches and shelter from the wind for flying insects; newts feed in long grass and hibernate under soil or stones; Wigeon and Coot graze on areas of short grass adjacent to open water. If a site is surrounded by extensive undeveloped land it may be helpful to consider how this can be used in the design of any new wildlife features.
d) Is it possible to link areas of similar habitat together? Corridors along which animals and plants can migrate are extremely valuable. Streams and ditches offer suitable corridors for many species of wetland wildlife.

4) The size of the wetlands. The size of a wetland is one factor determining the number and range of species which potentially can be accommodated. All species require a minimum area of suitable habitat in order to sustain a viable population. Although such minimum areas have rarely been set down, it is none the less possible to say in broad terms what types of wildlife might be found in what size wetlands Isolated ponds of less than 0.5 ha, for example, can provide valuable habitat for dragonflies and amphibians. By contrast, such ponds attract a very limited range of waterbirds, few of which are likely to breed there. In order to maximise the conservation value of such ponds, it will normally be more appropriate to design and manage them for amphibians and dragonflies rather than waterbirds. All too often people try to accommodate too many species within a nature area. Few sites are large enough to justify targeting a wide cross-section of wildlife; it is far better to design a wetland around a realistic community rather than a maximum variety.

5) Presence of notable species. Normally, priority should be given to retaining sufficient suitable habitat to support any notable species already present on a site, before attempting to encourage further species. If a species has already been recorded, there is a good chance that the site is already suitable for it. The restoration scheme for the land adjacent to Little Bradley Pond (see Feature 16.4 (Chapter 16 - Reclaiming industrial land)), for example, made a priority of creating further habitat for the existing exceptional dragonfly community, rather than trying to encourage additional species. If there is the opportunity to create wetlands that are likely to be colonised by rare or threatened species, provided they are appropriate to the area, this is preferable to producing a general wetland that is likely to be colonised only by common species. This does not necessarily mean creating a wilderness; the unusual properties of some industrial wastes such as PFA occasionally provide opportunities for rare plants (see 13.2.4 (Chapter 13 - Ash (PFA) storage)). A company will gain greater credibility and publicity where it makes a real contribution to nature conservation by, for instance, encouraging threatened wildlife.

6) The ability to manage a site. It is most important to make an assessment of the resources available to manage a site. There is little point in prescribing a superb wetland if its interest will depend upon a level of management that is never likely to be achieved. In general, aim to make management as simple as possible (see 8.6 (Chapter 8 - Other aspects of wetland design)). Clarify who is likely to carry out the work and how much they can realistically achieve. In some cases it will be possible to achieve the necessary management for wildlife simply by manipulating an existing maintenance regime, e.g. adjusting the grass mowing cycle. The ease with which management can be carried out will be influenced by the access to the site (is it, for instance, possible to use a tractor to carry out all the mowing?) and the range of tools and equipment that is available. It is a common misconception that there are many people available to manage a site on a voluntary basis; the truth is that it requires a dedicated, trained individual or group to develop and maintain a successful volunteer workforce.

7) Operational constraints. Industrial operations can have a major bearing on the wildlife that can realistically be attracted to a wetland. How, for instance, do industrial processes affect the supply and quality of water available? The sugar manufacturing process, for example, is highly seasonal, and this largely dictates the amount of water to be found in the treatment lagoons at a particular time of year. Operational activities may also have indirect effects; noisy processes, both on and adjacent to a site, may make parts of that site unsuitable for attracting certain birds and mammals. Any objectives and proposals for wildlife must recognise such constraints.

8) Legal constraints. There are various pieces of legislation which could influence the design and/or functioning of a wetland. The following list highlights some aspects that will need consideration and consultation with outside bodies. If at all possible it is best to discuss initial ideas informally before investing time in drawing up detailed plans.

a) Reservoirs Act. Wetlands contained by dams or embankments may require a licence under this Act. NRA can give guidance.
b) Discharge Consent. If a new wetland is allowed to drain into an existing watercourse then consent will be required from the NRA.
c) Drainage Consent. If any works are likely to affect drainage in the local area, then consent will again be required from the NRA.
d) Health & Safety regulations. These will influence who can legally carry out the required management; for instance, herbicides must only be used by contractors holding the relevant certificates. There may also be implications for allowing visitors onto a site and the safeguards that need to be implemented.
e) Planning regulations. It is always sensible to discuss proposals with the local planning authority. New buildings and certain changes in land-use will require planning permission.
f) The Wildlife and Countryside Act. The Act provides most of our wildlife legislation, parts of which may be relevant to site development or management. For example, plants can only be uprooted with the permission of the landowner and a licence is required to move or handle various protected species. It is illegal to disturb most nesting birds, and schedules for major works should be arranged accordingly. Further information about the Act should be obtained from the statutory conservation agencies (see Appendix 10
(Appendix 10 - Addresses of relevant organisations)).

9) Accommodating the public. A company will gain PR benefits if it can demonstrate to the public that it is actively encouraging wildlife. Whether, and to what extent, the public can be allowed on a site will in part be influenced by its location and layout. If, for instance, a site is very remote there may be little demand for such facilities. Where a road or public footpath skirts a site, relatively little work might be required to provide public access (see 8.4 (Chapter 8 - Other aspects of wetland design))."

(B93)

Published Guidelines linked in Wildpro

Return to top of page