bat activity transect survey report - · pdf filebat activity transect survey report _____ the...
TRANSCRIPT
Registered in England & Wales No. 5574199 Registered Office: 225 Bailbrook Lane, Bath, Somerset BA1 7AA
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Bat Activity Transect Survey
Report __________________________________________________________________________________________
The Land next to Quakers Walk, Devizes, Wiltshire
for
Society of Merchant Venturers ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Summer 2014
215 London Road East,
Batheaston, Bath BA1 7NB
Phone: 01225 858 999
Mobile: 07932 143 753
Email: [email protected]
SIMECOLOGY LTD Wildlife Surveys and Ecological Consultancy
215 London Road East,
Batheaston, Bath BA1 7NB
Phone: 01225 858 999
Mobile: 07932 143 753
Email: [email protected]
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
2
Document Number:
BTS-191214a-V001
Date of Issue:
19th December 2014
Issue Number and Revision Details:
1
Main Contributor:
Steve Maguire
Issued By: Approved by:
Steve Maguire Simeon Smith
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
3
Contents
1. Summary .......................................................... 5
2. Introduction ...................................................... 6
2.1. Brief ................................................................................ 6
2.2. Legislation ...................................................................... 6
2.3. Survey details ................................................................ 6
2.4. Site Details ..................................................................... 7
3. Methodology .................................................... 8
4. Results ............................................................. 9
5. Interpretation of Results .................................. 11
6. Recommendations........................................... 12
6.1. Retention/planting of boundary features ..................... 12
6.2. Planting of standards .................................................... 12
6.3. Careful consideration of lighting within all phases of
development .................................................................. 13
6.4. Artificial bat roosts (enhancements) ............................ 13
7. Survey Limitations ........................................... 13
8. References ....................................................... 15
9. Figure 1: Survey area & transect route ........... 16
10. Figure 2: Graph of bat activity ......................... 17
11. Figure 3: Aerial image of site ........................... 18
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
4
12. Figure 4: Bat Distribution ................................ 19
13. Appendices: Legislative context and statutory
designations .................................................... 21
i. Legislative context ......................................................... 21
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
5
1. Summary Simecology Ltd was commissioned by Smith’s Gore, on behalf of the Society of
Merchant Venturers, to carry out three bat detector transect activity surveys in the
summer of 2014 as an update to the original surveys carried out in summer
2009.
Three bat detector transect surveys were undertaken on the evenings of 11th
June, 29th July and 31st August 2014. These were carried out by experienced bat
surveyor, Simeon Smith (NE: 20131443).
The surveys were carried out under optimal conditions following the standard
methodology (BCT 2012).
The following species were recorded using the site (in decreasing order of total
number of passes recorded); Common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus, Serotine
Eptesicus serotinus, Soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus, Myotis bats Myotis
spp., Lesser horseshoe Rhinolophus hipposideros, Brown long-eared Plecotus
auritus and Noctule Nyctalus noctule.
Common pipistrelle bats accounted for approximately 68% of all bat passes
recorded.
The majority of bat activity was recorded along the tree line of Quakers Walk itself.
The rare Lesser horseshoe bat was recorded utilising the site which would
suggest the habitat at this point (along QW) is of sufficient quality, and the light
levels are of a low enough level, to support this light shy species.
A series of measures have been recommended and will be given in greater detail
in the subsequent Ecological Method Statement.
The following features should be included:
o Bat and bird boxes on some/all of the dwellings as an enhancement
o Significant boundary features such as trees and hedgerows should be
retained where possible, with new mixed species native hedgerows
planted where appropriate.
o Common lime trees should be planted along the east and south facing
boundaries to provide opportunities for bats (and other wildlife).
o A sensitive lighting strategy should be put in place, especially along the
western boundary (35m buffer zone).
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
6
2. Introduction
2.1. Brief
Simecology Ltd was commissioned by Smith’s Gore, on behalf of the Society of Merchant
Venturers, to carry out three bat detector transect activity surveys in the summer of 2014
as an update to the original surveys carried out in summer 2009. These original surveys
were carried out following the recommendations of an Extended Phase One habitat
survey carried out in May 2009 by Simecology Ltd:
“It will be necessary to conduct a minimum of three bat activity surveys under
appropriate atmospheric conditions at appropriate times of the year predominantly
along boundaries B1 and B2 [the tree line of Quakers Walk] and to a lesser extent along
boundaries B4 and B5 [the northern end of the eastern site boundary]. These surveys
both will help inform any potential negative impacts a development of this site may have
upon local bat populations and help guide any necessary mitigation measures.”
2.2. Legislation All species of bat and their breeding sites or resting places (roosts) are protected under
Regulation 41 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and
section 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).
It is an offence for anyone to intentionally kill, injure or handle a bat, to possess a bat
(whether live or dead), disturb a roosting bat, or sell or offer a bat for sale without a
licence. It is also an offence to damage, destroy or obstruct access to any place used by
bats for shelter, whether they are present or not.
2.3. Survey details A route was chosen so as to achieve the greatest coverage of features with minimal
overlap (to avoid false peaks in activity). Considering both the current state of the site,
and the nature of the previous surveys, it was decided that three transects carried out
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
7
across the 2014 survey season should provide sufficient data to assess how bats utilise
the site.
The following table shows the start/finish times, sunset times and weather conditions for
each survey event.
12th June 29th July 31st August
Start Finish Start Finish Start Finish
Time 21.24 00.24 21.00 00.00 19.57 22.46
Temp (oC) 20 15 20.8 19 16 14
Cloud
(Oktas) 0 1 7 8 0 0
Wind (Bft) 1 0-1 1 1 0 0
Rainfall 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sunset
time 21.24 21.00 19.57
2.4. Site Details
The site consists of a large arable field which has been recently cultivated. There is a
recently completed residential development to the north.
Situated on level ground with a gentle south westerly aspect the site lies on the northern
edge of Devizes town. The surrounding landscape is predominantly one of residential
properties to the south, amenity land (sports pitches) to the east and south-east, with
arable farmland and an associated hedgerow network to the north and west. An area of
allotment gardens, lying on the northern side of the Kennet and Avon Canal, are present
immediately south of the site.
The Kennet and Avon canal lies 100m to the south of the site and a small west-flowing
stream rises amidst dense woodland approximately 150 m west of the site boundary.
On the western edge of the site, the boundary is formed by a line of mature planted
deciduous trees with some younger planted deciduous trees and small numbers of self-
sown scrub species. This line of trees forms the eastern edge of the Quaker’s Walk path
and is mirrored by a very similar feature on the western side of the path. The tall mature
trees here are a significant landscape feature.
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
8
The eastern boundaries of the site consist mostly of post and rail fencing with young
planted deciduous trees on the outside of the fences (i.e. not within the site); rank
grasses and tall herb vegetation are associated with these fence lines. On the southern
edge there is a diffuse boundary with the allotment gardens; rank grasses and tall herbs
predominate here but there are some young planted trees along the western half of this
boundary. A concrete post with wire mesh fence forms the western fifth of this southern
boundary.
3. Methodology Three bat detector transect surveys were undertaken on the evenings of 11th June, 29th
July and 31st August 2014. These were carried out by experienced bat surveyor, Simeon
Smith (NE: 20131443). The visits consisted of the surveyor walking a set route using a
broadband bat detector (with in-built recording device) to record bat echolocations as
‘bat passes’ and to note the bats’ behaviour. As a bat species cannot always be reliably
identified using only a social call, social calls are recorded and documented during the
survey but are not presented in the final data as representing a ‘bat pass’.
Independent ‘bat passes’ are recorded when one minute or more elapses between
periods of echolocation (a bat pass within the same minute is assumed to emanate from
the same individual, unless more than one bat is seen in the field, more than one
species is confirmed from the recordings or two bats (overlapping calls) are confirmed
from the recordings).
Visual conditions during surveys do not always render it possible to determine whether
independent bat passes from the same species are emitted from one bat which is
circling the area (whilst travelling sufficient distance to remain away from the bat
detector for at least one minute), or from different bats. Thus whilst bat passes are a
useful tool in comparing activity between similar sites, it should be understood that they
provide only a relative, rather than an absolute, index.
Bat detector transect activity surveys are carried out in accordance with the standard
methodology (Bat Conservation Trust, 2012). Transects are designed so that they can be
completed at least once within three hours on foot at a steady pace. The route is chosen
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
9
so that all structures and areas affected by the proposed development or works, which
are of potential importance to bats (for example foraging and commuting areas), are
surveyed. Thus on occasions it may be necessary to survey outside the survey site
boundaries, for example if lighting is anticipated to overspill onto other areas or if a
designated site is expected to be affected. The level of survey effort (in terms of
frequency or repetition and number of surveyors) is determined by several factors,
including: the area of the site and the potential value of its habitats for bats; the regional
location of the site; the quality or designation of adjacent habitats; the sites’ connectivity
with adjacent habitats; and the species of bat known in the area (in this case the
previous survey effort at the site was also a deciding factor). Point counts, where the
surveyor remains stationary for five minutes, are chosen strategically along the transect
route to incorporate potentially good bat foraging habitats with areas where commuting
bats are likely to be detected. Figure 1 displays the transect route, directions and the
location of all point count stops.
Bat detection equipment used was an Elekon Batlogger with real time recording. All calls
were recorded onto an SD card in the Batlogger. The echolocation recordings were
subsequently analysed using BatSound (version 4.14) software according to the
parameters and summary statistics on bat echolocation calls given by Russ (1999,
2012) and Parsons and Jones (2000).
4. Results A visual comparison of the results for each species has been given in the chart in Figure
2. A series of images illustrating the general distribution of bats during each surveys
event is given in Figure 4.
Bats were recorded during all three of the survey events (June, July and August) and
showed relatively consistent levels of activity throughout. At least seven species of bat
were recorded using the site for foraging, feeding, socialising and commuting. In
decreasing order of total number of passes recorded, these species are:
Common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus
Serotine Eptesicus serotinus
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
10
Soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus
Myotis bats Myotis spp.
Lesser horseshoe Rhinolophus hipposideros
Brown long-eared Plecotus auritus.
Noctule Nyctalus noctula
N.B It is often not possible to identify Myotis bats to species level as there is significant
overlap in the calls of bats in this genus. Also, although it is similarly difficult to
determine whether the long-eared bat was in fact a Brown long-eared, and not the much
rarer Grey long-eared, in this instance the site does not fall within the current range of
the Grey long-eared bat and as such the long-eared bat recorded is assumed to be of the
Brown long-eared variety.
Of all the bats recorded on this site the most commonly recorded species was the
Common pipistrelle having 68.37% of the total number of passes (67 passes out of a
total of 98). Serotine and Soprano pipistrelle were next with 14.29% and 10.2%
respectively. This was followed by the Myotis sp. bats with approximately 2% and the
Brown long-eared, Lesser horseshoe and Noctule bats all with around 1%.
Of the 67 total passes by Common pipistrelle bats, 86.57% was foraging behaviour and
13.43% was of commuting. The other species recorded tended to show higher levels of
foraging activity as well. Of the total passes recorded by all bats, 78.57% was of foraging
behaviour and 21.43% of commuting.
Figure 2 illustrates the relative activity of each of the recorded species. The mean
number of bat passes heard per survey was 32.3 passes. This equates to approximately
0.19 bat passes per minute (approx. average survey time – 2 hrs 50 mins), although
note that since a bat pass within the same minute is assumed to emanate from the
same individual, the actual number of pass rates would be higher than this value.
Geographically, the arrangement of activity across the site tended to favour the wooded
tree-line and scrubby margins along Quakers Walk itself with the majority of commuting
and foraging taking place along here (see Figure 4). A smaller proportion of the activity
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
11
was recorded around the eastern side of the site (Point counts 4, 5, 6 & 7); however the
majority of this was foraging activity of common pipistrelle. Almost all of the Common
pipistrelle, Soprano pipistrelle, Serotine and Myotis activity was recorded around the
Quakers Walk tree line. The single Brown long-eared bat was recorded at PC4, the Lesser
horseshoe just north of PC8 and the Noctule at PC6.
5. Interpretation of Results Of all the activity recorded it is significant, and not surprising, to find that the most
frequently recorded species was that of Common pipistrelle with the most well used area
being the line of mature trees along Quakers Walk itself (see Figure 4). Other more
common species such as Soprano pipistrelle and Serotine were recorded but in far fewer
number than the Common pipistrelle, being around a fifth of the Common pipistrelle’s
total passes for each of these species.
It is unsurprising that the highest proportion of the activity observed at the site was of
Common pipistrelle, it being the most common and widespread species in the British
Isles, however; the overall distribution of activity and the number of species recorded
was significant. Rarer species such as Lesser horseshoe could indicate that the habitat
quality, at least along Quakers Walk itself, is of a high enough standard to support this
species (Figure 4 image A). This would also suggest that light levels along Quakers Walk
must be sufficiently low enough to support this light-shy species.
Overall the site does provide commuting and foraging for at least seven species of bat, a
relatively high number considering the size of the site and the relatively average overall
quality of the habitat. It should however be noted that the majority of the site has
relatively low habitat value (for bats) but that the line of mature trees and scrubby
understory along Quakers Walk on the western edge provides excellent habitat features
for bats, with rare species such as Barbastelle and Greater Horseshoe having been
recorded along here in the past.
To allow the site to continue to provide foraging and commuting opportunities for bats
once the development is complete it will be necessary to retain and, where possible,
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
12
enhance the existing features. The high quality of the habitat along Quakers Walk should
be safeguarded during the development with a suitable buffer between it and the
houses. The other boundary features towards the eastern side of the site should be
strengthened to provide increased connectivity as the change of use from agricultural to
residential will likely have a negative impact on whether bats continue to utilise the site.
There is opportunity here to not only retain and strengthen the existing features but to
enhance and expand the bat potential through implementation of a sensitive and
considerate landscaping plan and a well designed lighting strategy.
6. Recommendations This section is a summary of the various recommendations made in relation to bat
activity on the site. A more detailed strategy will be devised and issued as an Ecological
Method Statement which will provide specific measures to ensure the continued
provision of features for bats, and other wildlife, across the site following completion of
the proposed development.
6.1. Retention/planting of boundary features The Quakers Walk tree line (consisting mostly of mature Common Lime) will be retained
as it currently exists. Other significant standard trees and hedgerows should be retained
where possible to continue to provide opportunities for bats, and other wildlife, on the
site. New boundary features (such as mixed native species hedgerows) should be
included in the landscaping strategy of the new development.
6.2. Planting of standards The southern and eastern facing boundaries of the site should be planted with standard
trees to match the tree line along Quakers Walk. This will ensure that any
foraging/feeding opportunities which will inevitably be lost due to the development will
be compensated for via inclusion of this new connecting feature. Common lime should
be used to match, and expand, the existing habitat along QW.
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
13
6.3. Careful consideration of lighting within all phases
of development Bats are nocturnal creatures and as such lighting should be restricted in certain areas to
avoid potential disturbance due to light pollution. The western boundary of the
development (i.e. the built element next to the 35m buffer zone) should have limited or
(preferably) no lighting installed. If lighting is required then it should be low intensity, low
level lighting of either bollard type or, if wall mounted, should be fitted with appropriate
hoods or cowls to ensure no upward light spill. This section will have no vehicular traffic
and lighting would only be required for pedestrian access. This strip along the Quakers
Walk tree line should be maintained as a dark corridor, which will benefit not only bats
but all wildlife.
Lighting products now exist which can reduce the impact to wildlife and these should be
utilised in these areas. Lighting should be towards the red (warm) end of the spectrum
with negligible UV levels, such as the Phillips ClearField lighting technologies developed
in The Netherlands.
6.4. Artificial bat roosts (enhancements) Where possible, opportunities for wildlife should be enhanced across the site. Bat boxes
of an appropriate design should be incorporated into a number of dwellings in the
proposed development. Internally mounted bat tubes and soffit boxes could all be
utilised providing a range of roosting features across the site. A variety of bird nest boxes
could also be included to further enhance opportunities for birds, which could have been
impacted by the loss of habitat at the site following completion of the proposed works.
7. Survey Limitations These surveys give an index of the intensity with which bats use a site. They are not able
to provide absolute measures of the numbers of bats present. It is possible that
additional bat species use the site, but were not present on the nights of the surveys. In
particular, surveying in the spring and earlier summer, when bats first emerge from
hibernation and are making their way to maternity roosts, could well reveal different
patterns of use.
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
14
Where bats are present only in low numbers, the acoustic method may have failed to
detect them. This is a particular difficulty for species with quiet or highly directional calls
(such as long-eared Plecotus spp., Bechstein Myotis bechsteinii and horseshoe bats
Rhinolophus spp.). Equally, it is not always possible to distinguish species via the
acoustic method; for example there is some overlap between the peak frequency of calls
of the soprano pipistrelle and the common pipistrelle, and Myotis bats are not commonly
identified to species level on the basis of their echolocation calls as, again, they can have
overlapping parameters.
There are also inevitably confounding effects between location and time of night.
Walking the transect route repeatedly over the three hour period will have partially
overcome this limitation. A consistent transect route was used throughout the three
surveys to enable comparisons to be made between the same locations across the
season. Where overlaps in the transect route occur (routes never actually overlap but
sections will tend to ‘meet’ occasionally) there is the possibility of false hotspots being
assumed and as such the results of these surveys should be considered in this light.
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
15
8. References Bat Conservation Trust (2012). Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines 2nd Edition.
London: Bat Conservation Trust.
HM Government (1981). The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). London:
HMSO.
HM Government (2010). The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.
London: HMSO.
HM Government (2000). The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. London: HMSO.
Simecology Ltd (2009). Bat detector transect surveys. Quakers Walk, Devizes 2009.
Batheaston: Simecology Ltd.
Cover image: © Copyright Maurice Pullin and licensed for reuse under this Creative
Commons Licence. Online: http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2939897 [accessed:
04/12/14]
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
16
9. Figure 1: Survey area & transect route
Plan of the site showing the transect route, point counts (PC1, PC2 etc.) and the direction
in which the transect was carried out. The dark line from lower left to top middle is the
tree line along Quakers Walk. The Avon & Kennet Canal runs along the bottom.
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
17
10. Figure 2: Graph of bat activity
Chart showing the relative activity levels of each bat species recorded at the site during
the surveys. It can clearly be seen that there was a relatively constant level of bat activity
throughout the season.
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
18
11. Figure 3: Aerial image of site
Aerial image of the site highlighting its position in the wider landscape. The new
development on the adjoining land can clearly been seen to the north-east of the
highlighted area. The tree line along Quaker Walk can also be seen running SW to NE to
the left of the survey area, providing connectivity with the wooded area to the north and
the canal to the south.
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
19
12. Figure 4: Bat Distribution The data collected by the Elekon Batlogger during the three surveys includes GPS data
for each bat (or bats depending on what was recorded on each track) and as such can be
plotted on an appropriate mapping application to give an indication of distribution. The
following aerial images show distribution data for each survey event.
N.B. This data captures a moment in bat activity and relies on an accurate GPS fix at the
time the track (each track could contain calls from 2 or more bats) is recorded. These
images should therefore only be used to give an idea of distribution as opposed to an
absolute measure of where each individual bat was at a given time.
A - Transect survey: 12/06/14. Position of Lesser horseshoe bat shown in yellow.
LHS
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
20
B - Transect survey: 29/07/14.
C - Transect survey: 31/08/14. Position of Brown long-eared bat shown in yellow.
Long-eared
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
21
13. Appendices: Legislative context and
statutory designations
i. Legislative context This section provides a brief summary of British wildlife legislation. Specific details of
legislation for species present on site are provided in Section 2.2.
The Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended).
The main piece of legislation relating to nature conservation in Great Britain, which
transposes into British law the Berne, Bonn and RAMSAR Conventions, and the European
“Birds Directive” (drawn up by the European Community (EC) in response to the Berne
Convention). This legislation covers protection of wildlife (birds, other animals and
plants), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI’s) (with some SSSI’s also designated as
Special Protection Areas (SPA’s)), National Nature Reserves (NNR’s) and RAMSAR sites
(and also some other designations not strictly relevant to ecology, for example National
Parks and Public Rights of Way, which are beyond the scope of this report).
The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (The “Habitats
Regulations”).
The purpose of this legislation is to consolidate and update the original Conservation
(Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (“the 1994 Regulations”). The objective of the
Habitats Directive is to protect biodiversity through the conservation of natural habitats
and species of wild fauna and flora. The Directive lays down rules for the protection,
management and exploitation of such habitats and species. The Habitats Regulations
transpose the Habitats Directive in England, Wales and to a limited extent Scotland by
ensuring that activities are carried out in accordance with the requirements of the
Directive.
The Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act, 2000.
This legislation applies to England and Wales only. It increases protection for SSSI’s and
strengthens protection for threatened species. It also specifies that it is the duty of Local
Authorities to further the conservation of listed habitats and species (listed originally as
BTS-191214a-V001 Report date: December 2014 SIMECOLOGY LTD
22
UK BAP priority habitats and species but now covered by the UK Post-2010 Biodiversity
Framework).
The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act, 2006.
This legislation confers a legal duty on every public authority (including County, District
and Parish Councils) to conserve biodiversity. Section 40(1) of the Act says, ‘Every public
authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard so far as it is consistent with the
proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity.’ The duty
came into force on 1st October 2006.