the natural environment · 1.85 east of england 1,814 35,370 1.81 england 16,101 530,620 3.99 table...
TRANSCRIPT
The Forest Office, Maulden Wood,Nr Haynes West End, Beds MK45 3QTT: +44 (0)1234 743666F: +44 (0)1234 743667e: [email protected]
T: +44 (0)1234 743666 M: +44 (0)1234 743667e: [email protected]
To:Adventure,26-34 Liverpool Road,Luton,LU1 1RS
Richard WoolnoughDirector
The Forest Office, Maulden Wood, Nr Haynes West End, Beds MK45 3QTT: +44 (0)1234 743666 M: +44 (0)1234 743667e: [email protected] www.greensandtrust.org.uk
Veronika BaleEducation Officer
The Greensand TrustThe Forest Office, Maulden WoodHaynes West End, Bedfordshire MK45 3QTTel: 01234 743666Fax: 01234 743699www.greensandtrust.co.uk
w
The Forest Office, Maulden Wood, Nr Haynes West End, Beds MK45 3QTT: +44 (0)1234 743666 F: +44 (0)1234 743667 e: [email protected] www.greensandtrust.org.uk
Indicators of Sustainable Development in Bedfordshire March 2005
Produced by Sue Raven of the Greensand Trust for
Bedfordshi re County Counci l , March 2005
The Natural Environment
Contents Summary A. River and canal water quality Indicator 1 Percentage of length of rivers and canals of good quality Indicator 2 Percentage of length of rivers and canals of high nutrient status Indicator 3 Distribution of otters B. Condition of important wildlife & geological sites Indicator 4 Area of Sites of Special Scientific Interest and % in favourable condition Indicator 5 Area of County Wildlife Sites and % in favourable condition C. Condition of the wider countryside Indicator 6 Area of land under Countryside Stewardship agreements Indicator 7 Area of organic holdings Indicator 8 Area of woodland within Woodland Grant Scheme Indicator 9 Populations of wild birds D. Access to the countryside Indicator 10 Area of publicly accessible land managed for nature conservation per 1000 people Appendices 1.1 Notes on indicators suggested for possible future use – river flow rates & LERAPs 2.1 Details of Environment Agency’s General Quality Assessment Scheme 2.2 Environment Agency guidelines for the use of data 2.3 Chemical water quality data 2.4 Biological water quality data 2.5 Nutrient level data 3.1 Condition of Sites of Special Scientific Interest 3.2 Condition of County Wildlife Sites 4.1 Sites managed for nature conservation with public access 4.2 Bedfordshire details from Woodland Trust report ‘Space for People’
Summary Indicator 1 Percentage of length of rivers and canals of good quality In 2002, 57% of the length of rivers and canals in Bedfordshire was of good chemical quality; similar to that found in the East of England region but slightly lower than that seen for England overall. The increase in quality seen in Bedfordshire over the previous decade is more marked than that seen regionally and nationally. Indicator 2 Percentage of length of rivers and canals of high nutrient status In 2002, 77% of the length of the county’s rivers and canals had high nitrate concentrations and 95% had high phosphate concentrations; proportions that are slightly higher than those seen in the Anglian region and considerably higher than those seen for England as whole. Clear trends are difficult to identify. Indicator 3 Distribution of otters In 2003/04 positive signs of otters were found at 41% of sample sites in the county, a considerable increase since the previous survey in 1996/97 when positive signs were found at 29% of sites. The spread seen through the county’s waterways has also been seen regionally and nationally. Indicator 4 Area (ha) of Sites of Special Scientific Interest and % in favourable condition In 2004, 83% of the area of SSSI in the county was in favourable condition, up from 78% in 2001. This proportion is higher than the regional and national figures, however, it must be remembered that the percentage of the county’s area designated as SSSI is considerably lower than that seen in the region or England as a whole. Indicator 5 Area (ha) of County Wildlife Sites and % in favourable condition Between 2001 and 2004 the number of County Wildlife Sites monitored increased from 20 to 83. Of these 83 sites (22% of the total number within the county), 64% of their area was found to be in favourable condition. There are no equivalent regional or national figures. Indicator 6 Area (ha) of land under Countryside Stewardship agreements By 2003, there were 190 CSS agreements in the county covering an area of 2280ha; an increase in area of 78% since 2000. The proportion of the county’s land area under CSS agreements is similar to that seen in the East of England region but less than that found for England as a whole. At all scales uptake of the scheme has increased year on year. From 2000 to 2005, considerable increases were seen in the lengths of arable margins and hedgerows being managed under the scheme in the county. Indicator 7 Area (ha) of organic holdings By January 2004 there were 12 holdings registered as organic in the county, covering a total of 775ha, or 0.9% of the county’s agricultural land – a similar proportion to the East of England region but lower than that for England as a whole. This is an increase in the area of organic land in Bedfordshire of 9% since 2001. Indicator 8 Area (ha) of woodland within Woodland Grant Scheme Since 2002 the area of woodland receiving WGS in Bedfordshire has continued to increase although the precise figures could not be established. Payments for planting have declined since 1999/2000; those for planting conifers have now all but stopped. No equivalent regional or national figures are available. Indicator 9: Populations of wild birds Data from 30 common bird species suggests that in Bedfordshire there has been an increase in the proportion of species whose population size is declining between 1994 and 2003. This has also been seen at a national and regional scale but appears to be more marked in Bedfordshire. Indicator 10: Area (ha) of publicly accessible land managed for conservation per 1000 people In 2004 there was 6.3ha of publicly accessible land managed for nature conservation available per 1000 people in Bedfordshire; up from 5.6ha per 1000 people in 2002. The total area, 2436ha, represents 2% of the land area of the county. There are no equivalent regional or national figures. There was 0.77ha of LNR available per 1000 people.
A. River and canal water quality Background Information The Environment Agency’s General Quality Assessment [GQA] scheme monitors the chemical and biological quality and nutrient status of running water across England and Wales. In Bedfordshire all major rivers, canals and tributaries (a length of 236.4km) are covered by the GQA scheme and so it provides a good indication of the quality of running water throughout the county. Chemical quality is assessed on levels of dissolved oxygen, ammonia and biological oxygen demand – good indicators of the extent to which rivers are affected by the commonest types of pollution; sewage and the runoff and drainage from farms. Biological quality is assessed on the range of macro-invertebrates present in a stretch of water, compared with the number expected for the physical condition of that stretch. It gives a more integrated picture of the situation and can detect infrequently occurring pollution incidents that may be missed by the spot sampling techniques used in the chemical assessment. For both chemical and biological quality, stretches of rivers and canals are classified into six grades; Grade A (very good), Grade B (good), Grade C (fairly good), Grade D (fair), Grade E (poor) and Grade F (bad). To assess nutrient status, levels of nitrates and phosphates are monitored as these are the nutrients most likely to be directly influenced by human activities. Grades range from 1 (very low) to 6 (nitrates - very high, phosphates – excessively high). Unlike the chemical and biological grades these are descriptive and cannot simply be interpreted as good or bad. They reflect not only variation in agriculture and sewage, but local geology. A high level of phosphate (average concentration greater than 0.1mg/l) is that considered indicative of possible existing or future problems of eutrophication. A high level of nitrate (average concentration greater than 30mg/l) roughly corresponds with the limits used in the EC’s Drinking Water and Nitrate Directives. Further details of the GQA scheme, taken from the Environment Agency Public Water Quality Register, are given in Appendix 2.1. Source of data Data were obtained from the Environment Agency website [www.environment-agency.gov.uk] and also directly from the two regional offices covering Bedfordshire; Anglian and Thames. The most recent data available on the website were from 2002. All rivers and canals forming the county boundaries are included in the figures. Environment Agency guidelines for the use of the data are given in Appendix 2.2. Summary databases for the county prepared from the data supplied by the Environment Agency are given in Appendix 2.3 (chemical), Appendix 2.4 (biological) and Appendix 2.5 (nutrients).
Indicator 1 Percentage of length of rivers and canals of good quality County level In 2002, 57% of the length of rivers and canals in Bedfordshire was found to be of good chemical quality (grades A – B). 95% was of good or fair quality (grades A – D). Full details are given in Table 1.1 and shown on Map 1.1.
% of length of rivers and canals
Beds Borough
Mid Beds
South Beds
Luton
Borough
Beds
Beds & Luton
Chemical Grade A 0 4.60 0 0 2.22 2.14 B 53.41 55.93 51.88 0 54.35 52.36 C 34.09 21.33 17.22 100.00 24.89 27.64 D 7.45 17.08 16.75 0 13.77 13.26 E 5.05 1.06 14.15 0 4.77 4.60 F 0 0 0 0 0 0
% of good quality
53.41
60.53
51.88
0
56.57
54.50
% of good or fair quality
94.95 98.94 85.85 100.00 95.23 95.40
Table 1.1: Details of chemical water quality at county and district level, 2002 In the past, biological data has been available only every 5 years, however, from 2002, the Environment Agency aims to report on it annually. To date biological data for all sample stretches within the county are not available to download from their website for 2002 however the Agency has supplied a map illustrating the data [Map 1.2]. District level In order to break down data to district level, stretches crossing local authority boundaries have been allocated proportionally to each local authority area. Figures for these areas for 2002 are given in Table 1.1. Whether percentage of good quality or good and fair quality is considered the pattern between the districts is similar with South Beds having the lowest water quality and Mid Beds the highest. It should be noted that the figures for Luton Borough are based on only two sample stretches. Trends From 1990 to 2002 the percentage of Bedfordshire’s rivers and canals found to be of good quality has risen considerably. Its highest level came in 1996, however this was followed by a drop in 1997. Since then quality has risen again, although has not yet reached the peak seen in 1996. These changes are shown in Figure 1.1.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Year
perc
enta
ge o
f len
gth
of g
ood
qual
ity
1990 1991 1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20021993
Figure 1.1: Percentage of length of Bedfordshire’s rivers and canals of good chemical quality, 1990 to 2002 National/regional comparisons River water quality is one of the government’s national headline indicators and is also reported on regionally. Table 1.2 shows water quality for 1990 and 2002 on the local, regional and national scale. In 2002, the percentage of length of good quality was similar to that seen in the East of England, but slightly lower than that for England as a whole. However, in 1990, the figure for Bedfordshire was considerably lower than for both the East of England and the whole country. The increase in quality seen since then in Bedfordshire has been marked. Using the broader percentage of good or fair quality masks this improvement.
1990
2002
Change (% points)
Good
Good or fair
Good
Good or fair
Good
Good or fair England 43 84 65 94 22 10 E England 21 82 55 92 34 11 Bedfordshire
4 88 57 95 53 7
Table 1.2: Percentage of length of rivers and canals of good or good and fair quality, 1990 and 2002, at local, regional and national level [regional & national data from ‘Regional quality of life
counts – 2003’, DEFRA, June 2004]
Map 1.1
Map 1.2
Indicator 2 Percentage of length of rivers and canals of high nutrient status County Level In 2002, 77% of the length of Bedfordshire’s rivers and canals had nitrate concentrations classified as high or very high (grades 5 & 6), while 95% had phosphate concentrations classified as high to excessively high (grades 4, 5 & 6). Full details are given in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 and are shown on Maps 2.1 and 2.2.
% of length of rivers and canals
Beds Borough
Mid Beds
South Beds
Luton
Borough
Beds
Beds & Luton
Nitrate level
1 0 0 14.15 0 2.56 2.46 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5.68 0 7.08 0 3.20 3.08 4 16.42 16.55 22.41 100.00 17.56 20.58 5 77.90 7.61 21.69 0 33.88 32.65 6 0 75.84 34.67 0 42.80 41.23
% with high nutrient status
77.90 83.45 56.36 0 76.68 73.88
Table 2.1: Details of nitrate levels at county and district levels, 2002. Average nitrate concentrations of greater than 30 mg/l are considered high (grades 4 & 5)
% of length of rivers and canals
Beds Borough
Mid Beds
South Beds
Luton
Borough
Beds
Beds & Luton
Phosphate level 1 0 0 14.15 0 2.56 2.46 2 0 4.60 0 0 2.22 2.14 3 0 0 0 100.00 0 3.66 4 0 14.16 29.48 0 12.15 11.70 5 100.00 44.87 12.74 0 57.67 55.56 6 0 36.37 43.63 0 25.40 24.48
% with high nutrient status
100.00 95.4 85.85 0 95.22 91.74
Table 2.2: Details of phosphate levels at county and district levels, 2002. Average phosphate concentrations of greater than 0.1 mg/l are considered high (grades 4, 5 & 6)
District level In order to break down data to district level, stretches crossing local authority boundaries have been allocated proportionally to each local authority area. Figures for 2002 are given in Tables 2.1 and 2.2. In the case of both nutrients, South Beds district has the lowest percentage of length of rivers and canals of high nutrient status; perhaps reflecting the more agricultural, less urban nature of the other districts? Trends It appears that over the period from 1995 to 2002, the proportion of lengths of rivers and canals in Bedfordshire with high levels of nutrients has not changed a great deal. The slight changes seen in Figure 2.2 suggest that the proportion of lengths of rivers and canals with high levels of nitrates has dropped slightly whereas the proportion with high levels of phosphate has risen a little.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Year
% o
f riv
er le
ngth
nitratesphosphates
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Figure 2.1: Percentage of length of rivers and canals with high nutrient status from 1995 to 2002 In 1996, Nitrate Vulnerable Zones [NVZ] were designated by the government to protect drinking water supplies from high nitrate levels; in 2002, further NVZs were added. All of Bedfordshire is now considered a NVZ meaning that farmers must follow a set of rules to reduce the levels of nitrate being released into the water. It is possible this might be contributing to the slight drop in nitrate levels observed. National/regional comparisons The level of nutrients in rivers and canals is one of the government’s national core indicators. Table 2.3 shows the percentage of length with high nutrient status at the local, regional and national level. In this case, the regional area is the Environment Agency region in which the majority of Bedfordshire falls. In the case of both nutrients the percentage of lengths of rivers and canals with high nutrient status in Bedfordshire is slightly higher than for the Anglian region as a whole and considerably higher than that seen nationally. The Anglian region consistently recorded the highest percentage of all regions for
Map 2.1
Map 2.2
both nutrients – it is likely this reflects the high proportion of its land which is under intensive agriculture. In England as a whole, between 1995 and 2002, the percentage of rivers with high levels of nitrate showed little change while the percentage with high levels of phosphate fell slightly.
Nitrate
Phosphate
1995
2002
1990
1995
2002 England
54
52
67
58
60
Anglian Region 76 72 90 79 81 Bedfordshire 86 77 - 88 95 Table 2.3: Percentage of lengths of rivers and canals with high nutrient status in 1990, 1995 and 2002. Note – the Anglian region is an Environment Agency region, not a governmental one. [national & regional data from www.sustainable-development.gov.uk]
Indicator 3 Distribution of otters Background information The presence of otters as a predator at the top of the food chain gives some indication that the quality of wetland habitats within a river system is likely to be good. From the 1950s to the 1970s, otter populations underwent a steep decline over much of the UK, including Bedfordshire. Water pollution by organochlorine pesticides is thought to have been a major contributory factor in this decline. Records of otters received from Bedfordshire over the period 1995 to 2002 suggested that otters had now returned to many of the county’s watercourses. Some of these otters may have been from re-introductions to the county in the mid-1990s, some may have been wild-bred animals moving into the area. Over the winter of 2003/04 an otter survey was carried out throughout the county. This involved searching for signs of otters, eg spraint and footprints, at pre-selected survey sites. The survey employed the same methodology and sample sites as a survey carried out during the winter of 1996/97. Direct comparisons could therefore be drawn between the results of the two surveys to show how the distribution of otters in the county had changed over the seven year period. Source of data All information has been taken from ‘The Bedfordshire Otter Survey 2003/04’, a report prepared for the Wet Woodland Project in March 2004 by Amanda Proud of the Ivel & Ouse Countryside Project. County level During the winter of 2003/04 signs of otters were found at 26 out of 63 sample sites (41%). Positive signs of otters were found on the Ouse, the Elstow Brook, the Marston Vale flooded clay pits, the Ivel, the Hiz, the Flit, the Ivel Navigation and the Rhee. Map 3.1 shows the distribution of sample sites and those where positive signs of otters were found. District level Map 3.1 shows that during the winter of 2003/04 otters were widely distributed along the River Ouse through Bedford Borough. They were present in watercourses in the eastern part of the Mid Beds district, again part of the catchment of the Ouse, but no signs were found in the watercourses of South Beds which form part of the catchment of the River Lea. Trends The 1996/97 survey found positive signs of otters at 18 of the 63 sites (29%). The results of the 2003/04 survey (41% of sites positive) therefore show a considerable increase in distribution since 1996/97 [Figure 3.1]. During this period otters have spread across the county and are now found over most of the Ouse catchment.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1996/97 2003/04
Survey date
% o
f sam
pled
site
s sh
owin
g po
sitiv
e si
gns
of o
tters
Figure 3.1: Change in proportion of sample sites at which positive signs of otters were found during the surveys of 1996/97 and 2003/04. Number of sites sampled in both surveys was 63. National/regional comparisons The fourth national survey of otters in England was carried out by the Environment Agency from 2000 to 2002. Positive signs of otters were found at 34% of the sample sites visited. In the Anglian region positive signs of otters were found at 27% of sample sites. The survey confirmed that the distribution of otters has continued to increase in all regions of England since the first such survey in 1977-79 [‘Fourth Otter Survey of England 2000-2002, Environment Agency, 2003].
B. Condition of important wildlife and geological sites Background Information Sites of Special Scientific Interest [SSSI] and County Wildlife Sites [CWS] represent the best wildlife habitat in Bedfordshire. SSSIs are designated by English Nature, are of national importance and are statutorily protected; CWSs are of local importance and are designated by the Bedfordshire Biodiversity Forum. Together these sites cover about 6-7% of the area of the county. In 1997 English Nature began a monitoring programme for assessing the condition of SSSIs. Sites are divided into units, usually using physical rather than habitat boundaries. Each unit is assigned a habitat type; generally the most important one, although there may be other habitat types present in the unit. Each unit is classified as being in ‘favourable’ or ‘unfavourable’ condition. Condition is assessed according to both the condition of the habitats and species present and also the management in place to conserve, or recover, them. The category ‘unfavourable’ is further divided into ‘recovering’, ‘no change’ or ‘declining’ when compared to previous visits. English Nature aims to assess each SSSI every six years; more frequently if the site is perceived to be at risk. A monitoring system for CWSs, based on the SSSI assessment method, has been developed for Bedfordshire and has been in use since 2002. To date only 11% of the area of the county designated as CWS has been monitored. The monitoring scheme for both SSSIs and CWSs allows the results to be broken down into broad habitat types. Source of data Data on SSSI condition have been obtained from the English Nature website [www.english-nature.gov.uk] and are summarised in Appendix 3.1. Data on CWS condition have been taken from the CWS monitoring reports 2002-04, carried out for Mid Beds District Council and Beds County Council, and are summarised in Appendix 3.2.
Indicator 4 Area (ha) of SSSI and % in favourable condition County level The number of SSSIs in the county remains 40. These cover an area of 1413ha and include sites designated for their biological and geological interest. The slightly higher figure for the area compared to the last report is due to a correction within the English Nature database, not a change in area on the ground. Table 4.1 shows the condition of the county’s SSSIs as at 1 November 2004. The surveys on which this assessment is based were carried out over the period 1997 – 2004. Condition
Area (ha)
Percentage of total
area
[2001
Percentage] Favourable
915.32
64.8
[67.9]
Unfavourable – recovering 252.67 17.9 [10.5] Unfavourable – no change 120.47 8.5 [15.2] Unfavourable – declining 124.62 8.8 [6.2] Not assessed 0
0 [0.2]
Total 1413.08 Table 4.1: Area and condition of Bedfordshire’s SSSIs in 2004 For reporting purposes English Nature combines both favourable and unfavourable - recovering categories to represent favourable. This convention will be followed throughout this report. The category ‘unfavourable – recovering’ indicates that although the condition is currently unfavourable, management is in place to address the problems. In 2004, 82.7% of Bedfordshire’s SSSIs were in favourable condition, up from 78.4% in 2001. District level Table 4.2 breaks this data down by district. Sites crossing local authority boundaries have been allocated to the authority in which the majority of the site falls. South Beds has a lower percentage of its SSSIs, by area, in favourable condition than Bedford Borough and Mid Beds. District
No.
Area (ha)
% in favourable
condition
% in favourable
condition in 2001 Beds Borough
8
166.22
87.51
87.4
Mid Beds 14 492.19 93.28 89.5 South Beds 18 754.67 74.66 69.3 Luton Borough
0 0 - -
Total 40 1413.08 Table 4.2: Details of number, area and condition of SSSIs within Bedfordshire & Luton districts, 2004.
Habitat types Habitat
Total area of habitat (ha)
No. of sites at which habitat
found
% of area in favourable condition
% in favourable condition in
2001 Standing water
26.30
2
100.00
100.00
Fen/marsh/swamp 9.78 3 57.1 88.9 Bog 2.52 1 0 - Lowland woodland 684.85 10 95.8 93.4 Lowland calcareous grassland 400.56 12 64.9 54.5 Lowland neutral grassland 55.59 11 87.7 89.4 Lowland acid grassland 14.91 2 49.3 27.9 Lowland heathland 62.45 3 46.8 46.8 Earth heritage 156.12 5 86.6 85.5
Total
1413.08
Table 4.3: Details of SSSI condition by broad habitat type, 2004 The habitat types with the lowest percentage of area in favourable condition are heathland, acid grassland and fen/marsh/swamp. Standing water, woodland, neutral grassland and earth heritage sites all have a high percentage of their area in favourable condition, however, it should be noted in the case of standing water that this is represented by only two sites. Improvements in condition since 2001 have been seen for acid grassland and calcareous grassland. The condition of fen/marsh/swamp habitats has deteriorated during this period. Trends There has been no change in number or area of SSSIs since 2001, however, during this period the percentage of their area in favourable condition has risen slightly from 78% to 83% [Table 4.1]. Slight improvements in the percentage of area in favourable condition have been seen in Mid Beds and South Beds during this period while Beds Borough has remained the same [Table 4.2]. The condition of habitat types has mostly remained similar since 2001 [Table 4.3] although improvements have been seen for acid and calcareous grasslands and a drop in condition for fen/marsh/swamp habitats.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 2
Date
% o
f are
a of
SSS
I in
favo
urab
le c
ondi
tion
2001 2004
Figure 4.1: Change in percentage of area of SSSI in Bedfordshire that is in favourable condition, 2001-2004
National/Regional Comparisons The condition of SSSIs is one of the Government’s national core indicators. It has set a Public Service Agreement target that 95% of SSSI land, by area, should be in favourable condition by 2010. SSSI condition in November 2004 for Bedfordshire and its districts is shown in Table 4.4, together with regional and national figures. It can be seen that in general, the condition of our SSSIs is better than the regional and national figures; English Nature’s 2003 report on SSSI condition found that most lowland habitats were in better condition than the national average. Mid Beds has almost reached the government PSA target.
Area
% of SSSI area in
favourable condition England
65.36
East of England 77.52 Bedfordshire 82.65 Bedford Borough 87.51 Mid Bedfordshire 93.28 South Bedfordshire
74.66
Table 4.4: SSSI condition at national, regional and local scales, 2004 Whilst this is good news, it must not be forgotten that the percentage of the area of Bedfordshire that is designated as SSSI [1.2%] is considerably lower than this percentage for both the East of England region [6.6% - Regional Environment Strategy for the East England. EERA & EEEF, 2003] and England as a whole [around 7% - England’s best wildlife and geological sites: the condition of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in England in 2003. English Nature, 2003].
Indicator 5 Area (ha) of County Wildlife Sites and % in favourable condition County level There are currently 381 CWSs in Bedfordshire and Luton, covering an area of 7145ha (this excludes the SSSI land which is included within many CWS boundaries). No Regionally Important Geological & Geomorphological Sites (RIGS), the geological equivalent of CWSs, have yet been designated within Bedfordshire & Luton. 83 (21.8%) CWSs within Bedfordshire have been monitored since the monitoring programme started in 2002 – these cover 764.74ha and represent 10.7% of the area of CWSs in the county. As these are still all initial monitoring visits, no assessment can yet be made as to whether sites in ‘unfavourable’ condition are recovering, not changing or declining. Condition
Area (ha)
Percentage of area
monitored
[2002 percentage]
Favourable
492.24
64.3
[53.4]
Unfavourable 269.0 35.2 [46.6] Destroyed 3.5
0.5 [0]
Total 764.74 Table 5.1: Area (ha) and condition of Bedfordshire’s CWSs, 2004 Of the area of land designated as CWS that was assessed between 2002 and 2004, 64.4% was found to be in a favourable condition [Table 5.1]. One site of 3.5ha, Haynes Church End Marsh, was found to have been destroyed since it was designated in 1997. District level Table 5.2 shows the data for CWSs broken down by district. Sites crossing local authority boundaries have been allocated to the authority in which the majority of the site falls. District
Total no.
Total area (ha)
No. monitored
Area
monitored (ha)
% monitored in favourable
condition Beds Borough
123
2265.45
9
111.0
100.00
Mid Beds 145 3606.83 54 550.9 59.10 South Beds 90 1034.09 20 102.84 54.10 Luton Borough
23 238.98 0 0 -
Total 381 7145.35 83 764.74 Table 5.2: Details of number and area of CWSs, and condition of those monitored, within Bedfordshire & Luton districts, 2004 Although the percentage of monitored CWSs in favourable condition appears to be considerably higher in Bedford Borough, far fewer sites have been monitored in this district. All of the nine sites monitored in this district were woodland sites – a habitat which tends to be in relatively good condition within the county.
Habitat types Habitat
Total area of habitat (ha) monitored
No. of sites at which habitat
found
% of area in favourable condition
% in favourable condition in
2002 Standing water
-
-
-
-
Fen/marsh/swamp 12.30 4 0 - Bog - - - - Lowland woodland 488.94 50 87.14 71.4 Lowland calcareous grassland 28.80 3 100.00 - Lowland neutral grassland 145.0 22 16.34 21.4 Lowland acid grassland 89.70 11 15.27 10.7 Lowland heathland - - - - Earth heritage - - -
Total
764.74
Table 5.3: Details of CWS condition by broad habitat type, 2004 Care should be taken interpreting these figures as for several habitat types only a few sites have been monitored. As with SSSIs, the proportion of CWS woodland area in favourable condition is high. This is also the case for calcareous grassland however only three sites have been monitored to date. The condition of both acid and neutral grassland appears to be low. None of the fen/marsh/swamp habitat monitored was found to be in favourable condition, although the area monitored was small, covering only a small number of sites. Trends The number of County Wildlife Sites in the county has gone up very slightly since 2002 although one site has been found to have been destroyed since its designation. During this period the number and area of CWSs monitored has risen from 20 to 83; from 243ha to 765ha. The percentage of monitored CWSs in favourable condition, by area, has gone up since 2002 - from 53% to 64% [Table 5.1]. It must be remembered that the 2004 figure is a more representative estimate of CWS condition, as it now incorporates a larger sample of sites, not an improvement in the condition of the sites monitored in 2002. In 2002 only CWSs in Mid Beds had been monitored; by 2004 the number of sites monitored in this district had risen from 20 to 54 and the percentage of area in favourable condition had risen slightly from 53% to 59%. Table 5.3 includes data from 2002 broken down by habitat. Although the data are too few to draw firm conclusions, there appears to be a similar pattern between habitats to 2004 – woodland being in better condition than acid and neutral grassland. National/Regional Comparisons No equivalent national or regional figures are available for the condition of CWSs.
C. Condition of the wider countryside Indicator 6 Area (ha) of land under Countryside Stewardship agreements Background Information Countryside Stewardship has, until recently, been the government’s main scheme for the countryside. It was launched in 1991 and the last applications were received in 2004. As part of the England Rural Development Programme it is run by Defra. The scheme makes payments to farmers and other land managers to manage land in an environmentally beneficial way. Grants are available to enhance, restore and recreate targeted landscapes, their wildlife habitats and historical features and to improve opportunities for public access. Capital and annual payments are available for land committed to an approved 10-year management plan. Within the scheme various landscape types are eligible, for example, arable farmland, chalk & limestone grassland, countryside around towns, field boundaries, historic features, lowland heath, new access, meadows & pastures, old orchards and waterside land. In addition, each county has a set of targeting statements describing the most important environmental features and habitats in the county, together with key objectives as to how these should be conserved and enhanced. These guide the type of applications that are successful. As from 2005 a new Environmental Stewardship scheme will replace Countryside Stewardship, however, existing agreements will continue until the end of their 10 year term. Source of data Data for 2003 were obtained from the Defra website [www.defra.gov.uk], and further figures for 2005 were obtained from their Countryside Stewardship Advisor for Bedfordshire. Luton Borough is included within Bedfordshire on the Defra database. Indicator results County level By 2003 there were 190 Countryside Stewardship agreements in existence in Bedfordshire & Luton, covering an area of 2280ha. This represented 1.85% of the land area of Bedfordshire & Luton. In January 2005, 202 (14.4%) of the area’s 1402 holdings were involved in the scheme, 956km of arable margins were being managed under Stewardship agreements [roughly the same distance as from Land’s End to John O’Groats!] and 275 km of hedges had either been restored or were to be restored under the scheme. District level Breaking down data to district level is not recommended by Defra. It is felt that using the data on such a small scale could be misleading as the various districts contain different habitat types and as such are set different targets. Map 6.1 shows the distribution of holdings within the Countryside Stewardship scheme in Bedfordshire & Luton in July 2004.
Trends Since 2000 uptake of the Countryside Stewardship scheme has continued to increase in Bedfordshire. The number of holdings involved in the scheme rose from 166 in 2000 to 190 in 2003; an increase of 14% in three years [Figure 6.1]. By January 2005, the number had reached 202.
150
155
160
165
170
175
180
185
190
195
1 2
Date
No.
of a
gree
men
ts
2000 2003
Figure 6.1: Increase in number of Stewardship agreements in Bedfordshire, 2000 - 2003 The area of land involved increased from 1280ha in 2000 to 2280ha in 2003 [Figure 6.2]; an increase in area of 78% in three years.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1 2
Date
Are
a un
der a
gree
men
t (ha
)
2000 2003
Figure 6.2: Increase in area of land under Stewardship agreement in Bedfordshire, 2000 – 2003
Lengths of arable margins being managed under the scheme more than doubled in five years from 405km in 2000 to 956km in 2005. In 2000, 203km of hedges had been entered into agreements for restoration or planting. The figure for 2005 was 275km; an increase of 35% over five years.
National/Regional Comparisons The area under agreement under the Environmentally Sensitive Area and Countryside Stewardship Agri-Environment schemes is one of the Government’s national core indicators. Nationally there has been a continual increase in the area of land under both types of agreements in the period from 1987 to 2002. There are no ESAs within Bedfordshire – however this year on year increase has been seen in the uptake of Countryside Stewardship. Table 6.1 shows that the percentage of Bedfordshire & Luton under Countryside Stewardship agreements is similar to that found over the East of England region. These percentages however are lower than that for England as a whole; perhaps not surprising given the highly intensive arable nature of eastern England.
No. of agreements
Area under agreement (ha)
% of total land area
Bedfordshire
190
2,280
1.85
East of England 1,814 35,370 1.81 England
16,101 530,620 3.99
Table 6.1: Details of national, regional and local Countryside Stewardship agreements, 1994 - 2003 The percentage of holdings in Countryside Stewardship in Bedfordshire & Luton compares favourably with other counties in the area [Table 6.2].
Number of agreements
Number of holdings
% of holdings with agreements
Bedfordshire & Luton
202
1402
14.4
Cambridgeshire 343 3345 10.3 Hertfordshire 183 1544 11.9 West Essex
107 1992 5.4
Table 6.2: Percentage of holdings with Countryside Stewardship agreements, January 2005
Ag
ri-E
nvi
ron
men
tA
gre
emen
tsin
Bed
ford
shir
e
Thi
sm
apis
repr
oduc
edfr
omO
rdna
nce
Sur
vey
mat
eria
lwith
the
perm
issi
onof
Ord
nanc
eS
urve
yon
beha
lfof
the
Con
trol
ler
ofH
erM
ajes
ty's
Sta
tione
ryO
ffic
e(c
)C
row
nco
pyrig
ht.
Una
utho
rised
repr
oduc
tion
infr
inge
sC
row
nco
pyrig
htan
dm
ayle
adto
pros
ecut
ion
orci
vilp
roce
edin
gs.
Def
ra10
0018
880
2003
.
Map
Pro
duce
don
07Ju
ly20
04fr
omG
EN
-i,D
efra
RD
SG
ener
icIn
form
atio
nS
yste
m
Bed
ford
shire
Cou
nty
Bou
ndar
ies
Cou
ntry
side
Ste
war
dshi
pH
oldi
ngs
Map 6.1
Indicator 7 Area (ha) of organic holdings Background Information Organic farming, with its emphasis on sustainable production avoiding the use of pesticides and herbicides, can be used as an indicator of land which is being managed in a manner beneficial to the health of the environment. Organic farmers have to meet a range of standards and to be registered with an organic certification body. The baseline standards are provided by the Advisory Committee of Organic Standards (ACOS) which also approves and monitors the work of the organic certification bodies. A 2004 joint EN/RSPB review comparing organic and non-organic farms concluded that usually, although not always, organic farms were better for wildlife than equivalent non-organic farms [‘Does organic farming benefit biodiversity?’ Biological Conservation, 2004]. Source of data Defra now collates data on organic farming from the various organic sector bodies throughout the UK and provide county data on request. Luton Borough is included within Bedfordshire on the Defra database. Indicator results County level In January 2004 there were 12 holdings registered as organic within Bedfordshire, covering a total of 775ha of the county. This represents 0.9% of the county’s agricultural land by area. Of this land, 733ha were fully organic while 41ha were in conversion. Table 7.1 gives details of the types of organic crops involved.
Broad crop
Area (ha)
Cereals
207.70
Crops 62.58 Permanent pasture 288.61 Temporary pasture 173.03 Vegetables 21.32 Woodland & set aside 21.49 Total
774.73
Table 7.1: Organic crops in Bedfordshire, January 2004 District level The distribution of organic holdings throughout the county is shown on Map 7.1. The apparent location of two sites in Buckinghamshire is due to the plotting of the map by postcode. Table 7.2 shows that there are organic holdings in each of the districts apart from Luton.
Number of organic holdings Beds Borough
5
Mid Beds 4 South Beds 3 Luton Borough 0 Bedfordshire
12
Table 7.2: Numbers of organic holdings in Bedfordshire’s districts, 2004 Trends Data on organic holdings has only recently been collated in one place so long term data is hard to obtain. In December 2001 there were 10 holdings registered as organic within Bedfordshire [’Organic farming in Bedfordshire: constraints and solutions’, Elm Farm Research Centre, 2001]. This represented 711ha of land either fully organic or in conversion (0.81% of the county’s agricultural land). There has therefore been an increase of two holdings and 64ha in just over two years. This represents an increase in the area of organic land of 9%. National/Regional Comparisons The area of land converted or in conversion to organic production is one of the government’s national core indicators. This area has increased dramatically in recent years. In 1998 only 55,000ha of UK land was converted or in conversion to organic production but, by 2003, this figure had risen to 741,000ha [data from www.sustainable-development.gov.uk]. Table 7.3 shows that the percentage of Bedfordshire’s agricultural land registered as organic is similar to the East of England region, but lower than England as a whole. In England the percentage of agricultural land farmed organically is much higher in areas such as the south-west and the north-east.
In-conversion
Organic
Total (ha)
Total
agricultural area (ha)
% of total
agricultural area
England
36,904
222,026
258,930
9,177,389
2.8%
East of England 2,986 9,687 12,672 1,458,963 0.9% Bedfordshire 41 733 775 87,339 0.9% Table 7.3: Local, regional and national organic holdings, January 2004 [regional and national data from Organic Statistics, England published by Defra and National Statistics, July 2004]. Area of agricultural land in Bedfordshire from June Agricultural Census, 2003
Map 7.1
Bedfordshire
Hertfordshire
Buckinghamshire
Cambridgeshire
Northamptonshire
Organic HoldingsBy Postcode
Bedfordshire Organic Holdings
This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permissionof Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's StationeryOffice © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crowncopyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.Defra 100018880 2004. Map produced by Leeds GIU November 2004
0 4 8 12 162Kilometers
Indicator 8 Area (ha) of woodland within Woodland Grant Scheme Background Information The Woodland Grant Scheme [WGS] was, until June 2004, the government scheme to encourage the creation and beneficial management of woodlands. It was administered by the Forestry Commission. All privately owned woodlands were considered for grants under the WGS. Applicants that best suited the priorities of the England Forestry Strategy were given higher priority. Annual management grant was paid for the beneficial management of existing woodlands. The grant was paid for a five year period, during which the proposed work had to be carried out to the Forestry Commission’s satisfaction. Grants were also available for the planting of new woodlands; both broadleaf and conifer. Such areas had to be maintained to the satisfaction of the Forestry Commission for ten years after planting. Grant agreements in existence at the time of the scheme’s closure continue to operate. A new England Woodland Grant Scheme will be launched in July 2005. Source of data Data were obtained from the East England Conservancy of the Forestry Commission. Luton is included within Bedfordshire on this database. Indicator results County level Due to the format of data supplied concerning annual management grants, it has not been possible to accurately work out the area of woodland currently receiving this grant. Figures are however available for the area approved for this grant during the period April 2002 until December 2004. These cannot simply be added to the figure for August 2002 from the previous report to give an up-to-date figure as there is some overlap in the time periods and an unknown number of schemes will have expired during this period. During the financial year 2003/04, WGS payments were made for the new planting of 13.70ha of broadleaf woodland in Bedfordshire. No payments were made for the planting of coniferous woodland. District level District
Area of woodland (ha) approved for annual
management grant in April 2002 – Dec 2004
Area (ha) of new broadleaf planting in
2003/04
Area (ha) of new conifer planting in
2003/04
Beds Borough
166.91
1.89
0
Mid Beds 1036.91 11.81 0 South Beds 62.37 0 0 Luton Borough
15.6 0 0
Total 1281.79 13.70 0 Table 8.1: Details of WGS payments in Bedfordshire districts
It can be seen that the area of existing woodland being approved for annual management grant between April 2002 and December 2004 was greatest in Mid Bedfordshire. This district also saw the largest area of new broadleaf planting. Trends Additional areas of woodland in Bedfordshire received annual management grants during the period from 2002 to 2004. Figure 8.1 shows that the area of new broadleaf woodland being planted annually in Bedfordshire under the WGS appears to have been declining since 1999/2000. The area of conifer planted has always been significantly lower than the area of broadleaf planted and in the last few years this has all but stopped.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04
Year
Are
a (h
a)
broadleaf
conifer
Figure 8.1: Area (ha) of new planting in Bedfordshire under the WGS, 1993/94 – 2003/4 Figure 8.2 shows the area of broadleaf planting broken down by district.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04
Year
Are
a (h
a) o
f bro
adle
af p
lant
ing
Beds Borough
Mid Beds
South Beds
Figure 8.2: Areas (ha) of broadleaf planting in Bedfordshire districts, 1993/94 – 2003/04
National/Regional Comparisons Although it was originally intended that the national core indicator ‘area of land under agri-environment schemes’ would be developed to include the area of land within WGS, this appears not to have happened. The current national core indicator is ‘sustainable management of woodlands’ measured by the proportion of woodland area certified under the Forest Stewardship Council [FSC]. FSC certification is achieved by meeting the UK Woodland Assurance Standard [UKWAS] or the FSC UK standard. Certified woodlands are monitored to ensure that good management continues to be implemented. As with the WGS, woodland can be sustainably managed without being certified. This may particularly apply to small woodlands due to the cost of certification or where timber is not produced commercially and therefore there is no need for certification. In 2001, 291,000ha in England (24% of woodland) and 1,084,000ha in the UK (39% of woodland) was FSC certified. Data for Bedfordshire have been requested but not yet obtained.
Indicator 9 Populations of wild birds Background Information Birds are very useful indicator species. They are found in a wide variety of habitats and, being at or near the top of the food chain, their numbers reflect conditions throughout their habitat. The British Trust for Ornithology [BTO] runs a Breeding Bird Survey [BBS] in which its volunteers throughout the country collect data on numbers of common birds. The BBS is based on surveys of randomly selected 1km squares. Within each square two 1km transects across the square are walked on two occasions, surveyors recording the birds they hear or see. Its aim is not to establish total population sizes but to compare numbers year to year. The BBS was initiated in 1994 and its data are used by the BTO, the RSPB and JNCC to produce the government’s national headline indicator on population trends of wild birds. Prior to 1994, the Common Bird Survey provided data for examining trends in bird populations. It is recommended that a species must occur in 20 or more squares for accurate population trends to be established. The small size of Bedfordshire means that is difficult to calculate statistically significant trends for any but the commonest species. Source of data Data on 30 of the commonest species were obtained from the BTO’s website [www.bto.org] and the analysis was carried out by Paul Vann of Beds CC. The fieldwork for the BBS in the county was carried out by members of the Bedfordshire Bird Club. Luton is included within Bedfordshire in the BBS. Indicator results County level 1994 - 2000 2000 - 2002 2002 – 2003 Bedfordshire No. of species
whose population increased
21
17
13
No. of species whose population decreased
9
13
17
% increasing
70% 57% 43%
East of England No. of species whose population increased
18
14
14
No. of species whose population decreased
12
16
16
% increasing
60% 47% 47%
England No. of species whose population increased
22
16
16
No. of species whose population decreased
8
14
14
% increasing
73% 53% 53%
Table 9.1: Details of the proportion of 30 common species increasing at a county, regional and national level
District level Breaking these data down to district level is inadvisable due to the small sample sizes involved. Trends Table 9.1 suggests that in Bedfordshire between 1994 and 2003 there has been a decrease in the proportion of species whose population size is increasing.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1994-2000 2000-2002 2002-2003
Period
% o
f spe
cies
who
se p
opul
aito
n in
crea
sed
durin
g pe
riod
Figure 9.1: Changes in the proportion of 30 common bird species whose population size is increasing in Bedfordshire, 1994 – 2003. National/Regional Comparisons Populations of wild birds are one of the government’s national headline indicators. In the period 1970 to 2003, although the overall population of British breeding birds increased, populations of woodland and farmland birds declined significantly, falling by 11% and 43% respectively. An encouraging sign is that towards the end of this period, from 1998 to 2003, the decline in population of both these types of birds appeared to level off [www.sustainable-development.gov.uk]. Directly comparable figures are not available regionally, however regional wild bird indices calculated for 1994 – 2002 suggest that the proportion of woodland and, particularly, farmland bird species with declining populations was higher in the East of England than over England as a whole [Regional quality of life counts – 2003, Defra, 2004]. Table 9.1 suggests that the increase in the proportion of common species whose population size is declining seen at local, regional and national scales has been more marked in Bedfordshire.
D. Access to the countryside Indicator 10 Area (ha) of publicly accessible land managed for nature conservation per 1000 people Background Information Access to land rich in wildlife can contribute greatly to people’s quality of life. For this reason English Nature has produced a set of Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards, one of which is the provision of at least 1ha of Local Nature Reserve [LNR] per 1000 population. This is a target within the Urban Habitat Action Plan of the Bedfordshire & Luton Biodiversity Action Plan. As this target excludes other publicly accessible land of high wildlife value serving a similar function to LNRs, the above indicator was developed in order to provide a measure of the accessibility of land rich in wildlife to people in Bedfordshire. The definition of ‘managed for nature conservation’ used is ‘sites which have a management plan in which nature conservation plays an important role’. Sites which have permissive access have been included however those for which there is an entrance fee have been excluded. Source of data Data were obtained from organisations owning or managing such land in the county. An up-to-date database of the sites meeting the criteria is given in Appendix 4.1. Future data management As part of the Bedfordshire Green Infrastructure Project, an open spaces and outdoor access audit has recently been carried out by Beds County Council. Site boundaries are stored on a GIS system. The criteria for inclusion in this audit were broader than the present study, being based on the PPG17 definition of open space, however, the sites meeting the criteria for this indicator should be included within this wider audit (with the probable exception of those through which access is granted under the Countryside Stewardship scheme). In future it may be possible to include ‘indicator sites’ as a subset of the open space GIS database which would allow maps to be produced of their distribution. Indicator results County level In Bedfordshire, 2436ha of publicly accessible land is now managed for nature conservation. This equates to 6.27 ha per 1000 population and is 2.04% of the land area of the county [Table 10.1]. If Luton is included, the area rises to 2558ha; 4.47ha per 1000 people and 2.07% of the area of the two authorities. There are now 18 Local Nature Reserves within Bedfordshire but none in Luton. LNRs cover 299.23ha. This equates to 0.77ha per 1000 people in Bedfordshire, however only 0.52ha per 1000 people if Bedfordshire & Luton are considered together.
District level Table 10.1 illustrates the variation in provision between districts. When considered per 1000 people, provision is highest in Mid Beds and lowest in Luton Borough, however, as a percentage of the area of the district, South Beds and Luton score more highly. District
Population
Area (ha)
Area (ha) of access land
Area (ha) per 1000 people
% of district
area Beds Borough
149,900
47,653
606.87
4.05
1.27
Mid Beds 125,000 50,285 1146.08 9.17 2.28 South Beds 113,700 21,282 683.01 6.01 3.21 Luton
184,371 4,226 122.50 0.66 2.90
Bedfordshire 388,600 119,220 2435.96 6.27 2.04 Beds & Luton
572,971 123,446 2558.46 4.47 2.07
Table 10.1: Availability of publicly accessible land managed for nature conservation in Bedfordshire
[population data are 2003 mid-year estimates from Beds CC and Luton BC websites] District
No. of LNRs
Area (ha) of LNRs
Area (ha) of
LNR per 1000 people
% of district area
Beds Borough
7
60.40
0.40
0.13
Mid Beds 8 158.13 1.27 0.31 South Beds 3 80.7 0.71 0.38 Luton Borough
0 0 0 0
Bedfordshire 18 299.23 0.77 0.25 Beds & Luton 18 299.23 0.52 0.24
Table 10.2: Availabilty of LNRs in Bedfordshire districts. A similar pattern of variation can be seen in the availability of LNRs with Mid Beds having the largest area per 1000 people – at 1.27ha more than meeting English Nature’s target. There are no LNRs in Luton Borough. When provision is considered as a proportion of the area of the district, South Beds again scores slightly higher than Mid Beds. In both cases, provision is lower within Bedford Borough. Trends In 2002 in Bedfordshire there was 2168ha of access land managed for nature conservation; 5.6ha per 1000 people. By 2004 this had risen by 268ha (12%) to 2436ha, 6.3ha per 1000 people. Just under half of this increase is due to data newly included on access land provided by Countryside Stewardship (some 106ha). Much of this land was already accessible under agreement in 2002 but data was not easily obtained and so was not included in the database. However the remainder is due to new sites meeting the criteria – either by the production of management plans, land purchase or new access agreements. The provision of Local Nature Reserves in Bedfordshire rose very slightly between 2002 and 2004; from 0.76ha per 1000 people to 0.77ha per 1000 people.
National/Regional Comparisons There is no equivalent national or regional indicator. The government’s national core indicator ‘ease of access to local green space and countryside’ is based on data from a survey of attitudes to quality of life and the environment carried out in 2001 in which it was found that 84% of respondents were within easy walking distance of local green space or countryside. There are no equivalent local data. There are, however, other pieces of work which can provide an impression of where Bedfordshire stands in relation to other areas.
• A study in Luton using one of English Nature’s Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards – namely that no person should live more than 300m from their nearest area of natural greenspace of at least 2ha in size – showed that this standard was not being met in the Borough. The proportion of the population not having this access to greenspace varied between enumeration districts from 8% to 75% [A Review of the Provision of Accessible Informal Green Space in the Borough of Luton, Bedfordshire Wildlife Trust, 2003].
• Recently the Woodland Trust has developed a set of standards for the provision of woodland
open space [Space for People; targeting action for woodland access, The Woodland Trust, 2004]. They have carried out an audit to provide baseline data on the current situation across the country. Appendix 4.2 summarises the targets and the data they have for Bedfordshire, Luton and the districts, together with regional and national figures. In general it can be seen that currently access to woodland open space in Bedfordshire is less than for the East of England region and England as a whole. Access to woodland open space is much higher in Mid Beds than in the other districts.
Notes on indicators suggested for possible future use Appendix 1.1 River flow rates River flow is essential for maintaining river uses such as healthy ecosystems, abstraction, navigation and recreation. River flow rate varies naturally due to rainfall and is subject to marked seasonal and year-to-year variation. River flow rate is not a government indicator, however, it is reported on nationally by the Environment Agency, using data from eight sites throughout England and Wales. One of these sites is on the River Great Ouse at Offord (see below).
Source: Environment Agency
Data are reported as mean monthly river flows. They are displayed over decades to establish long term trends that may be due to climate change or abstraction. No clear trends have emerged nationally as yet, however, the Agency does note that there could be significant regional and local differences. The above graph does suggest a long term decrease in river flow in the Anglian region. A list of the gauging stations within Bedfordshire was requested from the Environment Agency and is shown below. Given the downward trend suggested by our closest national indicator site, and that data are available for a range of sites over a reasonable length of time, it seems worth developing a flow rate indicator for the county.
Gauging Stations within or just outside Bedfordshire Length of record Station Name Station Number River NGR River water level Flow Leighton Buzzard 033057 Ouzel SP 917 241 12/1993 - present 02/1976 - present Shefford 033028 Flit TL 143 393 10/1979 - present 09/1966 - present Arlesey 033033 Hiz TL 190 379 10/1979 - present 04/1973 - present Blunham 033022 Ivel TL 153 509 10/1979 - present 08/1959 - present Roxton 033039 Ouse TL 160 535 10/1979 - present 10/1972 - present Bedford 033002 Ouse TL 055 495 03/1993 - present 01/1933 - present Clipstone New Weir 033090 Clipstone Brook SP 940 259 09/2001 - present* 02/2004 - present Clipstone Old Weir 033030 Clipstone Brook SP 933 255 n/a 10/1957 - 07/1980 Meagre Farm 033012 Kym TL 155 631 10/1979 - present 05/1960 - present Ashwell 033040 Rhee TL 267 401 10/1979 - present 11/1965 - present Hitchin 033065 Hiz TL 185 290 02/1994 - present 08/1980 - present Bletchley 033058 Ouzel SP 883 322 07/1992 - present 05/1978 - present Willen 033015 Ouzel SP 883 409 08/1992 - present 01/1962 - present Broughton 033031 Broughton Brook SP 888 407 06/1991 - present 11/1970 - present Newport Pagnell Main 033137 Ouse SP 877 442 10/1979 - present 10/1969 - present Newport Pagnell Mill 033237 Ouse SP 877 442 12/1992 - present 10/1969 - present Cappenham 033018 Tove SP 712 487 10/1979 - present 02/1962 - present * there are a lot of gaps in this data. Quite a patchy record.
LERAPs Local Environment Risk Assessments for Pesticides [LERAPs] were suggested as a possible means of measuring beneficial farmland management in the form of buffer zones adjacent to water courses. A LERAP can be carried out by a landowner if they are spraying pesticide near a watercourse and would like to reduce the buffer zone specified on the product label. In the case of some products a LERAP cannot be carried out as it is illegal to reduce the specified buffer zone. This does not appear to be an appropriate method by which to measure beneficial farmland management and should not be considered further for development as an indicator.
The General Quality Assessment Scheme Appendix 2.1 Methodologies for the classification of river and estuary quality [taken from the Water Quality Public Register, Environment Agency, Anglian Region] General Quality Assessment of Rivers – Chemistry The chemical GQA describes quality in terms of chemical measurements which detect the most common types of pollution. It allocates one of six grades (A to F) to each stretch of river, using the same, strictly defined procedures, throughout England and Wales. The process is set out below. To each sampling site, we assign a stretch of river that the site will characterise. In the main these sites, and the monitoring, are the same as those used to take decisions on developments that will affect water quality – discharges, abstractions and changes in land use. We use only results from the routine pre-planned sampling programmes with samples analysed by accredited laboratories. To avoid bias we ignore all extra data collected for special surveys or in response to incidents or accidents. The routine programme involves monthly sampling at some 7,000 monitoring points on over 40,000 kilometres of rivers and canals in England and Wales. Sites are sampled a minimum of 12 times a year. We use the data collected over three years because this produces 36 samples per site, giving the required precision in making judgements about particular rivers, bearing in mind the cost of monitoring. All the results collected over the three years are included. No extreme data values are excluded. Chemistry grades at a glance
Grade Quality A Very good B Good C Fairly good D Fair E Poor F Bad
A grade is defined in Table 1 by standards for the determinands biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), ammonia and dissolved oxygen. A grade is assigned to each river length according to the worst determinand. These determinands are indicators of pollution that apply to all rivers, first because of the widespread risk of pollution from sewage or farms, and second because of the toxicity of ammonia and the requirement for dissolved oxygen for aquatic life, including fish. Table 2 describes the general characteristics of each grade.
General Quality Assessment of Rivers – Biology Each biological sampling site corresponds to a stretch of river also characterised by a chemical site (but not all stretches have a biological sampling point). Although biological and chemical sites are not always coincident they are subject to the same water quality, and as far as possible are not separated by tributaries, discharges, weirs or other potential influences on water quality. The biological scheme is based on the macro-invertebrate communities of rivers and canals, and include insects such as mayflies and caddis flies, together with snails, shrimps, worms and many others. Macro-invertebrates can be affected by pollutants that occur infrequently or in very low concentrations and which may be missed by chemical sampling. For biological assessment, macro-invertebrates are grouped into 83 taxa. As different taxa respond differently to pollution, they are given scores of between 1 (pollution-tolerant taxa) and 10 (pollution-sensitive taxa). The presence of taxa sensitive to pollution suggests better water quality than for sites where only pollution-tolerant taxa are found. By comparing taxa found in the sample with those expected if the river were unpolluted, rivers can be classified into one of six grades (Table 3). There will be some rivers where water quality might permit a higher grade were it not for limits imposed by poor habitat, the nature of the river channel or the pattern of river flows. The divisions between grades are based on the need to detect and report changes in biological quality so that any deterioration may be acted upon before it goes too far. The extremes (grades a and f) are set to reflect very good and bad quality, with intermediate grades set pragmatically between these extremes. Although the biology of these intermediate grades will differ from site to site in terms of the actual taxa that are present, the grades will reflect the relative position of the sites on a common scale between the best and worse possible quality. The grading of waters through sampling is not precise. There is, on average, a risk of 22% that rivers will be graded incorrectly. It is unusual for this error to extend beyond the adjacent grade. There is a tendency for a pessimistic grade to be calculated as taxa are more likely to be missed than added when samples are analysed. Biology grades at a glance
Grade Quality a Very good b Good c Fairly good d Fair e Poor f Bad
General Quality Assessment of Rivers – Nutrients Samples are analysed for their concentrations of two nutrients, nitrate and phosphate. Data collected over three years are used to determine average nutrient concentrations. All the results collected over three years are included. No extreme data values are excluded. A grade from 1 to 6 is allocated for both phosphate and nitrate. These are not combined into a single nutrients grade, because they reflect different aspects of water quality. Table 4 shows the limits for each phosphate grade. Table 5 shows the limits for each nitrate grade. There are no ‘good’ or ‘bad’ concentrations for nutrients in rivers in the way that we describe chemical and biological quality. Rivers in different parts of the country have different concentrations of nutrients. ‘Very low’ nutrient concentrations, for example, are not necessarily good or bad; the classification merely states that concentration in this river are very low relative to other rivers. Phosphate grades The descriptors used relate to the Phosphate concentrations in the grades. ‘High’ descriptions refer to grades where the average concentration is more than 0.1mgl-1. This is the concentration which is considered indicative of possible existing or future problems of eutrophication (the enrichment of water by nutrients, especially compounds of nitrogen and/or phosphorus, causing accelerated growth of algae and higher plant forms which can disturb the balance of organisms present in the water and the quality of the water concerned.) High concentrations of phosphate do not necessarily mean that the river is eutrophic. Other factors have to be taken into account such as the amount and type of algae present, flow rates and dissolved oxygen concentration. Nitrate grades The descriptors used relate to the Nitrate concentrations in the grades. ‘High’ descriptions refer to grades where the average concentration is more than 30mgl-1. This limit very roughly corresponds to the 95 percentile limit of 50mgl-1 which is used in the European Community (EC) Drinking Water Directive and the EC Nitrate Directive. There is, however, no direct comparison because the methods used to calculate the 95 percentile for the purposes of these Directives are strictly laid down and cannot be estimated from average concentrations over three years. Phosphate and Nitrate grades at a glance
Grade Description – Phosphate Description – Nitrate 1 Very low Very low 2 Low Low 3 Moderate Moderately low 4 High Moderate 5 Very high High 6 Excessively high Very high
SECTION 2 - TABLES Table 1: Standards for the chemical GQA
GQA Grade Dissolved oxygen (% saturation) 10-percentile
Biochemical oxygen demand (mgl-1)
90-percentile
Ammonia (mgNl-1)
90-percentile A 80 2.5 0.25 B 70 4 0.6 C 60 6 1.3 D 50 8 2.5 E 20 15 9.0 F <20 - -
NOTES: 90-percentile compliance – the river should contain less than the specified levels for at least 90% of the time. 10-percentile compliance – levels should not fall below the standard for more than 10% of the time. mgl-1 – milligrammes per litre mgNl-1 – milligrammes per litre of Nitrogen Table 2: Grades of river quality for the chemical GQA Chemical grade Likely uses and characteristics* A Very good All abstractions
Very good salmonid fisheries Cyprinid fisheries Natural ecosystems
B Good All abstractions Salmonid fisheries Cyprinid fisheries Ecosystems at or close to natural
C Fairly good Potable supply after advanced treatment Other abstractions Good cyprinid fisheries Natural ecosystems, or those corresponding to good cyprinid fisheries
D Fair Potable supply after advanced treatment Other abstractions Fair cyprinid fisheries Impacted ecosystems
E Poor Low grade abstraction for industry Fish absent or sporadically present, vulnerable to pollution** Impoverished ecosystems**
F Bad Very polluted rivers which may cause nuisance Severely restricted ecosystems
* Provided other standards are met ** Where the grade is caused by discharges of organic pollution
Table 3: Grades of river quality for the biological GQA Grade Biological criteria a The biology is similar to (or better than) that expected for an average, unpolluted river of
this type, size and location. There is a high diversity of families, usually with several species in each. It is rare to find a dominance of any one family.
b The biology shows minor differences from grade ‘a’ and falls a little short of that expected for an unpolluted river of this size, type and location. There may be a small reduction in the number of families that are sensitive to pollution, and a moderate increase in the number of individuals in the families that tolerate pollution (such as worms and midges). This may indicate the first signs of organic pollution.
c The biology is worse than that expected for an unpolluted river of this size, type and location. Many of the sensitive families are absent or the number of individuals is reduced, and in many cases there is a marked rise in the numbers of individuals in the families that tolerate pollution.
d The biology shows considerable differences from that expected for an unpolluted river of this size, type and location. Sensitive families are scarce and contain only small numbers of individuals. There may be a range of those families that tolerate pollution and some of these may have a high number of individuals.
e The biology is restricted to animals that tolerate pollution with some families dominant in terms of the numbers of individuals. Sensitive families will be rare or absent.
f The biology is limited to a small number of very tolerant families, often only worms, midge larvae, leeches and the water hog-louse. These may be present in very high numbers, but even these may be missing if the pollution is toxic. In the very worse cases there may be no life present in the river.
Table 4: Phosphate classification
Grade Grade limit (mgPl-1) Average
Description
1 <0.02 Very low 2 >0.02 to 0.06 Low 3 >0.06 to 0.1 Moderate 4 >0.1 to 0.2 High 5 >0.2 to 1.0 Very high 6 >1 Excessively high
NOTES: MgPl-1 – milligrammes per litre of Phosphate Table 5: Nitrate classification
Grade Grade limit (mgNO3l-1) Average
Description
1 <5 Very low 2 >5 to 10 Low 3 >10 to 20 Moderately low 4 >20 to 30 Moderate 5 >30 to 40 High 6 >40 Very high
NOTES: MgNO3l-1 – milligrammes per litre of Nitrate
Environment Agency Guidelines for the use of data Appendix 2.2
GENERAL 1. Nothing in this notice will in any way restrict your statutory or any other rights of access to
the Data. 2. All intellectual property rights in the data and information supplied to you (“Data”) whether
owned by the Agency (“Agency Data”) or third parties (“Third Party Data”) will continue to be owned by the respective parties.
3. The Data have not been prepared to meet your or anyone else’s individual requirements and it
is therefore your responsibility to ensure that the Data meet your needs. 4. The Agency cannot ensure that the Data in its possession will always be accurate, complete,
up to date or valid but the Agency will use reasonable care to ensure that you are provided with an accurate copy of the Data that is in its possession. The Agency gives no warranty that the copy of the Data that it provides is accurate. This does not restrict your statutory rights.
5. Any charge you may pay us reflects only the reasonable cost of supplying the Data to you. 6. If you have asked for the Data to be supplied in an electronic format we cannot guarantee that
the medium is free from any defects and you should undertake the appropriate virus checks. 7. Third party data use, including copying, must be limited to statutory rights.
USE OF AGENCY DATA 8. INTERNAL BUSINESS OR PERSONAL USE. You may use Agency Data for your own
private use or for use within your business without restriction. 9. GIVING COPIES TO OTHERS. You may do this without restriction in respect of Agency
Data provided that you make no charge and attach a copy of this notice. Recipients should also comply with the notice. Whenever possible and appropriate any authorised copying of Agency Data shall acknowledge the Agency’s ownership of Agency Data. One way of doing this is by adding the words “Copyright © Environment Agency” to the information or copy.
10. OTHER USE. If you wish to use Agency Data in any way other than as set out above
(including in particular for commercial gain, for example by way of rental, licence, sale or providing services for consideration) you should contact us with details of what you are proposing to do, UNLESS we have already indicated to you that your proposed use is agreed OR you are satisfied that such use would not infringe our intellectual property rights.
11. USE BY SOLICITORS, SURVEYORS ETC.. If you are a solicitor, a chartered surveyor or
other professional whose professional body has an arrangement with the Agency you may use Agency Data in accordance with these arrangements (“Professional Body Arrangements”) in which case paragraphs 1 to 8 above and the Professional Body Arrangements shall apply. Paragraphs 1 to 10 above shall apply in respect of all uses not covered by Professional Body Arrangements.
Riv
er N
ame
Loc
al
Aut
hori
tyE
nv. A
genc
y St
retc
h N
ame
LE
NG
TH
(k
m)
GQ
A02
GQ
A01
GQ
A00
GQ
A99
GQ
A98
GQ
A97
GQ
A96
GQ
A95
GQ
A94
GQ
A93
GQ
A92
GQ
A91
GQ
A90
GQ
A89
GQ
A88
GQ
A87
GQ
A86
GQ
A85
BA
RTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sS
PE
ED
TH
E P
LOU
GH
PH
....
RE
CTO
RY
FA
RM
4.5
BA
AB
BB
CC
CC
DD
DE
ED
CD
BA
RTO
N B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
SP
EE
D T
HE
PLO
UG
H P
H ..
.. R
EC
TOR
Y F
AR
M1.
3B
AA
BB
BC
CC
CD
DD
EE
DC
DB
RO
UG
HTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sB
IRC
HM
OO
R G
RE
EN
.....
M1
10.5
BB
BC
CC
BB
CD
DD
DC
CC
CO
CA
MP
TON
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
RE
CTO
RY
FA
RM
....
CO
NFL
. FLI
T4.
9C
BC
CD
CB
BB
CC
CD
DD
DE
OC
AT
DIT
CH
Mid
Bed
sN
EW
NH
AM
RO
AD
BR
IDG
E ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L0.
4B
BC
DD
CA
AB
BC
BC
DD
CC
OC
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
KS
outh
Bed
sLE
IGH
TON
BU
ZZA
RD
...O
UZE
L1.
5B
BB
BB
BB
BB
CC
DD
CB
CC
EC
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
KS
outh
Bed
sH
OC
KC
LIFF
E ..
... L
EIG
HTO
N B
UZZ
AR
D5.
0B
BB
BB
BB
BC
CD
ED
BB
CC
CC
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
K T
RIB
Sou
th B
eds
FOU
RN
E H
ILL
MA
NO
R ..
... C
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
K3.
0B
BB
BB
BB
BB
CC
DD
CB
CC
EE
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
Bed
s B
orou
ghO
CTA
GO
N F
AR
M...
CO
NFL
. OU
SE
1.1
BB
BC
CC
BC
CC
CC
CD
DD
CC
ELS
TOW
BR
OO
KB
eds
Bor
ough
A42
1...O
CTA
GO
N F
AR
M7.
9B
BB
CC
CB
CC
CC
CC
DD
DC
CE
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
Bed
s B
orou
ghS
TEW
AR
TBY
LA
KE
OU
TLE
T ...
. A42
14.
5C
BC
BC
CC
BC
CC
CD
DE
FF
FFA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Mid
Bed
sA
5120
...G
RE
EN
FIE
LD3.
5C
CC
BB
BB
BB
BB
BC
CD
DE
EFA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Mid
Bed
sG
RE
EN
FIE
LD ..
... H
ALL
EN
D2.
5C
CC
BB
BB
BC
DD
DD
DD
ED
DFA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Mid
Bed
sM
1 C
HA
LTO
N...
PR
EIS
TLY
FA
RM
2.1
DC
CB
BB
BB
BB
BB
CC
DD
DC
FAN
CO
TT B
RO
OK
/FLI
TS
outh
Bed
sM
1 C
HA
LTO
N...
PR
EIS
TLY
FA
RM
4.1
DC
CB
BB
BB
BB
BB
CC
DD
DC
FAN
CO
TT B
RO
OK
/FLI
TM
id B
eds
PR
EIS
TLY
FA
RM
... A
5120
2.3
DC
CB
BB
BB
BB
BB
CD
DD
DD
FLIT
Mid
Bed
sB
EA
DLO
W...
CH
ICK
SA
ND
S P
RIO
RY
2.9
BB
BB
BB
BB
BB
BC
CD
DD
CC
FLIT
Mid
Bed
sC
HIC
KS
AN
DS
PR
IOR
Y ..
... S
HE
FFO
RD
1.3
BB
BB
BB
BB
BB
BC
CD
DD
CC
FLIT
Mid
Bed
sH
ALL
EN
D ..
... B
EA
DLO
W3.
2B
BB
BC
CB
BB
CC
CC
CD
DE
EG
RA
ND
UN
ION
CA
NA
LS
outh
Bed
sG
RE
AT
SE
AB
RO
OK
...G
RA
FTO
N R
EG
IS6.
0E
EE
EE
DD
DD
EE
ED
DO
OO
CH
EN
LOW
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
HE
AD
WA
TER
S ..
... C
LIFT
ON
STW
3.1
CC
DD
DC
BC
CC
DD
DD
ED
DD
HE
NLO
W B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sC
LIFT
ON
STW
.....
CO
NFL
. IV
EL
1.2
EE
EE
ED
CE
ED
DE
EE
CC
DO
HE
XTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sH
EX
TON
.....
UP
PE
R G
RA
VE
NH
UR
ST
5.2
AA
AA
BA
AA
AB
BB
BC
CC
DO
HIZ
Mid
Bed
sH
OLW
ELL
BU
RY
BR
OO
K...
.TH
E G
RA
NG
E H
EN
LOW
4.1
CC
DC
CC
BB
BD
DD
DD
DD
DC
HIZ
Mid
Bed
sC
ON
FL. R
IVE
R O
UG
HTO
N ..
.. H
OLW
ELL
BU
RY
BR
3.0
DC
CD
DC
BB
BC
CC
CD
DD
CC
IVE
LM
id B
eds
BA
LDO
CK
- C
ON
FL H
IZ6.
0B
BC
DD
CA
AB
BC
BC
DD
CC
OIV
EL
Mid
Bed
sC
ON
FL. H
IZ ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L N
AV
IGA
TIO
N3.
9B
BC
CC
CB
BB
BC
CD
EE
EC
CIV
EL
Mid
Bed
sC
ON
FL. I
VE
L N
AV
IGA
TIO
N ..
. MA
NO
R F
AR
M5.
8B
BB
CB
CC
CB
BB
CD
DD
CC
CIV
EL
Mid
Bed
sM
AN
OR
FA
RM
....
GIR
TFO
RD
5.0
BB
CC
CC
BC
BC
CC
DD
ED
CO
IVE
LM
id B
eds
GIR
TFO
RD
.....
TE
MP
SFO
RD
4.0
BB
BB
BB
BB
BB
CC
DD
ED
CO
IVE
L N
AV
IGA
TIO
NM
id B
eds
CO
NFL
. FLI
T A
T S
HE
FFO
RD
....
CO
NFL
IVE
L4.
6B
BB
BB
BB
BB
BB
CB
CC
CC
CK
YM
Bed
s B
orou
ghTI
LBR
OO
K…
.GR
EA
T S
TAU
GH
TON
1.5
DC
DE
EE
ED
CE
EE
EE
EF
FE
LEA
Luto
nS
UN
DO
N P
AR
K…
.LE
AG
RA
VE
0.6
CD
EE
EE
ED
CD
DD
ED
LEA
Luto
nLE
AG
RA
VE
….L
UTO
N H
OO
LA
KE
S8.
3C
DE
EE
EE
DC
DD
DE
DLE
AS
outh
Bed
sLU
TON
HO
O L
AK
ES
….L
UTO
N S
TW3.
0D
CB
CD
DC
CC
DD
DD
ELE
AS
outh
Bed
sLU
TON
STW
….E
AS
T H
YD
E B
RID
GE
0.8
BB
BB
BB
BB
BC
EE
EE
MIL
LBR
IDG
E/C
OM
MO
N B
RO
OK
SM
id B
eds
GA
MLI
NG
AY
STW
...G
ALL
EY
HIL
L2.
9D
DD
ED
DD
DD
DD
EE
ED
DC
OM
ILLB
RID
GE
/CO
MM
ON
BR
OO
KS
Mid
Bed
sG
ALL
EY
HIL
L...I
VE
L6.
0C
DD
DD
DC
CC
CD
DD
DD
CO
ON
EW
INN
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
NE
W IN
N F
M ..
.. R
EC
TOR
Y F
AR
M5.
5B
BB
CD
DC
CC
CE
EE
EE
DO
OO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
OLN
EY
….T
UR
VE
Y1.
5B
BB
BB
BB
BC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
TUR
VE
Y ..
... H
AR
RO
LD M
ILL
RO
AD
BR
IDG
E5.
9B
BA
BB
BB
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
CO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
HA
RR
OLD
RO
AD
BR
IDG
E ..
.. S
HA
RN
BR
OO
K M
ILL
7.0
BB
BB
BB
BB
BC
CC
CC
CB
CC
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghK
EM
PS
TON
MIL
L...C
ON
FL. N
EW
CU
T8.
5B
BB
BB
BB
BB
BC
CC
CC
DC
CO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
BR
OM
HA
M M
ILL
.....
KE
MP
STO
N M
ILL
3.5
BB
BB
BB
BB
BB
BB
CC
CC
CC
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghC
ON
FL. N
EW
CU
T ...
.. C
ON
FL. E
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
4.0
CC
CC
CB
BC
CC
CC
CD
CC
CD
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghW
ILLI
NG
TON
.....
CO
NFL
. IV
EL
5.9
BB
BB
CC
BC
BC
CC
CB
BC
CC
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghC
ON
F E
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
...W
ILLI
NG
TON
1.0
BB
BB
CC
BC
CC
CC
CD
CC
DD
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghC
ON
FL. I
VE
L ...
. B14
28 B
RID
GE
4.4
DD
CC
CC
BC
CC
CD
DE
CC
CO
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghS
HA
RN
BR
OO
K M
ILL.
..TH
E S
PIN
NE
Y11
.0C
CB
BB
BB
BC
BC
CC
CO
OO
OO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
THE
SP
INN
EY
.....
BR
OM
HA
M M
ILL
7.5
CC
BB
BB
BB
CB
CC
CC
OO
OO
OU
ZEL
Sou
th B
eds
A41
46 B
RID
GE
...G
RO
VE
LOC
K3.
6B
CB
BB
BC
CC
CC
CC
CC
DD
DO
UZE
LS
outh
Bed
sG
RO
VE
LOC
K ..
... L
INS
LAD
E S
TW4.
3B
CB
BB
BC
CC
CC
CC
EE
EE
EO
UZE
LS
outh
Bed
sLI
NS
LAD
E S
TW ..
... S
TAP
LEFO
RD
MIL
L3.
1C
CC
DD
ED
CD
DE
EE
EE
EE
EO
UZE
L B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
HO
UG
HTO
N R
EG
IS…
.STA
NB
RID
GE
FOR
D S
TW4.
2C
BB
CC
CB
BB
CD
EE
EE
ED
DO
UZE
L B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
STA
NB
RID
GE
FOR
D S
TW…
.A41
46 B
RID
GE
2.5
BB
BC
CC
BB
CC
DD
DD
DD
CC
PIX
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
LETC
HW
OR
TH S
TW ..
.. C
ON
FL. H
IZ5.
0D
CB
BB
CC
BC
CE
EE
FF
FF
ER
IVE
R R
HE
EM
id B
eds
AS
HW
ELL
VIL
LAG
E ..
. HO
OK
S M
ILL
5.6
BB
BC
CC
BB
BC
CC
CC
EF
EB
RU
NN
ING
WA
TER
S/S
TEP
PM
id B
eds
FLIT
WIC
K S
TW ..
... H
ALL
EN
D4.
0D
DD
DD
DC
DD
EE
EE
EE
EE
ES
HA
RN
BR
OO
KB
eds
Bor
ough
HE
AD
WA
TER
S ..
... O
US
E4.
0E
DD
EE
EB
BD
DD
CC
DD
DD
D
App
endi
x 2.
3: C
hem
ical
wat
er q
ualit
y as
sess
men
ts -
Bed
ford
shire
and
Lut
on
Riv
er N
ame
Loc
al A
utho
rity
Env
. Age
ncy
Stre
tch
Nam
eL
EN
GT
H
(km
)B
IOL
00B
IOL
99B
IOL
98B
IOL
97B
IOL
96B
IOL
95B
IOL
94B
IOL
93B
IOL
92B
IOL
91B
IOL
90
BA
RTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sS
PE
ED
TH
E P
LOU
GH
PH
....
RE
CTO
RY
FA
RM
4.5
aa
cc
cd
ee
ed
dB
AR
TON
BR
OO
KS
outh
Bed
sS
PE
ED
TH
E P
LOU
GH
PH
....
RE
CTO
RY
FA
RM
1.3
aa
cc
cd
ee
ed
dB
RO
UG
HTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sB
IRC
HM
OO
R G
RE
EN
.....
M1
10.5
cc
Ob
bc
cc
cc
cC
AM
PTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sR
EC
TOR
Y F
AR
M ..
.. C
ON
FL. F
LIT
4.9
cb
bc
dd
bc
bd
eC
AT
DIT
CH
Mid
Bed
sN
EW
NH
AM
RO
AD
BR
IDG
E ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L0.
4a
aa
ba
aa
cO
ac
CLI
PS
TON
E B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
LEIG
HTO
N B
UZZ
AR
D...
OU
ZEL
1.5
bb
bb
bc
cc
ec
dC
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
KS
outh
Bed
sH
OC
KC
LIFF
E ..
... L
EIG
HTO
N B
UZZ
AR
D5.
0b
bb
bb
cc
ce
cd
CLI
PS
TON
E B
RO
OK
TR
IBS
outh
Bed
sFO
UR
NE
HIL
L M
AN
OR
.....
CLI
PS
TON
E B
RO
OK
3.0
bb
bb
bc
cc
ec
dE
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
Bed
s B
orou
ghO
CTA
GO
N F
AR
M...
CO
NFL
. OU
SE
1.1
bb
bb
cc
ac
cb
cE
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
Bed
s B
orou
ghA
421.
..OC
TAG
ON
FA
RM
7.9
bb
bb
cc
ac
cb
cE
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
Bed
s B
orou
ghS
TEW
AR
TBY
LA
KE
OU
TLE
T ...
. A42
14.
5b
cc
cc
cc
ec
cc
FAN
CO
TT B
RO
OK
/FLI
TM
id B
eds
A51
20...
GR
EE
NFI
ELD
3.5
bc
db
cc
cc
cc
eFA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Mid
Bed
sG
RE
EN
FIE
LD ..
... H
ALL
EN
D2.
5b
cd
bc
cc
cc
ce
FAN
CO
TT B
RO
OK
/FLI
TM
id B
eds
M1
CH
ALT
ON
...P
RE
ISTL
Y F
AR
M2.
1c
cb
cb
cO
OO
Oe
FAN
CO
TT B
RO
OK
/FLI
TS
outh
Bed
sM
1 C
HA
LTO
N...
PR
EIS
TLY
FA
RM
4.1
cc
bc
bc
OO
OO
eFA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Mid
Bed
sP
RE
ISTL
Y F
AR
M...
A51
202.
3c
cb
cb
cO
OO
Oe
FLIT
Mid
Bed
sB
EA
DLO
W...
CH
ICK
SA
ND
S P
RIO
RY
2.9
cd
bc
cd
de
ec
fFL
ITM
id B
eds
CH
ICK
SA
ND
S P
RIO
RY
.....
SH
EFF
OR
D1.
3c
db
cc
dd
ee
cf
FLIT
Mid
Bed
sH
ALL
EN
D ..
... B
EA
DLO
W3.
2c
bc
cc
ce
ce
bc
GR
AN
D U
NIO
N C
AN
AL
Sou
th B
eds
GR
EA
T S
EA
BR
OO
K...
GR
AFT
ON
RE
GIS
6.0
cd
bc
cb
OO
OO
bH
EN
LOW
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
HE
AD
WA
TER
S ..
... C
LIFT
ON
STW
3.1
cc
ed
ee
OO
OO
eH
EN
LOW
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
CLI
FTO
N S
TW ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L1.
2c
cc
cc
cO
OO
OO
HE
XTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sH
EX
TON
.....
UP
PE
R G
RA
VE
NH
UR
ST
5.2
ab
bc
bc
bb
be
cH
IZM
id B
eds
HO
LWE
LLB
UR
Y B
RO
OK
....T
HE
GR
AN
GE
HE
NLO
W4.
1b
bb
bb
cd
cO
cb
HIZ
Mid
Bed
sC
ON
FL. R
IVE
R O
UG
HTO
N ..
.. H
OLW
ELL
BU
RY
BR
3.0
cd
dc
dc
fd
Oe
dIV
EL
Mid
Bed
sB
ALD
OC
K -
CO
NFL
HIZ
6.0
aa
ab
aa
ac
Oa
cIV
EL
Mid
Bed
sC
ON
FL. H
IZ ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L N
AV
IGA
TIO
N3.
9a
bc
bb
cb
bO
cc
IVE
LM
id B
eds
CO
NFL
. IV
EL
NA
VIG
ATI
ON
... M
AN
OR
FA
RM
5.8
ba
ab
bc
bd
bb
bIV
EL
Mid
Bed
sM
AN
OR
FA
RM
....
GIR
TFO
RD
5.0
ba
ba
bb
bc
bb
bIV
EL
Mid
Bed
sG
IRTF
OR
D ..
... T
EM
PS
FOR
D4.
0b
bb
ba
be
cb
bc
IVE
L N
AV
IGA
TIO
NM
id B
eds
CO
NFL
. FLI
T A
T S
HE
FFO
RD
....
CO
NFL
IVE
L4.
6a
bc
cb
be
cc
bc
KY
MB
eds
Bor
ough
TILB
RO
OK
….G
RE
AT
STA
UG
HTO
N1.
5b
cc
cc
cc
bd
bc
LEA
Luto
nS
UN
DO
N P
AR
K…
.LE
AG
RA
VE
0.6
de
dLE
ALu
ton
LEA
GR
AV
E…
.LU
TON
HO
O L
AK
ES
8.3
ce
dLE
AS
outh
Bed
sLU
TON
HO
O L
AK
ES
….L
UTO
N S
TW3.
0c
cb
LEA
Sou
th B
eds
LUTO
N S
TW…
.EA
ST
HY
DE
BR
IDG
E0.
8b
cc
MIL
LBR
IDG
E/C
OM
MO
N B
RO
OK
SM
id B
eds
GA
MLI
NG
AY
STW
...G
ALL
EY
HIL
L2.
9d
cd
cd
dO
OO
Oc
MIL
LBR
IDG
E/C
OM
MO
N B
RO
OK
SM
id B
eds
GA
LLE
Y H
ILL.
..IV
EL
6.0
dd
de
dd
OO
OO
dN
EW
INN
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
NE
W IN
N F
M ..
.. R
EC
TOR
Y F
AR
M5.
5b
cd
dd
cd
cd
ef
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghO
LNE
Y…
.TU
RV
EY
1.5
bb
aa
bb
bb
bb
bO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
TUR
VE
Y ..
... H
AR
RO
LD M
ILL
RO
AD
BR
IDG
E5.
9a
ba
bb
bc
bb
bb
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghH
AR
RO
LD R
OA
D B
RID
GE
....
SH
AR
NB
RO
OK
MIL
L7.
0a
bb
cc
ba
ca
cc
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghK
EM
PS
TON
MIL
L...C
ON
FL. N
EW
CU
T8.
5a
bb
bb
bb
aO
bb
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghB
RO
MH
AM
MIL
L ...
.. K
EM
PS
TON
MIL
L3.
5a
bb
bb
bb
aO
bb
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghC
ON
FL. N
EW
CU
T ...
.. C
ON
FL. E
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
4.0
ab
ba
bb
OO
OO
bO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
WIL
LIN
GTO
N ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L5.
9a
bb
ba
aa
ba
ab
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghC
ON
F E
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
...W
ILLI
NG
TON
1.0
ab
bb
aa
ab
aa
bO
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
CO
NFL
. IV
EL
.... B
1428
BR
IDG
E4.
4a
ab
bc
bO
OO
Ob
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghS
HA
RN
BR
OO
K M
ILL.
..TH
E S
PIN
NE
Y11
.0c
bd
dc
de
dd
dc
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghTH
E S
PIN
NE
Y ..
... B
RO
MH
AM
MIL
L7.
5c
bd
dc
de
dd
dc
OU
ZEL
Sou
th B
eds
A41
46 B
RID
GE
...G
RO
VE
LOC
K3.
6a
db
cb
cO
OO
Oc
OU
ZEL
Sou
th B
eds
GR
OV
ELO
CK
.....
LIN
SLA
DE
STW
4.3
ad
Oc
bc
OO
OO
OO
UZE
LS
outh
Bed
sLI
NS
LAD
E S
TW ..
... S
TAP
LEFO
RD
MIL
L3.
1c
cc
cc
cb
bb
cc
OU
ZEL
BR
OO
KS
outh
Bed
sH
OU
GH
TON
RE
GIS
….S
TAN
BR
IDG
EFO
RD
STW
4.2
bb
bc
cc
de
ec
eO
UZE
L B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
STA
NB
RID
GE
FOR
D S
TW…
.A41
46 B
RID
GE
2.5
bb
bc
cc
df
dc
cP
IX B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sLE
TCH
WO
RTH
STW
....
CO
NFL
. HIZ
5.0
cb
cc
cd
dd
Oc
dR
IVE
R R
HE
EM
id B
eds
AS
HW
ELL
VIL
LAG
E ..
. HO
OK
S M
ILL
5.6
ac
bc
bb
OO
OO
OR
UN
NIN
G W
ATE
RS
/STE
PP
Mid
Bed
sFL
ITW
ICK
STW
.....
HA
LL E
ND
4.0
dd
dd
ed
ed
de
eS
HA
RN
BR
OO
KB
eds
Bor
ough
HE
AD
WA
TER
S ..
... O
US
E4.
0c
cc
cc
cO
OO
OO
App
endi
x 2.
4: B
iolo
gica
l wat
er q
ualit
y as
sess
men
ts -
Bed
ford
shire
and
Lut
on
Riv
er N
ame
Loc
al A
utho
rity
Env
. Age
ncy
Stre
tch
Nam
eL
EN
GT
H
(km
)PH
OS
90PH
OS
95PH
OS
00PH
OS
01PH
OS
02N
IT
95
NIT
00N
IT
01
NIT
02B
AR
TON
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
SP
EE
D T
HE
PLO
UG
H P
H ..
.. R
EC
TOR
Y F
AR
M4.
56
56
65
65
55
BA
RTO
N B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
SP
EE
D T
HE
PLO
UG
H P
H ..
.. R
EC
TOR
Y F
AR
M1.
36
56
65
65
55
BR
OU
GH
TON
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
BIR
CH
MO
OR
GR
EE
N ..
... M
110
.55
44
44
66
66
CA
MP
TON
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
RE
CTO
RY
FA
RM
....
CO
NFL
. FLI
T4.
96
55
55
55
54
CA
T D
ITC
HM
id B
eds
NE
WN
HA
M R
OA
D B
RID
GE
.....
CO
NFL
. IV
EL
0.4
34
55
56
66
6C
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
KS
outh
Bed
sLE
IGH
TON
BU
ZZA
RD
...O
UZE
L1.
54
23
34
45
54
CLI
PS
TON
E B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
HO
CK
CLI
FFE
.....
LE
IGH
TON
BU
ZZA
RD
5.0
42
33
44
55
4C
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
K T
RIB
Sou
th B
eds
FOU
RN
E H
ILL
MA
NO
R ..
... C
LIP
STO
NE
BR
OO
K3.
04
23
34
45
54
ELS
TOW
BR
OO
KB
eds
Bor
ough
OC
TAG
ON
FA
RM
...C
ON
FL. O
US
E1.
15
45
55
55
44
ELS
TOW
BR
OO
KB
eds
Bor
ough
A42
1...O
CTA
GO
N F
AR
M7.
95
45
55
55
44
ELS
TOW
BR
OO
KB
eds
Bor
ough
STE
WA
RTB
Y L
AK
E O
UTL
ET
.... A
421
4.5
55
55
54
33
3FA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Mid
Bed
sA
5120
...G
RE
EN
FIE
LD3.
56
66
55
66
66
FAN
CO
TT B
RO
OK
/FLI
TM
id B
eds
GR
EE
NFI
ELD
.....
HA
LL E
ND
2.5
66
65
56
66
6FA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Mid
Bed
sM
1 C
HA
LTO
N...
PR
EIS
TLY
FA
RM
2.1
66
65
56
66
6FA
NC
OTT
BR
OO
K/F
LIT
Sou
th B
eds
M1
CH
ALT
ON
...P
RE
ISTL
Y F
AR
M4.
16
66
55
66
66
FAN
CO
TT B
RO
OK
/FLI
TM
id B
eds
PR
EIS
TLY
FA
RM
... A
5120
2.3
66
65
56
66
6FL
ITM
id B
eds
BE
AD
LOW
...C
HIC
KS
AN
DS
PR
IOR
Y2.
96
56
55
66
66
FLIT
Mid
Bed
sC
HIC
KS
AN
DS
PR
IOR
Y ..
... S
HE
FFO
RD
1.3
65
65
56
66
6FL
ITM
id B
eds
HA
LL E
ND
.....
BE
AD
LOW
3.2
66
65
56
66
6G
RA
ND
UN
ION
CA
NA
LS
outh
Bed
sG
RE
AT
SE
AB
RO
OK
...G
RA
FTO
N R
EG
IS6.
02
11
11
11
1H
EN
LOW
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
HE
AD
WA
TER
S ..
... C
LIFT
ON
STW
3.1
66
66
65
54
4H
EN
LOW
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
CLI
FTO
N S
TW ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L1.
26
66
66
66
66
HE
XTO
N B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sH
EX
TON
.....
UP
PE
R G
RA
VE
NH
UR
ST
5.2
52
22
24
44
4H
IZM
id B
eds
HO
LWE
LLB
UR
Y B
RO
OK
....T
HE
GR
AN
GE
HE
NLO
W4.
16
56
66
66
65
HIZ
Mid
Bed
sC
ON
FL. R
IVE
R O
UG
HTO
N ..
.. H
OLW
ELL
BU
RY
BR
3.0
66
66
66
66
6IV
EL
Mid
Bed
sB
ALD
OC
K -
CO
NFL
HIZ
6.0
34
55
56
66
6IV
EL
Mid
Bed
sC
ON
FL. H
IZ ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L N
AV
IGA
TIO
N3.
96
66
66
66
66
IVE
LM
id B
eds
CO
NFL
. IV
EL
NA
VIG
ATI
ON
... M
AN
OR
FA
RM
5.8
66
66
66
66
6IV
EL
Mid
Bed
sM
AN
OR
FA
RM
....
GIR
TFO
RD
5.0
66
66
66
66
6IV
EL
Mid
Bed
sG
IRTF
OR
D ..
... T
EM
PS
FOR
D4.
06
66
65
66
66
IVE
L N
AV
IGA
TIO
NM
id B
eds
CO
NFL
. FLI
T A
T S
HE
FFO
RD
....
CO
NFL
IVE
L4.
66
55
55
66
66
KY
MB
eds
Bor
ough
TILB
RO
OK
….G
RE
AT
STA
UG
HTO
N1.
55
55
55
56
55
LEA
Luto
nS
UN
DO
N P
AR
K…
.LE
AG
RA
VE
0.6
34
33
54
44
LEA
Luto
nLE
AG
RA
VE
….L
UTO
N H
OO
LA
KE
S8.
33
43
35
44
4LE
AS
outh
Bed
sLU
TON
HO
O L
AK
ES
….L
UTO
N S
TW3.
02
23
44
33
3LE
AS
outh
Bed
sLU
TON
STW
….E
AS
T H
YD
E B
RID
GE
0.8
66
66
66
66
MIL
LBR
IDG
E/C
OM
MO
N B
RO
OK
SM
id B
eds
GA
MLI
NG
AY
STW
...G
ALL
EY
HIL
L2.
96
56
55
66
66
MIL
LBR
IDG
E/C
OM
MO
N B
RO
OK
SM
id B
eds
GA
LLE
Y H
ILL.
..IV
EL
6.0
66
66
66
66
6N
EW
INN
BR
OO
KM
id B
eds
NE
W IN
N F
M ..
.. R
EC
TOR
Y F
AR
M5.
54
23
44
44
44
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghO
LNE
Y…
.TU
RV
EY
1.5
65
55
55
55
5O
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
TUR
VE
Y ..
... H
AR
RO
LD M
ILL
RO
AD
BR
IDG
E5.
96
55
55
55
55
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghH
AR
RO
LD R
OA
D B
RID
GE
....
SH
AR
NB
RO
OK
MIL
L7.
06
55
55
55
55
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghK
EM
PS
TON
MIL
L...C
ON
FL. N
EW
CU
T8.
56
55
55
55
55
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghB
RO
MH
AM
MIL
L ...
.. K
EM
PS
TON
MIL
L3.
56
55
55
55
55
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghC
ON
FL. N
EW
CU
T ...
.. C
ON
FL. E
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
4.0
65
55
55
55
5O
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
WIL
LIN
GTO
N ..
... C
ON
FL. I
VE
L5.
96
55
55
55
55
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghC
ON
F E
LSTO
W B
RO
OK
...W
ILLI
NG
TON
1.0
65
55
55
55
5O
US
EB
eds
Bor
ough
CO
NFL
. IV
EL
.... B
1428
BR
IDG
E4.
46
55
55
55
55
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghS
HA
RN
BR
OO
K M
ILL.
..TH
E S
PIN
NE
Y11
.06
55
55
55
55
OU
SE
Bed
s B
orou
ghTH
E S
PIN
NE
Y ..
... B
RO
MH
AM
MIL
L7.
56
55
55
55
55
OU
ZEL
Sou
th B
eds
A41
46 B
RID
GE
...G
RO
VE
LOC
K3.
66
56
66
55
55
OU
ZEL
Sou
th B
eds
GR
OV
ELO
CK
.....
LIN
SLA
DE
STW
4.3
65
66
65
55
5O
UZE
LS
outh
Bed
sLI
NS
LAD
E S
TW ..
... S
TAP
LEFO
RD
MIL
L3.
16
66
66
66
66
OU
ZEL
BR
OO
KS
outh
Bed
sH
OU
GH
TON
RE
GIS
….S
TAN
BR
IDG
EFO
RD
STW
4.2
66
66
66
66
6O
UZE
L B
RO
OK
Sou
th B
eds
STA
NB
RID
GE
FOR
D S
TW…
.A41
46 B
RID
GE
2.5
66
66
66
66
6P
IX B
RO
OK
Mid
Bed
sLE
TCH
WO
RTH
STW
....
CO
NFL
. HIZ
5.0
66
66
66
66
6R
IVE
R R
HE
EM
id B
eds
AS
HW
ELL
VIL
LAG
E ..
. HO
OK
S M
ILL
5.6
55
55
56
66
6R
UN
NIN
G W
ATE
RS
/STE
PP
Mid
Bed
sFL
ITW
ICK
STW
.....
HA
LL E
ND
4.0
66
66
66
66
6S
HA
RN
BR
OO
KB
eds
Bor
ough
HE
AD
WA
TER
S ..
... O
US
E4.
05
55
55
55
44
App
endi
x 2.
5: N
utrie
nt le
vel a
sses
smen
ts -
Bed
ford
shire
and
Lut
on
App
endi
x 3.
1: C
ondi
tion
of S
SSI u
nits
(Bed
ford
shire
) - c
ompi
led
1 N
ov 2
004
Dat
a fr
om E
nglis
h N
atur
e
SSSI
nam
eD
istr
ict
Mai
n ha
bita
tU
nit n
o.U
nit a
rea
(ha)
Dat
eC
ondi
tion
Bar
ton
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
144
.23
10/6
/200
4Fa
vour
able
Bar
ton
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
23.
748/
11/2
004
Unf
avou
rabl
e de
clin
ing
Bid
denh
am P
itB
BE
arth
her
itage
10.
175/
25/1
999
Unf
avou
rabl
e de
clin
ing
Bid
denh
am P
itB
BE
arth
her
itage
20.
241/
11/2
002
Favo
urab
leB
low
's D
own
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd1
19.6
77/
11/2
003
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
Blo
w's
Dow
nS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
213
.63
7/11
/200
3U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gC
oope
r's H
illM
BD
war
f shr
ub h
eath
- lo
wla
nd1
18.0
610
/13/
1999
Unf
avou
rabl
e de
clin
ing
Dea
con
Hill
MB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd1
25.0
86/
15/2
004
Favo
urab
leD
eaco
n H
illM
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
210
.33
3/3/
1999
Favo
urab
leD
oubl
e A
rche
s P
itS
BE
arth
her
itage
11.
617/
11/2
001
Favo
urab
leD
rops
hort
Mar
shS
BN
eutra
l gra
ssla
nd -
low
land
12.
736/
30/1
999
Favo
urab
leD
unst
able
And
Whi
psna
de D
owns
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd1
38.5
58/
16/2
002
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
Dun
stab
le A
nd W
hips
nade
Dow
nsS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
212
.94
7/27
/200
0U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gD
unst
able
And
Whi
psna
de D
owns
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd3
21.8
78/
23/2
004
Unf
avou
rabl
e no
cha
nge
Fanc
ott W
oods
And
Mea
dow
sS
BN
eutra
l gra
ssla
nd -
low
land
19.
0611
/12/
1999
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
Fanc
ott W
oods
And
Mea
dow
sS
BN
eutra
l gra
ssla
nd -
low
land
24.
211
/12/
1999
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
Felm
ersh
am G
rave
l Pits
BB
Sta
ndin
g op
en w
ater
and
can
als
121
.64
7/21
/199
9U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gFl
itwic
k M
oor
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
111
.32/
26/1
998
Favo
urab
leFl
itwic
k M
oor
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
29.
562/
6/19
98Fa
vour
able
Flitw
ick
Moo
rM
BFe
n, m
arsh
and
sw
amp
32.
7110
/25/
2003
Unf
avou
rabl
e de
clin
ing
Flitw
ick
Moo
rM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd4
4.61
2/26
/199
8Fa
vour
able
Flitw
ick
Moo
rM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd5
31.6
7/28
/199
9Fa
vour
able
Gal
ley
And
War
den
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
111
.63
7/18
/200
3Fa
vour
able
Gal
ley
And
War
den
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
220
.41
7/18
/200
3U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gG
alle
y A
nd W
arde
n H
ills
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd3
14.4
47/
18/2
003
Unf
avou
rabl
e no
cha
nge
Gal
ley
And
War
den
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
40.
476/
27/2
001
Favo
urab
leH
ange
r Woo
dB
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd1
21.2
87/
16/2
001
Favo
urab
leH
ange
r Woo
dB
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd2
2.83
7/16
/200
1Fa
vour
able
Hou
ghto
n R
egis
Mar
l Lak
esS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
115
.46
10/3
1/20
00Fa
vour
able
Hou
ghto
n R
egis
Mar
l Lak
esS
BS
tand
ing
open
wat
er a
nd c
anal
s2
4.66
10/3
1/20
00Fa
vour
able
Ken
swor
th C
halk
Pit
SB
Ear
th h
erita
ge1
131.
3310
/21/
1998
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BD
war
f shr
ub h
eath
- lo
wla
nd1
8.6
6/22
/200
0U
nfav
oura
ble
decl
inin
gK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BD
war
f shr
ub h
eath
- lo
wla
nd2
6.56
6/22
/200
0U
nfav
oura
ble
decl
inin
gK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd3
15.9
49/
8/20
03U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd4
8.16
9/8/
2003
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd5
14.2
49/
8/20
03Fa
vour
able
Kin
gs A
nd B
aker
s W
oods
And
Hea
ths
SB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
63.
716/
13/1
997
Favo
urab
le
Kin
gs A
nd B
aker
s W
oods
And
Hea
ths
SB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd7
3.67
8/4/
2000
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BD
war
f shr
ub h
eath
- lo
wla
nd8
20.1
88/
4/20
00U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd9
15.1
69/
8/20
03U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd10
25.2
6/11
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd11
20.6
77/
29/1
999
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd12
18.4
57/
29/1
999
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd13
22.6
57/
29/1
999
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd14
10.3
37/
29/1
999
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd15
11.7
67/
29/1
999
Favo
urab
leK
ings
And
Bak
ers
Woo
ds A
nd H
eath
sS
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd16
6.51
6/11
/200
4Fa
vour
able
Kin
gs W
ood
And
Gle
be M
eado
ws,
H. C
onqu
est
MB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd1
9.43
6/9/
2004
Favo
urab
leK
ings
Woo
d A
nd G
lebe
Mea
dow
s, H
. Con
ques
tM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd2
26.6
76/
9/20
04Fa
vour
able
Kno
ckin
g H
oeM
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
17.
9710
/6/2
004
Favo
urab
leM
arst
on T
hrift
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
15.
597/
24/2
003
Favo
urab
leM
arst
on T
hrift
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
218
.32
7/24
/200
3Fa
vour
able
Mar
ston
Thr
iftM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd3
13.5
7/24
/200
3Fa
vour
able
Mau
lden
Chu
rch
Mea
dow
MB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd1
4.14
6/27
/200
0U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gM
auld
en H
eath
MB
Aci
d gr
assl
and
- low
land
12.
798/
2/20
04U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eM
auld
en H
eath
MB
Aci
d gr
assl
and
- low
land
24.
778/
2/20
04U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eM
auld
en W
ood
And
Pen
nyfa
ther
's H
illM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd1
50.6
27/
30/1
997
Favo
urab
leM
auld
en W
ood
And
Pen
nyfa
ther
's H
illM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd2
43.8
411
/13/
1998
Favo
urab
leM
auld
en W
ood
And
Pen
nyfa
ther
's H
illM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd3
16.5
11/1
3/19
98Fa
vour
able
Mau
lden
Woo
d A
nd P
enny
fath
er's
Hill
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
437
.81
1/15
/199
8Fa
vour
able
Nar
es G
ladl
ey M
arsh
SB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd1
5.12
6/9/
1999
Favo
urab
leN
ine
Acr
es P
itS
BE
arth
her
itage
120
.72
6/17
/200
3U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eO
dell
Gre
at W
ood
BB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
119
.29
4/15
/200
3Fa
vour
able
Ode
ll G
reat
Woo
dB
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd2
13.1
14/
15/2
003
Unf
avou
rabl
e no
cha
nge
Ode
ll G
reat
Woo
dB
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd3
31.6
84/
15/2
003
Favo
urab
leO
dell
Gre
at W
ood
BB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
421
.62
4/15
/200
3Fa
vour
able
Pot
ton
Woo
dM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd1
16.2
38/
1/20
02U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gP
otto
n W
ood
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
217
.65
7/31
/200
2Fa
vour
able
Pot
ton
Woo
dM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd3
13.8
67/
31/2
002
Favo
urab
leP
otto
n W
ood
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
415
.92
7/31
/200
2Fa
vour
able
Pot
ton
Woo
dM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd5
14.5
57/
31/2
002
Favo
urab
leP
otto
n W
ood
MB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
67.
297/
31/2
002
Favo
urab
leP
ullo
xhill
Mar
shM
BN
eutra
l gra
ssla
nd -
low
land
14.
253/
15/2
004
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
Pul
loxh
ill M
arsh
MB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd2
0.83
3/15
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gS
andy
War
ren
MB
Aci
d gr
assl
and
- low
land
17.
3512
/4/2
003
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
San
dy W
arre
nM
BD
war
f shr
ub h
eath
- lo
wla
nd2
9.05
8/5/
1998
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
Sm
ithco
mbe
, Sha
rpen
hoe
And
Sun
don
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
12.
776/
8/20
04U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eS
mith
com
be, S
harp
enho
e A
nd S
undo
n H
ills
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd2
5.67
4/15
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
decl
inin
g
Sm
ithco
mbe
, Sha
rpen
hoe
And
Sun
don
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
314
.35
4/15
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
decl
inin
gS
mith
com
be, S
harp
enho
e A
nd S
undo
n H
ills
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd4
21.2
74/
15/2
004
Unf
avou
rabl
e de
clin
ing
Sm
ithco
mbe
, Sha
rpen
hoe
And
Sun
don
Hill
sS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
528
.86
4/15
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
decl
inin
gS
mith
com
be, S
harp
enho
e A
nd S
undo
n H
ills
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd6
13.2
16/
7/20
04U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eS
outh
ill L
ake
And
Woo
dsM
BB
road
leav
ed, m
ixed
and
yew
woo
dlan
d - l
owla
nd1
25.2
87/
30/1
998
Favo
urab
leS
tevi
ngto
n M
arsh
BB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd1
4.63
7/1/
1999
Unf
avou
rabl
e no
cha
nge
Ste
ving
ton
Mar
shB
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
22.
857/
1/19
99U
nfav
oura
ble
decl
inin
gS
undo
n C
halk
Qua
rry
SB
Fen,
mar
sh a
nd s
wam
p1
1.49
3/18
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eS
undo
n C
halk
Qua
rry
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd2
24.6
83/
18/2
004
Favo
urab
leS
win
eshe
ad W
ood
BB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
19.
035/
25/1
999
Favo
urab
leS
win
eshe
ad W
ood
BB
Bro
adle
aved
, mix
ed a
nd y
ew w
oodl
and
- low
land
212
.53
5/25
/199
9Fa
vour
able
Tebw
orth
Mar
shS
BFe
n, m
arsh
and
sw
amp
15.
582/
20/2
002
Unf
avou
rabl
e re
cove
ring
Tilw
ick
Mea
dow
BB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd1
2.56
7/9/
2001
Favo
urab
leTo
ttern
hoe
Cha
lk Q
uarr
yS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
110
.57
1/18
/200
1U
nfav
oura
ble
decl
inin
gTo
ttern
hoe
Cha
lk Q
uarr
yS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
21.
621/
14/1
998
Favo
urab
leTo
ttern
hoe
Cha
lk Q
uarr
yS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
31.
215/
31/2
000
Unf
avou
rabl
e de
clin
ing
Totte
rnho
e K
nolls
SB
Cal
care
ous
gras
slan
d - l
owla
nd1
4.6
9/29
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
reco
verin
gTo
ttern
hoe
Kno
llsS
BC
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
- low
land
28.
489/
29/2
004
Favo
urab
leTo
ttern
hoe
Sto
ne P
itS
BE
arth
her
itage
12.
051/
11/2
002
Favo
urab
leW
aven
don
Hea
th P
onds
MB
Bog
s1
2.52
9/10
/200
4U
nfav
oura
ble
no c
hang
eW
aven
don
Hea
th P
onds
MB
Neu
tral g
rass
land
- lo
wla
nd2
2.21
9/6/
2004
Unf
avou
rabl
e no
cha
nge
Yel
den
Mea
dow
sB
BN
eutra
l gra
ssla
nd -
low
land
12.
7610
/17/
2002
Favo
urab
le
App
endi
x 3.
2: C
ondi
tion
of B
edfo
rdsh
ire's
Cou
nty
Wild
life
Site
sD
ata
from
mon
itorin
g ca
rrie
d ou
t in
2002
, 200
3 &
200
4*
Site
Site
Num
ber
Uni
tD
istr
ict
Are
a (h
a)D
ate
surv
eyed
Surv
eyor
Hab
itat
Con
ditio
nA
mpt
hill
Par
k18
82/4
/11
M7.
626
.6.0
2P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
eA
mpt
hill
Par
k18
82/4
/12
M17
26.6
.02
PI
LAU
nfav
oura
ble
Am
pthi
ll P
ark
1882
/4/1
3M
15.5
26.6
.02
PI
LAU
nfav
oura
ble
Am
pthi
ll P
ark
(Lau
rel W
ood)
1882
/4/1
4M
9.6
26.6
.02
PI
LWU
nfav
oura
ble
Asp
leyb
ury
Woo
d31
061/
11
M3
23.4
.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Buc
kle
Gro
ve31
006/
11
M16
8.5.
02P
ILW
Favo
urab
leC
ainh
oepa
rk W
ood
3107
0/3
1M
3.7
25.4
.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Cai
nhoe
park
Woo
d31
070/
32
M4.
425
.4.0
2P
ILW
Favo
urab
leC
ainh
oepa
rk W
ood
3107
0/3
3M
0.5
25.4
.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Flitw
ick
Woo
d17
89/2
1M
24.5
10.5
.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Hol
cot W
ood
3056
0/1
1M
22.7
15.5
.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Lark
Hill
3101
8/1/
11
M0.
81.
7.02
PI
LNFa
vour
able
Mar
ston
Thr
ift n
on-S
SS
I30
580/
121
M18
.716
.5.0
2P
ILW
Unf
avou
rabl
eM
arst
on T
hrift
spi
nnie
s30
580/
121
M3.
79.
5.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Mar
ston
Thr
ift s
pinn
ies
3058
0/12
2M
1.4
9.5.
02P
ILW
Favo
urab
leM
arst
on T
hrift
spi
nnie
s30
580/
123
M0.
69.
5.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Mau
lden
hea
th &
gra
ssla
nds
3100
8/6
1M
8.3
28.6
.02/
1.7.
02P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
eM
auld
en h
eath
& g
rass
land
s31
008/
63
M0.
928
.6.0
2/1.
7.02
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Mau
lden
hea
th &
gra
ssla
nds
3100
8/6
4M
4.6
28.6
.02/
1.7.
02P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eM
auld
en h
eath
& g
rass
land
s31
008/
66
M2.
528
.6.0
2/1.
7.02
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Mau
lden
hea
th &
gra
ssla
nds
3100
8/6
7M
4.5
28.6
.02/
1.7.
02P
ILA
Favo
urab
leM
auld
en h
eath
& g
rass
land
s31
008/
68
M2.
228
.6.0
2/1.
7.02
PI
LAFa
vour
able
Mea
dhoo
k W
ood
3100
21
M2.
53.
5.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Por
tobe
llo W
ood
3100
0/1
1M
2.9
3.5.
02P
ILW
Favo
urab
leS
alfo
rd W
ood
3064
91
M1
9.5.
02P
ILW
Favo
urab
leS
imps
onhi
ll P
lant
atio
n31
010/
51
M14
.521
.5.0
2P
ILW
Unf
avou
rabl
eS
peed
sdai
ry W
ood
3107
11
M3.
424
.4.0
2P
ILW
Unf
avou
rabl
eS
tepp
ingl
ey H
ospi
tal G
roun
ds18
70/1
1M
0.8
10.5
.02
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Tem
ple
Gro
ve31
072/
21
M2.
124
.4.0
2P
ILW
Unf
avou
rabl
eTi
ngle
y Fi
eld
Pla
ntat
ion
3106
6/1
1M
7.8
11.6
.02
PI
LWFa
vour
able
War
ren
Woo
d31
010/
71
M26
2.5.
02P
ILW
Favo
urab
leW
ater
gate
Mea
dow
, Teb
wor
th30
304/
11
M1.
64.
7.02
PI
LNFa
vour
able
Asp
ley
Gui
se M
eado
ws
431
M1.
316
.9.0
3P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eA
mpt
hill
Cem
eter
y20
11
M1.
416
.9.0
3P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
e
Am
pthi
ll C
uttin
g19
91
M2.
116
.9.0
3P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eA
mpt
hill
Kno
ll20
11
M0.
916
.9.0
3P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
eD
uck
End
191
1M
1.6
22.7
.03
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Duc
k E
nd19
12
M1.
722
.7.0
3P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
eH
eath
Mea
dow
(Ouz
el V
alle
y)11
1S
2.3
5.6.
03P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
eLi
nsla
de W
ood
91
S5.
520
.5.0
3P
ILW
Unf
avou
rabl
eN
orth
ley
Farm
Mea
dow
s31
41
M1.
619
.9.0
3P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eO
uzel
Mea
dow
s (O
uzel
Val
ley)
111
S14
17.6
.03
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Pul
loxh
ill N
orth
Mar
sh18
01
M0.
817
.9.0
3P
IF
Unf
avou
rabl
eP
ullo
xhill
Sou
th G
rass
land
s17
91
M8.
417
.9.0
3P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eP
ullo
xhill
Sou
th G
rass
land
s17
92
M2.
417
.9.0
3P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eR
eads
hill
Gra
ssla
nd18
41
M0.
317
.9.0
3P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
eS
andh
ouse
Pit
(Dou
ble
Arc
hes)
181
S3
24.6
.03
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
San
dhou
se P
it (D
oubl
e A
rche
s)18
2S
0.8
24.6
.03
PI
LCFa
vour
able
Shi
lling
ton
Chu
rchy
ard
294
1M
1.2
19.9
.03
PI
LNFa
vour
able
Shi
lling
ton
Mea
dow
292
1M
1.9
19.9
.03
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Sto
ckgr
ove
Cou
ntry
Par
k16
/17
1S
10.5
11.6
.03/
12.6
.03
PI
LAU
nfav
oura
ble
Sto
ckgr
ove
Cou
ntry
Par
k16
/17
2S
0.5
11.6
.03/
12.6
.03
PI
LAFa
vour
able
Tidd
enfo
ot P
ark
51
S4
12.6
.03
PI
LAFa
vour
able
Wav
endo
n H
eath
Ful
lers
Ear
th Q
uarr
y39
1M
1025
.6.0
3P
ILA
Unf
avou
rabl
eA
stey
Woo
d61
1B
8.8
20.5
.04
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Bow
els
Woo
d23
01
B8.
322
.6.0
4R
LLW
Favo
urab
leH
ow W
ood
851
B2.
220
.5.0
4P
ILW
Favo
urab
leLa
mbe
rt's
Spi
nney
601
B2.
124
.5.0
4P
ILW
Favo
urab
leM
olliv
er's
Woo
d23
11
B3.
629
.7.0
4R
LLW
Favo
urab
leP
ippi
n W
ood
259
1B
4.7
7.9.
04R
LLW
Favo
urab
leR
anso
m's
Woo
d63
1B
2.1
24.5
.04
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Sal
em T
hrift
861
B8.
214
.6.0
4R
LLW
Favo
urab
leS
heer
hatc
h W
ood
332
1B
7118
.6.0
4R
LLW
Favo
urab
leA
shen
Gro
ve12
21
S3.
71.
6.04
SH
LWFa
vour
able
Bad
gerd
ell W
ood
150
1S
10.6
7.5.
04P
ILW
Favo
urab
leC
astle
crof
t Woo
d13
91
S3.
99.
6.04
SH
LWFa
vour
able
Chi
ltern
Gre
en27
61
S2.
812
.7.0
4P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eFo
lly W
ood
132
1S
4.2
7.5.
04P
ILW
Favo
urab
leG
eorg
e W
ood,
Stre
atle
y16
51
S5.
26.
5.04
PI
LWU
nfav
oura
ble
Gre
encr
oft W
ood
114
1S
3.9
1.6.
04S
HLW
Favo
urab
leLi
ttle
John
's/D
ame
Elle
n's
Woo
ds13
71
S3.
79.
6.04
SH
LWFa
vour
able
Long
Gro
ve12
31
S3
25.6
.04
SH
LWFa
vour
able
Sal
low
sprin
gs W
ood
120
1S
2.1
30.6
.04/
16.7
.04
SH
LWFa
vour
able
Ski
mpo
t Woo
d14
01
S2.
58.
6.04
SH
LWFa
vour
able
Sta
nbrid
ge M
eado
ws
291
S4.
110
.6.0
4P
ILN
Favo
urab
leS
tann
ers
Woo
d14
11
S3.
248.
6.04
SH
LWFa
vour
able
Sun
don
Woo
d16
21
S5.
45.
5.04
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Thor
n S
prin
g13
51
S3.
93.
6.04
PI
LWU
nfav
oura
ble
Blu
e La
goon
305
1M
528
.7.0
4R
LLC
Favo
urab
leB
lunh
am D
isus
ed R
ailw
ay34
81
M5.
23.
9.04
RL
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Bro
adla
nds
298
1M
313
.5.0
4P
ILW
Favo
urab
leB
ury
Farm
, HC
(Kin
g's
Woo
d &
gra
ssla
nd)
229
1M
465.
7.04
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Chi
cksa
nds
Aer
ial S
ite (c
gra
ssla
nd)
290
1M
1613
.7.0
4P
ILN
Favo
urab
leC
ocka
yne
Hat
ley
Woo
d37
31
M40
16.6
.04
RL
LWFa
vour
able
Eve
rton
Chu
rchy
ard
374
1M
0.5
21.7
.04
RL
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Flitt
on M
oor
204
1M
2.7
9.6.
04P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eFl
itton
Moo
r20
42
M0.
59.
6.04
PI
FU
nfav
oura
ble
Gra
nge
Mea
dow
, Hay
nes
225
1M
529
.6.0
4P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eG
rang
e M
eado
w, H
ayne
s22
52
M5
29.6
.04
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
Gra
nge
Mea
dow
, Hay
nes
225
3M
729
.6.0
4P
ILN
Unf
avou
rabl
eH
ayne
s C
hurc
h E
nd M
arsh
220
1M
3.5
4.6.
04P
IF
Des
troye
dLo
wer
Ald
ers
303
1M
5.1
2.6.
04P
ILW
Favo
urab
leM
onta
gue
Woo
d18
61
M6
10.5
.04
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Moo
rs P
lant
atio
n19
61
M2.
328
.5.0
4P
ILW
Favo
urab
leN
unsw
ood
304
1M
2.9
17.6
.04
RL
LWFa
vour
able
Pal
mer
s W
ood
327
1M
6126
.5.0
4R
LLW
Favo
urab
leP
atem
ans
Woo
d29
71
M5.
913
.5.0
4P
ILW
Favo
urab
leP
enny
fath
ers
Moo
rs &
Gra
ssla
nds
187
1M
7.5
2.6.
04P
ILW
Favo
urab
leP
enny
fath
ers
Moo
rs &
Gra
ssla
nds
187
2M
2.4
2.7.
04P
IF
Unf
avou
rabl
eP
enny
fath
ers
Moo
rs &
Gra
ssla
nds
187
3M
22.
7.04
PI
FU
nfav
oura
ble
Pen
nyfa
ther
s M
oors
& G
rass
land
s18
74
M3.
12.
7.04
PI
FU
nfav
oura
ble
San
dy C
emet
ery
344
1M
1.7
20.7
.04
RL
LAFa
vour
able
Sir
John
s W
ood
363
1M
8.7
15.7
.04
RL
LWFa
vour
able
Ste
war
tby
Lake
209
1M
2314
.6.0
4P
ILC
Favo
urab
leTh
rift W
ood
181
1M
3.4
27.5
.04
PI
LWFa
vour
able
Utc
oate
Gra
nge
Mea
dow
421
M0.
86.
7.04
PI
LAFa
vour
able
Utc
oate
Gra
nge
Mea
dow
422
M0.
56.
7.04
PI
LAU
nfav
oura
ble
Woo
d ne
ar W
ashe
rs W
ood
491
M2.
311
.5.0
4P
ILW
Favo
urab
leW
rest
Par
k G
roun
ds18
31
M2
15.6
.04
PI
LNU
nfav
oura
ble
*Dat
a ta
ken
from
:
Con
ditio
n R
ecor
ding
Sys
tem
for C
ount
y W
ildlif
e S
ites'
pre
pare
d on
beh
alf o
f Mid
Bed
s D
C a
nd th
e B
eds
& L
uton
Wild
life
Wor
king
Gro
upby
the
Gre
ensa
nd T
rust
, Jun
e 20
02, P
hil I
rvin
g.
Mid
Bed
s C
ount
y W
ildlif
e S
ite W
ork
2003
' pre
pare
d on
beh
alf o
f Mid
Bed
s D
C b
y th
e G
reen
sand
Tru
st, D
ecem
ber 2
003,
Phi
l Irv
ing.
Cou
nty
Wild
life
Site
Mon
itorin
g &
Sur
vey
Wor
k 20
04' c
arrie
d ou
t on
beha
lf of
Mid
Bed
s D
C &
Bed
s C
C b
y th
e G
reen
sand
Tru
st, t
heIv
el &
Ous
e C
ount
rysi
de P
roje
ct a
nd th
e N
orth
Chi
ltern
s Tr
ust,
Sep
tem
ber 2
004,
Phi
l Irv
ing.
Key
to h
abita
ts
F =
fen/
mar
sh/s
wam
pLA
= lo
wla
nd a
cid
gras
slan
dLC
= lo
wla
nd c
alca
reou
s gr
assl
and
LN =
low
land
neu
tral g
rass
land
LW =
low
land
woo
dlan
d
Site
Grid
Ref
Dis
tric
tA
rea
(ha)
Stat
usM
anag
emen
t Det
ails
Acc
ess
situ
atio
n
Kem
psto
n W
ood
SP
995
470
BB
16.5
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
oodl
and
Trus
top
en a
cces
sW
ilste
ad W
ood
TL 0
7242
5B
B61
CW
Sow
ned
by H
ayne
s P
ark,
par
t man
aged
by
Par
k, p
art b
y FE
perm
issi
ve a
cces
sW
est W
ood
SP
993
625
BB
84C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
FEop
en a
cces
sB
egw
ary
Bro
okTL
169
564
BB
7.12
CW
Sm
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Cop
le P
itsTL
103
492
BB
1.86
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Sha
rnbr
ook
Sum
mit
SP
963
626
BB
8.82
CW
Sm
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Wym
ingt
on M
eado
wS
P 9
5963
2B
B1.
48C
WS
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sH
arro
ld/O
dell
CP
SP
960
570
BB
58.7
CW
Sow
ned
by B
CC
, man
aged
by
IOC
Pop
en a
cces
sC
laph
am P
ark
Woo
dTL
047
531
BB
11.5
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
eds
CC
open
acc
ess
Ste
ving
ton
Cou
ntry
Wal
kS
P 9
9552
5B
B10
CW
S (p
art)
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Bed
s C
Cop
en a
cces
sFe
nlak
e M
eado
ws
TL 0
6747
6B
B24
LNR
owne
d &
man
aged
by
BB
Cop
en a
cces
sM
owsb
ury
Hill
TL 0
6653
2B
B3
LNR
owne
d &
man
aged
by
BB
Cop
en a
cces
sP
ark
Woo
dTL
046
520
BB
4.6
LNR
owne
d &
man
aged
by
BB
Cop
en a
cces
sP
utno
e W
ood
TL 0
6551
6B
B11
LNR
owne
d &
man
aged
by
BB
Cop
en a
cces
sB
row
n's
Woo
dTL
025
545
BB
6LN
Row
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
BC
open
acc
ess
Hill
Ris
e, B
edfo
rdTL
045
508
BB
1LN
Row
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
BC
open
acc
ess
Bro
mha
m L
ake
TL 0
2751
5B
B10
.8LN
R/C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Bed
s C
Cop
en a
cces
sS
win
eshe
ad &
Spa
noak
Woo
dsTL
065
668
BB
46S
SS
Iow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
oodl
and
Trus
top
en a
cces
sFe
lmer
sham
Gra
vel P
itsS
P 9
9158
4B
B21
.19
SS
SI
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sG
ulliv
er's
Spi
nney
& C
hurc
h Fa
rmS
P 9
8561
5B
B2.
7ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
oodl
and
Trus
top
en a
cces
sLa
nd n
ear W
ater
End
(Cop
le)
TL 1
0447
8B
B3.
3ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
oodl
and
Trus
top
en a
cces
sP
aven
ham
Osi
er B
eds
SP
990
551
BB
1.4
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sP
riory
Cou
ntry
Par
kTL
075
490
BB
100
owne
d &
man
aged
by
BB
Cop
en a
cces
sB
idde
nham
Loo
p C
ount
ry P
ark
TL 0
1449
5B
B26
.3ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
BC
open
acc
ess
Hill
grou
nds
TL 0
3948
9B
B30
owne
d &
man
aged
by
BB
Cop
en a
cces
sC
row
Hill
Far
m, W
ilden
TL 0
8355
2B
B6
CS
S a
gree
men
t pe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
(exp
ires
2013
)M
ilton
Ern
est A
cces
sTL
023
563
BB
0.5
CS
S a
gree
men
tpe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
(exp
ires
2011
)O
akle
y O
pen
Are
aS
P 0
0452
9B
B5.
8C
SS
agr
eem
ent
perm
issi
ve a
cces
s (e
xpire
s 20
12)
Sta
fford
Brid
ge M
eado
ws,
Oak
ley
TL 0
0554
8B
B7.
4C
SS
agr
eem
ent
perm
issi
ve a
cces
s (e
xpire
s 20
13)
But
tons
Ram
sey
Com
mun
ity W
oodl
and
TL 0
0446
7B
B8
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Fore
st o
f Mar
ston
Val
epe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
Dog
Fie
ld, C
ople
TL 1
0249
2B
B5.
5ow
ned
by B
eds
CC
, man
aged
by
Fore
st o
f Mar
ston
Val
eop
en a
cces
sR
idge
way
Com
mun
ity W
oodl
and
TL 0
1546
5B
B13
.4ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y Fo
rest
of M
arst
on V
ale
perm
issi
ve a
cces
sV
an D
iem
ans
Land
TL 0
2045
5B
B8
leas
ed &
man
aged
by
Fore
st o
f Mar
ston
Val
epe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
Bra
min
gham
Woo
dTL
069
259
LB15
.5C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Woo
dlan
d Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Dal
low
Dow
nsTL
075
215
LB40
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y LB
Cop
en a
cces
sFa
llow
field
TL 0
8224
0LB
5C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
LBC
open
acc
ess
Leag
rave
Mar
shTL
058
246
LB6
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y LB
Cop
en a
cces
sB
radg
ers
Hill
TL 0
8724
3LB
10C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
LBC
open
acc
ess
Cow
slip
Mea
dow
TL 0
8224
6LB
6C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
LBC
open
acc
ess
Cas
tle C
roft
with
Blu
ebel
l Woo
dTL
074
206
LB9
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y LB
Cop
en a
cces
sR
iver
side
Wal
kTL
088
235
LB6
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y LB
Cop
en a
cces
sLi
mbu
ry M
eads
TL 0
7024
3LB
5ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y LB
Cop
en a
cces
s
App
endi
x 4.
1: S
ites
with
pub
lic a
cces
s m
anag
ed fo
r nat
ure
cons
erva
tion
in B
edfo
rdsh
ire -
as a
t Jan
200
5
Sto
psle
y C
omm
on w
ith H
ay W
ood
TL 1
0324
4LB
20ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y LB
Cop
en a
cces
sC
hick
sand
s W
ood
TL 1
0040
0M
B11
4C
WS
owne
d by
Cro
wn
Est
ates
, lea
sed
& m
anag
ed b
y FE
perm
issi
ve a
cces
sR
owne
y W
arre
nTL
120
405
MB
110
CW
Sow
ned
by S
outh
ill E
stat
e, p
art m
anag
ed b
y E
stat
e &
par
t by
FEpe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
Col
lege
Woo
dTL
142
470
MB
13C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
FEop
en a
cces
sC
ut T
hroa
t Mea
dow
TL 0
4038
1M
B1.
58C
WS
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sO
ld W
arde
n Tu
nnel
TL 1
1444
6M
B3.
32C
WS
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sC
ampt
on P
lant
atio
nTL
130
389
MB
15.4
CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
eds
CC
open
acc
ess
Duc
k E
nd, M
auld
enTL
051
375
MB
0.84
CW
Sow
ned
by B
CC
, man
aged
by
GS
Top
en a
cces
sR
ushy
mea
de, P
ullo
xhill
TL 0
6433
8M
B7
CW
Sow
ned
by P
ullo
xhill
PC
, man
aged
with
GS
Top
en a
cces
sA
mpt
hill
Par
kTL
025
385
MB
61C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Am
pthi
ll TC
open
acc
ess
Sw
iss
Gar
den
Woo
dlan
dTL
148
447
MB
3.82
CW
Sle
ased
from
Old
War
den
Est
ate,
man
aged
by
Bed
s C
Cop
en a
cces
s, o
n m
arke
d pa
ths
San
dy P
inna
cle
TL 1
7849
3M
B5.
4C
WS
leas
ed b
y S
andy
TC
from
Pym
Est
ate,
man
aged
by
IOC
Pop
en a
cces
sR
eyno
ld &
Hol
cot W
oods
SP
962
391
MB
97.8
CW
S (p
art)
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Woo
dlan
d Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Mar
ston
Val
e M
illen
nium
CP
TL 0
0541
4M
B75
CW
S (p
art)
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Fore
st o
f Mar
ston
Val
epe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
The
Rid
dyTL
167
487
MB
7.68
LNR
owne
d by
San
dy T
C, m
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust &
IOC
Pop
en a
cces
sFl
itton
Moo
rTL
056
360
MB
5.3
LNR
/CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
CC
open
acc
ess
Flitw
ick
Woo
dTL
024
348
MB
13.4
LNR
/CW
Sow
ned
by B
CC
, man
aged
by
FVE
Gop
en a
cces
sH
enlo
w C
omm
on &
Lan
gfor
d M
eado
wTL
184
405
MB
19LN
R/C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Bed
s C
Cop
en a
cces
sC
oope
r's H
illTL
028
376
MB
12.9
5LN
R/S
SS
Iow
ned
by A
mpt
hill
TC, m
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Kin
g's
Woo
d &
Gle
be M
eado
ws
TL 0
4540
3M
B40
LNR
/SS
SI
owne
d &
man
aged
by
BC
Cop
en a
cces
sM
auld
en C
hurc
h M
eado
ws
TL 0
5938
2M
B3.
4LN
R/S
SS
Iow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
CC
open
acc
ess
Mar
ston
Thr
iftS
P 9
7341
8M
B56
.4LN
R/S
SS
I/CW
Sle
ased
& m
anag
ed b
y B
CC
open
acc
ess
Mau
lden
Woo
dTL
074
387
MB
142
SS
SI
owne
d &
man
aged
by
FEop
en a
cces
sW
aven
don
Hea
th P
onds
SP
931
338
MB
4.9
SS
SI
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Bed
ford
Est
ates
acce
ss a
gree
men
t with
BC
C &
GS
TP
otto
n W
ood
TL 2
5250
2M
B94
.8S
SS
I/CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y FE
open
acc
ess
Flitw
ick
Moo
rTL
046
354
MB
38.4
6S
SS
I/CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
CC
& W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Peg
sdon
Hill
sTL
120
295
MB
74.3
9S
SS
I/CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Plu
mm
er's
Cop
se, H
ayne
sTL
098
415
MB
1ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
oodl
and
Trus
top
en a
cces
sS
tanf
ord
Woo
dTL
160
406
MB
24ow
ned
by S
outh
ill E
stat
e, m
anag
ed b
y FE
perm
issi
ve a
cces
sA
rlese
y O
ld M
oat
TL 1
8937
3M
B2.
12ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Gle
be M
eado
ws
TL 1
8937
6M
B2.
14ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
War
ren
Vill
asTL
182
472
MB
8.9
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sA
rlese
y B
ridge
Mea
dow
sTL
188
382
MB
5.48
CS
S a
gree
men
t pe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
(exp
ires
2007
)B
aulk
Hou
se, L
angf
ord
TL 1
7340
3M
B7.
96C
SS
agr
eem
ent
perm
issi
ve a
cces
s (e
xpire
s 20
09)
Car
ts F
arm
Tru
st, G
rave
nhur
stTL
120
361
MB
9.01
CS
S a
gree
men
t pe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
(exp
ires
2013
)C
hick
sand
s A
cces
sTL
131
391
MB
2.5
CS
S a
gree
men
t pe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
(exp
ires
2011
)D
eaco
n H
illTL
125
297
MB
36C
SS
agr
eem
ent
perm
issi
ve a
cces
s (e
xpire
s 20
11)
Mill
Mea
dow
s, n
ear A
rlese
yTL
189
364
MB
14.6
3C
SS
agr
eem
ent
perm
issi
ve a
cces
s (e
xpire
s 20
13)
Mill
Mea
dow
s, S
andy
TL 1
7348
7M
B4
CS
S a
gree
men
tpe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
(exp
ires
2013
)R
ecto
ry W
ood,
Cra
nfie
ldS
P 9
6041
8M
B7.
5ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y Fo
rest
of M
arst
on V
ale
perm
issi
ve a
cces
sB
arto
n G
rave
l Pits
TL 0
9829
9S
B1
CW
Sow
ned
by S
BD
C, m
anag
ed w
ith W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Sew
ell C
uttin
gS
P 9
9722
7S
B3.
57C
WS
owne
d by
SB
DC
, man
aged
with
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sTi
dden
foot
Wat
ersi
de P
ark
SP
915
237
SB
11.5
CW
Sow
ned
by S
BD
C, m
anag
ed b
y G
ST
open
acc
ess
Stu
dham
Com
mon
TL 0
2515
7S
B28
CW
Sow
ned
by S
BD
C, m
anag
ed w
ith S
tudh
am P
C &
NC
Top
en a
cces
s
App
endi
x 4.
1: S
ites
with
pub
lic a
cces
s m
anag
ed fo
r nat
ure
cons
erva
tion
in B
edfo
rdsh
ire -
as a
t Jan
200
5
Whi
psna
de H
eath
TL 0
1718
2S
B23
.6C
WS
owne
d by
SB
DC
& B
CC
, man
aged
with
NT
& N
CT
open
acc
ess
San
dhou
se P
itS
P 9
3629
8S
B4
CW
Sow
ned
by L
afar
ge, m
anag
ed b
y G
ST
perm
issi
ve a
cces
sB
lueb
ell (
Lins
lade
) Woo
dS
P 9
0726
3S
B5.
5C
WS
owne
d by
BC
C, m
anag
ed b
y G
ST
open
acc
ess
Ouz
el M
eado
ws
(incl
. Vim
y R
d)S
P 9
1926
3S
B15
CW
Sow
ned
by L
LTC
& m
anag
ed b
y G
ST
open
acc
ess
Hea
th W
ood
& M
eado
wS
P 9
1227
4S
B11
.6C
WS
owne
d by
SB
DC
, man
aged
with
GS
Top
en a
cces
sLa
ncot
Mea
dow
TL 0
0321
7S
B2.
07C
WS
man
aged
by
the
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sC
otta
ge B
otto
m F
ield
TL 0
4020
6S
B15
LNR
/CW
Sow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y B
eds
CC
open
acc
ess
Gal
ley
& W
arde
n H
ills
TL 0
9226
5S
B52
LNR
/SS
SI
owne
d &
man
aged
by
LBC
open
acc
ess
Totte
rnho
e K
nolls
SP
979
220
SB
13.7
LNR
/SS
SI/C
WS
owne
d by
BC
C, m
anag
ed b
y N
atio
nal T
rust
& W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Dro
psho
rt M
arsh
TL 0
0727
6S
B2
SS
SI
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sD
unst
able
Dow
nsTL
197
204
SB
52.6
SS
SI
owne
d by
BC
C, m
anag
ed b
y N
Top
en a
cces
sW
hips
nade
Dow
nsTL
001
190
SB
34S
SS
Iow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y N
Top
en a
cces
sS
mith
com
be H
ills
TL 0
7329
5S
B17
.59
SS
SI
owne
d by
BC
C, m
anag
ed b
y N
atio
nal T
rust
open
acc
ess
Sun
don
Hill
s C
PTL
055
290
SB
49.8
7S
SS
Iow
ned
by B
CC
, man
aged
by
Nat
iona
l Tru
stop
en a
cces
sTo
ttern
hoe
Qua
rry
SP
985
225
SB
8.51
SS
SI
owne
d &
man
aged
by
the
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sB
low
s D
owns
TL 0
3321
6S
B46
.36
SS
SI/C
WS
owne
d &
man
aged
by
Wild
life
Trus
top
en a
cces
sS
tock
grov
e C
P
SP
918
291
SB
26S
SS
I/CW
Sow
ned
by B
CC
, man
aged
by
GS
Top
en a
cces
sK
ing'
s W
ood,
Hea
th &
Rea
chS
P 9
3229
8S
B63
.5S
SS
I/NN
Row
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y La
farg
e, W
ildlif
e Tr
ust,
BC
C &
GS
Tpe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
Bar
ton
Hill
sTL
090
298
SB
44S
SS
I/NN
Row
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y E
nglis
h N
atur
eop
en a
cces
sS
allo
wsp
rings
TL 0
0618
6S
B1.
2ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y W
ildlif
e Tr
ust
open
acc
ess
Hou
ghto
n H
all P
ark
TL 0
2523
5S
B17
.5ow
ned
by S
BD
C &
HR
TC, m
anag
ed b
y N
CT
open
acc
ess
Whi
psna
de G
reen
TL 0
1717
7S
B15
owne
d by
SB
DC
, man
aged
with
NT,
NC
T &
Zoo
open
acc
ess
Lins
lade
Com
mun
ity W
oodl
and
SP
905
260
SB
32ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y Le
ake
Fam
ily T
rust
acce
ss a
s lo
ng a
s sc
hem
e la
sts
Sha
rpen
hoe
Cla
pper
sTL
067
303
SB
29ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y N
atio
nal T
rust
open
acc
ess
Mol
eski
nTL
063
297
SB
45ow
ned
& m
anag
ed b
y N
atio
nal T
rust
open
acc
ess
Kno
lls W
ood
SP
921
270
SB
5.3
owne
d by
SB
DC
, man
aged
with
GS
Top
en a
cces
sC
hew
s C
harit
y Fa
rm, D
unst
able
TL 0
0023
2S
B4.
04C
SS
agr
eem
ent
perm
issi
ve a
cces
s (e
xpire
s 20
12)
Hea
th &
Rea
ch P
oors
Lan
dS
P 9
1928
2S
B3
CS
S a
gree
men
t pe
rmis
sive
acc
ess
(exp
ires
2009
)
App
endi
x 4.
1: S
ites
with
pub
lic a
cces
s m
anag
ed fo
r nat
ure
cons
erva
tion
in B
edfo
rdsh
ire -
as a
t Jan
200
5
App
endi
x 4.
2:
Det
ails
for B
edfo
rdsh
ire d
istr
icts
, the
Eas
t of E
ngla
nd a
nd E
ngla
nd
from
The
Woo
dlan
d Tr
ust (
2004
) ‘Sp
ace
for P
eopl
e: T
arge
tting
act
ion
for w
oodl
and
acce
ss’
The
Woo
dlan
d Tr
ust A
cces
s S
tand
ard
aspi
res
• th
at n
o pe
rson
sho
uld
live
mor
e th
an 5
00m
from
at l
east
one
are
a of
acc
essi
ble
woo
dlan
d of
no
less
than
2ha
in s
ize
• th
at th
ere
shou
ld a
lso
be a
t lea
st o
ne a
rea
of a
cces
sibl
e w
oodl
and
of n
o le
ss th
an 2
0ha
with
in 4
km (8
km ro
und
trip)
of p
eopl
e’s
hom
es
Eng
land
E
ast o
f Eng
land
B
edfo
rdsh
ire
Luto
n B
eds
Bor
ough
M
id B
eds
Sou
th B
eds
% p
opul
atio
n w
ith a
cces
s to
2h
a+ w
ood
with
in 5
00m
10.1
8 8.
49
5.19
6.
51
3.61
8.
97
3.22
Accessible woods
% p
opul
atio
n w
ith a
cces
s to
a
20ha
+ w
ood
with
in 4
km
55.1
8
44
.24
43.5
30
8.73
75.2
455
.25
% e
xtra
pop
ulat
ion
with
ac
cess
to a
2ha
+ w
ood
with
in 5
00m
if e
xist
ing
woo
ds o
pene
d
26.0
8
27
.48
22.5
924
.51
16.0
527
.73
25.6
6
Inaccessible woods
% e
xtra
pop
ulat
ion
with
ac
cess
to a
20h
a+ w
ood
w
ithin
4km
if e
xist
ing
woo
ds
open
ed
26.7
4
37
.55
25.7
480
.80
32.5
013
.41
30.0
8
% p
opul
atio
n re
quiri
ng n
ew
woo
dlan
d fo
r acc
ess
to a
2h
a+ w
ood
with
in 5
00m
63.7
4
64
.03
72.2
268
.98
80.3
463
.30
71.1
2
% p
opul
atio
n re
quiri
ng n
ew
woo
dlan
d fo
r acc
ess
to a
20
ha+
woo
d w
ithin
4km
18.0
8
18
.21
30.7
219
.20
58.7
711
.34
14.6
7
Min
imum
are
a of
new
w
oodl
and
requ
ired
for 2
ha+
woo
ds w
ithin
500
m (h
a)
48,6
83
7,35
259
077
195
275
119
Woodland creation
Min
imum
are
a of
new
w
oodl
and
requ
ired
for
20ha
+ w
oods
with
in 4
km
(ha)
15,3
92
3,25
416
320
6340
80