the online meeting place for all who love our amphibians and reptiles
Home Page Live Forums Archived Forums Site Search Identify Record Donate Projects Links
Forum Home Forum Home > Conservation > Habitat Loss
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Development and Translocation
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Development and Translocation

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
calumma View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote calumma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Development and Translocation
    Posted: 10 Jun 2004 at 6:58pm
As a conservationist I am increasingly frustrated by the poorly conceived 'mitigation' and 'translocation' projects that effectively exploit loopholes in current legislation.

Although mitigation projects that involve the movement of European protected species can and do occur, I feel that the current licensing system is more than capable of ensuring that method statements are sufficiently robust. Whether there is sufficient follow-through on such projects to ensure that proposed work maintains best practice is a different matter of course!

My real issue is with the wholesale translocation of the more widespread reptile species. In areas of rapid development (think Ashford, Thames Gateway etc), onsite mitigation options are limited and offsite translocation is the norm. However, suitable sites for translocation are few and developers are usually extremely time constrained and unwilling to wait months or years for otherwise unsuitable habitat to be brought into a favourable status. Increasingly, we are seeing the movement of animals into areas where the species already occur. Such areas include public open spaces owned by local authorities (e.g. country parks). Developers and their consultants are also starting to approach nature conservation organisations. For such organisations, allowing consultants to release animals into otherwise protected areas could represent a significant revenue stream. Should we be accepting that country parks and nature reserves are nothing more than dumping grounds for animals that are otherwise holding up development? Should conservation organisations, at least, oppose such activities on the basis that wholesale translocation is a poor conservation tool?

Thoughts on this are welcome...

Lee
Lee Brady

Kent Herpetofauna Recorder | Independent Ecological Consultant



Email
Back to Top
calumma View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote calumma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2004 at 3:07pm
A further issue to throw into the debate.

Should conservation organisations themselves be paid by developers to undertake protected species survey work. Many organisations will act in a consultancy capacity in order to provide protected species information to developers. Some organisations go one step further and actually engage in translocation work. There is no evidence to suggest that the quality of such work differs from other consultancies (read that how you will...).

Obviously it is beneficial for protected species to be identified before development proposals are at an advanced stage. However, I have a concern that the lure of money may encourage the unwise to provide advice that does not necessarily further conservation ideals.

Lee
Lee Brady

Kent Herpetofauna Recorder | Independent Ecological Consultant



Email
Back to Top
Wolfgang Wuster View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 374
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Wolfgang Wuster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2004 at 4:46pm
Lee,

Regarding your last point, the HGBI guidelines for ARGs quite strongly advise AGAINST any partcipation in relocation schemes, although there is (as far as I recall) nothing there against initial survey work being done by them. This seems to strike roughly the right balance...

Cheers,

Wolfgang

Wolfgang Wüster

School of Biological Sciences, University of Wales, Bangor

http://pages.bangor.ac.uk/~bss166/
Back to Top
calumma View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote calumma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2004 at 4:55pm
Wolfgang,

I'm not necessarily referring to ARGs when I talk about conservation organisations. Think *cough* countryside projects *cough* or *cough* wildlife trusts *cough* ;-)

Lee
Lee Brady

Kent Herpetofauna Recorder | Independent Ecological Consultant



Email
Back to Top
herpetologic2 View Drop Down
Forum Coordinator
Forum Coordinator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote herpetologic2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2004 at 6:01am
Not to mention certain government bodies who fail to even take on any mitigation or compensation prior to their cough restoration work cough cough cough!!!!
Back to Top
calumma View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote calumma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jun 2004 at 11:18am
A further issue for folk to consider.

How ethical is it for consultants to translocate animals onto roadside verges. Although roadside habitat could be sympathetically managed, it is very difficult to install structures such as hibernacula etc into such areas. Many verges offer good habitat for reptiles and can act as important dispersal corridors through an otherwise inhospitable landscape (think arable). However, releasing a large number of animals onto a verge (where there is potentially already a good population) could overload an area and result in significant roadkill.

Does it happen? You betcha...

Lee
Lee Brady

Kent Herpetofauna Recorder | Independent Ecological Consultant



Email
Back to Top
test View Drop Down
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote test Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Jun 2004 at 1:11pm

Doesn't sound very ethical at all Lee.

Apart from the possibility of existing populations being at carrying capacity, how likely is it that roadside verges used as receptor sites would be managed in the long term to avoid succession into not so good reptile habitat I wonder?

Still I suppose if a consultant has been paid lots of money to mitigate a site, they have to dump (sorry translocate) the animals to somewhere. Cough cough cough.

Back to Top
herpetologic2 View Drop Down
Forum Coordinator
Forum Coordinator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1511
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote herpetologic2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jun 2004 at 6:49pm

Hmmm we will get to the point of absolutely no movement of any animals from proposed development sites???

Cough Cough - maybe we will be given the light within the new reptile mitigation guidelines from English Nature

Hibernacula can easily be built along road verges - and they can be built within the arable land (say a nice ditch with bank and hedge) - but is there any legal obligation to do so - well technically there is isnt there - Abandonment of Animals Act is it 1960? 

Lee if it was proposed to move reptiles onto a road verge, say a development was being planned alongside a road - which had an extensive soft landscape - newly created with small bushes - grassland developing etc

It would be correct to survey the proposed development site (donor)and the road verge (receptor) - would it be possible to move the reptile population onto the adjoining land and road verge after suitable hibernacula, log piles etc have been constructed - of course an agreed monitoring programme should also be put in place - would this be acceptable??? would it happen?

Has anyone driven along the A12 recently I think last year reptiles were captured from the roadside and translocated several miles to a country park - do you remember Lee (at our EARG meeting) the location was confidential despite it been reported in the press -

Thousands of pounds was spent on reptile fencing over 4kilometres of road and they moved the animals off the roadside!!!! Apparently to prevent the animals from being road kill!!!

People are questioning the amount sof money being spent on reptile mitigation aswell as GCN's - some are saying what good does it do really? others are saying who is going to pay for all this (mitigation)? what can be done differently with the money to benefit nature conservation????

 

 

 

Back to Top
test View Drop Down
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote test Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jun 2004 at 7:58pm

My view is we should be looking at the purchase of arable land before mitigations occur. This way it could be given the time to develop into reasonable habitat and act as receptor sites ready made. I do not know if this is economical or truly desirable, what are others thoughts on this?

I guess the legal obligation doesn't ask a lot really, but we have to ask how a translocation should be judged.

Is it successful if the animals are simply moved to stop them being squashed by heavy plant machinery?

Or, should mitigation really aim to result in a viable breeding population that is capable of colinisation of surrounding habitat and gene interaction with other populations.

GCN moved to urban country parks springs to mind, what does it achieve if there is no gene flow? (this is not directed at any particular project, just an example) I would view road side verges along the same lines, yes possibly good corridors for naturally dispersing animals, but very poor as receptor sites for viable populations in the long term?

The verges of the A12 do look very good, but will these areas be managed in the long term to suit reptiles, or will they likely succumb to succession to scrub and eventually woodland over the years?

In particular the problem I can see with linear habitat is that only a short distance of the site needs to become uninhabitable for the reptiles to become isolated.

I wonder how the abandonment of animals act would be interpreted if a case did go to court concerning animals left on a roadside verge, not very favourably perhaps?

Back to Top
calumma View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote calumma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Jun 2004 at 8:57am
Habitat enhancement work (inc building hibernacula etc) can be undertaken in many places. However, if there is any perceived health and safety issue, such work is unlikely to take place. Many highway carriages are designed with wide verges to facilitate future road widening schemes. I remember a local authority countryside officer bemoaning the very existence of 'roadside nature reserves'. His view was 'what's the point'...

I agree with Gemma's view that mitigation should include provision for habitat creation/enhancement. Unfortunately the current legislation provides no means by which this can be enforced. It can therefore be very difficult to convince a client to undertake such work. Although it may be unlawful to abandon an animal in a place where it is not likely to survive, the practicality of proving that such an event took place means that a prosecution is very unlikely.

I believe that most reputable consultants (ecological or otherwise) would be unprepared to dump animals into areas that are clearly not going to support any animal life. However, even well intentioned translocations often target areas that are perceived to be 'good' habitat, but which already support reptile populations. The result is an ever increasing 'dumping' of animals into existing habitat areas and little or no habitat creation. Monitoring of such projects rarely takes place.

Rather worryingly, I know of several local authorities that acknowledge this unfortunate trend by simply ignoring reptiles during the planning process. That is, the local countryside/planning officer may be aware of an important reptile population on a site but takes no action because he/she believes translocation work to be a waste of time...

Lee

Edited by calumma
Lee Brady

Kent Herpetofauna Recorder | Independent Ecological Consultant



Email
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.06
Copyright ©2001-2016 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 1.125 seconds.