SuDS for People and Wildlife

Transcription

1 SuDS for People and Wildlife Marcia Rae Graduate Research Assistant

2 A sequence of management practices and control systems designed to drain surface water in a more sustainable manner than some conventional techniques CIRIA 2000 Graham et al Sustainable drainage systems: Maximising the potential for people and wildlife

3 Holm Dell, Highland Council flood alleviation project

4 Knocknagael, Slackbuie

5 Multiple benefits Improving biodiversity Providing amenity Connecting with the local environment

6 Focus on Amphibians Amphibians are in global decline (Wyman 1990) Reduction and homogeneity of habitat (Brooks et al,2005) SuDS are required in all new developments in Scotland Previous studies suggest amphibians are utilising SUDS (Brand and Snodgrass, 2009;Parris,2006)

7 Limited powers of dispersal Easily recognised No specialist equipment required

8 Methodology Builds on work that started in 2010 Identified ponds Surveyed for amphibians Looked at characteristics of ponds Habitat connectivity Water quality Woodside, Culloden

9 DNA sampling

10 Community engagement 50 secondary school pupils Over 100 members of the public 158 primary school pupils

11 Pond Drying Ponds that did not have amphibians were dry on average 7 out of 10yrs Amphibian species richness was also correlated with the number of years a pond was dry

12 Amphibian Presence Amphibians present at 75% of sites 10 sites with one species present 19 sites with more than one species present

13 Invertebrates Invertebrate species richness was associated with amphibian presence

14 Vegetation Cover Probability of amphibians decreases with increasing coverage of nonaquatic vegetation Probability of amphibian presence increases with increasing aquatic vegetation coverage

15 Predator Refuge Gently sloping sides Shallow edges High percentage of native vegetation cover

16 Terrestrial Habitat Quality 27 of 40 sites were classed as good or high quality 23 of these sites had amphibians Amphibians agreed with us 85% of the time

17 OPAL Water Quality Survey All control ponds were in very healthy category SuDS scores varied more but the majority were quite healthy or very healthy 15 SuDS in same category as GCN ponds

18 Nitrate, Phosphate and Salt The majority of Phosphate and nitrate concentrations were below 2mg/L Salt concentrations lower than levels that would prevent amphibian breeding

19 Issues Raised Ownership Tower Road, Culloden

20 Maintenance Druid Temple Road

21 Knocknagael, Slackbuie Tower Road, Culloden

22 Morningfield Drive Inshes Park Woodside Heights

23 No fencing or warning signs Gently sloping sides Highest number of frog spawn and newts recorded Maintenance paid for by residents Briargrove Drive, Inshes

24 In conclusion SuDS support amphibian populations and other wildlife They have the potential to provide added amenity, education and biodiversity to the city environment Information on ownership and maintenance needs to be addressed

25 References. Brand, A.B., Snodgrass, J.W (2009) Value of artificial habitats for amphibian reproduction in altered landscapes. Conserv Biology 24(1): Brooks, R. P., Wardrop, D. H., Cole, C. A. and Campbell, D. A (2005) Are we purveyors of wetland homogeneity? A model of degredation and restoration to improve wetland mitigation performance. Ecological Engineering 24: CIRIA (2000) Sustainable urban drainage systems design manual for Scotland and Northern Ireland. CIRIA, London Graham, A., Day, J., Bray, B. and Mackenzie, S. (2008) Sustainable drainage systems: Maximising the potential for people and wildlife O Brien, D. (2014) Sustainable drainage system (SuDS) ponds in Inverness, UK and the favourable conservation status of amphibians. Urban Ecosyst 18(1): Parris, K. M. (2006) Urban amphibian assemblages as metacommunities. Journal of Animal Ecology 75: Wyman, R.L (1990) What s happening to the amphibians? Conserv Biology 4: