BIODIVERSITY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
SUNNYBANK VALE, DROYLSDEN
June 2011
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 2
BIODIVERSITY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
SUNNYBANK VALE, DROYLSDEN
A Report prepared for –
Friends of Sunnybank Vale, Droylsden
By
The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit
Tameside MBC
Room 1.45 Council Offices
Wellington Road
Ashton-under-Lyne
Tameside
Ol6 6DL
0161 342 2250
June 2011
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 3
CONTENTS
1 Introduction
2 Background to this Assessment
3 Overall Site Description
4 Legislative framework and responsibilities
5 Suggested Biodiversity Enhancement Measures - Recommendations
6 Other Useful Sources of Information/funding
Appendices
1 Species Recorded during the visit
2 Invasive Weeds
3 The control of Himalayan balsam
4 The control of Japanese knotweed
5 Map of site showing its proximity to Clayton Vale LNR and SBI’s
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 4
1 INTRODUCTION
Biodiversity can perhaps best be defined as ‘the mix of wild plants and
animals with which we share our world’, or more simply as ‘wildlife’. Urban
greenspaces can be valuable places for biodiversity and can provide
important wildlife corridors to allow wildlife to move through.
This is an assessment of the current biodiversity value of one of these
spaces, Sunnybank Vale, and provides suggestions for some simple
measures that could be taken to enhance the biodiversity value of the site.
2 BACKGROUND TO THIS ASSESSMENT
The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) was asked by the Friends of
Sunnybank Vale to make a brief visit to the site and provide a short follow-up
report with suggestions for biodiversity enhancements.
The information in this report has been drawn from a short site visit on 14th
June 2011 conducted by Mandy Elford, Greater Manchester Biodiversity
Manager and Suzanne Waymont, Senior Ecologist, together with an
Ecological Data Search for existing information about the site, obtained from
the GM Local Records Centre. This only shows site details no protected
species records are shown therefore it should not be taken as a
comprehensive ecological assessment of the site.
3 OVERALL SITE DESCRIPTION
The site now known as Sunnybank Vale is a former landfill site previously
known and sometimes still referred to simply as ‘the tip’. The majority of the
land is owned by Greater Manchester Waste although the perimeter of the
site is owned and maintained by Tameside MBC. The site is bounded to the
east by residential properties, to the south by open recreation grounds and
allotments, to the west (separated by Edge Lane) by Clayton Vale Local
Nature Reserve (LNR) and to the north by residential properties and Clayton
Vale LNR.
Sunnybank Vale is a valuable area of greenspace east of Manchester City
Centre and has the potential to serve a large part of the community of
Droylsden. The site is already an important habitat for wildlife however there
is significant potential for enhancing the biodiversity value of the site and also
making the site more welcoming for people.
The site is adjacent to Clayton Vale LNR and two of the ponds within the LNR
are Sites of Biological Importance (SBIs).
There are no Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within the site
boundary.
Bullfinch was recorded on the site visit; bullfinch is a UK Biodiversity Priority
Species.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 5
The site comprises planted broadleaved trees, scrub and semi-natural
grassland which is generally rather species-poor. There are some old mature
trees around the perimeter of the site and some standing deadwood. There
are also areas of wet grassland.
4 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK AND RESPONSIBILITIES
There are certain laws, statutes and guidelines related to nature conservation
that groups and developers should be aware of and need to take into account
when planning management and/or changes to the habitats on a site.
These will be covered in detail should a full ecological assessment of the site
be commissioned, but this preliminary study has indicated that the most
important statutory duties that apply to this site may relate to the need to
control invasive plant species, particularly Himalayan balsam and Japanese
knotweed.
5 SUGGESTED BIODIVERSITY ENHANCEMENT MEASURES
Sunnybank Vale has potential for biodiversity enhancements. The following
preliminary proposals are suggestions and not prescriptions, open for debate
and change.
Suggestions are made for the enhancement of the existing important
biodiversity features on the site but there are also more general suggestions.
All of the proposals are aimed at the principle of increasing the number and
variety of ecological niches available in Sunnybank Vale. This means
introducing as much variety as possible, particularly in terms of providing:
1 temporal variety – this means having food sources and sources of
shelter and protection available for as many wildlife species as
possible for as much of the year as possible. For example, planting a
range of flowering plants that make nectar available through as much
of the year as possible, or putting up bat hibernation boxes for use
during the winter months.
2 as wide a range of sustainable food sources as possible
3 a range of areas that can be used by wildlife for shelter – for example
log piles, low growing shrubs and artificial nesting boxes for birds, bats
and invertebrates.
4 a variety of texture and structure in the vegetation – for example,
planting hedgerows and shrubs, allowing grass to grow to different
heights in some places and allowing some areas of bare soil to be
created and left for periods in the year.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 6
Recommendations –
The following are general recommendations and could be subject to
change and/or modification if a full survey is commissioned.
Certain areas of the site have densely planted young trees, these trees
require thinning in places this will enable a woodland ground flora to establish
and/or be planted and will also provide site-lines along the paths making the
site feel more welcoming and safe for people.
Retain standing deadwood wherever possible. Leave fallen branches to
decay on site where possible and create log piles from the thinning of the
trees. Dead wood is great for invertebrates.
Removal of the invasive plant species Himalayan balsam and Japanese
knotweed (see appendix 3 & 4 re treatment of these species).
Areas of the species poor grassland could be transformed into more speciesrich
wildflower meadows. Advice on how to do this and seed mixes can be
obtained from a variety of sources, including Landlife, a nationally registered
wildflower charity, based in Liverpool. Their email address is
https://www.landlife.org.uk.
Management of areas of semi-natural grassland by mowing once or twice a
year.
There are a number of places where wet grassland occurs; as there are no
open areas of water on the site it would be a good opportunity to create a
number of ponds within these areas. As the site was a former tip, advice
would need to be sought from the environment agency to see if this was
possible.
There are opportunities along the perimeter of the houses to the north of the
site to plant new hedgerows. Once the hedgerows are planted the grass
could be left longer at the base of the hedge line to create more diversity.
Funding is available for the creation of new hedgerows
(www.treecouncil.org.uk).
A number of bird boxes could be placed around the site. To avoid these
boxes being predated fix a metal panel to the front. This will also save having
to replace boxes which can potentially be destroyed by predators such as
woodpeckers and squirrels.
Consider the placement of a variety of bat boxes for use at various different
times in the year (summer roosting/hibernation).
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 7
USEFUL SOURCES OF INFORMATION/FUNDING
♦ Landlife, a wildflower charity, offer advice on wildflower grassland
creation and can supply seeds. www.wildflower.org.uk
♦ The RSPB are a useful source of information on biodiversity
enhancements for birds. www.rspb.org.uk
♦ The SITA Trust offers a range of grants for practical biodiversity
projects. www.sitatrust.org.uk
♦ The Tree Council offers a range of grants for hedgerow planting and
also woodland planting. www.treecouncil.org.uk
♦ The Heritage Lottery Fund offers a range of funding for community
groups www.hlf.org.uk.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 8
Appendix one – Species Recorded during site visit
Trees/shrubs Grassland
Goat Willow Red clover
Grey Willow Yorkshire fog
Sycamore Creeping buttercup
Silver birch False oat grass
White Poplar Field horsetail
Hawthorn Rosebay willowherb
Maple Crested dog’s tail
Hazel Common vetch
Cherry Common bird’s foot trefoil
Blackthorn Compact rush
Rowan Hard rush
Oak Reed canary grass
Alder Yellow flag iris
Rose Pendulous sedge
Goat Willow Horseradish
Grey Willow Ground elder
Bramble Red clover
Ash Hedge woundwort
Speckled Wood Butterfly – Photo taken on site
Invasive Species
Japanese knotweed
Himalayan balsalm
Fauna
Shrew
Bullfinch (UK Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Species)
Jay
Chiff chaff
Wood Pigeon
Carrion Crow
Blackbird
Speckled wood butterfly
Small skipper butterfly
Alder Beetle
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 9
Appendix two – Invasive Weeds
What are invasive weeds?
Several types of plant can become invasive weeds. They are either native species
that grow well in disturbed or nutrient-enriched conditions, to the detriment of other
plant and animal species, or non-native plants that have been introduced to this
country by accident or as a consequence of trade or deliberate collection. The latter
tend to grow in situations where native plants of similar form do not. Not all nonnative
species become weeds, but if they do, they become very difficult to control.
Native weed species, although troublesome, do not cause as much ecological or
physical damage as the non-native variety. Invasive non-native species tend to share
characteristics that make them successful. These are related to the method of
reproduction, growth rate, growth form and persistence, but in particular the absence
of pests and diseases and their consequent resistance to control. The introduction of
plant species into new environments carries risks. The danger of species becoming
serious weeds in agricultural areas is well controlled, but other potential weeds are
not currently recognised and subject to risk assessment and management. The
effects of climate change will alter the distribution of weed species in future; already,
several aquatic weeds found in Europe originated in sub-tropical areas of the world.
The predicted consequences of global warming, including increased temperatures,
increased carbon dioxide and stormier weather, make it more likely that additional
invasive species will cause problems in future. The huge increase in the distribution
of Himalayan balsam since 1962 indicates that conditions are ideally suited for this
species. Other species may respond similarly in future if climate change favours their
colonisation and rapid growth. Plants that grow in water and on riverbanks can cause
flooding if not managed correctly. The consequences and costs of invasive nonnative
species are huge.
Existing legislation
When non-native species become invasive they can transform ecosystems, causing
a variety of problems including seriously threatening native and endangered species.
These problems are acknowledged in several international treaties, European Union
Directives and also in domestic legislation. The problems caused by some invasive
non-native species occur worldwide, and international obligations to address them
are placed on the United Kingdom through regional and global agreements. These
include the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), International Plant Protection
Convention (IPPC), the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife
and Natural Habitats, and the EC Habitats and Species Directive. The sixth CBD
conference adopted a series of Guiding Principles for States to follow as part of their
invasive non-native species policies. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as
amended) provides the primary controls on the release of non-native species into the
wild in Great Britain. It is an offence under section 14(2) of the Act to ‘plant or
otherwise cause to grow in the wild’ any plant listed in Schedule 9, Part II. The only
flowering plants currently listed in Schedule 9 are Japanese knotweed and giant
hogweed. However, Japanese knotweed in particular has continued to spread and
has nearly doubled its distribution in the past 20 years. Stricter enforcement
provisions for wildlife offences were introduced under the Countryside and Rights of
Way Act 2000. These include increased penalties available to the courts for offences
committed under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The Weeds Act 1959
provides for the control of five specified weeds. These are non aquatic species,
though ragwort, (Senecio jacobaea), can grow in riparian areas. This legislation is
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 10
directed at clearing weeds that threaten agricultural production.
Other legislation relevant to non native species control includes:
• Environmental Protection Act 1990
• Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991
• Town and Country Planning Act 1990
• Highways Act 1980
• Water Resources Act 1991
• The Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994
• The Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002
The Government has acknowledged the problems that can be caused by non-native
invasive species. It has established a programme board to oversee a GB-wide
framework strategy. This strategy was a key recommendation from the Non-native
Species Review Group Report that was published in 2003 and is in line with the
guiding principles established by the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Invasive Weed Control
Responsibility for dealing with invasive weeds rests with individual landowners.
Strategic, widespread control is currently not the sole responsibility of any statutory
organisation. The Environment Agency may seek to control specific invasive weeds
on land that it owns or flood defence structures that it maintains. Control efforts by
individuals can help reduce the spread of invasive non-native species and are most
successful if carried out as a catchment wide co-ordinated strategy with collaboration
of all relevant parties. Control often needs to be repeated year after year.
General methods of control
There are four basic methods of controlling weeds: mechanical, chemical, natural
and environmental. Mechanical control includes cultivation, hoeing, pulling, cutting,
raking, dredging or other methods to uproot or cut weeds. Chemical control uses
specific herbicides. Natural control uses pests and diseases of the target weed to
weaken it and prevent it from becoming a nuisance. Environmental control works by
altering the environment to make it less suitable for weed growth, for example by
increasing or decreasing water velocity. In England and Wales the use of herbicides
in or near rivers, canals, lakes and drainage channels requires prior agreement from
the Environment Agency.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 11
Appendix three - Control of Himalayan Balsam
Control measures should aim to prevent flowering, and are best carried out before
June for maximum effectiveness. Chemical control near water can be carried out with
herbicides containing glyphosate or 2,4-D amine. Glyphosate will kill all plants, but
2,4-D amine will kill only broad-leaved weeds; for best effect, use when the plant is
small and actively growing, particularly in springtime. Cutting, mowing or strimming
on a regular basis for about three years will be effective and may even eradicate the
plant from isolated sites.
Non Chemical Control
Cutting
Cut at ground level using a scythe, machete, flail or strimmer before the flowering
stage in June. Cutting earlier than this will promote greater seed production from
plants that regrow. Cutting should be repeated annually until no more growth occurs.
Pulling
Shallow-rooted plants can be hand pulled up very easily and disposed of by burning,
or composting unless seeds are present.
Grazing
Grazing by cattle and sheep is effective from April throughout the growing season. It
should be continued until no new growth occurs.
Chemical Control
Glyphosate
Treatment with a weed wipe in mixed stands, or by foliar spray in dense stands,
before flowering. If all plants are controlled, then spraying programmes should only
be required for two to three years.
2,4-D amine
Treat during early spring at the rosette stage for effective control.
In general
It is essential to establish vegetation quickly after control measures have been
applied. Dense grass sward tends to discourage seed germination. Control should be
undertaken on a catchment basis, working from the upstream end to prevent seed
recolonisation.
* In England and Wales the use of herbicides in or near rivers, canals, lakes and
drainage channels requires prior agreement from the Environment Agency.
Boarshaw Cemetery – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 12
Appendix four – Control of Japanese knotweed
There are several stands of Japanese knotweed on the site
Japanese knotweed, Fallopia japonica is a very invasive weed. It occurs throughout
Greater Manchester in a variety of places. It was introduced from Japan as a garden
plant in 1850. It was spread through fly tipping and vegetative propagation across
large tracts of land. The smallest fragment of this invasive plant will propagate.
Knotweed has been controlled with some success for some years by means of foliar
herbicide spraying, although there are a number of concerns regarding the impact of
foliar spraying because of its effect on the surrounding vegetation. Herbicide
spraying therefore needs to be undertaken carefully by properly trained operatives.
This method also requires two visits per year to the site. In 1999 a three year
programme to investigate a new methodology for the control of knotweed
commenced. The research looked at a new way of controlling knotweed using the
cut and injection method; it also compared a variety of herbicides which were known
to have been successful in controlling knotweed using the foliar spray methodology.
The research investigated the effect on the surrounding ground flora and shrubs and
trees.
Herbicides tested
• Glyphosate (Roundup Pro Bi-active)
• 2,4D Amine (Dormone)
• Asulam (Asulox)
• Picloram (Tordon 22K)
• Triclopyr (Garlon 4)
• Diquat (Reglone)
• Imazapyr (Arsenal 50)
Only Glyphosate, Diquat and 2,4D Amine are licensed to use near water
courses, where many infestations occur. Picloram and Imazapyr can be
persistant and damage neighbouring trees and broadleaved herbs. Picloram
and Imazapyr are not recommended for use in areas to be landscaped or in
natural vegetation. The following best practice has emerged from the
research.
Methodology for Control
• The knotweed is cut with loppers, just below the first node, usually about 8
to 10cms above ground level. Some operators prefer to cut just above the
node and perforate the septum with a sharp instrument. There does not
appear to be any difference between the effectiveness of the methods.
• The cut growth is stacked on site, usually on polythene and later burnt.
• The optimum timing is mid-August to late September, provided the
knotweed is not stressed by drought or frost.
• Using a spot gun applicator, 5 to 10mls of the herbicide (Roundup biactive)
is applied to the hollow cut stem. With larger patches, a dye is
added to ensure each stem is treated.
Boarshaw Cemetery – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 13
• Any re-growth is likely to be low growing and distorted and cannot
therefore be treated with the injection method. This should be spot
sprayed with Roundup Pro-Biactive, ensuring minimum run-off.
• The site should be monitored for at least five years and any re-growth
tackled as soon as possible
The cut and inject method is a very effective way of controlling Japanese
knotweed. Although primarily designed for use in sites of high nature
conservation value or in gardens and cemeteries, it can in fact be used
anywhere. There can be time savings over the foliar spray method because it
needs only one visit per year. Aftercare treatment will generally require spot
spraying of individual re-growth the following year. The method can be used
in moderately windy conditions. It will be accepted far more readily by
communities concerned about herbicide use.
It is important to treat all knotweed on a site. The ‘edge effect’ of leaving
plants will cause knotweed to re-invade. It is also important to re-visit the site
annually and tackle any re-growth.
Roundup Pro-Biactive is the most effective herbicide for most situations and
is licensed to be used near water courses. Kill rates vary, depending on soil
depth and how well established the knotweed is. On some very extensive
research sites in Cornwall, a 99 per cent reduction in knotweed has been
achieved over three years.
Boarshaw Cemetery – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 14
Appendix Five
Map Showing Boundary of the site and its proximity to SBI’s and LNR’s
(no protected species data is included)
SUNNYBANK VALE, DROYLSDEN
June 2011
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 2
BIODIVERSITY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
SUNNYBANK VALE, DROYLSDEN
A Report prepared for –
Friends of Sunnybank Vale, Droylsden
By
The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit
Tameside MBC
Room 1.45 Council Offices
Wellington Road
Ashton-under-Lyne
Tameside
Ol6 6DL
0161 342 2250
June 2011
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 3
CONTENTS
1 Introduction
2 Background to this Assessment
3 Overall Site Description
4 Legislative framework and responsibilities
5 Suggested Biodiversity Enhancement Measures - Recommendations
6 Other Useful Sources of Information/funding
Appendices
1 Species Recorded during the visit
2 Invasive Weeds
3 The control of Himalayan balsam
4 The control of Japanese knotweed
5 Map of site showing its proximity to Clayton Vale LNR and SBI’s
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 4
1 INTRODUCTION
Biodiversity can perhaps best be defined as ‘the mix of wild plants and
animals with which we share our world’, or more simply as ‘wildlife’. Urban
greenspaces can be valuable places for biodiversity and can provide
important wildlife corridors to allow wildlife to move through.
This is an assessment of the current biodiversity value of one of these
spaces, Sunnybank Vale, and provides suggestions for some simple
measures that could be taken to enhance the biodiversity value of the site.
2 BACKGROUND TO THIS ASSESSMENT
The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) was asked by the Friends of
Sunnybank Vale to make a brief visit to the site and provide a short follow-up
report with suggestions for biodiversity enhancements.
The information in this report has been drawn from a short site visit on 14th
June 2011 conducted by Mandy Elford, Greater Manchester Biodiversity
Manager and Suzanne Waymont, Senior Ecologist, together with an
Ecological Data Search for existing information about the site, obtained from
the GM Local Records Centre. This only shows site details no protected
species records are shown therefore it should not be taken as a
comprehensive ecological assessment of the site.
3 OVERALL SITE DESCRIPTION
The site now known as Sunnybank Vale is a former landfill site previously
known and sometimes still referred to simply as ‘the tip’. The majority of the
land is owned by Greater Manchester Waste although the perimeter of the
site is owned and maintained by Tameside MBC. The site is bounded to the
east by residential properties, to the south by open recreation grounds and
allotments, to the west (separated by Edge Lane) by Clayton Vale Local
Nature Reserve (LNR) and to the north by residential properties and Clayton
Vale LNR.
Sunnybank Vale is a valuable area of greenspace east of Manchester City
Centre and has the potential to serve a large part of the community of
Droylsden. The site is already an important habitat for wildlife however there
is significant potential for enhancing the biodiversity value of the site and also
making the site more welcoming for people.
The site is adjacent to Clayton Vale LNR and two of the ponds within the LNR
are Sites of Biological Importance (SBIs).
There are no Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within the site
boundary.
Bullfinch was recorded on the site visit; bullfinch is a UK Biodiversity Priority
Species.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 5
The site comprises planted broadleaved trees, scrub and semi-natural
grassland which is generally rather species-poor. There are some old mature
trees around the perimeter of the site and some standing deadwood. There
are also areas of wet grassland.
4 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK AND RESPONSIBILITIES
There are certain laws, statutes and guidelines related to nature conservation
that groups and developers should be aware of and need to take into account
when planning management and/or changes to the habitats on a site.
These will be covered in detail should a full ecological assessment of the site
be commissioned, but this preliminary study has indicated that the most
important statutory duties that apply to this site may relate to the need to
control invasive plant species, particularly Himalayan balsam and Japanese
knotweed.
5 SUGGESTED BIODIVERSITY ENHANCEMENT MEASURES
Sunnybank Vale has potential for biodiversity enhancements. The following
preliminary proposals are suggestions and not prescriptions, open for debate
and change.
Suggestions are made for the enhancement of the existing important
biodiversity features on the site but there are also more general suggestions.
All of the proposals are aimed at the principle of increasing the number and
variety of ecological niches available in Sunnybank Vale. This means
introducing as much variety as possible, particularly in terms of providing:
1 temporal variety – this means having food sources and sources of
shelter and protection available for as many wildlife species as
possible for as much of the year as possible. For example, planting a
range of flowering plants that make nectar available through as much
of the year as possible, or putting up bat hibernation boxes for use
during the winter months.
2 as wide a range of sustainable food sources as possible
3 a range of areas that can be used by wildlife for shelter – for example
log piles, low growing shrubs and artificial nesting boxes for birds, bats
and invertebrates.
4 a variety of texture and structure in the vegetation – for example,
planting hedgerows and shrubs, allowing grass to grow to different
heights in some places and allowing some areas of bare soil to be
created and left for periods in the year.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 6
Recommendations –
The following are general recommendations and could be subject to
change and/or modification if a full survey is commissioned.
Certain areas of the site have densely planted young trees, these trees
require thinning in places this will enable a woodland ground flora to establish
and/or be planted and will also provide site-lines along the paths making the
site feel more welcoming and safe for people.
Retain standing deadwood wherever possible. Leave fallen branches to
decay on site where possible and create log piles from the thinning of the
trees. Dead wood is great for invertebrates.
Removal of the invasive plant species Himalayan balsam and Japanese
knotweed (see appendix 3 & 4 re treatment of these species).
Areas of the species poor grassland could be transformed into more speciesrich
wildflower meadows. Advice on how to do this and seed mixes can be
obtained from a variety of sources, including Landlife, a nationally registered
wildflower charity, based in Liverpool. Their email address is
https://www.landlife.org.uk.
Management of areas of semi-natural grassland by mowing once or twice a
year.
There are a number of places where wet grassland occurs; as there are no
open areas of water on the site it would be a good opportunity to create a
number of ponds within these areas. As the site was a former tip, advice
would need to be sought from the environment agency to see if this was
possible.
There are opportunities along the perimeter of the houses to the north of the
site to plant new hedgerows. Once the hedgerows are planted the grass
could be left longer at the base of the hedge line to create more diversity.
Funding is available for the creation of new hedgerows
(www.treecouncil.org.uk).
A number of bird boxes could be placed around the site. To avoid these
boxes being predated fix a metal panel to the front. This will also save having
to replace boxes which can potentially be destroyed by predators such as
woodpeckers and squirrels.
Consider the placement of a variety of bat boxes for use at various different
times in the year (summer roosting/hibernation).
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 7
USEFUL SOURCES OF INFORMATION/FUNDING
♦ Landlife, a wildflower charity, offer advice on wildflower grassland
creation and can supply seeds. www.wildflower.org.uk
♦ The RSPB are a useful source of information on biodiversity
enhancements for birds. www.rspb.org.uk
♦ The SITA Trust offers a range of grants for practical biodiversity
projects. www.sitatrust.org.uk
♦ The Tree Council offers a range of grants for hedgerow planting and
also woodland planting. www.treecouncil.org.uk
♦ The Heritage Lottery Fund offers a range of funding for community
groups www.hlf.org.uk.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 8
Appendix one – Species Recorded during site visit
Trees/shrubs Grassland
Goat Willow Red clover
Grey Willow Yorkshire fog
Sycamore Creeping buttercup
Silver birch False oat grass
White Poplar Field horsetail
Hawthorn Rosebay willowherb
Maple Crested dog’s tail
Hazel Common vetch
Cherry Common bird’s foot trefoil
Blackthorn Compact rush
Rowan Hard rush
Oak Reed canary grass
Alder Yellow flag iris
Rose Pendulous sedge
Goat Willow Horseradish
Grey Willow Ground elder
Bramble Red clover
Ash Hedge woundwort
Speckled Wood Butterfly – Photo taken on site
Invasive Species
Japanese knotweed
Himalayan balsalm
Fauna
Shrew
Bullfinch (UK Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Species)
Jay
Chiff chaff
Wood Pigeon
Carrion Crow
Blackbird
Speckled wood butterfly
Small skipper butterfly
Alder Beetle
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 9
Appendix two – Invasive Weeds
What are invasive weeds?
Several types of plant can become invasive weeds. They are either native species
that grow well in disturbed or nutrient-enriched conditions, to the detriment of other
plant and animal species, or non-native plants that have been introduced to this
country by accident or as a consequence of trade or deliberate collection. The latter
tend to grow in situations where native plants of similar form do not. Not all nonnative
species become weeds, but if they do, they become very difficult to control.
Native weed species, although troublesome, do not cause as much ecological or
physical damage as the non-native variety. Invasive non-native species tend to share
characteristics that make them successful. These are related to the method of
reproduction, growth rate, growth form and persistence, but in particular the absence
of pests and diseases and their consequent resistance to control. The introduction of
plant species into new environments carries risks. The danger of species becoming
serious weeds in agricultural areas is well controlled, but other potential weeds are
not currently recognised and subject to risk assessment and management. The
effects of climate change will alter the distribution of weed species in future; already,
several aquatic weeds found in Europe originated in sub-tropical areas of the world.
The predicted consequences of global warming, including increased temperatures,
increased carbon dioxide and stormier weather, make it more likely that additional
invasive species will cause problems in future. The huge increase in the distribution
of Himalayan balsam since 1962 indicates that conditions are ideally suited for this
species. Other species may respond similarly in future if climate change favours their
colonisation and rapid growth. Plants that grow in water and on riverbanks can cause
flooding if not managed correctly. The consequences and costs of invasive nonnative
species are huge.
Existing legislation
When non-native species become invasive they can transform ecosystems, causing
a variety of problems including seriously threatening native and endangered species.
These problems are acknowledged in several international treaties, European Union
Directives and also in domestic legislation. The problems caused by some invasive
non-native species occur worldwide, and international obligations to address them
are placed on the United Kingdom through regional and global agreements. These
include the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), International Plant Protection
Convention (IPPC), the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife
and Natural Habitats, and the EC Habitats and Species Directive. The sixth CBD
conference adopted a series of Guiding Principles for States to follow as part of their
invasive non-native species policies. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as
amended) provides the primary controls on the release of non-native species into the
wild in Great Britain. It is an offence under section 14(2) of the Act to ‘plant or
otherwise cause to grow in the wild’ any plant listed in Schedule 9, Part II. The only
flowering plants currently listed in Schedule 9 are Japanese knotweed and giant
hogweed. However, Japanese knotweed in particular has continued to spread and
has nearly doubled its distribution in the past 20 years. Stricter enforcement
provisions for wildlife offences were introduced under the Countryside and Rights of
Way Act 2000. These include increased penalties available to the courts for offences
committed under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The Weeds Act 1959
provides for the control of five specified weeds. These are non aquatic species,
though ragwort, (Senecio jacobaea), can grow in riparian areas. This legislation is
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 10
directed at clearing weeds that threaten agricultural production.
Other legislation relevant to non native species control includes:
• Environmental Protection Act 1990
• Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991
• Town and Country Planning Act 1990
• Highways Act 1980
• Water Resources Act 1991
• The Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994
• The Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002
The Government has acknowledged the problems that can be caused by non-native
invasive species. It has established a programme board to oversee a GB-wide
framework strategy. This strategy was a key recommendation from the Non-native
Species Review Group Report that was published in 2003 and is in line with the
guiding principles established by the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Invasive Weed Control
Responsibility for dealing with invasive weeds rests with individual landowners.
Strategic, widespread control is currently not the sole responsibility of any statutory
organisation. The Environment Agency may seek to control specific invasive weeds
on land that it owns or flood defence structures that it maintains. Control efforts by
individuals can help reduce the spread of invasive non-native species and are most
successful if carried out as a catchment wide co-ordinated strategy with collaboration
of all relevant parties. Control often needs to be repeated year after year.
General methods of control
There are four basic methods of controlling weeds: mechanical, chemical, natural
and environmental. Mechanical control includes cultivation, hoeing, pulling, cutting,
raking, dredging or other methods to uproot or cut weeds. Chemical control uses
specific herbicides. Natural control uses pests and diseases of the target weed to
weaken it and prevent it from becoming a nuisance. Environmental control works by
altering the environment to make it less suitable for weed growth, for example by
increasing or decreasing water velocity. In England and Wales the use of herbicides
in or near rivers, canals, lakes and drainage channels requires prior agreement from
the Environment Agency.
Sunnybank Vale – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 11
Appendix three - Control of Himalayan Balsam
Control measures should aim to prevent flowering, and are best carried out before
June for maximum effectiveness. Chemical control near water can be carried out with
herbicides containing glyphosate or 2,4-D amine. Glyphosate will kill all plants, but
2,4-D amine will kill only broad-leaved weeds; for best effect, use when the plant is
small and actively growing, particularly in springtime. Cutting, mowing or strimming
on a regular basis for about three years will be effective and may even eradicate the
plant from isolated sites.
Non Chemical Control
Cutting
Cut at ground level using a scythe, machete, flail or strimmer before the flowering
stage in June. Cutting earlier than this will promote greater seed production from
plants that regrow. Cutting should be repeated annually until no more growth occurs.
Pulling
Shallow-rooted plants can be hand pulled up very easily and disposed of by burning,
or composting unless seeds are present.
Grazing
Grazing by cattle and sheep is effective from April throughout the growing season. It
should be continued until no new growth occurs.
Chemical Control
Glyphosate
Treatment with a weed wipe in mixed stands, or by foliar spray in dense stands,
before flowering. If all plants are controlled, then spraying programmes should only
be required for two to three years.
2,4-D amine
Treat during early spring at the rosette stage for effective control.
In general
It is essential to establish vegetation quickly after control measures have been
applied. Dense grass sward tends to discourage seed germination. Control should be
undertaken on a catchment basis, working from the upstream end to prevent seed
recolonisation.
* In England and Wales the use of herbicides in or near rivers, canals, lakes and
drainage channels requires prior agreement from the Environment Agency.
Boarshaw Cemetery – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 12
Appendix four – Control of Japanese knotweed
There are several stands of Japanese knotweed on the site
Japanese knotweed, Fallopia japonica is a very invasive weed. It occurs throughout
Greater Manchester in a variety of places. It was introduced from Japan as a garden
plant in 1850. It was spread through fly tipping and vegetative propagation across
large tracts of land. The smallest fragment of this invasive plant will propagate.
Knotweed has been controlled with some success for some years by means of foliar
herbicide spraying, although there are a number of concerns regarding the impact of
foliar spraying because of its effect on the surrounding vegetation. Herbicide
spraying therefore needs to be undertaken carefully by properly trained operatives.
This method also requires two visits per year to the site. In 1999 a three year
programme to investigate a new methodology for the control of knotweed
commenced. The research looked at a new way of controlling knotweed using the
cut and injection method; it also compared a variety of herbicides which were known
to have been successful in controlling knotweed using the foliar spray methodology.
The research investigated the effect on the surrounding ground flora and shrubs and
trees.
Herbicides tested
• Glyphosate (Roundup Pro Bi-active)
• 2,4D Amine (Dormone)
• Asulam (Asulox)
• Picloram (Tordon 22K)
• Triclopyr (Garlon 4)
• Diquat (Reglone)
• Imazapyr (Arsenal 50)
Only Glyphosate, Diquat and 2,4D Amine are licensed to use near water
courses, where many infestations occur. Picloram and Imazapyr can be
persistant and damage neighbouring trees and broadleaved herbs. Picloram
and Imazapyr are not recommended for use in areas to be landscaped or in
natural vegetation. The following best practice has emerged from the
research.
Methodology for Control
• The knotweed is cut with loppers, just below the first node, usually about 8
to 10cms above ground level. Some operators prefer to cut just above the
node and perforate the septum with a sharp instrument. There does not
appear to be any difference between the effectiveness of the methods.
• The cut growth is stacked on site, usually on polythene and later burnt.
• The optimum timing is mid-August to late September, provided the
knotweed is not stressed by drought or frost.
• Using a spot gun applicator, 5 to 10mls of the herbicide (Roundup biactive)
is applied to the hollow cut stem. With larger patches, a dye is
added to ensure each stem is treated.
Boarshaw Cemetery – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 13
• Any re-growth is likely to be low growing and distorted and cannot
therefore be treated with the injection method. This should be spot
sprayed with Roundup Pro-Biactive, ensuring minimum run-off.
• The site should be monitored for at least five years and any re-growth
tackled as soon as possible
The cut and inject method is a very effective way of controlling Japanese
knotweed. Although primarily designed for use in sites of high nature
conservation value or in gardens and cemeteries, it can in fact be used
anywhere. There can be time savings over the foliar spray method because it
needs only one visit per year. Aftercare treatment will generally require spot
spraying of individual re-growth the following year. The method can be used
in moderately windy conditions. It will be accepted far more readily by
communities concerned about herbicide use.
It is important to treat all knotweed on a site. The ‘edge effect’ of leaving
plants will cause knotweed to re-invade. It is also important to re-visit the site
annually and tackle any re-growth.
Roundup Pro-Biactive is the most effective herbicide for most situations and
is licensed to be used near water courses. Kill rates vary, depending on soil
depth and how well established the knotweed is. On some very extensive
research sites in Cornwall, a 99 per cent reduction in knotweed has been
achieved over three years.
Boarshaw Cemetery – Biodiversity Recommendations Page 14
Appendix Five
Map Showing Boundary of the site and its proximity to SBI’s and LNR’s
(no protected species data is included)