136
NBIS to identify the volunteer capacity in Norfolk and across the UK. At every
stage, the potential for transferability to a UK-wide approach was reviewed.
The project established that:
• Habitat patches were missed from the classification and patches of other habitat
mistakenly included;
• Priority habitats can be difficult to identify both in the field by volunteers and
from imagery; this is due to the complexity of the gradation of one habitat into
another. This is compounded by the existing habitat class names, which despite
being pinned to BAP or Annex 1 names as much as possible, were difficult for
non-experts to use in the field.
• A stratified sampling strategy for validation would involve both a desk-based and
field-based assessment. This is a real issue for habitats of conservation interest
because they are often too scarce to be picked up on any random-stratified
method. A large number of randomly selected sample squares are needed to provide scientifically robust results in Norfolk.
• Within Norfolk, there is a keen group of volunteers with a range of backgrounds
and skills but a limited appetite to add habitat recording to existing activities or
carry out desk-based assessments.
• Most volunteers prefer to validate locations very close to where they live, so
volunteer sampling strategies need to take this into account.
• A well-designed smart-phone application would appeal to a wide range of users
but would be costly to develop, unless rolled-out across the UK with the potential
for multi-year assessments to coincide with Living Map updates.
• Training will be critical to participation, along with effective communication of
the purpose, outputs and confidence in the product.
Examples of the Use of the Mapped Outputs in Norfolk
Prior to the project, the NBIS held only partial records for selected sites in the
county. They had no regional overview of the habitats but held some sub- regional
maps and old site maps: the potential for repeating these, however, was limited by
resource constraints.
Regional Scale and Sub-regional Mapping
The UK National Planning Policy Framework
7
(NPPF) places requirements on local
authorities to map habitats as a means of providing evidence on biodiversity to
understand the provision of green infrastructure and ecological networks. In a wider
7 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-planning-policy-framework--2
K. Medcalf et al.
NBIS to identify the volunteer capacity in Norfolk and across the UK. At every
stage, the potential for transferability to a UK-wide approach was reviewed.
The project established that:
• Habitat patches were missed from the classification and patches of other habitat
mistakenly included;
• Priority habitats can be difficult to identify both in the field by volunteers and
from imagery; this is due to the complexity of the gradation of one habitat into
another. This is compounded by the existing habitat class names, which despite
being pinned to BAP or Annex 1 names as much as possible, were difficult for
non-experts to use in the field.
• A stratified sampling strategy for validation would involve both a desk-based and
field-based assessment. This is a real issue for habitats of conservation interest
because they are often too scarce to be picked up on any random-stratified
method. A large number of randomly selected sample squares are needed to provide scientifically robust results in Norfolk.
• Within Norfolk, there is a keen group of volunteers with a range of backgrounds
and skills but a limited appetite to add habitat recording to existing activities or
carry out desk-based assessments.
• Most volunteers prefer to validate locations very close to where they live, so
volunteer sampling strategies need to take this into account.
• A well-designed smart-phone application would appeal to a wide range of users
but would be costly to develop, unless rolled-out across the UK with the potential
for multi-year assessments to coincide with Living Map updates.
• Training will be critical to participation, along with effective communication of
the purpose, outputs and confidence in the product.
Examples of the Use of the Mapped Outputs in Norfolk
Prior to the project, the NBIS held only partial records for selected sites in the
county. They had no regional overview of the habitats but held some sub- regional
maps and old site maps: the potential for repeating these, however, was limited by
resource constraints.
Regional Scale and Sub-regional Mapping
The UK National Planning Policy Framework
7
(NPPF) places requirements on local
authorities to map habitats as a means of providing evidence on biodiversity to
understand the provision of green infrastructure and ecological networks. In a wider
7 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-planning-policy-framework--2
K. Medcalf et al.