ecology reports

[treequip]

A section 211 notice is all that is required to give notice to the council that you want to carry out works to trees within a CA and the council may, if they see fit, serve a TPO. The issue here though is about protected species and protected habitats. If on your mission to remove trees, you happen to disturb a bat roost or a bat, you will be committing a criminal offence.

 

The council has asked for an eco report. No doubt the council specifically requires a Preliminary Ecological Assessment report (PEA) previously known as a phase 1 survey (see my previous comment). If there is no potential for bats or other protected species, then there can be no reason to stop you from felling trees unless it is expedient to serve a TPO but if the PEA identifies the potential for bats (or any other protected species) then you will be required to carry out a bat roost assessment and possibly other assessments as well. If bats are found and the need to fell trees is still there and the council hasn't served a TPO, you will require mitigation to safely move the bats.

 

It may seem a pain for some (especially after reading some of the comments on here where it appears that bats are no more than a nuisanace) but that is the law and you would be wise to obey the law. Ecologist are not the enemy and to think of them as such is to miss the point but remember, they are also constrained by the law and have to follow strict guidelines.

 

The issue is indeed the prevention of disturbance but that has NOTHING to do with the "211" nor does the authority have any power to require any sort of paperwork other than the "211"

 

They can ask but you don't have to comply, they can require and you don't have to comply.

 

If the contractor is concerned about the presence of a protected species they can by all means get a report but that's between the contractor and the ecologist he is paying.

 

The report is nothing to do with the LA, even if they did have sight of a report how would they do anything about it? They have no powers to insist any recommendations were met.

 

This is just some LA dude justifying their own existence

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Not surprised. Bats don't need a bridge; they can fly.

 

Unless I'm missing something here.

 

Yes, you are!

[oslac]

That may well be. And I doubt that the LA dude can require an eco report but he could serve a TPO and could stick his nose in, after the event, and try to determine if any protected habitat was damaged. Lets hope the contractor is very sure that no bat roosts or other protected habitat or species is harmed.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

 

It may seem a pain for some (especially after reading some of the comments on here where it appears that bats are no more than a nuisanace) but that is the law and you would be wise to obey the law. Ecologist are not the enemy and to think of them as such is to miss the point but remember, they are also constrained by the law and have to follow strict guidelines.

 

Hope I didn't give that impression, it wasn't intended. Even though I referred to our lecturer as a "bat geek" that wasn't (intended) derogatory just a bit cheeky! He had a BSc En Sci, lv 2 Cert Arb and (most importantly) a passion for his subject balanced by a pragmatic approach to offering solutions rather than throwing up barriers. It was a good brief and I'd recommend it!

[Mat]

That may well be. And I doubt that the LA dude can require an eco report but he could serve a TPO and could stick his nose in, after the event, and try to determine if any protected habitat was damaged. Lets hope the contractor is very sure that no bat roosts or other protected habitat or species is harmed.

 

But that is the case regardless of whether or not the site is in a conservation area.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

That may well be. And I doubt that the LA dude can require an eco report but he could serve a TPO and could stick his nose in, after the event, and try to determine if any protected habitat was damaged. Lets hope the contractor is very sure that no bat roosts or other protected habitat or species is harmed.

 

Is it not the case that the damage would have to be intentional for a prosecution to succeed?

 

That kind of brings us full circle in that the presence of an Eco report would show due diligence in avoiding intentional disturbance. If it happens by accident or omission, after having taken reasonable investigative measures, then on discovery of roosting bats you would need to stop and seek advice from BCT.

 

It may well be that you can't be compelled to have the survey, but is it worth locking horns with LA if they already have an interest in the site? Maybe a middle ground would be to ask local BCT to have a walk through but you might get answers you really don't want to hear!

[Mat]

The offence is to disturb a bat roost, rather than intend to disturb a bat root.

 

If you are up a tree and disturb bats (or a roost that bats use) you have already commited an offence.

[oslac]

Hope I didn't give that impression, it wasn't intended. Even though I referred to our lecturer as a "bat geek" that wasn't (intended) derogatory just a bit cheeky! He had a BSc En Sci, lv 2 Cert Arb and (most importantly) a passion for his subject balanced by a pragmatic approach to offering solutions rather than throwing up barriers. It was a good brief and I'd recommend it!

 

No, all is cool.

We are forever up against the client, contractor, tree officer, case officer and every other consultee under the sun and although it is difficult, I try to understand where each party is coming from and then tell everyone what they don't want to hear. They quite often see me as the bad guy but I see my role as navigating complicated projects to a sucessful conclusion and quite often that means that everyone needs to compromise and I need to take a few hits on the chin. Mind you, I love my job.

[Little Steven]

The issue is indeed the prevention of disturbance but that has NOTHING to do with the "211" nor does the authority have any power to require any sort of paperwork other than the "211"

 

They can ask but you don't have to comply, they can require and you don't have to comply.

 

If the contractor is concerned about the presence of a protected species they can by all means get a report but that's between the contractor and the ecologist he is paying.

 

The report is nothing to do with the LA, even if they did have sight of a report how would they do anything about it? They have no powers to insist any recommendations were met.

 

This is just some LA dude justifying their own existence

 

Hi Andy,

Just to add some more to the mix.... wondering if its why the L.A are condition /requesting a report...

I believe the area of work in question is SSSI, would the likes of Natural England etc make the condition.

Steve

[treequip]

Hi Andy,

Just to add some more to the mix.... wondering if its why the L.A are condition /requesting a report...

I believe the area of work in question is SSSI, would the likes of Natural England etc make the condition.

Steve

 

Hi Steve

 

Unless its a planning application the LA cant condition anything, its a "211" and the ONLY option is a TPO

 

If it is a SSSI that's natural England's remit, the LA has no interest and couldn't bring a prosecution it they tried