The Nature Recovery Network (NRN) is a major commitment in the Environment Act, and is a series of maps indicating a national network of wildlife-rich places. The maps identify potential areas for the expansion of key habitats which are able to deliver benefits such as biodiversity, people’s access to greenspace and regulation of flooding and air quality.
These maps can then be used to assist with the development of green infrastructure strategies and planning, or the delivery of BNG, giving decision makers an evidence-based map to refer to when making these decisions.
Nature Recovery Networks have been developed for all the local authorities in Staffordshire, indicating what habitats should be created and restored where.
Net Gain Staffordshire is the only land registry that displays where land falls on this network, making decisions regarding habitat restoration for BNG transparent and ensuring it is delivering for nature.
For more detailed information on how the maps are created, please see our resources page, or get in touch via our contact page.
The Map
To see the map click here. This map shows the nature recovery network for Staffordshire. It displays where there are opportunities for grassland, woodland, heathland, wetland, urban and pasture and arable expansion.
If you want to see where there is available land for Biodiversity Net Gain uplift within the county, please log in or register for the portal here.
Disclaimer: Units displayed on the portal may be provided by third parties and are not verified by Net Gain Staffordshire or Staffordshire Wildlife Trust. In order to verify unit validity before purchase please contact the landowner/developer through this portal. Biodiversity Net Gain surveys and unit calculations should always be completed by a qualified ecologist. Please see the website of the Chartered Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) for details.
Habitat Distinctiveness Mapping
Habitat distinctiveness mapping is one of several elements included within the Biodiversity Metric by using habitat as a proxy for wider biodiversity value via associating and scoring different habitat types according to their relative biodiversity value.
An example of this would be irreplaceable ancient woodlands scoring very highly (higher biodiversity value) whereas intensively managed amenity grassland or highly improved agricultural arable land score lower (lower relative biodiversity value).
The criteria used for the creation of the habitat distinctiveness map was based on the habitats listed within the Biodiversity Metric defining what habitats are included within each distinctiveness band.
The distinctiveness map was produced using Phase 1 habitat data by associating a distinctiveness value to each specific habitat type (e.g. arable land) in a GIS package based on guidance provided in Crosher et al. 2019, selecting and isolating the habitats spatially into the 5 respective distinctiveness bands.
Further ratification to the irreplaceable habitats in the very high distinctiveness band was completed by use of Ancient Woodland Inventory boundaries.
Habitat distinctiveness mapping provides multiple uses:
- Identifying areas of high biodiversity value which are a priority for protection and expansion within a local plan whilst working in line with biodiversity mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimise, remediate, compensate).
- Flagging areas that may contain medium value (semi-natural) habitat. These could be highlighted in policy as requiring a comprehensive biodiversity evaluation if they are put forward for planning purposes (based on mitigation hierarchy). Biodiversity offsetting/compensation may be required in these areas if they are developed.
- Identifying possible wildlife corridors which can be highlighted and designated as part of a local plan/Green Infrastructure Strategy. These areas could be the target of restoration projects/funding/aspirational opportunity areas funded through development compensation (obviously the allocation of funds is based on broad scale spatial analysis as opposed to the methods of calculating the offsetting requirement of a specific site).
Planning policy supports application of the mitigation hierarchy which determines a hierarchy of actions when using the biodiversity metric.
This may mean retaining habitats in situ or avoiding habitat damage.
It is easier to achieve biodiversity net gains where habitat impacts are avoided due to the way that habitat creation and enhancement risks are accounted for.
The mitigation hierarchy is in the desirability order as follows:
- Avoid – Where possible habitat damage should be avoided
- Minimise – Where possible habitat damage and loss should be minimised
- Remediate – Where possible any damaged or lost habitat should be restored
- Compensate – As a last resort, damaged or lost habitat should be compensated for
The mitigation hierarchy corresponds with the habitat distinctiveness mapping, e.g. very high distinctiveness habitats such as irreplaceable ancient woodlands should be avoided from development, low and medium distinctiveness habitats could be restored to a higher quality habitat.
The habitat distinctiveness mapping is based on available habitat data and the designated nature conservation site boundaries for the borough, including UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) and priority habitat areas.
Habitat distinctiveness mapping does not include species explicitly. Instead, it uses broad habitat categories as a proxy for the biodiversity ‘value’ of the species communities that make up different habitats. The metric does not change existing levels of species protection and the processes linked to protection regimes are outside the scope of the metric.
Habitats are assigned to distinctiveness bands based on an assessment of their distinguishing features including for example rarity (at local, regional, national and international scales), and the degree to which a habitat supports species rarely found in other habitats.
This map does NOT provide the relevant information required in relation to the undertaking of a BNG assessment. It is intended purely as a way of determining the potential impact risks at a district/county level. It is not intended or suitable for use at a local or site level.
Strategic Habitat Areas
The Strategic Habitat Areas map assesses the proportion of broadly categorised semi-natural habitats e.g. woodland, grassland, heathland etc. within an area to determine whether these are ‘strategic’, ‘semi-strategic’ or ‘non-strategic’ for the creation or restoration of further habitat based on the proportion of habitat already present in the area.
The strategic habitat areas were produced using the composite Phase 1 habitat data identified in the evidence base review. Firstly specific higher quality habitats were selected and isolated from the composite Phase 1 habitat map (e.g. heathlands or species-rich grassland).
The proportion of the selected habitats that overlap individual Ordnance Survey 1km grid squares was then calculated in a GIS package and each square subsequently classified into one of the area bands below, based on the area of habitat overlapping the 1km square.
The strategic habitat areas can be viewed as a hierarchy when it comes to the creation of a particular type of habitat:
- Strategic areas (>30% of the area contains semi-natural habitat). These areas already have a relatively large area of high quality semi-natural habitat but more would still be of benefit. Generally, these areas in principle will already have reasonably high habitat connectivity.
- Semi- strategic areas (5-30% of the area contains semi-natural habitat). These are key areas in which to focus habitat creation or restoration. There is some high quality semi-natural habitat but additional high quality semi-natural habitat would improve the function of the network. Generally, these areas in principle will already have reasonably moderate connectivity.
- Non-strategic areas (<5% of the area contains semi-natural habitat) These are where there is very little or no semi-natural habitat and it would be difficult or prohibitive to increase the amount of habitat to above 30% of the area (functional threshold).
The strategic area mapping described will be crucial in delivering the fundamental principles in the Making Space for Nature Report (Lawton et al., 2010).
An overall strategic areas map was produced based on the combination of all the habitats analysed as part of the strategic mapping exercise. For this map, the criteria for strategic and semi-strategic areas have been swapped so that strategic areas are those with the highest amount of overall habitat. By altering the methodology in this way it is possible to create a coarse overall ‘connectivity map’ by highlighting the areas with highest combined overall habitat availability and connectivity as opposed to those areas where it is best to create habitats.
The strategic areas are not static and are merely a snapshot in time, changes are an inevitable part of the mapping as available habitat data changes.
To an extent the strategic areas mapping is self-fulfilling, as opportunities to enhance habitats described by the map are practically implemented on the ground, mapped through subsequent monitoring and the new habitat data being incorporated into future maps will influence future changes in the areas on the map.
Loss of habitats will be worst in areas where there is already a high proportion of habitats and good connectivity, therefore the strategic areas in this map correspond to the highest strategic significance category in the Statutory Biodiversity Metric (Table 1).
Inversely it is more beneficial to create or enhance habitats in areas which already have some semi-natural habitat but potentially not enough to be as functional from a connectivity standpoint.
Enhancement or creation of additional habitat in these areas is likely to have a greater impact than in areas where there is little or no habitat as it is contributing to a small existing network rather than trying to create potentially isolated areas from scratch.
Table 1 shows this by placing the ‘formally identified in local strategy’ category against the ‘semi-strategic area’ class based on the principle that these have some but not a lot of semi-natural habitat with that area already.
Table 1 - Application of Staffordshire specific strategic significance to Statutory Metric strategic significance categories
| Statutory Metric Strategic Significance category (Site habitat baseline) | Statutory Metric Strategic Significance category (on and off-site habitat creation/enhancement) | Category identified in East Staffordshire strategic significance mapping |
|---|---|---|
| Formally Identified in Local Strategy | Location ecologically desirable but not in local strategy | Strategic area |
| Location ecologically desirable but not in local strategy | Formally Identified in Local Strategy | Semi-strategic area |
| Area/compensation not in local strategy | Area/compensation not in local strategy | Non-strategic area |
Habitat Connectivity Opportunity Areas
The strategic areas mapping described previously does not take into account individual habitat type. Certain habitat types may only make up a small proportion of an overall habitat network and may be capable of supporting unique species not supported by other habitat types.
Broad habitat types need to be taken into account to avoid the potential loss of key habitats or target the ideal location for creation / enhancement of these habitats within the network; working toward an aspirational connected habitat network: A Nature Recovery Network.
Using local knowledge coupled with additional datasets including soils, nature conservation site boundaries, Staffordshire Biodiversity Action Plan (SBAP) Ecosystem Action Plan Areas (EAPs) and priority habitat inventories along with a piece of ecological modelling software called Condatis (Wallis & Hodgson, 2012), it was possible to scrutinise and refine the strategic areas map to define comprehensive Habitat Connectivity Opportunity (HCO) areas map for the district based on individual habitats.
The HCO areas define where habitats are both already well connected and aim to broadly identify where to direct the delivery of habitat creation, enhancement and / or restoration of broad habitat types to create a connected habitat network across a county scale.