www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

Seeing the news about the go-ahead for the high speed rail link from London to the West Midlands, does anyone know if this affects any sensitive butterfly sites along the route?

The BBC news website (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16469112) says "County wildlife trusts are concerned the proposed route will pose a threat to wildlife. They estimate more than 150 nature sites could be affected, including 10 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs).

Four nature reserves will be directly impacted, they say. They are Finemere Wood Nature Reserve and the Calvert Jubilee Nature Reserve, managed by the Berks, Bucks and Oxon Wildlife Trust, Broadwater Lake Nature Reserve, managed by Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust, and Park Hall Nature Reserve, managed by the Wildlife Trust for Birmingham and the Black Country.

The government has said that extra tunnelling and route amendments mean that the impact of more than half the route will now be mitigated. However, the wildlife trusts say this could actually make the damage to wildlife worse."

The latest route maps are downloadable here.
http://assets.dft.gov.uk/hs2-maps-20120110.htm

It goes right through the heart of Black Hairstreak country (which don't disperse well at all) - including Finemere Wood, which is a superb site for many species.

Cheers,

- Pete

This proposed rail link is entirely unnecessary and a grotesque example of political stupidity and misplaced priorities. There is absolutely no need for anyone to travel any faster between London and the north of England. We're all online - I have had video conferences with colleagues in other countries and even given private lessons to a girl in Florida over the internet. That is the future - not faster trains. On the other hand, there is a huge need for ordinary public transport in the UK to be brought in line with the excellent services in much of continental Europe in terms of fares, coverage and day-to-day management.

If anyone has any remaining ideas on how to stop this ridiculous, short-sighted plan, please post them and we must all do what we can to change their minds.

Guy

I completely agree - what a vast waste of money. That's not to mention the countryside at risk

I hope BC will get together with other wildlife conversation bodies and stand against it.

Lee

I have to disagree with most of the previous posts.

I believe electric railways are less disruptive than most transport schemes, especially motorways, since they are far narrower and do not emit pollution along their length. In fact, the edges of many existing railways provide valuable havens for wildlife and create corridors along which the more sedentary species can spread.

Europe has already found that high speed routes are of economic value and provide a good alternative to air traffic over routes of less than about 1500km. Although, in theory, much more could be achieved by electronic communications, people still want to meet face-to-face in many situations, and there is no way of teleporting goods and materials! Rail fares in UK are a separate issue.

Mike

It does seem like a ridiculous amount of money to spend so that people can arrive in London half an hour sooner. However, it is true that it may provide some habitat. Sadly the verges of the A1 through East Lothian are probably the biggest area of native habitat up here. Any butterflies trying to live along the route of HS2 would probably be splatted beyond recognition, though!

I'll meet Mike Oxon halfway. I agree entirely that railways are vastly better than motorways, for a great many reasons, and I support them (I never learnt to drive and so rely on them). But we have railways. I just checked the timetable and I can leave London Euston in 3 minutes' time and arrive in Birmingham 1 hour and 24 minutes later. What is the imperative to cut a little more off that time?

Guy

MikeOxon wrote:I believe electric railways are less disruptive than most transport schemes, especially motorways, since they are far narrower and do not emit pollution along their length. In fact, the edges of many existing railways provide valuable havens for wildlife and create corridors along which the more sedentary species can spread.

Must admit, when I first heard of it, I thought to myself that there may be opportunities for butterflies along the many miles of embankments that will be created. That said, the route will undoubtedly affect some sensitive butterfly areas although a railway is certainly preferable to a motorway, which will create far, far more pollution and environmental damage.

We need a good local (as well as national) network of railways and canals ......... oops.
Neil

The care needs to be taken during the construction phase - much more damaging in terms of indiscriminate occupation of land by plant and machinery compared to the actual land usage of the finished line. When it's been ripped up and flattened, you cannot easily put it back.

That said, was there not some success when the M40 was built, with the road diverted around the sensitive areas and the creation of the M40 Compensation Area? Did this not prove very successful in terms of colonisation by Black and Brown Hairstreaks having been set out with them in mind? (As an aside, I've often wanted to visit this, and would be grateful for any guidance as to where precisely it is, and how it might be accessed!)

Dave

I am pleased to see investment in railways. HS2 isn't just to make journey times faster it also increases capacity, in particular i believe that this extra capacity will be used by freight.

I hope that HS2 prooves more reliable than the ancient system we have in place at the moment - two points failures today meant 3 hours to get from Malvern to Bournville

As I understand it from the plans, the railway will follow the line of the old Great Central Railway and pass about 200m from the edge of Finemere Wood. It would surprise me if the woodland itself is damaged, but I am not sure whether the fields in between are part of BBOWT's holding and form part of their attempts to create meadow and scrub mosaics suitable for the Black Hairstreak. Similarly to the north the line skirts a number of other woodlands that I understand to be of value for butterflies before passing the edge of the nature reserves on the old Calvert brick pits. There would appear to be the opportunity, at least, to make use of the railway construction to link up these various habitats.

Finemere Wood is an excellent place for butterflying. His Majesty nectared on unidentified and probably unmentionable fluids on the ground before circling round my head, Marbled Fritillary patrolled endlessly up and down the main ride only breaking their routine for psychotic attacks on anything orange, Silver-washed Fritillaries and Purple Hairstreaks abounded and there was a lovely freshly emerged Brown Argus in the meadow, iridescent greens and purples appearing on the brown ground colour. I understand the alien fritillaries are gone now but it remains one of my favourite places to watch butterflies.

David M wrote:That said, the route will undoubtedly affect some sensitive butterfly areas although a railway is certainly preferable to a motorway, which will create far, far more pollution and environmental damage.

To me, that is the problem. These factors just don't seem to considered at the outset, only afterwards when we kick up a fuss. I just can't stand the idea of large areas of countryside being at risk:

Millerd wrote: The care needs to be taken during the construction phase - much more damaging in terms of indiscriminate occupation of land by plant and machinery compared to the actual land usage of the finished line. When it's been ripped up and flattened, you cannot easily put it back.

Let's not forget Butterfly Conservation's motto is 'saving butterflies, moths and our environment'.

MikeOxon wrote:I believe electric railways are less disruptive than most transport schemes, especially motorways, since they are far narrower and do not emit pollution along their length. In fact, the edges of many existing railways provide valuable havens for wildlife and create corridors along which the more sedentary species can spread.

I agree that potential wildlife corridors and lack of pollution vs motorways are plus points.

MikeOxon wrote: Europe has already found that high speed routes are of economic value and provide a good alternative to air traffic over routes of less than about 1500km.

The trouble is though, we are different to much of Europe in that we are such a small and overcrowded island with so many people fighting for not enough space and infrastructure. Building more just puts more and more of the countryside and our wildlife at risk. I'm not saying anything new should ever be built anywhere but I do fear for already threatened species in the affected areas. I think we need conservation at the heart of the planning process, not as an afterthought - if that could be accomodated in all future greenbelt/greenfield development I would be happier.

Millerd wrote:That said, was there not some success when the M40 was built, with the road diverted around the sensitive areas and the creation of the M40 Compensation Area? Did this not prove very successful in terms of colonisation by Black and Brown Hairstreaks having been set out with them in mind? (As an aside, I've often wanted to visit this, and would be grateful for any guidance as to where precisely it is, and how it might be accessed!)

I don't know where the compensation area is, but I will point out the huge curve the M40 had to take to bypass Bernwood Forest - I wonder if that was at risk of being flattened at any point?

There was a editorial in the Evening Standard last night that argued the pros and cons of the whole scheme. The paper (but not this piece) has come down in favour as long as domestic services do not suffer for the 'greater national good'. I will try and find a link in moment but it said that one original route suggestion was for HS2 to ran parallel to the M40 to avoid more countryside destruction - I shudder to think which of the many sites I have visited over the last few years would vanish if that idea was taken up.

EDIT - here is the Evening Standard piece:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/markets/a ... g-route.do

Apologies if I appear naïve and not thinking this through, but isn't the reason for the new rail link based on a need for an increase in capacity as the cost of maintaining existing stock is uneconomical in the long run (the high-speed aspect is just incidental as any new railway won't be built on old fashioned principles)?
I also have say I agree with Mike's assessment that if this is needed (and I'm sure a lot of research and deliberation has gone into this) then electric railways are the greener option. If the old railways are subsequently closed down and allowed to be reclaimed by nature this will be a benefit to wildlife. I also agree with the other sentiments of the short to mid-term damage this is likely to create and respect the fact that protest helps ensure that governments don't just make these type of decisions lightly. As ever with these things there is a conflict of interest, (exacerbated by the density of our population) with the need to economically prosper as a country and conserve our valuable natural assets.

Philzoid wrote: I also have say I agree with Mike's assessment that if this is needed (and I'm sure a lot of research and deliberation has gone into this) then electric railways are the greener option.

High speed is less green than low speed though, I think. Some reasoned but inconclusive discussion on the environmental aspects here http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/g ... -emissions, but you can find sites that support or refute any opinion you decide to hold

If the old railways are subsequently closed down and allowed to be reclaimed by nature this will be a benefit to wildlife.

One of the reasons the new one is high speed is that the line is straighter and the trains don't stop between the major urban centres. So the old line will continue to exist to serve the intermediate destinations.

My local Wildlife Trust isn't happy: http://www.bbowt.org.uk/newsletters/HS2_Campaign.asp

Cheers,

- Pete

millerd wrote:That said, was there not some success when the M40 was built, with the road diverted around the sensitive areas and the creation of the M40 Compensation Area? Did this not prove very successful in terms of colonisation by Black and Brown Hairstreaks having been set out with them in mind? (As an aside, I've often wanted to visit this, and would be grateful for any guidance as to where precisely it is, and how it might be accessed!)

Google returns a link to the Butterfly Conservation Regional Action Plan Thames Region, which gives SP629110 as the location of the M40 compensation area, but no clue to accessing it.

Further down Google's output I found English Nature's The butterfly handbook, which gives some additional information about the compensation area and 'mitigating the impacts of roads on butterfly populations' in general. At first sight, it looks as though it could be an interesting read.

If I manage to find some more specific information about the M40CA, I'll update this post.

EDIT: Here's a handy page (including a map) from the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme, which gives SP62901020 as a more precise location, slightly south of the earlier one. However, page 7 of 'The butterfly handbook' (see above) suggests that the compensation area runs between Shabbington Wood and Whitecross Green, which is a couple of miles away, so something doesn't seem quite right.

Paul

The area where the arrow points to on the map can be reached from the car park at Bernwood Forest. I've walked down almost to the M40 from the main car park. The area closest to the M40 isn't as good an area as other parts of the forest for butterflies but I may not have been in the exact spot of the compensation area.

Pete Eeles wrote:My local Wildlife Trust isn't happy: http://www.bbowt.org.uk/newsletters/HS2_Campaign.asp

Cheers,

- Pete

Hello Pete,

Neither is mine,

http://www.warwickshire-wildlife-trust. ... SC,1X35C,1

Cheers,

Neil F.