Hampshire County Council

Yateley Common Management Committee Item 3

19 February 2002

Review of the Yateley Common Country Park

Executive Management Plan - January 1999

Report of the Director of Arts, Countryside and Community

Contact : John Tickle, ext 6000

1. Summary

1.1. This report analyses the work carried out at Yateley Common Country Park over the last three years in relation to the long term management objectives set out in the Yateley Common Country Park Executive Management Plan - January 1999.

2. Performance Against Long Term Management Objectives

2.1. To eliminate encroachments on Common Land.

There has been limited progress in this area. Discussions with Sims Metals continue with regard to their site off Vigo Lane. No other actions have been taken against encroachments on the Common.

2.2. To protect the site from inappropriate development on adjacent land.

No significant applications have been made for development on adjacent land in the last three years.

2.3. To minimise activities such as motor cycling, fires, litter, dumping, joy riding, etc.

Little progress can be reported in this area. The number of fires has been significantly reduced in 2000 - 2001 but this is likely to be due to wet summer weather and Foot and Mouth access restrictions rather than any long term trend.

Activity in relation to other site abuses is generally restricted to clearing up the consequences rather than any proactive measures to reduce or prevent problems.

2.4. To review the bridleway and path network .......

This is ongoing. Following consultation with HCC Rights of Way staff and The Ramblers Association, we are now almost ready to submit proposals for wider consultation.

2.5. To manage all paths and bridleways to such a standard that there are not wet areas that are difficult to use or erosion gulleys, and that access is not restricted by adjacent vegetation.

Pathside vegetation has been cut back annually so that access is not restricted on public Rights of Way and legitimate permissive routes.

Erosion gulleys have been repaired in several places and no dangerous gulleys currently exist.

There has been little progress in relation to wet areas. Some improvements have been carried out near to the `Pinch Point'.

2.6. To provide a high quality education service to local schools and other groups and to raise the awareness of visitors about the value of the site.

An education service has been provided to all schools and other groups that have requested it. Numbers of school visits were significantly reduced in 2001 due to Foot and Mouth access restrictions.

Apart from ongoing informal communication between site staff and the public, there has been no progress on raising visitor awareness.

2.7. To remove eyesores and enhance the landscape quality of the site.

Newly created eyesores (usually arising from dumping) have been removed. No historic problems have been dealt with.

2.8. To protect important archaeological features.

This is largely an issue that does not require active management. No activities have been carried out in relation to this objective during the past three years.

2.9. To create or maintain healthy populations of all species of nature conservation importance.

Work in this respect has largely centred upon ongoing heathland restoration work. No specific targeted projects to benefit specific species have been carried out.

2.10. To remove low quality secondary woodland from core areas of zones 2-4 and to restore heathland in these areas.

Work funded by MAFF through the Countryside Stewardship scheme has been completed on schedule, as has work funded by English Nature.

2.11. To remove low quality woodland and scrub habitats from zone 1 and to restore them to heathland, grassland or high quality scrub as appropriate.

Some work funded by Countryside Stewardship has been carried out but no additional works have been possible.

2.12. To improve the quality of heathland habitats by removal of bracken and dominant grasses where appropriate and by promoting diversity of structure.

Bracken spraying has been carried out in limited areas near to Cricket Hill Lane but has not been possible elsewhere. Turf stripping of dominant grasses has not been possible due to lack of resources.

2.13. To improve the structure of grassland habitats by careful manipulation of grazing pressure.

No work has been possible in this area; however there does not appear to have been any significant deterioration in the quality of the grassland habitats.

2.14. To reduce fragmentation of important habitats.

Reduction in the fragmentation of heathland habitats has been achieved by Countryside Stewardship funded works. No work has been possible with other habitats.

2.15. To reinstate grazing across the site.

This is a long term objective for which no actions were proposed during the duration of this management plan.

2.16. To eliminate invasive exotic species throughout the site.

There has been very limited progress. A small amount of Rhododendron has been removed.

2.17. To protect high quality woodland habitats and ensure a supply of dead wood.

This is largely a passive activity although work in relation to 2.16 would be beneficial in certain areas.

2.18. To obtain comprehensive data on the species of all taxa present on the site.

A small amount of additional data has been obtained during the period under review, primarily through the use of an outside consultant in 2001 and through ad hoc staff observations. No staff time has been made available for biological surveying.

2.19. To monitor populations of all important species in order to assess the effects of management and natural change.

Very limited data has been obtained, usually of the more visible species. No staff time has been made available for biological monitoring.

2.20. To carry out research on appropriate species or habitats where this will inform site management.

No such activities have been carried out.

Recommendation

That this report be noted.

4cR100202