White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report

Crewe Green Link Road (South) White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report September 2012 B1772401/OD/033

Originated by Checked by Reviewed by Approved by ORIGINAL NAME NAME NAME NAME Simon Holden Rhonda Ridley Saffra Wright Rosie Simon DATE September 2012 INITIALS SH Document Status INITIALS Draft RR INITIALS SW INITIALS RS REVISION NAME NAME NAME NAME DATE INITIALS INITIALS INITIALS INITIALS Document Status REVISION NAME NAME NAME NAME DATE INITIALS INITIALS INITIALS INITIALS Document Status REVISION NAME NAME NAME NAME DATE INITIALS INITIALS INITIALS INITIALS Document Status

Contents Executive Summary 1 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Background 3 1.2 Limitations 3 2 Methodology 5 2.1 Desk Study 5 2.2 Field Survey 5 2.2.1 Habitat assessment 5 2.2.2 Trapping survey 5 2.2.3 Catch processing 6 2.2.4 Bio-security 6 3 Results 7 3.1 Desk study 7 3.2 Field Survey 8 3.2.1 Habitat Assessment 8 3.2.2 Trapping Survey 9 4 Conclusion 11 5 References 13 Appendix A White-Clawed Crayfish Information 15 Summary of Biology and Habitat Requirements 15 Nature Conservation Status 16 Legislation and Policy Relating to White-clawed Crayfish 16 Licensing 17 Appendix B Crayfish Habitat Assessment Form 19 Appendix C Photographs 21 Appendix D White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Results 23 Figures 27 OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report

Page Not Used OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report

Executive Summary This report presents the findings of a white-clawed crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes) survey undertaken by Jacobs UK Ltd. (Jacobs) on behalf of Cheshire East Council (CEC) as part of the Crewe Green Link Road (South) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which will be reported in the Environmental Statement for the scheme. Gresty Brook and Basford Brook were subject to a presence/absence survey for white-clawed crayfish on 15 th and 16 th August 2012. A total of 73 white-clawed crayfish were recorded during the survey. No non-native crayfish were recorded. The survey results support the findings of previous surveys (Revell, 2010) which also recorded a large population of white-clawed crayfish in this watercourse. The white-clawed crayfish population of Gresty Brook/Basford Brook has been assessed as being of regional nature conservation value. OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 1

Page Not Used OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 2

1 Introduction 1.1 Background Jacobs UK Ltd. (Jacobs) has been appointed to undertake an environmental impact assessment (EIA) on behalf of Cheshire East Council (CEC) for the development of a new link road between the A5020 Western Gate roundabout (Grid Reference SJ72295369) and the A500 (Grid Reference SJ72645279), located to the south east of Crewe. This link road is known as Crewe Green Link Road South, which will be referred to as the Scheme throughout the report. The EIA is reported in the Environmental Statement for the scheme. CEC previously undertook an environmental assessment of this link road, which was reported in the Planning and Environmental Statement that supported the planning application submitted in June 2011. Planning permission was granted in October 2011. This planning application did not include the areas required for the borrow pit, flood compensation area, soil storage area and temporary site compounds. CEC is now undertaking an environmental assessment of the whole road scheme including these additional areas, which will support a new planning application. This report has been prepared to present the results of a white-clawed crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes) survey conducted by Jacobs ecologists to inform the EIA for the planning application of the Scheme. The objectives of this survey were to establish the current status of white-clawed crayfish in the survey area and to evaluate the importance of the survey area for this species. The survey area is defined as Gresty Brook and Basford Brook. The location of the survey area is shown on Figure 1. White-clawed crayfish is listed under annexes II and V of the EU Habitats Directive and Appendix II of the Bern Convention, and protected under Schedule 5 the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). It is a priority species under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan and the Cheshire Biodiversity Action Plan (CRBP 2008). Further details regarding the biology and habitat requirements, nature conservation status, legislation and policy framework of white-clawed crayfish is summarised in Appendix A. 1.2 Limitations The water level in Basford Brook and Gresty Brook was too deep to survey by hand searching or torch survey. Trapping was selected as the most appropriate survey method. This method has limitations in that only adult crayfish are captured. It does not therefore allow an assessment of the population structure to be inferred from the results (i.e. it is not possible to determine breeding success or recruitment levels). The findings of this report represent the professional opinion of qualified ecologists and do not constitute professional legal advice. The client may wish to seek professional legal interpretation of the relevant wildlife legislation cited in this document. OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 3

Page Not Used OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 4

2 Methodology 2.1 Desk Study A review of the white-clawed crayfish data in the Crewe Green Link South Planning and Environmental Statement (TEP, 2011) was undertaken. A search of National Biodiversity Network website (www.data.nbn.org.uk) was undertaken during the scoping stage of the project to gather information on the protected species that may be present in the survey area. Information was also sought from the local biological recording centre for Cheshire: record. The centre was contacted and asked to provide records of species within 5km of the survey area. The Environment Agency (EA) was consulted and white-clawed crayfish survey data was requested. 2.2 Field Survey 2.2.1 Habitat assessment During the site visit on 15 August 2012 Jacobs ecologists recorded the habitat quality in Gresty Brook / Basford Brook. This involved recording physical characteristics of the water course (channel width, depth, substrate, bank profile and flow types) and the vegetation structure within the channel and along the banks. Features offering suitable refuge habitat such as undercut banks, submerged tree roots and cobbles were recorded using a standard survey form (see Appendix B). Professional judgement was used to assess the quality of the habitats for whiteclawed crayfish. Further information on survey methods is given by Peay (2003). 2.2.2 Trapping survey Nineteen crayfish traps (Trappy Traps TM ) were set along the Gresty Brook / Basford Brook at the locations shown on Figure 1. Trap dimensions were 520mm long and 210mm wide, with a mesh size of 20mm. The locations were chosen to allow the water course to be sampled throughout the reaches potentially impacted by the Scheme (reaches 2 and 3). Traps were set at a higher density in areas where potential impacts were anticipated to be higher due to proposed drainage outfalls. The traps were set in the late afternoon on 15th August 2012. They were baited with tinned sardines and tied off to nearby fence posts/trees or pegged to the bank to prevent them being lost. The location of each trap was marked on a map and a note made of nearby features to ensure every trap was recovered. The traps were left to fish overnight and were recovered the following morning (16th August 2012). The trapping was authorised by the EA (Trapping consent ref: C/SO/10072012/S5) and undertaken by a licensed surveyor (Simon Holden, Natural England survey licence no. 20121048). OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 5

2.2.3 Catch processing When the traps were retrieved the catch was carefully removed and placed in a white plastic sorting tray. A small volume of water and vegetation was placed in the tray to ensure the crayfish were not unduly stressed. Each crayfish was briefly examined to determine species, sex and any signs of damage or disease. The carapace length was measured using digital callipers. Data were recorded on a standard survey form and the crayfish were released back to the water course immediately after processing. 2.2.4 Bio-security All traps and surveyors waders were disinfected with Virkon prior to the survey to prevent the risk of transferring crayfish plague (Aphanomycosis) to the water course. OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 6

3 Results 3.1 Desk study According to the Local Biodiversity Action Plan for white-clawed crayfish in the Cheshire region, distribution of the species is patchy although there are significant populations in catchments within the county (Cheshire Region Biodiversity Partnership 2008). A review of the Crewe Green Link South Planning and Environmental Statement (TEP, 2011) verified the historical existence of white-clawed crayfish. A survey in 2001 concentrating on two stretches of Basford Brook (the A500 crossing and the proposed location of the link road spur crossing), found high densities of whiteclawed crayfish with a total of 59 recorded. TEP carried out further surveys in 2003 (on Basford Brook), 2004 (on Gresty Brook) and 2008 (both water courses) and recorded white-clawed crayfish during all surveys. In addition, an MSc student (Charlotte Harris) undertook surveys along Basford Brook as part of her research project in 2006 and found white-clawed crayfish both north and south of the A500. record provided 8 records of white-clawed crayfish between 2003 and 2005 along Basford Brook and upstream where it becomes Mere Gutter. The nearest record to the site is approximately 1km upstream (Table 1). Table 1 Summary of white-clawed crayfish records from record. Site Name Grid Ref Distance / Record Date direction from site Basford Brook SJ7305151324 0km 21 2003 Basford Brook SJ7305151324 0km 7 2003 Chorlton (Crewe & SJ7362549461 4km Present 2004 Nantwich) - CP Chorlton (Crewe & SJ7361949508 4km Present 2004 Nantwich) - CP Chorlton (Crewe & SJ7365049222 4km Present 2004 Nantwich) - CP Blakenhall - CP SJ7413348673 4.5km Present 2004 Blakenhall - CP SJ7419048574 4.5km Present 2005 Chorlton (Crewe & Nantwich) - CP SJ7361949508 4km Present 2005 The EA provided a report of a survey undertaken in 2010 (Revell, 2010) and also provided information about a survey undertaken during spring 2012. The EA conducted a white-clawed crayfish survey of Basford Brook and Mere Gutter (the same water course further upstream) on the 10th and 11th August 2010. This involved a night torch survey at Mere Gutter and the deployment of twenty-four traps across four sites. This survey was carried out to re-confirm the presence of whiteclawed crayfish and obtain up-to-date records, with the previous EA survey being carried out in 2005. Following the construction of the A500 by-pass a decade ago, a crayfish rescue was carried out by the developer prior to the installation of the Basford Brook culvert. Habitat creation was also carried out as mitigation in the form of back-waters upstream of the culvert (Revell, 2010). OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 7

The survey area for the 2010 survey comprised Sites 1 and 2 immediately upstream and downstream of the A500 to assess the state of the white-clawed crayfish population at this point. To inform the proposed designation of Mere Gutter and Basford Brook as an SBI (Site of Biological Interest), Sites 3 and 4 were located 3.5 km upstream of the A500 sites. White-clawed crayfish were recorded at each of the four sites surveyed. No invasive, non-native crayfish (e.g. American signal crayfish) were found. During the night-time torch survey, three crayfish believed to be A. pallipes were seen from the downstream side of Waybutt Lane bridge. In total, 152 white-clawed crayfish were caught through trapping. The report concluded that white-clawed crayfish appear to be well established and widely distributed in Basford Brook and Mere Gutter. The water course remains one of three known key sites for native crayfish in Cheshire and, arguably, one of the most important in the North West (Revell, 2010). The EA has anecdotal evidence of white-clawed crayfish within Basford Brook and Mere Gutter as far back as the early part of last century. Confirmed EA records date back to 1991 (Revell, 2010). Through liaison with local EA Fisheries and Biodiversity officers it was established that a further survey for white-clawed crayfish was carried out by the EA in 2012 (P. Breslin and F. Percival, pers. comm.). This involved the use of artificial refugia (straw bales) placed in the water course to encourage crayfish to shelter within them. Several adult white-clawed crayfish were recorded. No signal crayfish have been recorded in the water course but there are concerns that this species may soon spread from a stillwater fishery adjacent to the water course further downstream. 3.2 Field Survey 3.2.1 Habitat Assessment The surveyed water course changes its name within the survey area. In the upstream reach towards the A500 it is called Basford Brook, becoming Gresty Brook just south of the Crewe Derby railway line. The water course flows in a south to north direction, turning towards the west as it becomes Gresty Brook. The Basford Brook floodplain is flat and wide in the survey area. The Gresty Brook floodplain is interrupted to the north by the railway embankment, to the south the top of the embankment grades into the surrounding arable land. The water depth during the survey ranged from approximately 0.75m to 1.1m. Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) is the main emergent plant which is occasional in small stands. Submerged plants include pedunculate water-starwort (Callitriche brutia), curled pondweed (Potomogeton crispus), fool s watercress (Apium nodiflorum) and lesser water-parsnip (Berula erecta). Throughout the ecological surveys undertaken by Jacobs to inform the current EIA the water course has been divided into four reaches starting at the north of the site on Gresty Brook and continuing upstream to Basford Brook. The two surveyed reaches are described below and their location is shown on Figure 1. Photographs showing the general character and bank profile of each reach are shown in Appendix C. OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 8

Reach 2 The channel has been straightened in this reach. The adjacent habitat comprises agricultural land (pasture and arable) and the banks are open and unshaded. The left bank profile ranges from shallow (<45 ) to vertical and the height ranges from approximately 0.5m to 1.25m. The right bank is vertical, low (approximately 0.1-0.5m) and cattle poached. The current is slow and the channel width is approximately 1.5m - 2m. Reach 3 The watercourse in this reach has not been straightened to the same degree as reach 2 and it is more similar in character to reach 1, a small length of bank has been reinforced at the base by wooden boards this is located towards the middle of the reach. The adjacent habitat is agricultural land (pasture and arable), mature trees are frequent on the west bank but the tree density is not such that it limits ground layer vegetation. The banks are mainly steep and they are variable in height, averaging approximately 1m above the water level. The right bank is partially fenced in this reach, some cattle poaching of banks is evident where sections are unfenced and where banks are not steep. The current is slow and the channel width is approximately 1.5m. 3.2.2 Trapping Survey A total of 73 white-clawed crayfish were captured in the trapping survey, 14 from reach 2 and 59 from reach 3. No non-native crayfish were recorded. Several crayfish exhibiting signs of porcelain disease (Thelohaniasis) were recorded. Raw data are presented in Appendix D. OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 9

Page Not Used OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 10

4 Conclusion White-clawed crayfish were confirmed by field survey to be present throughout the surveyed lengths of Gresty Brook and Basford Brook. The white-clawed crayfish population of Gresty Brook/Basford Brook has been assessed as being of regional nature conservation value. This report has been used to inform the EIA and develop an appropriate mitigation strategy, which is presented in the Environmental Statement for the scheme. OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 11

Page Not Used OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 12

5 References Revell, D. (2010) White-clawed Crayfish Survey of Basford Brook & Mere Gutter, Nr. Crewe, 10-11th August 2010. Environment Agency, North West Region (South Area), Warrington. Cheshire Region Biodiversity Partnership white-clawed crayfish webpage (2008). http://www.cheshire-biodiversity.org.uk/action-plans/listing.php?id=60. (Accessed 10 September 2012). H.M.S.O. (1994) Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan. H.M.S.O., London. H.M.S.O. (1981) Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. H.M.S.O., London. Holditch, D. (2003). Ecology of the White-clawed Crayfish. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series Mo. 1. English Nature, Peterborough. Peay, S. (2000). Guidance on works affecting white-clawed crayfish. English Nature. Peay, S. (2003). Monitoring the White-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No.1, English Nature, Peterborough. TEP (2011) Crewe Green Link Road South, Crewe, Cheshire: Planning and Environmental Statement. TEP. OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 13

Page Not Used OD/033 White-clawed Crayfish Survey Report 14

Appendix A White-Clawed Crayfish Information Summary of Biology and Habitat Requirements Crayfish are the largest, most mobile freshwater invertebrates, and are considered keystone species within their habitats (Holditch, 2003). Adults may reach over 12cm from the tip of their rostrum (snout) to the telson (tail plate), but often are less than 10cm. Males have larger claws than females and are more territorial, particularly during the mating season. Females develop a broader abdomen to accommodate the brood. The abdominal appendages of the females are more hairy than the males and are used to support the eggs, which are glued to them after laying. Crayfish are nocturnal (although individuals affected by crayfish plague may exhibit daytime activity) and their activity throughout the year varies seasonally in response to temperature, river flow, growth cycle and breeding (Peay, 2000). White-clawed crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes) are omnivorous, but eat mostly macroinvertebrates (worms, insect larvae, snails), small fish, macrophytes, algae, dead plants and carrion when available. During the moulting process, crayfish consume calcified plants as a source of calcium. White-clawed crayfish can live for more than 10 years and reach sexual maturity after three to four years. Breeding takes place between September to November when the water temperature drops below 10 C for an extended period. Whiteclawed crayfish may migrate into deeper water during the winter or burrow into river banks. Females overwinter with a clutch of eggs held under their tail. Clutches range from 20 to 160 eggs, but usually less than 100 (Holditch, 2003). Eggs hatch on the female and the juveniles become independent between June and August depending on geographical location, occurring later in the north of England. Similarly the moulting and growth period (which happens once or twice a year in adults during which time they are prone to predation) may extend from May to October in the south and July to September in the north. The presence of juveniles and a varied size range indicate a breeding population. White-clawed crayfish are predated by fish, mammals (mink, rat, otter, water vole) and birds (heron and crows). In Britain, geology and water quality determine crayfish distribution. White-clawed crayfish have a preference for slow flowing sections of chalk or clay streams with good water quality. White-clawed crayfish occur in areas with relatively hard, mineral-rich waters on calcareous and rapidly weathering rocks. It is found in a variety of water bodies including canals, streams, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and even in lakes and ponds. White-clawed crayfish are typically found in water courses of 0.75m to 1.25m deep, but the species may occur in very shallow streams (about 5cm) and deeper, slow flowing rivers (2.5m). Within these water bodies crayfish occupy habitats under refuges such as rocks, logs, tree roots, but emerge to forage for food. Other favourable channel features include vertical banks and overhanging vegetation more than 0.5m above the water surface. White-clawed crayfish may be found in localised populations occupying only favourable sections of the channel. Holditch (2003) gives further information on the variables that affect white-clawed crayfish distribution OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 15

Nature Conservation Status The white-clawed crayfish is the only native crayfish to the UK and has suffered a significant decline throughout its European range in recent years. This decline can be attributed largely to competition and disease spread from non-native crayfish and the remaining populations are severely affected by habitat loss and disturbance. Since the 1980s many populations have been eliminated and populations have declined by 25-49% (CRBP, website 2008). Most populations now exist in northern and central England (Peay, 2000). White-clawed crayfish are susceptible to predation and competition by introduced species particularly the North American signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus). The two populations may live alongside one another for a time, but eventually the native species is lost due to signal crayfish being larger, faster growing and more aggressive. White-clawed crayfish are also threatened by two diseases: aphanomycosis, or crayfish plague, which is caused by a fungus often carried by the introduced species and can cause mass mortality of many populations. White-clawed crayfish have no resistance the crayfish plague and entire populations can be wiped out within a couple of weeks of coming into contact with the disease; and thelohaniasis, or porcelain disease, is caused by a protozoan, Thelohania contejeani, and although it causes a porcelain white colouration to the tissues on the underside it rarely causes mass mortality if less than 10% of the population is affected. White-clawed crayfish populations have been affected by loss of habitat (through canalisation, dredging, siltation, development) makes sections of watercourses unsuitable. Pollution also affects crayfish populations and they tend to be restricted to clean rivers and streams. The species is very vulnerable to pollution incidents for example relating to biocides and silage. These threats have contributed to a rapid rate of population loss throughout the European range and consequently white-clawed crawfish are globally Endangered on the IUCN Red List. The unfavourable and declining status means that where works requiring land drainage consent are planned, the EA may make protection of white-clawed crayfish a condition of the consent. Where mitigation measures involve taking of white-clawed crayfish this requires a conservation licence from Natural England or Countryside Council for Wales. Legislation and Policy Relating to White-clawed Crayfish White-clawed crayfish is protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) under which it is an offence to: intentionally or deliberately capture or kill, or intentionally injure white-clawed crayfish; possess a white-clawed crayfish, or any part of it, unless acquired lawfully, and sell, barter, exchange or transport or offer for sale WCC or parts of them. This does not confer protection of habitat used by white-clawed crayfish. Non-native crayfish (signal crayfish) are listed on Schedule 9 of the WCA and as such it is an offence to release, or allow to escape, these species during engineering works. OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 16

The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 implements the European Union s Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC (a) on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora) in Great Britain; the white-clawed crayfish is listed on Annexes II and V of the Directive which means that Member States are not only required to designate Special Areas of Conservation (SAC s) to protect important populations, but should also take measures to ensure that the taking of white-clawed crayfish in the wild is compatible with their being maintained at a favourable status. White-clawed crayfish is a UK BAP priority species and a Species of Principle Importance under Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006 (Section 42 in Wales) and the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act in Scotland. It is government policy that local authorities consider the conservation status of such species when determining planning applications. The Local Biodiversity Action Plan for the Cheshire region has a species action plan for white-clawed crayfish. The aims of the plan are to attempt to maintain the present distribution of this species by limiting the spread of crayfish plague, limiting the spread of non-native species, and by maintaining appropriate habitat conditions. Licensing Licences are available from Natural England to allow taking or handling of crayfish for scientific or educational purposes, such as surveys, or for conservation purposes. There is no provision under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) for licensing what would otherwise be offences for the purpose of development, maintenance or land management. Such activities must be covered by the defence in the Act that permits otherwise illegal actions if they are the incidental result of a lawful operation and could not reasonably be avoided. This defence can only be tested in court, so it is important to demonstrate that every option which would have prevented an offence being committed had been considered before relying on a statutory defence. OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 17

Page Not Used OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 18

Appendix B Crayfish Habitat Assessment Form Catchment Date (dd/mm/yy) Weather, good 1, mod 2, poor 3 Photo ref. & Location CRAYFISH HABITAT SURVEY FORM Surveyors Flow norm 1, low 2, fal l 3, ri se 4 River Water temp. oc y, good 1, mod 2, poor 3 Site (no., name) Grid ref. (d/s end) Start and finish time Site length (m) Width channel (m) Survey method, std 1, quad 2, net/kick 3, trap 4, view 5 Details (if not standard) Descript. (channel features, landuse) sample patch 1 sample patch 2 sample patch 3 sample patch 4 sample patch 5 Extent (l x w patch) Channel (1 margins, 2 mid, 3 both, other specify) Depth (metres) Feature (1 marg. d'water, 2 pool, 3 glide, 4 run, 5 riffle) Refuges in channel tick all present in patch, ring main type(s) searched cobble (6.5-15cm) cobble (15-25.6cm) boulder (25.6-40cm) boulder (>40cm) rubble (give size) woody debris other urban debris tree roots, fine moss filamentous algae other submerged veg. emergents Main substrate beneath bedrock cobble (6.5-15cm) pebble (<6.5cm) gravel (<1.6cm) sand (<2mm) clay silt Siltation none low moderate high Refuges in bank none cobble/boulder tree roots, large vertical or undercut bank dry stone wall other reinforced crayfish burrows Shading above Crayfish/10 refuges, or per unit (depending on method) Search time Bullhead present? OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 19

Page Not Used OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 20

Appendix C Photographs Reach 2 Plate 1 Middle of reach 2 looking downstream (north) Plate 2 Middle of reach 2 looking upstream (south) OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 21

Reach 3 Plate 3 Middle of reach 3 looking downstream (north) Plate 4 Middle of reach 3 looking upstream (south) OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 22

Appendix D White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Results CRAYFISH RECORDING FORM Catchment River Basford Brook Site reference REACH 2 Date 16/08/2012 Surveyors Simon Holden/Rhonda Ridley Sheet no. 1 Record no. Species Sex Carapace length, mm Damage Disease Breeding Moult Sub-site location ref. Catch method 1 WCC M 44 T10 Trap 2 None - - T11 Trap 3 WCC M 41.5 Dark with spots T12 Trap 4 WCC F 42.3 T12 Trap 5 WCC F 46.5 Claw regrowing Porcelain T12 Trap 6 WCC F 43 T12 Trap 7 WCC F 48 T12 Trap 8 None - - T13 Trap 9 WCC F 43.5 T14 Trap 10 WCC F 48 1 antennae/part left claw T14 Trap 11 WCC F 39.5 T14 Trap 12 WCC M 47 Tip of rostrum Very dark T14 Trap 13 None - - T15 Trap 14 WCC F 43.5 T16 Trap 15 WCC M 52 T16 Trap 16 WCC M 39 T16 Trap 17 None - - T17 Trap 18 WCC?? 1 missing claw (left) T18 Trap 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Additional comments: OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 23

CRAYFISH RECORDING FORM Catchment River Basford Brook Site reference REACH 3 Date 16/08/2012 Surveyors Simon Holden/Rhonda Ridley Sheet no. 1 Record no. Species Sex Carapace length, mm Damage Disease Breeding Moult Sub-site location ref. Catch method 1 WCC F 38.2 T1 Trap 2 WCC M 42.7 Part antennae T1 Trap 3 WCC M 37.5 T1 Trap 4 WCC F 37.5 T1 Trap 5 WCC F 39.8 T1 Trap 6 WCC F 43.2 T1 Trap 7 WCC F 46 Part antennae T1 Trap 8 WCC M 43 T1 Trap 9 WCC M 41.8 T1 Trap 10 WCC M 50 T1 Trap 11 WCC M 52.2 T1 Trap 12 WCC F 40 T2 Trap 13 WCC F 43 T2 Trap 14 WCC M 43 T2 Trap 15 WCC M 46.8 T2 Trap 16 WCC M 43.9 Tip rostrum T2 Trap 17 WCC F 35.8 T2 Trap 18 WCC F 41.2 T3 Trap 19 WCC M 48 T3 Trap 20 WCC M 53 Very dark T3 Trap 21 WCC M 46 T4 Trap 22 WCC M 37.6 T4 Trap 23 WCC M 45.5 T4 Trap 24 WCC M 39.1 T4 Trap 25 WCC M 42 T4 Trap 26 WCC F 39.5 T4 Trap 27 WCC F 43.5 T4 Trap 28 WCC M 45.8 T4 Trap 29 WCC M 39.3 T4 Trap 30 WCC M 39.3 T4 Trap 31 WCC F 43.6 Very dark T5 Trap 32 None - - T6 Trap 33 WCC M 38.5 T7 Trap 34 WCC F 38.7 Dark T7 Trap 35 WCC M 40.1 T7 Trap 36 WCC M 50.3 Dark T7 Trap 37 WCC M 40 T7 Trap 38 WCC M 37.4 T7 Trap 39 WCC F 41.4 Dark T7 Trap 40 WCC M 46.8 1 antenna missing Dark T7 Trap 41 WCC F 42.1 T7 Trap 42 WCC M 38.9 T7 Trap 43 WCC M 41.9 T7 Trap 44 WCC M 47.2 T7 Trap 45 WCC M 43.7 Porcelain T7 Trap Additional comments: OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 24

CRAYFISH RECORDING FORM Catchment River Basford Brook Site reference REACH 3 Date 16/08/2012 Surveyors Simon Holden/Rhonda Ridley Sheet no. 2 Record no. Species Sex Carapace length, mm Damage Disease Breeding Moult Sub-site location ref. Catch method 46 WCC F 40.5 T7 Trap 47 WCC F 40.1 T7 Trap 48 WCC M 39.5 Porcelain T7 Trap 49 WCC M 48.3 T7 Trap 50 WCC M 39 T8 Trap 51 WCC M 38.2 T8 Trap 52 WCC F 48.2 Left claw missing T8 Trap 53 WCC F 40.1 T8 Trap 54 WCC F 40.2 T8 Trap 55 WCC M 40.6 T8 Trap 56 WCC F 41 T8 Trap 57 WCC M 52.5 T8 Trap 58 WCC M 38 Tip rostrum T9 Trap 59 WCC F 45 Quite pink T9 Trap 60 WCC M 45 T9 Trap 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 Additional comments: OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 25

Page Not Used OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 26

Figures Figure 1 - White-clawed Crayfish Survey Results OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 27

Page Not Used OD/033 White-Clawed Crayfish Survey Report 28