For those areas which were found to have been mis-mapped and required re-classification, indicative ecological value of the re-identified habitat(s) was assigned to the re-classified area. If the ecological status was considered to be different from the indicative ecological value, an adjusted ecological value was given to the re-identified area.

For a correctly mapped habitat, ecological value was adjusted (ie upgraded or downgraded) from the indicative value if:

• the habitat was found to be substantially disturbed by human activities (thus requiring downgrading); and/or

• the habitat was found to support better (upgrade)/worse (downgrade) ecological characteristics than other areas of the same habitat type.

Results obtained from the field surveys of individual surveyed habitats are summarised in Annex G. The existing status of each habitat type is discussed below based on the results obtained from ecological value assessment during field visits. Sites where the ecological value has been adjusted (upgraded/downgraded) due to reasons other than mis-mapping are listed in Tables 7.1a-q. Photographs are provided for those habitats (sub-sites) which have an indicative ecological value of high but were downgraded to low or negligible after field assessment.

As ecological value assessment was considered not necessary for Bare Rock or Soil, Grassland or Modified Watercourse (see Section 3.3 of TR2), these habitats are not included in the following discussion.