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.
|