Search

Since 1978, a series of national surveys (Countryside Surveys) have been carried out by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (formerly the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology) to gather data on the natural environment in Great Britain. As the sampling framework for these surveys is not optimised to yield data on rarer or more specialised habitats, a survey was commissioned by the then Department of the Environment (DOE, now the Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs, DEFRA), in the 1990s to carry out additional survey work in English landscapes which contained semi-natural habitats that were perceived to be under threat, or which represented areas of concern to the Ministry. The landscapes were: lowland heath, chalk and limestone grasslands, coasts and uplands. These landscapes were chosen from a list identified as 'key habitats' in the Countryside Stewardship Scheme, an agri-environment scheme initiated in 1991. The survey design was a series of gridded, stratified, randomly selected 1 km squares taken as representative of classes derived from environmental classifications (or spatial masks) for each of the four landscape types in England determined from a statistical land classification. This resulted in a total of 213 of these squares being surveyed in the summers of 1992 and 1993, with information being collected regarding vegetation species, land cover, landscape features and land use. Data from the survey were collected using standardised, repeatable methods, with the database now providing a valuable baseline against which future ecological changes, resulting from a range of different drivers, may be compared. Following the surveys, the data were analysed and described in a series of contract reports showing that valuable habitats were restricted in all landscapes and that the majority were within designated land. The data set provides major potential for analyses, beyond those published in the reports published in 1996, for example in relation to climate change, agri-environment policies and land management. Precise locations of the plots are restricted, largely for reasons of landowner confidentiality. However, the representative nature of the data set makes it highly valuable for evaluating the status of the associated landscapes and vegetation covered. Both land cover data and vegetation plot data were collected during the surveys in 1992 and 1993, and are available via the following DOI: https://doi.org/10.5285/7aefe6aa-0760-4b6d-9473-fad8b960abd4. The spatial masks are also available from: https://doi.org/10.5285/dc583be3-3649-4df6-b67e-b0f40b4ec895. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Countryside Survey (CS) of Great Britain (GB) provides a unique and statistically robust series of datasets, consisting of an extensive set of repeated ecological measurements at a national scale, covering a time span of 29 years. CS was first undertaken in 1978 to provide a baseline for ecological and land use change monitoring in the rural environment of GB, following a stratified random design, based on 1 km squares. Originally, eight random 1 km squares were drawn from each of 32 environmental classes, thus comprising 256 sample squares in the 1978 survey. The number of these sites increased to 382 in 1984, 506 in 1990, 569 in 1998 and 591 in 2007. Detailed information regarding vegetation types and land use was mapped in all five surveys, allowing reporting by defined standard habitat classifications. Additionally, point and linear landscape features (such as trees and hedgerows) are available from all surveys after 1978. From these stratified, randomly located sample squares, information can be converted into national estimates, with associated error terms. Other data, relating to soils, freshwater and vegetation, were also sampled on analogous dates. However, the present paper describes only the surveys of landscape features and habitats. The resulting datasets provide a unique, comprehensive, quantitative ecological coverage of extent and change in these features in GB. Basic results are presented and their implications discussed. However, much opportunity for further analyses remains. Data from each of the survey years are available via the following DOIs: Landscape area data 1978: http://doi.org/10.5285/86c017ba-dc62-46f0-ad13-c862bf31740e, 1984: http://doi.org/10.5285/b656bb43-448d-4b2c-aade-7993aa243ea3, 1990: http://doi.org/10.5285/94f664e5-10f2-4655-bfe6-44d745f5dca7, 1998: http://doi.org/10.5285/1e050028-5c55-42f4-a0ea-c895d827b824, and 2007: http://doi.org/10.5285/bf189c57-61eb-4339-a7b3-d2e81fdde28d; Landscape linear feature data 1984: http://doi.org/10.5285/a3f5665c-94b2-4c46-909e-a98be97857e5, 1990: http://doi.org/10.5285/311daad4-bc8c-485a-bc8a-e0d054889219, 1998: http://doi.org/10.5285/8aaf6f8c-c245-46bb-8a2a-f0db012b2643, and 2007: http://doi.org/10.5285/e1d31245-4c0a-4dee-b36c-b23f1a697f88; Landscape point feature data 1984: http://doi.org/10.5285/124b872e-036e-4dd3-8316-476b5f42c16e, 1990: http://doi.org/10.5285/1481bc63-80d7-4d18-bcba-8804aa0a9e1b, 1998: http://doi.org/10.5285/ed10944f-40c8-4913-b3f5-13c8e844e153, and 2007: http://doi.org/10.5285/55dc5fd7-d3f7-4440-b8a7-7187f8b0550b. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]