Where is the protection ?

[Plantzzman]

Brocakat the site is next to a main road and is not secure - the only defence to the site is an earth / rubble mound at the entrance. What this means is anyone can access the site for good or bad reasons. While built away from the access point anyone walking around the site would wonder what the large plastic sheeted fence was on the site. In this case a group (it was suggested Eastern Europeans) moved onto the site. When I visited the site the group had pulled up the plastic reptile barrier and had made a wind break from it and the hibernacula had been pulled up and the associated wood was being burnt by the group on a camp fire. The site itself is secure on all sides other than the side on the road which could and should have easily been fenced off as it is council property.

[Plantzzman]

Maccyd82 almost all the documents can be found here http://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/acolne...ystemkey=87966

The nub of the situation for me is that I am not sure that the hibernacula were built well enough for the winter - images I have seen of similar hibernacula used small diameter pipes with a nail through the middle of the entrance to stop predators etc from accessing where as in this case they were large diameter- maybe 6 inch, no nail though the entrance to stop predators and also by spring the outsides of the two mounds were so worn away I and others question if the construction was sound - why would you use access pipes unless the intention was the outer soil mound would stay secure ?
But then I guess the REAL nub of the situation for me is how can it be acceptable for this all to take place and be in the position where NOBODY has to prove their actions ? nobody has to prove that their man handling of the lizards have not lead to their deaths, nobody has to prove that the construction of the hibernacula has lead to the lizards deaths, nobody has to prove anything ! at the very least those who have taken on the task in relation to the lizards - be it the site owner (the council), the developer or the developers contractors must be answerable for all of this ! otherwise what future is there for wildlife where developers can act but dont have to prove their actions ?

[Brocakat]

Thanks for the update, Plantman - the reason I asked is because, working for a City Council in relation to the maintainance of their Soft Landscape, I am aware that:------- Gypsies & other travellers have the right of a 'certain' time-period ( before being served upon then a Court Order requiring them to vacate that land) -------to stay on that land which had at the point of entry - Free Access.

However, land accessed by a party such as Gypsies & other travellers by means of breaking-through / breaching a boundary is immediately Illegally Accessed , and the party can be removed without recource to a Court Order. If the Council apply for one. And they should - especially if you lobby the relevant Ward Councillors . Especially if you told them it could be a Voting Issue.

So if this Council aren't bothered to have even rudimentary boundary fencing, etc ------- especially at those lengths adjoining any Public Highway -- there is no real deterent to any party going on there , and TBH it's a bit of an invitation for any party to go on there - with possible environmental damage & loss of features.

I would accuse this Council of being disingeneous to the point of almost inviting Travellers to go there - to go there even for that short, but legal - time.

[Plantzzman]

Hi Brocakat thanks for your reply, sorry only just replying but have been busy with work related to the site in question. The site is secure from the aspect of soil barriers to stop caravans accessing the site but sadly it isnt fully fenced so anyone can access the site - great for me being able to monitor the site to some degree but not good as in this case a group on foot moved on and made a temporary camp out of what was used for the lizard translocation.
I have had contact with Natural England and sadly it seems much of our UK wildlife is doomed as they appear unable to do anything and suggest that in my case the City Council dont have to do anything in relation to monitoring after translocation. The aspect alot of this seems to fall down on is the fact the lizards went into a kind of limbo because the application didnt get passed so maybe potential monitoring that WOULD have been put into place if planning was passed is not implimented.
This is a comment from their latest email
"there is no specific legal requirement for monitoring after translocating Common Lizards either as part of a planning development or not. Rightly or wrongly, Derby City Council do not have to monitor the impacts of their translocations although it would be best practice for them to do so. This means that any agreement to monitor is voluntary. Natural England did not advise Derby City to not undertake monitoring. Furthermore our correspondence to the planning application did advise a management scheme was drawn up which would include monitoring."
So what does the future hold ?

[Plantzzman]

Just an update - Natural England are now saying they will tell the developer that catching the common lizards before the planning inquiry result is NOT best practice - its not clear why this wasnt the case the first two times !