Part of the site (2.8 hectares) was designated as a SINC by the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre (Hampshire County Council) in October 2000 as a result of botanical surveys carried out by Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust (HWT) in 1991 and 1998. The site is now included as a SINC in the recently adopted (2005) Havant Borough District Wide Local Plan 1996-2011.
The site meets SINC criteria 2A and 6A, which are as follows:
2A: Agriculturally unimproved grasslands 1 which support a characteristic flora and fauna.
6A: Sites which support one or more notable species 2 .

4.1.1.1    Site descriptions

The Brook Meadow site is described as:
“A large area of unimproved grassland/fen and upper saltmarsh with associated scrub and woodland communities”
in the SINC Summary of Interest provided by the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre (Hbic) in Winchester. This document which has been included as Appendix 3 also states that although
“the site was unmanaged at the time of survey it does retain three old meadow indicators: Meadow Barley, Distant Sedge and Strawberry Clover and various indicators of saline influenced communities including the County Scarce Carex divisa (Divided Sedge).”
Several trees on the site are subject to TPOs. Most of these trees are in Palmers Road copse as well as along the western banks of the River Ems upstream as far as the bend. The locations of the trees covered by TPO 0871 are marked on the map in Appendix 4.

4.1.2    Site definition and boundaries of designated nature conservation area

The Brook Meadow SINC map provided by Hbic (Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre) is included in Appendix 2.
The area covered by SINC status excludes the Seagull Lane patch, Palmers Road copse and Lumley copse. However, Lumley copse is just over the border in West Sussex and so would not be included in a Hampshire nature conservation designation. The areas outside the designated SINC area are an integral and valuable part of the whole and therefore LNR status is sought for the whole site.

4.2    Identification of nature conservation features

4.2.1 Proposed list of features for this management plan

I.             Unimproved Neutral Grassland
II.            Fen and Upper Saltmarsh areas
III.           Sea Club-rush Swamp
IV.           Lower reaches of a Chalk River
V.            Riverine Woodland
VI.           Scrub and Woodland.

4.3.  Evaluation of features

4.3.1  Evaluation

4.3.1.1  Size

The whole site covers an area of approx. 3.7 hectares (excluding Seagull Lane patch, Lumley Road copse and Palmers Road copse). This is not a very large area when compared to most nature conservation sites but the site is in the middle of a small town and so in this respect it covers a substantial part of the urban area. In addition, the site is bounded in the west by the River Ems and in the east by the Lumley Stream.

4.3.1.2    Diversity

The site encompasses a range of habitats, namely:  unimproved neutral grassland, wetland area (Carex ripera fen), upper saltmarsh, ruderal herb fen and Sea Club Rush swamp with associated scrub mainly on the margins and woodland communities alongside the lower reaches of a chalk river and a stream. 
These rich habitats support a wide variety of wildlife. The total number of plant species recorded on the site since 1998 is 311, including Bryophytes (mosses and liverworts) but excluding Fungi. This list of plants recorded includes 185 flowering plants, 49 trees and shrubs, 33 grasses, 2 horsetails, 18 sedges and rushes, and 23 mosses and liverworts. The 30 different fungi found on the site are listed separately.
In addition, 65 bird species and 24 species of butterfly have been recorded. Other insects are recorded separately. The records also include 17 mammals, several amphibians and molluscs.
The report of the Invertebrate Survey of the main grassland area of Brook Meadow (HWT, 2004) concludes that,
“Brook Meadow fulfils a valuable role in supporting biodiversity in the heart of Emsworth. In a comparison with other wetland sites in Hampshire and Oxfordshire, “Brook Meadow supports a reasonably distinctive fauna; not as diverse as the two nature reserves, which is to be expected given the greater variety of plant species and habitat structure at the two larger sites.”
An invertebrate survey of the chalk river habitat of the River Ems (2005) showed that all 13 of the major invertebrate groups were found in the lower reaches of the River Ems. The two sites furthest downstream showed the greatest diversity with 10 out of the 13 groups.

4.3.1.3    Naturalness

The site is essentially man-made mainly due to the modifications made to the river to serve various watermills over the centuries. These modifications included creating a linear millpond, planting Crack Willows along the riverbanks and diverting a short section of the river to the north. 
However, most of the site is unimproved grassland used as grazing land and water meadows since records began. This continued right up until the 1950’s after which the land was put to a variety of marginal uses with varying degrees of intervention. Between the late 1970’s and late 1980’s the linear millpond was drained and additional embankments were made as part of the works involved with the construction of the Emsworth short by-pass (A259) to the south and the A27 (T) to the north. These embankments were extended by using topsoil from the meadowland.
In the 1980’s, an embankment was built along the south western boundary of Gooseberry Cottage to prevent the property from flooding. This embankment now forms the large Bramble hedge along the eastern boundary of the South Meadow.
This was followed by a period of non intervention until 2000 when regular management work, including annual cuts, began.

4.3.1.4    Fragility

The site is reasonably resilient when faced with changing conditions. However, there is a long-term risk of damage to the site as a result of sea levels rising and climate change.
Otherwise the risks are confined to specific habitat damage by human misuse, including erosion of the riverbank by walkers which destroys the Water Vole habitat, unauthorised felling of trees along the banks of the Lumley Stream and pollution of the watercourses due to industrial, agricultural or residential causes. 

4.3.1.5    Rarity

Unimproved neutral grassland is becoming scarce nationally but Hampshire has approximately 20% of all the neutral unimproved grassland in the UK.
The site has seven old meadow indicators as well as indicators of saline influenced communities including the nationally scarce Divided Sedge (Carex divisa). A nationally rare fungus (Agrocybe cylindracae) and two locally rare mosses (Amblystegium tenax and Eurhynchium speciosum) have been found on the site. In addition, the locally rare Conyza sumatrensis (Guernsey Fleabane) was recorded in July 2003. Silaum silaus (Pepper Saxifrage) and (Lychnis flos-cuculi) Ragged Robin are two scarce and declining plant species associated with neutral grassland lowland meadows with low-input nutrient regimes, both of which are found on this site.
Biodiversity Action Plan species
Brook Meadow is covered by the Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan because it provides a habitat for four species of high priority concern.
Refer to Appendix 7 for relevant excerpts from the Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan and the UK Biodiversity Species Action Plan.
The site has a healthy population of Water Voles, which is a nationally endangered species and a priority species in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) and as the South East is the national stronghold, and Hampshire may contain the highest populations within the region, it is of extreme importance in the Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan. Other SAP (Species Action Plan) mammals include Serotine Bats and Pipistrelle Bats. The Little Egret, a regular visitor to the River Ems, is also a priority species in the Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan although numbers are increasing. See Appendix 7 for the list of animals and plants considered to be priority species in the UK and Hampshire BAP. Those species which have been recorded on the site are marked with an *.
An Invertebrate survey was carried out by HWT in June 2004. This survey recorded a Nationally Scarce Cranefly and a Nationally Scarce/Na 3 Solitary Mining Bee with 9 Local 4 species. As well as 71 Common species and 1 whose national status is unclear. The Local species found at Brook Meadow include three more solitary bees one of which is a ground-nesting species. All these bees require good sources of nectar and pollen. The other Local species include a metallic green malachite beetle, metallic blue leaf beetle feeding on willows in marsh and fenland, a parasitic fly, Essex Skipper butterfly, a leaf cutter bee and a Banded Demoiselle (metallic blue (males) or metallic green (females) damselfly).

4.3.1.6    Typicalness

The main part of the site is typical of lowland unimproved grassland which has been neglected and not consistently grazed since the 1950’s. Despite this the grassland has retained aspects of its original meadow flora.
The lower reaches of the River Ems contain flora and fauna typical of a chalk river.

4.3.1.7    Recorded history

A list of species recorded between 1998 and 2005 are included in Appendix 4. Wildlife surveys are given in Appendix 3 or under References. Information about past management is given in paragraph 3.2.3.3.
The history of the River Ems and its mills is well documented in David Rudkin’s Booklet, ‘The River Ems and Related Watercourses’. The BMCG held a Brook Meadow Through the Ages exhibition in 2005 and is planning to publish the material collected for the exhibition in the form of an 80-page booklet in 2006.

4.3.1.8    Position in an ecological unit

Even though the site is located in an urban area, it forms an essential wildlife corridor between the countryside to the north and Chichester Harbour AONB in the south. An intricate balance exists between the semi-saline lagoons to the south (Peter Pond and Slipper Mill Pond) and the flow of freshwater down the Lumley Stream. Saline influence from Peter Pond is essential to maintain the variety of habitat in Brook Meadow.

4.3.1.9    Potential for improvement

The main area of grassland (Central and North meadows) is at the second stage of regeneration (see Clare Bishop’s HWT report included in Appendix 5) and therefore is the most obvious site for improvement in terms of both species and habitat diversity. According to the Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan (pp 24, 25),
“Neutral unimproved grasslands contain an exceptional diversity of plant species, many now scarce in Britain.… A mixture of open fen and carr can support an exceptional range of plants, insects and birds.”
The HWT Invertebrate survey 2004 concludes,
“As management develops, the site has great potential to increase in interest and to support a more distinctive community of wetland, grassland and woodland invertebrates.”
The potential for improvement to the wooded habitats is limited to the selective coppicing and pollarding of the Crack Willows to extend the life of the trees. Pollarding the large Crack Willows lining the riverbanks will improve the Water Vole habitat by reducing shading.
Human use will have to be carefully monitored because of the small size of the site and its proximity to the industrial area and town centre of Emsworth. It is therefore important to continue to protect and improve wildlife habitats by for example making dead hedges and installing selective fencing.

4.3.1.10  Intrinsic appeal

The site is very aesthetically pleasing, with views along the River Ems from the two bridges, lots of wildflowers in the spring and butterflies in the summer. The diversity of wildlife to be seen on the site includes birds such as Little Egret, Grey Wagtail, Kingfisher and Grey Heron which are regular visitors to the River Ems. The endangered Water Vole can be seen swimming in the river especially in the spring and summer months, attracts visitors to come and look at them.
In his booklet about the River Ems and related watercourses (1984), David Rudkin shows a photograph of Brook Meadow about which he writes,
“The course of the Ems marked by very old willows in the meadows below the railway line. This lovely little rural scene that brings the country right up to the town”.
In fact, BMCG has recently coined the catch phrase “Brook Meadow – wildlife on your doorstep!” to raise public awareness of the site. And public interest in the site has increased enormously over the last three years.
The area is also very popular with special interest visitors such as botanists, moth experts and students researching Nettles. The Havant branch of HWT and the HWT Watch group visit the site regularly.
The site constitutes a relatively unspoilt and wild area within the context of a largely urban part of Hampshire that includes some of the most densely populated parts of the country.

4.3.1.11  Public access

The site is easily accessible from three entrances linked by raised gravel paths. These permissive paths link up with a public footpath at Seagull Lane which goes north to Westbourne and east to Lumley. 
The raised paths direct walkers and cyclists along a designated route through the site and a network of occasional paths crisscross the main area of grassland. The number of daily visitors is an average of 120 a day and is therefore unlikely to cause permanent damage.
A network of occasional paths criss-crosses the meadow area and there is a riverside path in Palmers Road copse. This network of paths directs visitors along established routes while protecting the surrounding wildlife habitat.
Car parking is provided in a HBC owned car park near the south entrance.
There are parts of the site where public access is discouraged or prevented. This particularly applies to the western riverbank, which can only continue to be home to a healthy population of Water Voles as long as this area remains undisturbed. At one end of this area, a fence has been erected with a line of Hawthorns in front of it in Palmers Road copse and at the other end behind the industrial estate a dead hedge has been laid to discourage access into this area. An additional dead hedge has been constructed behind the bottle bank in Palmers Road car park to restrict access onto the western riverbank.
The unauthorised felling of dead Elms along the banks of the Lumley Stream has caused considerable damage to both the habitat and its wildlife. In addition, this previously wild and overgrown area has now been opened up to make access into this protected wildlife habitat easier and make it more susceptible to misuse. A suitable hedge and/or fence needs to be erected and signs put up prohibiting access onto this valuable wildlife habitat.
There is no suitable disabled access onto the site at the moment. HBC are considering a means of access for the disabled at the south entrance.
The entrances are designed in such a way to discourage motorbikes and no cars or horses are allowed onto the site.
Increased public usage affects management in that the site must be safe for visitors, e.g. removing branches of trees overhanging footpaths, not allowing potentially harmful plants such as Hemlock Water Dropwort to get out of control, educating the public about clearing up after their dogs and generally keeping the site free of litter.

4.3.1.12  Education

The site has considerable value for education. Now that the site is more accessible, it has become more popular with visitors, especially schools. The site is within easy walking distance of 3 local schools that visit the site regularly throughout the year and now treat it as part of their outdoor classroom. In addition to the local schools, in 2005 the site was visited by several schools from outside Havant Borough, including primary schools in Rowlands Castle, Southbourne and Cosham (which was the school’s third annual visit) and a secondary school in Portsmouth. These visits will be encouraged and it is hoped that they will continue in the future; with the reservation that increasing educational use puts a strain on the available resources since most of the day-to-day management is carried out by volunteers.

4.3.1.13  Interpretation

It is important to interpret the site and its management to the visiting public. There are two reasons for this:
1.    increase public awareness of a valuable local natural resource by giving up-to-date general interpretation and information
2.    educate the public to avoid/diminish conflicts by putting up specific information aimed at special groups, particularly dog walkers.
The existing interpretation needs to be maintained and kept interesting. Imaginative ideas are required and thought needs to be given to finding ways of educating the public especially about litter in general and dog fouling in particular as well as keeping dogs out of the river during the Water Vole breeding season.

4.3.1.14 Research/study

Brook Meadow is a valuable site for research into the ecology and management of unimproved grassland and saline influenced communities.
There is a need to take salinity measurements of the lower lying areas, especially in the SE area to monitor any changes in this habitat.
The research/studies already carried out, such as moth surveys and wildflower surveys need to be carried out regularly to monitor changes over time. The findings of the HWT 1998 survey should be built on by carrying out quadrat surveys every year and recording plants according to area to enable effective evaluation of management activities.
It would be useful to develop a list of the wildflowers and grasses usually found in the various areas with notes about the plant’s preferred habitat, mode of reproduction, time of flowering and any relationships known to exist with wildlife such as insects, for example,
Great Willowherb: “Tall purple-pink willowherb forms dense clumps with a virulent root system but is a food plant for the spectacular Elephant Hawk Moth” (taken from ‘Making Wildflower Meadows’ by Pam Lewis). Such a database would prove very useful as a management tool. This research could be developed as part of David Search’s university dissertation.
The site is not due to be resurveyed by Hbic until 2008, since SINC surveys are carried out every 10 years. However, it might be possible to bring this forward with regard to the application for LNR status as well as requesting that the two areas in Hampshire previously omitted (Palmers Road copse and Seagull Lane patch) are also surveyed at the same time. 
Annual visitor surveys are useful to establish the number and type of visitor. This information can be used to resolve conflicts between types of use and refine interpretation. Visitor surveys have been carried out in 2002, 2004 and 2005 and should be continued on an annual basis.
Measurements of the Salinity of the soil, especially of those areas regularly inundated by the Lumley Stream would provide very useful information about the types of plants growing in these areas.

4.4    Ideal Management Objectives (short and long term)

Policy and planning:
1)    Unimproved grassland is getting increasingly scarce nationally and needs to be protected and restored.
2)    Ensure that the site maintains its SINC status and that the various habitats and priority species are given an appropriate level of protection in the Local Development Framework (which succeeds the Local Plan). Propose that SINC status is extended to include Palmers Road copse and Seagull Lane patch in Hampshire and the equivalent SNCI Lumley copse.
Site safeguard and management:
3)    Maintain and restore the main plant communities of the site along with the main features of importance to animals such as bare soil, small uncut patches of grassland, scattered bushes and scrub margins.
4)    Restore the open nature of certain parts of the site.
5)    Increase biodiversity by selective cutting/mowing.
6)    Try to decrease the fertility of the meadow by cutting and removing rank vegetation.
7)    Maintain and create a variety of different habitats and micro-habitats.
8)    Diversify the grassland structure both horizontally and vertically.
9)    Set aside areas of minimum intervention.
10)    Retain deadwood (for fungi, insects and other invertebrates).
11)    Keep the River Ems flowing freely.
12)    Maintenance of main paths to encourage public access along certain routes while leaving the rest undisturbed.
13)    Try to accommodate the various users of the meadow without compromising the conservation value of the site.
Species management and protection:
14)    Create specific conditions to encourage certain species.
15)    The site is a SINC due to the presence of a number of rare species of plants, old
      meadow indicators and endangered animals. Their habitats should be conserved and
      protected as much as possible without destroying the ecological balance.
16)    Encourage old meadow indicators to increase.
17)    Control coarse grasses and grassland weed species in main area of meadow.
18)    Control areas of scrub and trees in the main part of the meadow.
19)    Plant only native plants of local provenance.
20)    Control invasive plants (especially non native plants like Japanese Knotweed).
Research and monitoring:
21)    Establish systematic monitoring of the wildlife.
Communication and publicity:
22)    Increase public awareness of the conservation area.
23)    Provide information about the wildlife to be seen in the meadow.
24)    Hold regular public events in the meadow (e.g. nature hunt, guided walks, herb walks).
25)    Encourage schools and children in general, natural history groups, and other wildlife/conservation/interest groups to visit the meadow.

4.5    Factors Influencing Management

4.5.1    Natural trends

Grassland tends to scrub over, initially with Bramble and later with woodier species unless control measures are taken.
The fertility of the soil in the South meadow and some eastern parts of the Central meadow may increase due to flooding of the southern part of the site.
Sea level rises will cause some areas to change into salt marsh since most of the site is only a few metres above sea level.

4.5.2    External factors

Those parts of the main area of grassland that are cut annually are under threat from any reduction in availability of suitable cutting machinery and the manpower to drive it.
The fertility of the site will increase unless the main area of grassland is cut and the arisings are removed from the site after they have been cut.
The flow of water in the river varies due to poor levels of maintenance of the sluice to the north and high abstraction levels at the pumping station. The sluice is privately owned and measures need to be taken in the near future to resolve this issue.
Increase in industrial activity on the adjacent industrial estate and lack of pollution control could pose a threat.
There might be local habitat loss if the area to the north were to be developed for housing or industry.

4.5.3    Man induced trends

Almost the entire site is man made. The embankments are largely the result of flood prevention works related to the construction of the A259 and the A27(T).
A riverside walk was created in Palmers Road copse including a bridge over the River Ems in about the 1980’s. Access to the north meadow was improved in the 1990’s by the construction of another bridge.
The south meadow is used as a balancing pond, with a simple sluice on the river. The gates are removed in the winter by the Environment Agency to allow water in the river to overflow into this area causing the south meadow to be completely flooded. This has happened at least twice since 2000.
Palmers Road copse has been planted with several semi-alien trees and there are several ‘garden escapes’ in this area too. Several non native trees have been planted on the boundaries of the gardens on Lumley Road.

4.5.4    Internal man induced factors

Public access to the site at present levels is not generally thought to be harmful although certain activities need monitoring to establish their impacts. The majority of visitors are local, with dog walking a popular use of the site. Other popular uses are: walking, bird watching, fishing and a gathering place for young people especially in the summer.
All of these uses will need to be monitored as all have the potential to cause damage to the site or produce conflict between users. Examples of this sort of conflict are:
a) A picnic table installed by HBC in December 2002 was vandalised to such an extent that it had to be removed in July 2003.
b) A second seat in Palmers Road copse was removed in 2005 by HBC at BMCG’s request because it was being used as a meeting place especially for underage drinkers.
c) A current example is the one of dog fouling and school visits.
Several features of interest are potentially vulnerable to disturbance or damage by visitors to the site, e.g. riverbank. Despite this the site is also one to which visitors are to be encouraged, which will require continued monitoring and interpretative input.

Operations likely to cause damage to site interest (Potentially Dangerous Operations, PDO’s)
The following potentially damaging activities should not be carried out on the site:
a)    lighting fires
b)    uncontrolled use of metal detectors involving digging up the soil
c)    uncontrolled use of herbicides and pesticides
d)    destroying the riverbank habitat (Water Voles are an endangered species and their habitat is protected by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act)
e)    uncontrolled digging up of plants
f)    uncontrolled cutting down of trees or parts of trees
g)    discharging (dangerous) waste matter into the river and stream (pollution)
h)    putting large items in the river and stream (danger of flooding)
i)    large-scale fishing with nets
j)    shooting/hunting/trapping wildlife

4.5.5    Obligations

This management plan forms part of the application for Local Nature Reserve status, which sets down the conditions for the management of the site.

4.5.6    Legal constraints

Nature conservation designations
The main legal constraints lie with the nature conservation designations, particularly the Wildlife and Countryside Act. As a result of the recent amendment to this Act under the Countryside Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW Act) and the requirement under the Habitats Directive to maintain feature habitats in favourable condition, the owners and occupiers have an obligation to apply to English Nature for consent for any works undertaken on the site of the proposed Local Nature Reserve.
Section 74 of the CROW Act gives a list of species and habitats of principal importance for the conservation of Biological Diversity in England. Species of principal importance listed in this section found on this site include: Song Thrush, Water Vole and Pipistrelle Bat.
The habitat of principal importance listed in Section 74 relevant to this site is Chalk Rivers - the River Ems is listed as one of the UK’s chalk rivers (see The State of England’s Chalk Rivers – a report by the UK Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group for Chalk Rivers).
Health and Safety
Havant Borough Council is obliged to undertake all reasonable steps to protect the public entering the property under the Health and Safety at Work Act. This legislation is open-ended and measures need to be taken by the Borough Council to ensure the highest safety standards are achieved.
Health and Safety on the site are the responsibility of HBC.
A Generic Risk Assessment of the site and a Safety Plan covering the activities of BMCG is given in Appendix 9.

The presence/absence of the following services has been checked with the following utilities:

Service	Utility	Location of pipes and cables	Maps	Comments
1) Drinking water	Portsmouth Water Ltd	No water mains present on the site
2) Foul water  2a) Surface water		A main UNK sewer crosses the Seagull Lane patch in a north-south direction with two smaller vitrified clay sewers from properties to the north-west. Manhole on southern boundary of Seagull Lane patch. This main UNK sewer flows south and eventually comes out along the eastern edge of Palmers Road car park A concrete main sewer goes under the railway and River Ems into the North Meadow and then flows east into Lumley Road. Surface water west of River Ems drains into river at 2 points a) end of Seagull Lane in road near entrance to BM. This drains east underground towards the North bridge. b) manhole and pipes draining SE from North Street and Palmers Road onto the land at the back (east) of the industrial estate.	Appendix 8, map 1. Brown lines. Blue lines Blue lines	Care should be taken when planting large trees in the area of these pipes, especially if driving in stakes and/or fence posts. Any excavation work should be carried out with care.
3) Gas		High Pressure gas mains from the gasholder on Palmers Road under the River Ems, turns north along western boundary of North Meadow again crossing under the River Ems at the North bend then under the railway at the culvert. Medium Pressure gas mains under the road at bottom of Seagull Lane which go north along western edge of the unmade up part of Seagull Lane.		No excavation work should be carried out with powered mechanical machinery within 3 metres of a gas pipeline and with hand held power tools no closer than 1.5 metres.
4) Electricity		There do not appear to be any High or Low Voltage cables on or under the site.		Wayleave for electricity to Mobile Mast. Where does it go?
5) Telephone		No telephone cables are present on or under the site.

Biodiversity
Biodiversity means biological diversity. The UK government signed the Rio Earth Summit in June 1992. National and County Biodiversity Action Plans have been produced as part of the world-wide process to protect the variety of wildlife on earth and their habitats.
Local Biodiversity Action Plans have been produced for both habitats and some notable species. The Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan was published in July 2000.
The most important Habitat Action Plan for this site is the one for Chalk Rivers. The UK Habitat Action Plan for Chalk Rivers was published in July 2000.
One of the objectives and targets for this Action Plan is to “Restore important non-SSSI rivers to favourable condition”.  The River Ems is listed in ‘The State of England’s Chalk Rivers’ - a report by the UK Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group for Chalk Rivers, 2004 (Appendix 2 - The UK’s chalk rivers).
Of the Species Action Plans, those for the Water Vole, Pipistrelle Bat and Song Thrush are the most relevant (see Appendix 7).

4.5.7    Management constraints

Access onto the site is restricted for large machinery. The only access to large machinery such as tractors is via the Lumley gate off Lumley Lane.
The management of the South Meadow by cutting and removing the rank vegetation is impossible because of the difficulty of getting cutting machinery onto the southern part of the site. This part of the site was cut once by a contractor in July 2003 but the problems with access meant that bailing machinery could not get onto this part of the site. This resulted in a huge “haystack” of vegetation which eventually had to be burnt because of fears of spontaneous combustion. The only way that access could be improved would be to build a ramp wide enough for machinery to get onto this part of the site. It has been decided that this structure would be too intrusive and would adversely affect the rural feel of the site.   
The implication for management is that some areas can only be cut by using smaller machinery such as a power scythe and/or brushcutter or not cut at all.
Access for large machinery is also restricted after constant heavy rainfall since some areas get very boggy and waterlogged. This means that any cutting by heavy machinery must take place before October.
In order to reduce fertility, the arisings should be completely removed from the site. This objective has only been achieved once since 2000 because of the costs incurred of removal. This has meant that in other years the arisings have been piled up around the edges of the meadow. On two occasions in 2002 and 2005, these arisings caught fire by spontaneous combustion. In the first case, the fire brigade had to be called out to extinguish the fire. The group is currently working with HBC’s Open Spaces Development Team to solve this problem.
Coppicing and pollarding the trees by members of BMCG is restricted to those trees which can be cut with a bow saw. Trees with larger diameters must be cut by HBC or their contractors using chain saws.
Trees/branches which fall across the river are the Environment Agency’s responsibility.
The chalk river habitat is largely managed by the Environment Agency, this includes the removal of any intrusive plant species on the riverbanks, such as Japanese Knotweed.
Close liaison between the EA and BMCG is necessary to ensure that the management work is carried out effectively.
The group’s decision not to burn any arisings has been taken because of the ecological impact burning would have on the environment.
When coppicing work is carried out to the trees, the cut branches are used to form a dead hedge

at the back of the industrial estate which does not have a boundary fence. This dead hedge serves to protect the riverbank from damage by humans and provides a habitat for invertebrates. Large logs and branches are piled up away from the river to make wood piles.

4.5.8    Results of surveys and implications for management

Water Vole surveys (September 2002 and June/July 2004)
The 2002 survey carried out by HWT together with members of BMCG showed that there were 4 distinct areas of Water Vole burrows on both banks of this section of the River Ems with evidence of latrine sites and feeding stations. The second survey carried out in June/July 2004 by members of BMCG showed an increase in the number of burrows, latrines and feeding stations found, indicating 5 distinct areas of Water Vole activity. In addition to these surveys, Brian Fellows has been keeping a log of Water Vole sightings.
These surveys indicate that Water Voles do not like very shaded or stony riverbanks. There was no evidence of Water Voles at all on the northern section of the river which is shaded by several mature Crack Willows and the riverbank is very stony with little covering vegetation.
The management implications of these results are as follows:
a) Large branches which fall over the river should be removed to prevent shading of the riverbank
b) This habitat is protected by law and erosion of this in some places very shallow riverbank must be avoided by restricting access to this area by dogs and people. This can be done by erecting fencing and dead hedges.
c) The annual cutting of the riverbank must be carefully controlled by liasing with the Environment Agency to ensure that 1 metre of vegetation is left along the river margins.
d) In addition, only a certain proportion of the riverbank vegetation should be cut in any one year. The optimum is to cut alternate sections of the east and west banks but this often not feasible.
e) The annual cut should not be any earlier than August and preferably later, to minimise disturbance to the Water Voles.
f) The public should be informed about the protection of this habitat and the reasons for the management carried out to ensure their full cooperation and support.

Invertebrate survey of grassland (2004 HWT)
The results of this survey and their implications for management are summarised as follows.
Brook Meadow contains a mixture of wet meadow, watercourses and boundary scrub/trees. These habitats and their associated micro-habitats have the potential to support large numbers of invertebrates.
1)    Open grassland vegetation
Cutting is the only viable management option. This has a drastic impact on the invertebrate species present especially if a programme of repeated cutting of large areas is carried out producing an even vegetation structure. This danger can be avoided if the site is cut on a rotational basis, with different sections being cut in different years. Part of the grassland should be left uncut for at least a year, and perhaps two or three years, while other areas are cut more frequently. This would maintain a range of habitat structure, with areas of longer and shorter vegetation.
Cuttings should be removed from the site to prevent nutrient build-up and to ensure that areas of bare ground are left for basking, hunting and egg laying.
2)    River margins
River margins have a continuum of habitats from completely under water to wet mud through to drier riverbank habitats. Management should aim to provide a good range of these transitional habitats. In addition, areas that are unshaded or partially shaded will host the largest number of species but shaded river margins also have their own specialists (a nationally rare Cranefly which was found in this habitat is a good example). The wooded margins where this Cranefly was found should be retained. Elsewhere there is scope for sensitive reduction in shade for example by removing some trees and scrub or by pollarding individual trees.
3)    Trees/scrub
The tree and scrub species in Brook Meadow are valuable for invertebrates; willows support one of the highest total number of plant-feeding invertebrates of any tree species.
However, to maintain the meadow as an open area it will be necessary to control trees and scrub from invading the open areas. Fallen willow branches are potentially important for invertebrates such as bees and wasps which build nests in the dry wood. Removing dead wood from the site would have a negative effect on the invertebrate fauna.
In summary: Overall, Brook Meadow fulfils a valuable role in supporting biodiversity in the heart of Emsworth. As management develops, the site has great potential to increase in interest and to support a more distinctive community of wetland, grassland and woodland invertebrates.
Invertebrate survey of River Ems (2005, Portsmouth University)
The purpose of this survey was to record the range of invertebrate species found in the lower reaches of the River Ems and in so doing to calculate a biotic index which gives an indication of the water quality of the river. Some species of invertebrates can only live in unpolluted water, while others can tolerate water polluted with organic matter. In addition, a botanical survey of the riverbank and in-stream vegetation was carried out at the same time.
Samples were taken at 7 locations along the stretch of the river flowing through Brook Meadow (1 being the most southerly near the South bridge and 7 being the most north-easterly near the railway arch).
The results of the survey show that the biotic index scores recorded were relatively high, indicating that the water is reasonably clean. High scores of 8 and above indicate pure streams with high water quality. The River Ems, however, comes into Brook Meadow after having run through farmland and gardens to the north, it is therefore likely to have accumulated some organic pollution.
pH values were also quite high showing that the water is slightly alkaline - to be expected in a chalk stream.
The highest biotic index scores and therefore the cleanest water were recorded at site 5 just south of a culvert under the railway which issues from a spring to the north. The lowest scores were recorded from site 2 which is at the same level as the sluice to the balancing pond (South Meadow). This makes it the least clean site of the seven. It was noted that the riverbed at this site had a thick layer of silt consisting of organic matter.
It was also noted that several species were found in the southern most sites which are known to occur in salt water, indicating that this section of the river is occasionally inundated by sea water.
Finally, there was no indication that any of the drains that run into the river from the industrial estate are having any obvious or permanent effect on the wildlife in the river.
Full reports of these two Invertebrate Surveys can be found on the group’s website:
www.hants.org.uk/brook-meadow/
Visitor Surveys
The group has carried out 3 Visitor Surveys since 2000, namely on Saturday 27 July 2002, Saturday 25 September 2004 and Saturday 13 August 2005. The 2002 and 2005 surveys were carried out over a 12-hour period between 8am and 8pm but the 2004 survey was only over a 10-hour period (8am to 6pm). People were asked the reason for their visit and whether they had any comments on the management of the meadow. The results are summarised in the table in Appendix 3.
It must be emphasised that this survey is a single snapshot and should not be interpreted otherwise. In order to build a more representative picture of the visitors to the meadow we need to repeat the exercise to include weekdays and Sundays and at various times of the year.
The results show that the number of daytime visitors increased by more than 50% between 2004 and 2005, but with fewer evening visitors probably due to bad weather. In all three surveys there were more female visitors than male with substantially more females (77% more) in 2004. The number of children under 15 has remained surprisingly constant at a relatively low level.
The number of adults (between the ages of 16 and 50) was higher than seniors (adults over the age of 50) in both 2002 and 2005. Whereas in 2004, there were equal numbers of adults and seniors.
The number of visitors coming to the meadow with dogs was remarkably constant over the 3 years surveyed. Whereas the number of visitors to the meadow without dogs increased dramatically by 62% between 2004 and 2005. Several of the dog walker visitors had more than one dog and were generally well behaved with the majority retained on their leads.
The spread of visitors across the 10- or 12-hour survey period was uneven with 2 peak periods, one between 10am and 12 noon and the other between 4 and 6pm.
All three entrances are well used with the North gate most regularly used with percentages varying between 33% and 46%. The South gate was the most used entry point in 2002 (48%) but declined to 27% in 2004 and 2005. The Lumley gate has shown a steady increase in visitors from 21% in 2002, to 27% in 2004 and 34% in 2005.
The reasons given by people visiting the meadow are many and varied, ranging from a shortcut to the shops through to dog walking, pleasure and leisure. The majority of visitors were leisure and pleasure walkers without dogs with just a few child and adult cyclists, and the odd jogger. Some visitors said that they come to the meadow regularly and often daily.
It is encouraging to see a healthy increase in the number of people visiting the meadow for purposes other than dog walking.
Generally, the majority of visitors believe that BMCG’s activities are having a positive effect on the meadow. The majority of visitors said that they appreciated the work being done by BMCG volunteers in keeping paths and the river clear and in clearance of litter. The reaction to the BMCG information boards was very favourable, especially the photos.

4.5.9 Impact assessment

Putting the arisings around the edges of the meadow rather than complete removal from the site increases fertility and also poses a fire risk due to spontaneous combustion.
Cutting large areas by using heavy machinery with rotary blades or flails that chop the stems to bits has an adverse effect on vertebrates such as mice and frogs and also invertebrates. It is better to use a hay mower attachment and then leave the arisings to dry out for a few days before collecting them up for removal. This method gives any wildlife time to find another home.
A power scythe has the least impact on wildlife such as mice, frogs and invertebrates but is only really suitable for cutting small areas of less than ½ an acre.
Strimmers and brushcutters can be used for cutting small areas but this can be perilous for wildlife.
Phased cutting and to a greater extent Mosaic cutting methods are less detrimental to wildlife. In these methods, only a few areas are cut at any one time leaving small patches/areas uncut so that insects such a grass-dependent meadow butterflies are left with somewhere to breed (Pam Lewis ‘Making Wildlife Meadows’, 2003; Martin Harvey ‘Invertebrates at Brook Meadow’, July 2004).
In the first two annual cuts (August 2001 and 2002) the whole of the North and Central Meadows were cut at the same time. This had the desired effect of reducing dominant plants like Great Willowherb and Common Nettle but this method is not very wildlife friendly.
The phased cutting method was started in the third annual cut in which the Central Meadow was cut in July and the North Meadow in September 2003. The arisings were removed from the site for composting. In 2004, the annual cut was carried out in stages between October and December. This was much later than desired because of poor weather conditions and failure to obtain a contractor. The 2005 annual cut was also carried out in stages but this time only 50% of both the Central Meadow and North Meadow were cut in July and the other 50% in September. Details of which areas were cut between 2001 and 2005 are given on page 61 in Table II: Six-year Work Plan for Brook Meadow and for 2005 in map 1, Appendix 6.
It is planned to progress from phased cutting to mosaic cutting in the future to reduce the impact on wildlife.

4.6    Rationale, Operational Objectives and Management Options

4.6.1    Rationale

• The following are the main objectives of the Brook Meadow Conservation Group in the management of the site.
• To increase the biodiversity of the flora and fauna.
• To improve the diversity of grassland and maintain grassland in a favourable condition.
• To maintain and extend areas of fen and upper salt marsh.
• To maintain the diversity of native woodland and scrub habitats and retain landscape and boundary diversity.
• To maintain river courses in favourable condition and to create new water bodies where appropriate.
• To protect the habitats of endangered mammals.
• To maintain and develop the attractiveness of the site for visitors insofar as this is compatible with the other site objectives.
• To maintain in favourable condition, as a minimum, to the requirements determined by English Nature.

4.6.2    Identification of Operational Objectives

The following operational objectives have been identified based on the rationale given above.
1) Maintaining the continuity of the site’s SINC status and the protection of its diverse habitats
    and its wildlife by close cooperation with HBC, HWT, the Environment Agency and the
    Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre.
    To be achieved by:
2) The main part of the site to be restored to unimproved grassland by:
3) Biodiversity to be increased by:    
4) Fertility of the main grassland area to be reduced by cutting and removing the rank vegetation. Ph tests and tests for phosphates and nitrates to be carried out regularly.
5) Policy of recycling the cuttings to be maintained by:
6) Regular voluntary work sessions to be held twice a month on the first Thursday and the third Sunday of the month from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.
7) Monitoring wildlife systematically by carrying out the following surveys regularly throughout the year:
8) Informing and encouraging the general public to use the site responsibly by:
9) Encouraging local junior schools and children in general, natural history groups, and other  wildlife/conservation/interest groups to visit the site by making practical provisions and  educational support.
10) Monitoring and updating the Management Plan in December each year after the management work carried out in that year has been appraised for effectiveness.

4.6.3    Management options and guiding principles for management work:

The habitats are the focus for management action and it is by effectively managing these that the features identified in the designations will be maintained.  Features identified in the SINC designation are unimproved lowland grassland with populations of species which will only be maintained by managing habitat and human activity. CROW Act features are habitats and species of principal importance for the conservation of Biological Diversity in England, namely the chalk river habitat which requires management and protection from damage. Species of principal importance are Water Vole and Pipistrelle Bat, which depend on the maintenance and protection of this habitat for their continued survival.
While the management plan will try to conserve certain rare species and habitats, the main aim of the management plan will be to maintain and restore the main plant communities of the site along with the main features of importance to animals such as bare soil, scattered bushes and scrub margins. It will not try to conserve rare species to the exclusion of all others since the extinction of certain species may be due to influences beyond our control, such as changes in climate.
Habitat management must have regard for the wider context of the site. The site proposed as a Local Nature Reserve forms part of a green chain and stream corridor which links the countryside to the north with Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in the south. Two saline lagoons (Peter Pond and Slipper Mill Pond) are located to the southeast of the site. Both lagoons are designated as SINC equivalents and Slipper Mill Pond is within the Chichester Harbour AONB.
Improving the habitat at Brook Meadow has the potential to contribute to the stability and continuity of this valuable wildlife corridor.
The management of these features will make the widest contribution to conservation if it is done within the context of the wider resource of the area and not just on a site-specific basis.