Wareham Common: What is the outlook for the future?

The drainage ditches hold the bulk of the key botanical interest; is the rest of the Common 

to be sacrificed to protect these special species?

So what is the prognosis for the ecology of the Common and its once favourable biodiversity?

It would seem the prospects are not that good unless action is taken to reverse the recent trends. It is difficult to see how insect numbers can recover and the use of the Common by birds as a breeding habitat increases without an overall ecological management plan rather than the fragmented and botanically focused arrangements that currently exist.  

The problem is that there is no incentive for this to happen, it is not going to be designated a local nature reserve any time soon and the costs of restoring the habitat to improve species diversity would likely be prohibitive. 

Wareham Common has only limited ecological protection and has seen increasing ‘pollution’ from ongoing human activities. Some cables were put under ground a while back which resulted in fuel oil polluting one of the drainage ditches that once was popular with dragonflies and damselflies. The railway bridge was painted and the contractors cleared some bramble scrub and brought in some hard core to make a standing for their equipment and store; no restoration took place when they had finished. Three large width marker poles were left rather than taken away. With more work to come on the bridge it is likely to further impact that corner of the north section of the Common

Add into the equation increased recreational use by the growing local population and a related increase in the number of uncontrolled dogs and resulting faeces together with general litter proliferation and the situation looks even less favourable. This is without considering the possible effects of modern agricultural methods and lengthened flooding periods in winter. 

Having been a stable, slow changing environment for hundreds of years it seems that the current much faster rate of change in the world has left its mark. The Common is really only a microcosm of what is happening on land resources everywhere on planet Earth and it does not bode well for the human race if the diverse array of species that keep the ecosystem we are dependent on thriving is decimated by our ongoing, relentless growth.

As someone who has benefited greatly from the economic boom we have enjoyed during my lifetime I confess to being a hypocrite in now seemingly condemning that system. The warning signs have been there for all to see for those that chose to look for over forty years and I fear it will be generations to come that will pay the price for excesses of the current generation. 

SWOB Analysis

Strengths	Weaknesses
A working ecosystem over many centuries	Modern practices are hastening the rate of change and the system cannot adapt fast enough to cope The railway and the road have fragmented the original site and altered aspects of the ecosystem
Has natural protection provided by its unsuitability for economic use other than cattle grazing	As has happened in the past with the railway and the road economic demand will overbear ecological interest Modern cattle grazing is potentially having a detrimental effect on the ecosystem
Has been under the same family ownership for many years and is administered by the ancient Court Leet who appoint a hayward to undertake essential habitat maintenance	Prevents further legal protection and ecological improvement as a local nature reserve Historic provision of commoners grazing rights and registration under the Commons Act 1961 Primary interest is income from cattle rearing and there is no financial incentive to spend money on ecological improvement or to undertake any changes that might limit income streams No access to external funding for conservation management as in private ownership
Has legal protection as a Site of Special Scientific Interest under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1961	Only about 50% of the total area falls under the designation of the SSSI The protected area is fragmented and formed or three noncontiguous blocks The designation is primarily for its botanical interest
The SSSI designation means that Natural England have applied their ‘View About Management’ for this type of habitat to the site which the land owner has to comply with	The VAM is focused on protecting botanical interest and not the overall ecology The VAM does not put specific limits on the numbers of cattle grazing The VAM makes no reference to controlling flood levels The VAM only applies to certain parts of the common (see above)
There are no immediate and obvious physical or economic dangers that will impact the site	Land was compulsory purchased for the bypass to be built in the 1970s so there is precedent for something to happen of this nature although a full environmental assessment would be required now If land was taken for such a purpose alternative grazing land has to be provided but this could be of less ecological interest to the land lost as was the case with the bypass
Opportunities	Barriers
To reduce the level of cattle grazing on the site	The economics of cattle grazing would presumably be severely affected by this and result in no grazing at all which would be as detrimental as over grazing Without a reduction in cattle numbers the concentration of cattle in restricted areas, even though on a rotation system, would continue excessive trampling (or ‘poaching’) Continued use of antibiotics in the cattle will potentially lead to a greater loss of invertebrate life
To exercise a more ‘sensitive’ approach to scrub clearance	Lack of resources at Natural England to closely monitor and supervise scrub clearance The non-designated areas are open to any scrub clearance the Court Leet/Hayward decide to implement without any need to consider the effects on invertebrate life Natural England appear to be only concerned about the botanical interest that made the site eligible for designation in the first place
To widen the management plan to include the control of flood levels and flooding times	Not within the remit of Natural England to do this No one is responsible for this and has no interest in doing it as the flooding is not currently affecting the grazing of cattle
To undertake ‘improvement’ works to create a better environment and create wider biodiversity (eg: a scrape area for wintering birds perhaps?)	Lack of interest or funding Means a change of use from the historic tradition of allowing grazing on the common grazing Would affect the economics of grazing cattle
To monitor more closely essential works carried out by various bodies to ensure subsequent restoration	No one seems to have the power or interest to enforce this Repairs are due to be carried out on the railway bridge in the near future
To restrict the public access to parts of the common to reduce the disturbance to nesting birds	Enforcement impossible Historic allowance of people to roam on the common even though it is private land Insufficient on its own to encourage more birds to nest especially lapwing and redshank
To plan for the potential effects of climate change on flood duration and water salinity	More winter storms could mean the common is flooded for longer periods with deeper flood waters A rise of one metre in sea levels which some scientists predict could bring the tidal section of the river up to the north bridge and possibly on to the common  These possible consequences are too far away to be of concern to the land owner and would need funding to modify water management