Logan runs, and so do dogs. (A Logan’s Meadow update)

I am looking south-west across a grassy flood plain towards the tall ash trees in the distance. It is mid-June and everything is taking on a verdant hue. The noises that surround me in this close, and already somewhat damp, early evening air are dominated by constantly-babbling (and oft-amplified) rowing boat cockswains (and the loudhailing coaches that follow alongside on bicycles), but the bridge I am standing on, despite its young age, also sways, creaks and groans to the pressure put on it by the numerous cyclists and joggers that use it on a daily basis. Indeed, it is so noisy and wobbly that to a reasonably hefty person like myself, it makes one react as if it were some sort of World War II temporary munitions Bailey bridge. Secure enough, but by no means re-assuring under foot!

But there is also another sound that can be heard: the swifts are finally back in the vicinity and taking an interest in the swift tower again, complete with new, starling-proof caps on the 100 or so entrance holes (http://lnr.cambridge.gov.uk/keep-eye-swift-tower/).

Alongside it, the new extension to the Logan’s Meadow LNR seems to be blooming, with ever-growing reeds with their roots in water, and already-tall, meadow grasses on the drier ground alongside. So, all is good, right?

Well, not quite.

I’ve been keeping a regular eye on this place as late Spring has slowly progressed into early Summer. It is at about halfway along my preferred route for the daily walk home from work and a perfect place to stop and take a breather if you've been walking hard. This preference is much swayed not by the general views, but more by the specific presence of a ditch that provides some of the best close views of water voles you could ever hope for... I cannot help but to keep coming back to see how they are doing!

...But all is not well.

Whilst I sometimes question if my almost concrete-set view (of the place) is sensible, or indeed even partially correct, all I ever conclude after deep thought is that the points I made in my blog entry of June 2015 still hold. And then I, again, lament that this place could be so much better!

What is wrong?

I don’t need to go into that here (please read this instead), but I do feel the need to update you so I can start some kind of timeline with respect to looking at this place more regularly from now on. Despite my untrained eyes, I intend to blog again (and again) about his place, and tell you what I see. Who knows, maybe the Council will one-day up their game and do something more radical and fully wildlife-oriented!

What do you see, John?

I see dogs. Lots of dogs.

And, even though we are entering the summer season, I see empty football pitches. I so very rarely see the football pitches being used – for either football or other sport. And no surprises why perhaps… the soil was nigh-on saturated during the, admittedly unseasonably wet, Spring and early Summer and, in places, the grass was too long and unmaintained. Don't forget: this is a flood plain, and whilst many town park football pitches are hardly Wembley-like in quality, it doesn't help when there's seemingly no groundsman (or woman) regularly at work helping to at least keep the grass height down. Again I ponder, why would you play football here when you can go just around the corner to the semi-decent pitch at St. Andrew’s Wreck?

I do see the new sports outdoor gym-style equipment being used though. At least, in the last few weeks when the temperatures (or, more likely, available sunlight) have been condusive for evening fitness activity. It is only a small paved 'nooky' corner of the overall space, but I concede: it seems to be well used so far. 

I also see rubbish. Not so much out of water, but enough to distract me. Indeed, AND ONCE MORE, one of the most conspicuous pieces of litter is the black plastic of a dog poo bag. Sometimes, brazenly left at the side of a hedge or tree, but often just in the water, half floating like some soiled mini-black iceberg… presumably thrown there so it then can’t be easily seen. Out of sight, out of mind, eh?

Okay, okay... tell me some new things!

So, an admission: I don't really understand the nuances of crop rotation on flower meadows, but I must say, when I was looking at the slow growth of the plants in the “E: Marginal meadow planting” area in early Spring, I was worried. The soil looked almost bare, and I wondered if mowing the space before Winter's end had had any genuinely positive purpose for resident wildlife. Remember, this section effectively comprises the majority of the fully dedicated-for-nature 2014 "Phase 2" extension of Logan's Meadow reserve... but at that point, the football pitches themselves actually contained (or rather, retained) more wildlife.

But, conversely, when things finally kicked off and the plants grew and the flowers bloomed, it was all really quite pleasant and, again, forced me to engage in said 'deep thought' and question my convictions.

Fast forward to August.

Visually, not much has changed. The football pitches are much the same, albeit a lot drier at long last, and the view west from the bridge shows even taller grasses on the borders, and reasonably mature green reeds interspersed by subtly violet-flowered willow-herbs along the cut-off channel. There is more colour, and less green, but it certainly does look different when the sun's out!

The football pitches. Welcoming enough on a warm evening... but empty.

Decent colours and native perennials. I wonder if there are any rodents in there?

But on the eastern side of the bridge (where the water voles usually are), things are quite different...

Whilst the open space there is for the communal use of the adjoining private residences (and therefore not technically within the bounds of the Council LNR), the site is publicly accessible, and flood plain/field is now like a jungle! And, at the same time, the ditch there has dried out. Again!

I can't quite work this 'drying' out as it is in an older and more established water course than the permanently-wet Logan's cut-off channel... but I guess the simple fact is that there is (a) too much plant material clogging things up at the river-feeding ends (that even the water voles, which consume approximately 80% of their body weight every day, can't get through) and/or (b) the ditch's bottom is just that little bit higher than the (presumably quite low) average Summer depth of the adjoining (and heavily controlled) River Cam. If the rain cannot keep it filled in Summer, the river certainly cannot either. In its middle section, it is never more than 20cms or so deep anyway.

Dried-up ditch (August 12th, 2016). Two dumped bikes just off camera!

So... for the second year running, no more voles will likely be seen as Summer turns into Autumn. Whilst I can confirm breeding took place in there this year, my guess is that this (still man-made) stream/ditch/channel (sorry, I know I am not being consistent!) is more ephemeral in nature and will simply never remain wet all-year-round. It just goes to prove how dry Cambridge is I guess. We had a lot of a rain this summer, but it wasn't enough to stall the same drying-out process by more than a few weeks.

Juvenile Water Vole, June 26th, 2016

Where are you going with this, John?

Well... the grassy field that is not in the LNR has an amazing structure of wild plants. Plants you do find in the LNR's verges, but on a larger, untidier scale! Tall nettles, (land-rooted) reeds, meadowsweets, bramble, thistles. It's great!

To date, I don't know when it is going to be cut, but I hope it is not soon as I have found something there this year that I was only ever half-hoping I would... and that is: a Wasp Spider colony! 

Wasp spider (Argiope bruennichi), Cambridge, August 12th, 2016.

Why is this significant? 

Other than being (arguably!) very pretty and still quite hard to find in the UK, these spiders aren't protected, but... they are a great indicator species: and that means, quite simply, we have good habitat here! And with good habitat, other interesting species abound. For example, after a quick survey with a friend where we found 8 Wasp spiders in total, we also found other species of meadow and grass-loving spiders, plus numerous grasshopper and cricket species that they would (then) feed on, including the once-hard-to-find Roesel's Bush-cricket. 

A quick summary

So, I see the water voles just off-site. And now I see the wasp spiders just off-site, too. And whilst the older part of Logan's Meadow still returns some exciting sightings from time-to-time (I found a great cluster of Common Newts the very same day that both a Kingfisher flew right over my head and fledgling Sparrowhawks called for food in the tree above for example), I still see standards slipping in the extended part next door.

Yes, these kinds of projects can take time to come good. And yes, there is still some enjoyment to be had from in the extended part. 

But... I believe you can fast-track a place into success if you put both hard work in and go full-in with your hand on the rules and aim big! For example, I would ban dogs from Logan's Meadow tomorrow if I had a chance! Or at least restrict them to being on leads.

I know dogs are walked on both sides of the bridge, regularly disturbing the water voles especially... but it seems to me that Logan's Meadow is the preferred target location for the dog walkers, rather than elsewhere.

Dogs ruin the Phase 2 cut-off channel's water clarity by swimming and paddling through it at all times during a regular day... and, along with bored teenagers and even the homeless, they upset what other wildlife might want to settle in the wilder parts simply by continual (off-lead) disturbance. Reduced dog impact would show results pretty quickly I think. And even if not, there'd be no little black bags of poo cluttering up the place...

But, don't get me wrong, dogs aren't to blame here really... owners are. And if people can't give an urban nature reserve enough respect (either through ignorance or design), then I don't think the wildlife will either. 

Good luck enticing (the now on the increase) otter to come back to the old 'hidden' holt there for example!

Anyway, that's all for now then. I'll try and add some more photos to this asap to pad it out a bit further! 

Cheers,

ZeeOx

***

Talking of the Phase 2 extension, I can’t find a recognition of the enlarged LNR space on the Cambridge City Council's dedicated LNR website. After a website update, it just shows the old LNR map, pre-extension:   

http://lnr.cambridge.gov.uk/nature_reserve/logans-meadow/ (Info Panel PDF is out of date: http://lnr.cambridge.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/LogansMeadow-LNR-Panel.pdf )

Compared to:-

https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/logans-meadow-local-nature-reserve

https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Logans-meadow-project-poster.pdf

Missed Opportunity!

This year represents the second consecutive season for Swifts, an Amber-status summer-visiting bird in the UK, to successfully breed in the (now 4 years-old) Swift Tower on Riverside, north Cambridge.

Designed for 100 nesting pairs, this tower courted controversy when it was built due to its overall cost (during the early months of the post-2010 General Election austerity crisis) and coincidental (or not!) poor timing with the redundancy of Cambridge City Council's only full-time Local Nature Reserves Warden(/Nature Conservation Officer).

Currently used by nesting Starlings in the main (which is actually a Red-status bird!), about half a dozen Swifts are using the tower this summer, stopping miserable cynics like me from saying it was a complete failure. So: now it's here then, and working, let's hope the numbers of nesting birds continue to rise, year-on-year!

(The back of the tower, with Riverside Bridge's long adjoining, pre-river crossing, section behind.)

The tower is currently situated in a field undergoing radical change. In actual fact a flood plain, the field is separated from the adjoining River Cam by a narrow stretch of mature trees, including Weeping willow, and a newly cut 'relief-channel'- style stream (but more on that later). This field (and the neighbouring field beyond the bridge) used to contain sports pitches for the employees' use of the (now long-closed) Pye Electronics' Factory, and today also continue to provide (council-run) football pitches for public use.

Also alongside the field (on its western edge) is a Local Nature Reserve - Logan's Meadow: www.lnr.cambridge.gov.uk/reserves/logans_meadow/default.asp

Logan's Meadow is (quote, from the Council's website) "an oasis for nature within a recently developed area of the city", which is a bit of an odd summary really as the mainly Ash trees there are tall and old, and the surrounding road network and adjoining riverside infrastructure are well established. True, there are relatively new houses both beneath nearby Elizabeth Way and at the flats immediately behind it, but what I mean by odd is that it is not a new wild space for nature in the sense of those often created from scratch for new housing developments.

Indeed, Logan's Meadow has long been an important, albeit oft overlooked, integral part of northern Cambridge's overall biodiversity and its small network of (genuinely) wild spaces, and, due to neglect, abuse and lack of support, evolved into a bit of a lost treasure.*

(A BBQ and loud music in a nature reserve? - As observed from the other side of the river.)

But that is probably about to change...

After some work tidying up and adding new features to the reserve about 10 years ago, Logan's Meadow has now been linked up (by formal path access) with said adjoining field containing the Swift Tower and, at long last, additional work has taken place to try and improve the whole area along this stretch of the river, with wildlife specifically in mind.

You can now cross the fancy-looking Riverside Bridge and easily access both the reserve proper and the new field with the tower, stream and continuously developing and mature wild areas, along with access to open-access gardens to flats immediately to the east of the bridge as well.

(The River Cam passing underneath Riverside (Cycle and Pedestrian) Bridge. Note the gate-able 'cut-off' stream in the foreground.)

So... where am I going with this? Why have I called the Blog Entry "Missed Opportunity!"?

After all, the Swifts are nesting, a wild flower meadow and new reed beds have been planted, and Logan's Meadow has been re-invigorated...

(Shortly after the first meadow ploughing session. Note the dog!)

Well, because I believe Cambridge City Council, for want of a more mature term, have chickened-out of doing something really special here. Also, with what they have done, a few mistakes have been made... and these really undermine the current and future functionality of the place as an 'oasis for nature'.

What could they have done?

So, aside of the initial expense on the Swift Tower, with its artistic rather than practical slant**, and the loss of an excellent custodian of the City's wild places at the same time, the council have only used a small percentage of the available flood plain for the new wild spaces. My argument is that they should have used the WHOLE FIELD!

(Artist's impression? - The new site map for the whole site... doesn't it look good?)

The new stream cutting that will, in time, provide both shelter away from the river for fish fry, other marine animals, plus the birds and mammals that feed on them, could have been extended much further into the field, and have various channels and pools leading off it.

The reeds that will now grow alongside the stream will hardly be the most extensive, and the wild flower meadow will have a width of no more than 10 or so metres. Using the whole field could have created a significant stronghold for riparian wildlife in the city... and perhaps entice back the Otters and Kingfishers which once 'denned' and nested here not so long ago.

(Early doors: the reed and other water-loving plants' sectors.)

If the whole field had been turned over to reedbed, who knows what could have been encouraged in? Imagine Bearded Tits establishing themselves in Cambridge City for example! (Or even a passing Bittern in winter!) There is a site just outside of the city where you can see Bearded Tits occasionally, and Bitterns have also been seen at nearby Milton Country Park too, so I don't think it's within the realms of extreme fantasy personally.

You would also have had a valuable flood relief opportunity, on a part of the river that often floods its banks... and the houses on the opposite side of the river. The field, as it stands, often has open standing pools of water in the winter, and grass that is often so saturated after rain that you wouldn't want to walk on it, let alone engage in sport.

Lastly, imagine the educational potential of such a site, if properly thought out! Perhaps the construction of a couple of hides would have worked wonders, or maybe even just one, tall raised viewing platform or hide at the northern-end of the site that allowed the new (normally) hidden pools and channels (and their residents) to be viewed from a height and at distance... and perhaps even to enable the tower's Swifts to be seen flying past at eye level!

Why did they not do this then?

As far as I know, it was not an economic decision. At least, in terms of using the entire field. The argument apparently, was that the football pitches were still needed as there were no nearby pitches for the local community.

But I am sorry to say: this is poppycock (and I'm sorry for the use of another immature term in this entry!). For starters, the nearest football pitches are literally just 5 minutes walk away at the Chesterton Recreation Ground... and there is also the massive Stourbridge Common to the east for those wanting a more casual kick-about. Yes, there may be dogs there (see my point below)... but that's just an occupational hazard for playing 'free' football anywhere in Cambridge I'm afraid. Stourbridge Common is easily accessible using the new Riverside Bridge... or the Green Dragon Bridge just 5 minutes further along opposite the pub on Water Street.

Just how much organised football is played in this part of Cambridge then? Well, judging by the site's use currently, not that much, let's be honest!

What's wrong now?

So, you might think that a small start is better than none. And I guess you're right, if you just measure things at a macro level...

How is the site currently used then?

In short, it's used for dog walking. Every evening I walk home past the field, which is quite often, I might see some joggers, or maybe even the occasional informal kick-about (and even more rarely, Scouts, Guides, etc. on some sort of formal activity)... but, without a doubt, the biggest use of the place is for people exercising their dogs.

(Moorhen and dog prints.)

Combining walking dogs with observing wildlife is a massive activity in the UK, and I would say it challenges sports fishing in terms of overall numbers of regular participants... so I do know how carefully I have to tread here (pun intended)... But, regardless, this is not the site we should be endorsing this kind of activity! How can a place used primarily for dog walking truly combine with being an 'oasis for nature'?

Most dogs are off the lead as soon as they are led off the adjoining bridge, with its odd out-of-scale wheelchair slope that often leads straight into saturated mud! (see below, with attractive trolley cameo!). This leaves them loose to disturb wildlife straight-away (I'm worried about the nearby Water Vole - see below!), and also: to soil the football pitches.

What is it with this country doubling-up formally marked-out football pitches with places to exercise dogs? Not everyone 'poops and scoops' (and of those who do, I've lost count of the then non-disposed black bags thrown into nearby bushes)... and even those that do do it properly, what is left behind on the grass is not pleasant if you, say, happen to make a fine header in a football game and then land in a place that was recently popped and scooped by hand. Dog-owners are not clinical 'crime scene' cleaners after all!

(A discarded poo-bag... thrown in the water of the new stream's reedbed area.)

I have seen dogs of all descriptions attacking any bird that happens to be on the ground at the site, and also dogs going through the badly maintained wire fence around the new stream and into bushes and tree understories where interesting birds like Blackcap, Grey heron, etc. like to nest or take refuge.

If you're thinking dogs have to exercised somewhere... well, as I've pointed out already for the footballers, Stourbridge Common is nearby, and a large place full of lovely endless fields for standard dog-related activities... and from the north of town, the new bridge gets you there in no time!

On top of this, Logan's Meadow used to have an occupied Otter Den, or Holt, and a well-maintained Kingfisher nesting bank. But not now. I have seen the latter nest there, but not for while... and both the nesting bank and 'secret' Holt have overgrown and seen much neglect of late. I have also yet to see an Otter on the River Cam, despite their increasing numbers nationally after long-years of persecution... and, indeed, increasing numbers of them on the Cam's tributaries not far to the south of the city.

Personally, I think these Otters are put off by boats (rowers!) that use the small and narrow Cam for intense practice all-year-round. The rowing boats are environmentally friendly of course, and quiet too, but the associated noise of on-board - and mic'd-up - coxes and the cycling coaches that accompany them, put an end to the river being quiet until it's gone dark.

Regardless of this then (a rant for another day perhaps!), wouldn't it have been great if the whole 'Pye' field had been turned over to quiet backwaters and reedbeds for the Otters to re-discover and make a new, quieter, home away from the main river course? And also, how about a new, fully set-back, Kingfisher nesting bank too? (Perhaps right opposite a hide like at RSPB Rainham Marshes?)

(The old Kingfisher nesting bank - photo'd in early April, 2015... now even more overgrown!)

***

Will these dogs be better fenced out in time then? Will the Council enforce a policy of dogs on leads through the boardwalk areas as more wildlife shows up? Will Logan's Meadow's improved accessibility mean less abuse (especially at night), rather than more? Maybe!

(Pointless wire fencing.)

I am not going to predict anything about these concerns here but, for once, I will try and look at the glass half-full as the place matures and more wildlife arrive...

The new meadow space has only just been turfed up, but I look forward to it maturing. I am also very much looking forward to seeing how many reeds grow alongside the stream and whether they manage to succeed in enticing in migratory reed specialist warblers like Reed and Sedge warbler to nest.

One thing's certain, I expect the sightings of the endangered Water Vole (Arvicola amphibius) to go up. The adjoining field, with its small, but slightly longer and well-established stream, now has an easily observed full-time resident (along with several rats!) and I hope to see its future broods link up with those that hopefully also discover the new stream, and Logan's Meadows' ponds.

(Water Vole and Brown Rat highways!)

It's true that dogs will occasionally kill Water Voles (if they spot them!)... but I would say their main enemy is the Mink and the lack of suitable habitat.

***

HOWEVER... all that said, my underlying point will always remain though: it was a missed opportunity.

A big one.

Cheers,
ZeeOx

P.S. I welcome responses to this piece. It could be that people will completely disagree with my evaluation and so, for balance, I will happy (sort of!) to see any decently-put arguments posted under the comments... as long as they're not rude!
--------

* Indeed, a recent report has shown its ponds to be a bit of a strong spot for the Smooth newt, Lissotriton vulgaris.

**... and a tower which took ages to entice the birds in through the use of a tape loop that only seemed to play in late summer when the Swifts had already migrated back to Africa (I am assuming it was solar-power triggered?).

Further interesting Swift Tower Links

http://actionforswifts.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/modifications-to-cambridge-swift-tower.html

https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/news/2014/07/11/the-swifts-have-landed

https://www.facebook.com/cambridgenews/posts/10152322106533031

(And yes, that's a Daily Mail link in there at the top of this entry... I am working on my absolutist Lefty bias!)