Your site management | Floodplain Meadows Partnership

Clifton hay bales — Photo credit: Bob Missin

When managing a site it is important to make a record of the following details:

Size of site.
If the hay was cut.
If so, dates of cut. Include all dates if different strips were cut at different times.
Type of animals on site after hay cut, and for how long.
Number of animals.
Number and type of hay bales.

All this information is really useful in interpreting plant community changes and learning the elements that can be damaging or beneficial to species-richness. You can tell us about these details through our meadow map. Follow the link to your meadow on our Meadow Map and click on the Meadow Watch link.

Here is a video footage showing some of the meadow managers we have worked with.

Plant indicators

Decisions about what management action to take at a site can be made by looking for key plant indicators, or by recognition of change in typical management activity. For example extensive summer floods may result in a missed or late hay cut, or sites may become too wet to sustain species-rich meadow communities. See below for a table of 'problem plants' and what environmental or management conditions they may indicate.

Plant	What does this indicate?	Possible causes	Possible solutions
Soft rush	Waterlogging Acidification Soil disturbance	Silting up ditches and grips. Stock poaching in wet conditions	Restore surface drainage Apply lime Avoid overgrazing
Sharp-flowered rush	Wet soil Low nutrient availability	Silting up ditches and grips	Improve surface drainage and consider addition of farmyard manure Cut before flood likely to drown shoots
Greater pond-sedge	Waterlogging Late or missed cuts resulting in a rank sward	Silting up ditches and grips Late (after 15th July) or missed hay cuts, lack of management	Restore surface drainage Cut early (mid June)
Reed sweet-grass, reed canary grass	Ditch siltation and water overspill into meadow resulting in waterlogging	Silting up ditches and grips	Maintain ditches, Cut twice (or at least once!)
Slender tufted-sedge, lesser pond-sedge	Ponding of low lying areas Consecutive wet summers	Silting up ditches and grips	Maintain surface drains Cut twice annually for three years (see control of invasive sedges case study)
Common nettle	Eutrophication	Late or missed hay cuts Flooding with nutrient-rich water	Cut early (mid June) Cut twice annually (June and September) Maintain surface drains Work with agencies to reduce nutrient levels in wider catchment
Marsh ragwort	Waterlogging Soil disturbance	Silting up ditches and grips Stock poaching in wet conditions	Cut early (mid June) Avoid overgrazing Consider winter sheep grazing
Hogweed	Eutrophication Lowering of water level in the river or ditches	Flooding with nutrient-rich water Late or missed hay cuts Alteration of river management Over abstraction	Maintain surface drains Work with agencies to reduce nutrient levels in wider catchment Cut early (mid June) Cut twice annually (June and September)
Curled dock	Waterlogging Eutrophication	Silting up ditches and grips Late or missed hay cuts	Restore surface drainage Cut early (mid June)
Spear thistle, creeping thistle	Eutrophication Soil disturbance	Late or missed hay cuts Stock poaching in wet conditions	Cut early (mid June) Avoid overgrazing
Creeping buttercup, hard rush	Compaction resulting in waterlogging	Poor timing of grazing and vehicle access	Avoid vehicle access in wet conditions; avoid grazing when soil too wet to support animals
False oat-grass, creeping thistle	Accumulation of ditch spoil above the normal field level	Insensitive ditching works	Spread ditch spoil
Tussocks of course grasses (e.g. false oat-grass, cock's-foot, tufted hair-grass, Yorkshire fog)	Late or missed cuts Lack of grazing	Late or missed hay cuts Accumulation of litter through under grazing	Cut early (mid June) Cut twice annually (June and September) Temporary fencing to keep animals in restricted areas Revise stocking densities/reinstate aftermath grazing

Management for wildlife

A rich array of species have adapted to the cycle of hay cutting, aftermath grazing and periodic inumdation. Many of these species benefit from the margins and areas of transition between one vegetation type and another, and management requirements vary. It is important to remember that hisoric management at a site will have shaped the range of taxa, and this pattern should be maintained where known. Adapting management to the needs of a particular species is not advisable as there will be impact on other interest features, Below is a table which outlines management approaches that be used for the benefit of different species groups.

Management options	Species group	Objective
Carry out a breeding-bird survey in spring	Birds	Check if there are any ground-nesting birds using the site and identify locations
Consider a staggered cutting pattern	Birds, invertebrates, mammals	Try to avoid areas where there are nests until young have fledged. Allow some areas to be cut later on an annual rotation to allow small mammals to escape and to provide invertebrate habitat for longer
Rotate staggered cutting	Birds, invertebrates	When there are breeding birds nesting, avoid nest sites, and avoid cutting the same areas at the same time year on year
OR consider cutting in a spiral pattern from the inside out if corncrake or curlew are present	Birds, invertebrates, mammals	This would enable fledgling birds, invertebrates and small mammals to escape the machinery
Maintain margins and boundaries	Invertebrates	Irregularly cut areas contribute towards an overall habitat diversity in the landscape, which will benefit invertebrates
Leave uncut margins and fringes of vegetation alongside watercourses on a rotational basis	Invertebrates mammals	Allow some margins to be left uncut each year and rotate uncut margins between years
Consider type of livestock	Invertebrates	Beetle abundance was found to be higher in cattle-grazed swards than those grazed by sheep during an aftermath-grazing study (Woodcock et al. 2006)

Managing a floodplain meadow in an urban environment

Managing a meadow in an urban environment can be a challenge for all sorts of reasons. We put together an article on this issue in the July 2011 newsletter which included some case studies from managers around the country. The longer versions of the case studies are found below:

Gloucester City Council

Friends of Rawcliffe Meadows (York)