We’re sorry, but GBIF doesn’t work properly without JavaScript enabled.
Our website has detected that you are using an outdated insecure browser that will prevent you from using the site. We suggest you upgrade to a modern browser.
{{nav.loginGreeting}}
  • Get data
      • Occurrences
      • GBIF API
      • Species
      • Datasets
      • Occurrence snapshots
      • Hosted portals
      • Trends
  • How-to
    • Share data

      • Quick-start guide
      • Dataset classes
      • Data hosting
      • Standards
      • Become a publisher
      • Data quality
      • Data papers
    • Use data

      • Featured data use
      • Citation guidelines
      • GBIF citations
      • Citation widget
  • Tools
    • Publishing

      • IPT
      • Data validator
      • Scientific Collections
      • Suggest a dataset
      • New data model ⭐️
    • Data access and use

      • Hosted portals
      • Data processing
      • Derived datasets
      • rgbif
      • pygbif
      • MAXENT
      • Tools catalogue
    • GBIF labs

      • Species matching
      • Name parser
      • Sequence ID
      • Relative observation trends
      • GBIF data blog
  • Community
    • Network

      • Participant network
      • Nodes
      • Publishers
      • Network contacts
      • Community forum
      • alliance for biodiversity knowledge
    • Volunteers

      • Mentors
      • Ambassadors
      • Translators
      • Citizen scientists
    • Activities

      • Capacity enhancement
      • Programmes & projects
      • Training and learning resources
      • Data Use Club
      • Living Atlases
  • About
    • Inside GBIF

      • What is GBIF?
      • Become a member
      • Governance
      • Implementation plan
      • Work Programme
      • Funders
      • Partnerships
      • Release notes
      • Contacts
    • News & outreach

      • News
      • Newsletters and lists
      • Events
      • Ebbe Nielsen Challenge
      • Graduate Researchers Award
      • Science Review
      • Data use
  • User profile

Site Condition Monitoring of the downy willow Salix lapponum component of the Vascular Plant Assemblage interest of Skinsdale Peatlands SSSI, 2016

Dataset homepage

Citation

NatureScot (2020). Site Condition Monitoring of the downy willow Salix lapponum component of the Vascular Plant Assemblage interest of Skinsdale Peatlands SSSI, 2016. Occurrence dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/zgqag7 accessed via GBIF.org on 2023-01-27.

Description

Considerably more downy willow Salix lapponum was present on the site than previously recorded. Tea-leaved willow Salix phylicifolia was also present. Several populations of both mountain willows are regarded as self-sustaining using the Gilbert (2015) monitoring guidance. The Salix lapponum component of the vascular plant assemblage interest is regarded as being in favourable condition using Common Standards Monitoring for Vascular Plants. Red deer were the chief cause of trampling and browsing damage. Note that duplicates of some or all records may be held by other data providers such as BSBI & Highland Biological Recording Group.

Purpose

Site Condition Monitoring is a six-year rolling programme of assessment, against quality standards, of the state of notified features on designated sites. This report is principally concerned with mountain willows on Skinsdale Peatlands SSSI. Downy willow Salix lapponum is a nationally scare species of mountain willow which forms part of the Vascular Plant Assemblage interest of Skinsdale Peatlands SSSI. Monitoring visits to the site over the previous 12 years had suggested the population of downy willow had declined. The main aim of the current assessment therefore was to relocate and assess the current status of the known populations of downy willow and to search for any unrecorded stands of the plant within the SSSI. A secondary aim was to assess whether there were any pressures on the downy willow population. Although not part of the core remit of the survey, any populations of the nationally scarce dwarf birch Betula nana and alpine bearberry Actostaphylos alpinus that were encountered were recorded.

Sampling Description

Method steps

  1. Stands of mountain willow were subjected to three types of monitoring recording: i) Standard SCM protocols for assessing Mountain Willow ii) A new recording protocol based on the recommendations of Gilbert (2015) iii) Standard Vascular Plant SCM recording Grid references and location photographs relating to the known population of downy willow were used to relocate it. In addition, the location of a willow stand whose identification remained ambiguous was revisited in order to assess its status. Additional searching of potential habitat locations was undertaken to extend the range of known locations of the target feature. To gain access to steep ledges and cliffs standard rock climbing equipment was used. A few areas that remained inaccessible were surveyed by binoculars. Mountain willow locations were recorded using a hand-held GPS receiver and by photography.

Taxonomic Coverages

Geographic Coverages

Bibliographic Citations

Contacts

originator
NatureScot
Great Glen House, Leachkin Road
INVERNESS
IV3 8NW
Telephone: 01463 725000
homepage: https://www.nature.scot/
metadata author
NatureScot
Great Glen House, Leachkin Road
INVERNESS
IV3 8NW
Telephone: 01463 725000
homepage: https://www.nature.scot/
distributor
NBN Atlas
Unit F, 14 - 18 St Mary's Gate, Lace Market
Nottingham
NG1 1PF
Nottinghamshire
GB
email: admin@nbnatlas.org
Colin McLeod
administrative point of contact
position: editor
email: Colin.McLeod@nature.scot
What is GBIF? API FAQ Newsletter Privacy Terms and agreements Citation Code of Conduct Acknowledgements
Contact GBIF Secretariat Universitetsparken 15 DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø Denmark