A look at the species counts within Sidmouth's Riverside Park. Explore why trees thrive but grass and mammal diversity face challenges from human activity.
How effective is the Riverside Park as a "wildlife highway"? By comparing the number of species found in this cluster to the total recorded across the entire Sidmouth area, we can see exactly where this network excels.
The most striking success of the park is its collection of Trees and Shrubs, with 73.3% of all species recorded in the region found here. This is largely due to the area’s "parkland heritage," which has left a legacy of diverse woody species.
Pteridophytes (ferns) are also highly successful, with 60% of the region's species present, thriving in the damp, shaded areas along the river.
Despite the extensive meadows, there are some surprising gaps in diversity:
Grass Diversity: Only 23 out of 45 regional grass species are found here. This is likely because much of the land was historically used for livestock grazing, which can lead to a less diverse "sward".
Bees, Wasps, and Ants (Hymenoptera): This is the only insect group where more than 50% of the regional species are present, thanks largely to the wildflowers in Sid Meadow.
Dragonflies and Damselflies: Only 4 species were recorded. Most prefer standing water rather than the fast-moving River Sid.
The data suggests that human and pet activity significantly impacts local wildlife:
Mammals: Only 3 species were officially observed. Many mammals are nocturnal or nervous of the high volume of people and "keep a low profile".
Birds: While 23 species were counted, this may be understated. However, the high number of dogs along the river is noted as a primary reason for the limited count of sensitive waterside bird species.
High Volume vs. Low Variety: Some areas show a trend of "high volume/low variety," such as the massive carpets of Meadow Buttercup in Margaret’s Meadow or Wild Carrot in Sid Meadow.
Species Group Species in Network % of Total Sidmouth Survey
Trees and Shrubs 33 73.3%
Ferns (Pteridophytes) 9 60.0%
Bees/Wasps/Ants 16 57.1%
Birds 23 41.1%
Mosses (Bryophytes) 8 25.8%
Look at it another way
Before you go
Objective: Use real-world data to identify habitat health.
The Task:
Analyze the Data: Look at the table above. Why do you think Trees and Shrubs have such a high percentage (73.3%) while Mosses are so low (25.8%)? (Hint: Think about the "parkland heritage" mentioned in the text ).
The Dog Impact: The article mentions that dogs along the river account for a "restricted waterside species count". If you were a park manager, what one change would you make to help birds feel safer?
Field Survey: Visit Margaret’s Meadow. Can you find a "high volume" species like the Meadow Buttercup? Now, try to find a "low volume" species (one that is harder to spot). Why is it important for a nature recovery project to move away from just one or two dominant species?
Go to the next THREAD or return to the TOPIC menu