by the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists’ Society. Specialist input was also sought from the recording community.
The results of the audit to date are presented in the tables in Annexes 1-10. A brief analysis of the tables suggests that:
The total number of BAP species occurring in Norfolk is 419, which represents 36 per cent of the national list;
Eighty-eight per cent of the species on the national bird list have been recorded in Norfolk, highlighting the importance of the county for both resident and migrant species. In addition, 59 per cent of the moth species found on the national list have been recorded in Norfolk. Many of these are quite common, indicating the potential importance of the county for holding key source populations;
The number of BAP species that are now considered extinct in the county, and in some cases nationally, is 72. This number consists primarily of beetle species (24) and vascular plants
. Analysis of the data reveals that, of the BAP species, beetles have lost 63 per cent of the species formerly resident in Norfolk, and there has also been a 41 per cent loss in the number of vascular plant species. Freshwater fish have lost 50 per cent of formerly resident BAP species; however, this figure includes the burbot and sturgeon, both of which have been nationally extinct for some years;
There are 43 BAP species for which the current status is unknown. This is primarily a function of the lack of recent records for species that were known to occur in Norfolk in the past. To address this issue, it may be necessary to target surveys for these species, in former locations and likely habitat areas.
On the basis of these results, it is evident that Norfolk is a particularly important county for the conservation of BAP species and the achievement of BAP targets.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND PRIORITIES FOR THE FUTURE
This audit of BAP species has provided a wealth of information which should be of help not only to the BAP process in the county, but also to planners, naturalists, researchers and environmental managers. However, the audit has also highlighted the fact that many records are old or historic. Whilst these are always interesting for comparative or historical investigation purposes, modern records (<10 years old) are urgently needed for the Species Action Plans, forward planning and development control, as has been highlighted in the recently-published NBRC Business Plan. Another concern is that data for some taxonomic groups (e.g. nearly all marine taxa) are virtually absent.
It is critically important that efforts be made to address these gaps, if NBIS is to fulfil its functions effectively. There is a particular need to enhance records of the following:
Dragonflies (the sharing of data held by the dragonfly recorder has been agreed in principle);
Other invertebrtes (with the exception of beetles);
Lower plants (with the possible exception of the fungi);
Marine species (the Centre holds almost no fish records since Patterson’s list of 1933);