THE DISTRIBUTION OF PADINA PAVONICA 21 



Studland is the most easterly reported locality, although there seems to be no valid reason why 

 plants do not appear in areas of Poole Harbour. In Studland Bay, north of Handfast Point and 

 near the village of Studland (SY 042824), there is a small area of rocks forming the kind of habitat 

 commonly exploited by Padina pavonica', no specimens were detected there on 5 August 1970, or at 

 various dates in summers 1975 and 1976, but since 'Studland' is not qualified on the Holmes 

 specimen, the same area may not have been involved. 



One of the major Dorset localities for Padina is the Swanage area. Numerous records, well 

 distributed in time, exist since Pulteney (1799) recorded the plant from there; some, for example 

 that in Greville (1830), are undoubtedly secondary. Batters's (1902) record was probably partly 

 based on previous data, although collections by Batters himself and by George were available to 

 him by then. Although it is possible, the years recorded on specimens (1859, 1861, 1867, 1885, 

 1890, 1891) doubtfully represent really discontinuous appearance of the alga at Swanage. There is 

 no way of knowing whether Holmes, his wife, Batters, and others who consistently visited Swanage 

 on collecting trips during the second half of the 19th century, equally consistently observed Padina 

 on all those trips. It seems likely that once they accepted the common appearance of a particular 

 alga, especially one so obvious as P. pavonica, they would in future be inclined rather to note its 

 sudden and discontinuous absence than its customary presence. Nevertheless, recent careful 

 searches (May 1964, 5 August 1970, April 1974, May 1974, frequently in 1975 and 1976) of the 

 intertidal rocks between Swanage Pier and Peveril Point and of the rocks off Peveril Point itself 

 failed to detect any plants of P. pavonica. Cotton (1908-11) and Grubb (1936), both of whom 

 studied Peveril Point in detail, similarly did not record the alga. If a population were present up to 

 the early years of this century, it has since, for whatever reason, died out and never apparently re- 

 established in the immediate area. In critical cases like this, the availability of information 

 concerning exact locations visited by 19th century workers is vital; the imprecise locational data 

 are all the more regrettable. 



Chapman's Pool has a fairly long history of the occurrence of Padina pavonica, but based on 

 fewer records than for Swanage. Some of the older 'Swanage' data may really be referable to this 

 spot. The earliest traced record is unequivocal since luckily represented by material; from that 

 time (September 1894) until now, recording has been fairly consistent. The gaps in recording 

 (between Holmes and Batters, in the early 20th century, and 1924-25; between 1924-25 and 1960) 

 probably have no other significance than chance absence of publication or specimen preservation. 

 Thereafter, the population was consistent and is still extant. A series of step-like cementstone 

 ledges, tilted slightly towards the shore and covered by a slimy, almost muddy coating of eroded 

 shale, offers a suitable habitat for Padina and was certainly the source of all recent collections; on 

 25 September 1972, among quite large local patches of Padina were some notably large individual 

 plants. 



Kimmeridge (in the Bay, below Gaulter Gap) seems not to have been recorded as a location 

 for attached Padina until 1965. Cementstone ledges similar to those at Chapman's Pool run out to 

 seaward ; parts of these ledges are fully exposed at low water, but the rocks between them remain 

 submerged. In this shallow water between the ledges, Padina colonies were detected in the detailed 

 surveys of 1969-71 ; a few other small colonies were noted in pools on the west side of the bay. 

 Populations are present in the shaly debris covering the hard rock surfaces at both these places. 

 Absence of Kimmeridge Bay from older published or herbarium records of Padina does not 

 necessarily indicate that Burrows's comment regarding recent spread applies directly there. Like 

 Chapman's Pool, it may have hitherto been included under the blanket name 'Swanage'. 



Lulworth Cove was first mentioned by Pulteney (1799) and repeated in Greville (1830). 

 Holmes's MS for the unpublished Victoria County History of Dorset also lists Lulworth, but 

 appears to be original or at least confirmatory from observation. There seem to have been no 

 subsequent data confirmatory of Padina pavonica in Lulworth area until the visits by Carter in 

 1924-25, and by Burrows in 1967 and 1972. A similar, although more recent, sparse history of 

 records applies to Osmington Mills, where the probable reason is relative rarity of shore visits by 

 collectors; that reasoning is most unlikely to be applicable in as famous an area as Lulworth. 

 There may well be additional small populations (as in Brandy Bay, God Cliff) remaining to be 



