Transcript PowerPoint presentation

Parkland Plans with
Higher Level Stewardship
Jo Barnes and Ruth Garner
Historic Environment Lead Advisers for Natural
England – East, London and South East
Agenda
• Introduction to Environmental Stewardship (ES)
• Explain how Parkland fits into the objectives of ES
• Demonstrate what we can achieve in Parklands through
ES
• Explain the opportunities for consultation with CGT’s in
ES
• Clarify the content and format of consultations with
CGT’s
• Identify NE staff involved in the consultation process
Environmental Stewardship
• ES is an agri-environment scheme open to
farmers and other land managers in England
who deliver effective environmental
management on their land
• In return for looking after our wildlife,
landscapes, historic features, and natural
resources (soils and water), ES provides farmers
and land managers with a financial incentive that
supports and rewards them for this work
Environmental Stewardship
• Natural England (NE) manages
Environmental Stewardship (ES) on behalf
of Defra
• Land entered into the ES must be
registered on the Rural Land Registry and
must be part of the farmed environment
Environmental Stewardship
ES has three elements:
• Entry Level Stewardship (ELS) – noncompetitive so automatically guaranteed an
agreement if enough basic level management
options are delivered on eligible land and meet
all scheme conditions. Promotes good
stewardship of the countryside through simple
and effective land management
• Organic ELS (OELS) – as above for organic
operatives
Environmental Stewardship
• Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) – discretionary.
Agreements allocated where they are likely to
achieve most environmental benefit and good
value for money.
• NE want HLS agreements that will help manage,
restore or create features set out in targeted
area and theme statements.
• Agreements involve more complex types of
management and capital items are available
Environmental Stewardship
Primary objectives:
• Conserve wildlife (biodiversity)
• Maintain and enhance landscape quality and
character, by helping to maintain important
features such as field boundaries
• Protect the historic environment, including
archaeological features and traditional farm
buildings
• Protect natural resources, by improving water
quality and reducing soil erosion and surface
run-off
Historic Environment and HLS
HLS includes options to protect the historic environment
including:
• Farm buildings
• Parkland
• Parkland structures ie bridges and follies
Historic Environment and HLS
• Upstanding archaeology – banks, mounds, WW structures and
medieval ruins
• Below ground archaeology – roman villas, flat cemeteries etc
• Water meadows
• Historic boundaries – railings, walls and ancient hedgerows
Historic Parkland and HLS
Historic Parkland
• Important historic landscape feature in its own
right
• Important areas of permanent pasture especially
where they are “islands” in arable landscapes
• Preserve archaeological features, sometimes at
the landscape scale
• Key rare wood-pasture and veteran tree habitats
Historic parkland and HLS
English Heritage’s Heritage Counts 2005
• Mapped extent of parkland using 1918 and then 1995
Ordnance Survey (OS) maps, against Joint Character
Areas
• In 1918 parkland in England was concentrated in the SE
– in the Cotswolds, Chilterns and High Weald
• In 1918 the OS recorded ~400,000 ha of parkland
• This is the “core” rather than full extent of designed
landscape
• By 1995, OS recorded less than 180,000 ha of parkland
HE and HLS targeting
All target area statements have 3 objectives for HE
assets:
• Positive management of visible and below
ground archaeological and historic features
• Protect, maintain and restore historic landscapes
and their features, such as parkland
• Maintain or restore historic buildings
SE HLS non-target areas
HE and HLS targeting
SE HLS theme statement:
• Theme 5 – reducing risk to nationally designated
assets identified by the Heritage @ Risk Survey
• Theme 7 – reducing the damage caused to
undesignated below-ground archaeological sites
by cultivation, and protecting and enhancing
visible undesignated HE features
How we decide which parkland to
invest in with HLS?
• Since the spending review of 2010 NE have
become more targeted
• However we receive applications for up to 20
registered landscapes a year and a further 40
unregistered
• We therefore need to prioritise parkland further
Which parklands could be
considered eligible for HLS?
• The following criteria should be met for a parkland to be
considered eligible for HLS management or restoration
options:
– Registered landscape/@risk landscape
– Unregistered landscape that sustains another high
value environmental feature such as an SSSI, @high
risk SM, or priority BAP habitat e.g. chalk grassland
– Unregistered landscape that sustains multiple
medium value environmental features such as below
ground archaeology, protected species, BAP habitat,
improved educational access
Quarr Abbey on the Isle of Wight
Managing and restoring parkland
requires evidence
•
There are a variety of opportunities within the HLS
agreement process for consultation by NE with CGT’s
• An informal consultation at pre-application phase, by
email
– This would be an information gathering exercise to
establish the sites eligibility for HLS – normally for
low status sites
• A more formal consultation by email when the
application is submitted
– This would be to identify works required on the site
and help with determining issues of significance
Involvement with Parkland Plans
•
The final opportunity is when a Parkland Plan is
recommended as part of the HLS agreement
• NE would notify the CGT by email of the
commissioning of a Parkland Plan
• CGT would then determine their level of commitment to
the project e.g.
– One off contribution of information to the plan
– Attendance at the inception meeting
– Attendance meetings throughout the project
– Comments on draft documentation
Additional information for higher
graded parkland
•
For Parks @ Risk and other Grade I and II* parkland
there is often a large amount of information on overall
significance of the site
•
However, for decisions over the restoration of specific
features within the parkland e.g. avenues, tree clumps,
views etc, additional information is essential
•
This invariably means a parkland plan has to be
produced, which is where CGT’s can most usefully
input into the process.
What type of information can
CGT’s provide?
• Any research into the significance of particular features
on the site in relation to other sites, or in relation to other
features on this site
For examples:
– Research identifying the rarity, and therefore value, of
the e.g. survival of Capability Brown sluices on a site
– Research identifying the overriding importance of a
particular scheme of planting throughout the design
life of the parkland
– Research into the overriding significance of a certain
period of the designed landscape
Addition information for lower
graded and unregistered parkland
• For Grade II and Unregistered parkland there is
often little or no information about the
development and significance of the site
• Therefore any information setting the site in its
regional or national context is invaluable
Addition information for lower
graded and unregistered parkland
Information could include:
• research highlighting particular elements of value
in the landscape
• Site visit information suggesting the level of
preservation on the site, its integrity
• Biodiversity information detailing habitat survival
on the site
• Information indicating a significant time depth on
the site
Example of unregistered
parkland at Holmbush Park,
Surrey
What format should the
information be provided in ?
• Information should be provided via email and attached documents
where possible, as many NE officers are home workers
• The email should include the following
– CGT name and name of author
– The name of the parkland
– Grid reference of the feature if about a specific feature
– List the number of bits of information
– Identify the nature of the information e.g. observation at a site
visit, individual research, verbal report etc.
– State the subject of the information
– A summary of findings
• The summary should clearly state the significance and value of the
feature or parkland being discussed.
Consultations
• DO NOT PANIC - it is at the discretion of
the CGT as to whether a consultation
response is provided
• NE asks that consultations are politely
declined where there is a shortfall in
capacity
Deciding whether to provide a
Consultation
•
NE work to tight deadlines and consultations
during the lifetime of the application process
are required within 21 days of the request
•
In terms of CGT involvement in the Parkland
Plan process, if an interest is expressed by the
CGT, NE advisers will issue invitations to the
staged meetings which members can accept or
decline
Who will be asking for Consultations
• There are 5 NE teams across the SE
region, nominally based in offices
– Winchester – covering Hants and IOW
– Oxford – covering Berks, Bucks and Oxon
– Guildford – covering Surrey
– Worthing – covering Sussex
– Ashford – covering Kent
Addresses are available on the NE website
Who will be asking for Consultations
• The teams are known as Land Management
teams and each has a team leader:
–
–
–
–
–
Rachel Bailey - Hants and IOW
Jonathan Newman - Surrey, Berks and London
Caroline Svendsen - Oxon and Bucks
Kristoffer Hewitt - West and East Sussex
Mick Oliver - Kent
• Within the teams there are between 5 and 10
land management advisers – these are the
people who will be consulting you
What next?
• NE advisers have been informed of the potential to
include CGT’s within the HLS process
• We anticipate a slow start to the process as NE advisers
begin to integrate the consultation process into their
ways of working and CGT’s find the capacity to respond
• The details of this presentation with the consultation
format guidance will be made available to CGT’s
We look forward to the
development of a rewarding and
productive partnership