Parkland Plans with Higher Level Stewardship Jo Barnes and Ruth Garner

1. Parkland Plans with Higher Level Stewardship Jo Barnes and Ruth Garner Historic Environment Lead Advisers for Natural England – East, London and South East

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. Environmental Stewardship ES has three elements: • Entry Level Stewardship (ELS) – non-competitive 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. Historic Environment and HLS HLS includes options to protect the historic environment including: • Farm buildings • Parkland • Parkland structures ie bridges and follies

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

13. 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

14. SE HLS non-target areas

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. Quarr Abbey on the Isle of Wight

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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.

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. Example of unregistered parkland at Holmbush Park, Surrey

26. 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.

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. We look forward to the development of a rewarding and productive partnership