Current Management

Despite the notion of naturalness and even Supporting the management plan is the wilderness which some hold of the South West landscape strategy (PDNPA, 2008b) which Peak, this is a very managed landscape. Swathes details the characteristics of the landscape and of the area are designated for their conservation the priorities to protect, manage and plan for value and much has been managed under the future (the table overleaf shows the priorities successive forms of agri-environment schemes. for each Landscape Character Type).

The majority 29,388ha (83%) of the South West The Peak District Biodiversity Action Plan Peak Landscape Partnership area falls within the reviewed and revised in 2011 identifies Peak District National Park. National Parks are conservation objectives and priorities for the part of a global protected area programme and South West Peak. are classed as an IUCN category 2 protected area, defined as: Biodiversity objectives: 1. To maintain, enhance and restore moorland Large natural or near natural areas set aside to fringe habitats, particularly to support wading protect large-scale ecological processes, along bird species such as lapwing, curlew and snipe with the complement of species and ecosystems 2. To restore and expand upland heathland and characteristic of the area, which also provide blanket bog Current a foundation for environmentally and culturally 3. To enhance wetland and riparian habitats compatible spiritual, scientific, educational, and species recreational and visitor opportunities (IUCN, 2016). 4. To enhance and expand native broad-leaved woodland. Management The 1949 National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act set out what our National Conservation Priorities: Parks would be like. The Environment Act 1995 • To prevent further declines in wader revised the original legislation and set out two populations, and to increase breeding success statutory purposes for National Parks in • To link and enhance semi-natural valley England and Wales: woodlands • Maintenance and enhancement of moorland 1. Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, habitats on large estates wildlife and cultural heritage. • Integrated management of in-bye grasslands 2. Promote opportunities for the understanding for birds, fungi and invertebrates and enjoyment of the special qualities of • To improve species diversity in rivers National Parks by the public. and streams.

When National Parks carry out these purposes These plans and strategies, produced in they also have the duty to seek to foster partnership with a wide range of organisations, the economic and social well being of local set the context, objectives and priorities for the communities within the National Parks. whole area.

The National Park management plan (Peak District National Park, 2012) brings together and coordinates the work of many different partners who help achieve the purposes and duty of the Peak District National Park. It aims to encourage integrated approaches that achieve National Park purposes in ways that benefit everyone. The plan is the single most important policy document for the place.

Derbyshire Gritstone sheep © Karen Shelley-Jones 71 Current Management Current Management

Landscape guidelines ws astures alleys itstone s alleys V V astures alley P oodland oodland y Enclosed oir V v land Hills side Mead o W W e r South West Peak itstone Uplands Open Moo r Moo r and Ridges Enclosed G r Uplands Dense l G r Slopes and with Upland P Upper Rese r with Ri v Protect

Protect historic drystone walls

Protect historic hedgerows

Protect historic parkland landscapes

Manage

Manage and enhance woodlands

Manage and enhance clough woodlands

Manage and enhance plantation woodlands

Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees

Enhance and restore moorland landscapes

Encourage diverse approaches to moorland management

Enhance the diversity of agricultural grasslands

Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape Manage the network of minor roads to maintain character and local access LManagean thed dispesrcased andp histoeric settlementguide patternsl ines

of development ws astures alleys itstone s alleys V

Manage intrusive features on farmland and farmsteads V astures alley P oodland oodland y Enclosed oir V v land Hills side Mead o W W e r SoManageut histoh rWic mineersal tlandscapes Peak itstone Uplands Open Moo r Moo r and Ridges Enclosed G r Uplands Dense l G r Slopes and with Upland P Upper Rese r with Ri v Plan This is a priority throughout the landscape character type

Create new native broadleaved woodland This is a priority in some parts of the landscape character type, often associated with particular conditions/features

CreateT hcloughis is n owt oodsa priority but may be considered in some locations

This will generally be inappropriate in this landscape character type Create, extend and link areas of heath / moor

Develop small-scale renewable energy for local needs

Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings

This is a priority throughout the landscape character type

This is a priority in some parts of the landscape character type, often associated with particular conditions/features

This is not a priority but may be considered in some locations Oxeye daisies © PDNPA This will generally be inappropriate in this landscape character type

72 73 Current Management Current Management

Agri-Environment Agreements farming methods over hundreds of years were The ESA scheme was voluntary and offered Table 1. South West Peak ESA options considered highly valued both for their scenic farmers financial incentives (over a ten year The importance and vulnerability of this beauty and habitats. The ESA scheme was set agreement) to conserve, enhance and re- Tier Option Hectares landscape has been recognised over the up to help farmers conserve the best landscape, create landscape features and wildlife habitats. 1A Arable & ley grassland 2,122 years through the targeting of national agri- wildlife and historic features of the countryside. Additionally, farmers were also encouraged 1AW Arable & ley grassland environment and area management schemes. to provide opportunities for public access with woodland 78 The ESAs were chosen using the for walking and recreation (University of 1B Enclosed permanent SWP Environmentally Sensitive Area scheme following criteria: Hertfordshire, 2011). grassland 8,544 In 1992 the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and • the area must be of national significance; 1C Enclosed permanent Food (MAFF) designated an area of 33,800ha • conservation of the area must depend on The level of uptake of the ESA scheme was rough grazing 1,661 of the South West Peak National Character Area adopting, maintaining or extending particular good with 84% (2002-2003), 82% (2003-2004) 1D Moorland 941 (NCA) as an Environmentally Sensitive Area farming practices; and 72% (2004-2005) of the eligible area 2A Pasture 3,079 (ESA), which came into force in February 1993 • farming practices must have changed or in agreement with options for ley grassland, 2B Meadow 876 and was one of 22 such ESAs in England. ESAs be likely to do so, in ways that pose a threat meadows, pastures, moorland and woodland. 2C Regeneration to extensive were countryside areas where landscape, wildlife to the environment; The main options in the area were for low- meadows 109 and historic interest were of national importance. • it must be a distinct area of intensity management of grassland. 2D Regeneration to extensive Countryside features like hedges, walls, ditches, environmental interest. pastures 442 field barns, hay meadows, heather moorland and 2E Enhanced moorland 3,377 river valley grasslands, created by traditional WT Woodland 26

Other Agri-environment Environmental Schemes Stewardship

Higher Level Stewardship

Entry Level & Higher Level WGS and EWGS Grants Uplands Entry Level & Higher Level Old Countryside Stewardship Scheme Organic Entry Level & Higher Level ESA Scheme Entry Level National Park EES Agreements

Uplands Entry Level

Uplands Organic Entry Level

74 75 Current Management Current Management

The ESA payments were calculated on income • improve and extend wildlife habitats; several categories: Woodfuel Woodland protection chemical residues that could enter the foregone by the farmer due to being restricted • conserve archaeological sites and historic Improvement Grant, Woodland Improvement water in the reservoir. from draining, reseeding, ploughing or otherwise features; Grant, Woodland Management Grant, Woodland cultivating and by limiting the numbers of stock • improve opportunities for enjoying the Creation Grant, Woodland Planning Grant, The project officer has developed excellent which could be grazed, thereby aiming to protect countryside; Woodland Assessment Grant and Woodland working relationships with almost every farmer the diverse vegetation composition and structure. • restore neglected land or landscape features; Regeneration. EWGS has now been superseded in the area. By explaining to individuals how Regeneration to extensive meadows attracted the and by the new Countryside Stewardship. they can make a difference to water quality by highest payment of £170 per hectare per annum. • create new wildlife habitats and landscapes changing their agricultural practices, the advice (University of Hertfordshire, 2011). WGS and EWGS schemes have been operating has led to a fifty per cent reduction in levels of Maintenance and enhancement of the landscape in the South West Peak for some years, most harmful chemicals in the water (Trent Rivers Trust, and historic interest were promoted through In the South West Peak LPS area approximately notably in the more wooded part in the west. 2016). a drystone walling supplement and various 1,250ha of land was entered into agreements for These grants focused on maintenance, natural Conservation Plan items, such as hedge planting uplands, meadows and pasture plus agreements regeneration, planting, thinning, selective felling Severn Trent Water has also funded a number of and laying, and the renovation of traditional for 94 metres of field boundaries. Countryside and, in one notable location, clearfelling of a high priority capital projects on farm to tackle farm buildings. The drystone walling supplement Stewardship covered such a small area due to the conifer plantation to allow for regeneration of potential diffuse and point source pollution of £20 per metre (later increased to £25) was wide coverage of the ESA scheme. broadleaf woodland and heathland. The latter risks such as field drainage issues and yard approximately 77% of the actual cost. raised considerable concern amongst local infrastructure improvements. Environmental Stewardship residents who campaigned against the decision A review in 2009 of the grassland condition of Environmentally Sensitive Area and Countryside for some months. New Countryside Stewardship six ESAs looked at lowland meadows and lowland Stewardship schemes were superseded In 2015, Environmental Stewardship was dry acid grassland of the South West Peak. Of by Environmental Stewardship in 2005. EWGS and Environmental Stewardship grants superseded by the new Countryside Stewardship the grasslands surveyed none met the expected Environmental Stewardship provided funding to helped to deliver woodland management and (which also replaced EWGS and CSF) with all condition standards for the nominated type of farmers and other land managers in England who creation in the HLF and SITA-funded Dane new agreements starting in January 2016. Unlike grassland, the lowland meadows being “closer delivered effective environmental management Valley Woodland project near Wincle. Woodland previous rural development schemes, applications approximations to more agriculturally improved on their land. Its primary objectives were to: creation was focused in areas where it would for most elements of Countryside Stewardship swards than to species-rich hay meadows • Conserve wildlife (biodiversity) link or extend existing high quality woodland. are competitive, which means that applications (Manchester & Glaves, 2009).” From baseline • Maintain and enhance landscape quality and Other woodlands which had not been managed are scored against criteria, so not everyone who surveys in 1994 to resurvey in 2003 the quality of character effectively for some years were brought into applies will be successful. Targeting and scoring is the meadows had declined with species diversity • Protect the historic environment and natural new management agreements to benefit a range used to encourage applicants to choose options having reduced. The overall number of species resources of wildlife including redstart, pied and spotted that help achieve the environmental priorities per plot [field] had reduced slightly but with • Promote public access and understanding of the flycatchers and willow warbler. which have been identified in their local area. a larger decline at the more detailed quadrat countryside level, suggesting that the variety of species were • Protect natural resources Catchment Sensitive Farming The main priority for Countryside Stewardship is mostly still present within fields but at lower Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) was a to protect and enhance the natural environment, frequencies. The authors of the survey suggest The take-up of Environmental Stewardship in project run by Natural England in partnership in particular the biodiversity and water quality. that “reinstatement of appropriate management the South West Peak was very good with 19,765 with the Environment Agency and DEFRA to Other outcomes include: at these apparently degrading sites should result ha or 55% of the LPS area covered either under raise awareness of diffuse water pollution from in an increase in species richness at the scale Entry Level (ELS) or Higher Level Stewardship agriculture by giving free training, advice and • flood management; of the nest [quadrat]” (Manchester, Carey, & (HLS) including uplands and organic variants. At capital grants to farmers in selected priority • the historic environment; Pywell, 2005). the time of writing 4,202ha of agreements have catchments. The selected catchments were those • landscape character; expired; a further 508ha will expire during 2016. where improvements in water quality would • genetic conservation; This outcome, albeit on just a sample of sites, make the greatest contribution under the Water • educational access. indicates the difficulty in applying universal and Table 2. Expiry dates and area of Framework Directive objectives. nationally agreed management prescriptions in a Environmental Stewardship agreements The scheme comprises three elements: higher tier varied landscape and emphasises the need for a Expiry year Hectares The Peak District Dales was a priority catchment, for environmentally significant sites with complex different approach. 2017 1,126 ha which included a small part of the South West management where support is required from 2018 4,377 ha Peak forming the catchment for Tittesworth Natural England or the Forestry Commission; Countryside Stewardship Scheme 2019 834 ha Reservoir and the River Hamps and Manifold mid-tier agreements for other sites which do not In 1991 DEFRA introduced the Countryside 2020 1,210 ha catchment. The main issues here were pesticides require the same level of support; capital grants Stewardship Scheme, which made payments to 2021 1,811 ha and faecal indicator organisms. for other items. farmers and land managers to improve the natural 2022 1,738 ha beauty and diversity of the countryside. 2023 3,959 ha The Trent Rivers Trust has employed a dedicated Due to decreased funding available under the project officer since 2011 in the Tittesworth new scheme, early projections were for a national The Scheme was set up with the following Woodland Grant Scheme Reservoir catchment, funded by Severn Trent decrease in coverage from around 70% to 40%. objectives relating to landscape, wildlife, cultural The Forestry Commission’s Woodland Grant Water. The role of the project officer is to work Across the Peak District, where coverage was heritage and access: Scheme (WGS) was replaced in 2005 by their with farmers to promote best farming practice at 87%, coverage is estimated to fall to between • sustain the beauty and diversity of the English Woodland Grant Scheme (EWGS), to reduce the risk of diffuse pollution of nutrients 40% and 50%. Take up generally in the first year landscape; providing grants for woodland owners under such as nitrates and phosphates and crop was particularly low. There is currently only one

76 77 Current Management Current Management

higher tier agreement in the South West Peak Environmental Enhancement Scheme The majority (66%) of farms in the South West straddling the border with the White Peak and no The Environmental Enhancement Scheme Peak are grazing livestock as shown on the live mid-tier agreements. (EES) is a National Park scheme which has pie chart below, with dairy making up 11%. The been used to help with projects that may not income from dairy farming nationally is notably Less Favoured Area be suitable for national schemes. The National higher than for livestock grazing, creating a clear Park Authority (NPA) has an undertaking to use disparity in annual farm business income. So the Rural Development Plan for England (RDPE) majority of famers in the South West Peak graze measures wherever these can practically deliver sheep on Severely Disadvantaged land with an the management required. However, the RDPE annual farm business income of under £15,000. schemes are targeted on national priorities and therefore do not necessarily address the special Number of holdings by farm size qualities and local needs that have led to the designation of each National Park.

The NPA may therefore provide funding to extend the availability of agri-environment and environmental investment measures to achieve their local environmental priorities and thereby address this gap in conservation support.

In the South West Peak, few EES agreements have been put in place; these have mostly been for hay meadow management, pasture management, fencing, gates, stiles, hedgerow restoration and drystone wall restoration.

As a result of the move away from production based subsidies (following the Second World War) to payments for environmental enhancements, overgrazing became less common and the restoration of historic features and <5ha >50ha and habitats increased. Substantial public funding 53 137 <100ha has gone towards restoring the drystone walls >5ha and >100ha 252 78 and traditional farm buildings that are so <20ha distinctive of the South West Peak. Many field >20ha and 162 barns do, however, remain at risk and in need <50ha of maintenance and/or repair. Although a large proportion of the area is currently covered by Environmental Stewardship, there are still habitats in need of restoration and others that are Note that these figures are for the whole vulnerable to loss owing to financial pressure on of the South West Peak National Character farming (Natural England, 2013). Area, they are unavailable for the Landscape Partnership area. Annual farm business income for livestock farming is particularly low, especially in the uplands or Less Favoured Areas. All of the South West Peak falls within a Less Favoured Area, most is classified as ‘Severely Disadvantaged’, Severely Disadvantaged while some parts, as shown on the map, are classed as ‘Disadvantaged’ and can support Disadvantaged some dairy farming.

78 79 Current Management Current Management

Annual Farm Business Income and manage over 6,000 hectares or 17% of the The Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981 is the South West Peak. primary legislation which protects species and habitats and protects Sites of Special Scientific The largest single private landowner is Lord Interest (SSSIs). 100,000 Dairy Derby, the 19th Earl of Derby who owns the 1,600 90,000 hectare Crag Estate in the centre of the area The Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Grazing straddling the boundaries between the three Act of 2000 covers access to open country, 80,000 Livestock counties. The remaining 78% of land is in private public rights of way and nature conservation, 70,000 (LFA) ownership, mostly small farms of 20ha or less. strengthening protection for SSSIs by giving

60,000 greater power to Natural England to enter into management agreements, to refuse consent for 50,000 Area Management and Protection damaging operations, and to take action where 40,000 Note that these damage is being caused through neglect or

Income in £ in Income figures are for the A number of area management plans are in inappropriate management. 30,000 whole of the South West Peak National place, covering the larger blocks of land including 20,000 Character Area, they Macclesfield Forest, the Goyt Valley, the Warslow The Natural Environment and Rural Communities are unavailable for 10,000 Moors Estate and the Roaches Estate; the (NERC) Act of 2006 imposes a ‘duty’ on the Landscape management of these areas is undertaken either public authorities to have regard to conserving 0 Partnership area. solely by the landowner/tenant or in partnership biodiversity; this includes restoration or 11/12 10/11 12/13 12/13 13/14 14/15 09/10 09/10

07/08 enhancement of a population or habitat. The Act 06/07 with other interested parties. Close working 03/04 05/06 04/05 08/09 relationships between public bodies, charities also includes a list of species and habitats which Survey Year and the National Park Authority over the are of principal importance for the conservation years have secured sensitive and sustainable of biodiversity in England and is designed to be management practices, which are reviewed and used to guide decision makers in implementing Estate Lands farms, numerous smallholdings, a licensed inn revised as necessary. their duty. with land, country cottages and accommodation Formerly, swathes of the South West Peak were land (Beresford, 2015). For example, the Goyt Liaison Group is both a EU directives on the conservation of natural part of lorded estates and medieval hunting strategic and operational body comprising of habitats and wild fauna and flora are also part forests, notably Macclesfield Forest in Cheshire, On the death of Charles Harpur-Crewe in the United Utilities, the major landowner within the of English law, providing for the designation and Malbanc Frith in Staffordshire and part of the 1980s the family owed considerable death duties valley, the Forestry Commission who lease a protection of 'European Sites' (SACs and SPAs), Royal Forest of the Peak in Derbyshire. which they were unable to pay. In 1985 the proportion of land from United Utilities and the the protection of 'European Protected Species' Government accepted the residual estate in lieu Peak District National Park. The working group (e.g. bats, dormouse, great crested newts, otters) A noteworthy landowner for several generations of death duties; Calke Abbey was given over to is joined on a regular or occasional basis by other and the adaptation of planning controls for the was the Harpur-Crewe family. The Harpur-Crewe the National Trust (National Trust, 2010), and the stakeholders such as Derbyshire Police, Natural protection of such sites and species. estate was founded in the early 1500s by Richard remaining country estate – the Warslow Moors England and High Peak Borough Council. Harpur, a successful London solicitor. The family Estate in Staffordshire was given over to the Peak The Water Framework Directive is an EU acquired large estates, through wealth and District National Park. The group work together to meet the shared directive which imposes on member states a marriage, across Staffordshire and Derbyshire. objectives of each organisation to deliver duty to ensure no deterioration and/or maintain Sir Henry Harpur (1st baronet) acquired the Calke land management, conservation and visitor ‘good’ ecological and chemical status of all Abbey estate at Ticknall in southern Derbyshire Major Landowners management needs within the context of the watercourses. in 1622 and the baronetcy in 1626 (Wikipedia, operational needs of United Utilities and the 2016). At the height of its powers the Harpur- A number of other major landowners beside the Forestry Commission. The long-term strategic Our oldest form of heritage protection is Crewe family owned a contiguous tract of National Park Authority own and manage land in aims and more daily operational objectives are scheduling, designed specifically for sites of an land reaching from Warslow to Calke Abbey, a the area. United Utilities owns land surrounding designed to reflect the ecological and cultural archaeological character; this dates from the distance of nearly 40 miles. The house at Calke Fernilee and Errwood Reservoirs in the Goyt heritage importance of the location. The day to 1882 Ancient Monuments Act, when a 'Schedule' (not an abbey at all) and country shooting estate Valley, Lamaload Reservoir and its surrounding day management of the Goyt is enhanced by on of prehistoric sites deserving of state protection in Staffordshire were owned by a succession land and Macclesfield Forest. Severn Trent Water the ground delivery by the Peak District National was first compiled. Any works to scheduled of baronets and their descendants. Over the owns Tittesworth Reservoir and its surrounding Park Ranger Service which is jointly funded by monuments require consent from the secretary generations until the late 1900s the estate land which extends northwards into the South United Utilities. of state for culture, media and sport. gradually declined and there were some early West Peak. The National Trust owns Lyme Park Listed structures and Conservation Areas are disposals of property; the deeds of the house at the northernmost tip of the area and two National Park status provides a degree of afforded special protection through the planning owned by one of the LPS board members small tenanted farms near Grindon in the south. protection to heritage; however, the primary process. For the former, listed building consent show that it was sold from the Harpur-Crewe Staffordshire Wildlife Trust owns Black Brook measures of protection come from legislation must be obtained before any alterations or estate in 1928. Nature Reserve and manages the Roaches and regulations which are no different from those change of use can occur, including the setting estate, while Derbyshire and Cheshire Wildlife in force in other parts of the country. of the building. This is designed to preserve In July 1951 some 9,357 acres (3,787 hectares) of Trusts manage one small site each. The Ministry or enhance the special features of the listed the Harpur-Crewe north Staffordshire estate were of Defence also owns and leases land near to building. Conservation Area status is designated sold off in 212 lots comprising dairy and grazing Warslow. Between them these public bodies own to groups of buildings and their associated lanes,

80 81 Current Management Current Management paths, trees and open spaces in places of special On the other hand, interviewees who had a “I got very tired of idiots with clipboards coming architectural or historic interest. In Conservation child lined up to take over the farm were very and telling me what to do with no idea of hill Areas, planning control measures help to protect conscious that they wanted to hand the farm farming at all. They even admitted that they and enhance the buildings and their setting. over in a good state and with as much land didn’t know anything about farming, and as possible. Keeping the farm alive and in the they come up with some silly ideas that are family appears to be a strong driver amongst the unworkable.” Need for Training and Skills farmers interviewed. There is also a failure by some farmers we spoke Professionals Even without a clear succession plan, it would to to appreciate the immense difficulties faced by We carried out a series of interviews with farmers seem that some farmers are reluctant to see their public agencies in terms of workloads, cutbacks and workshops with stakeholders during our lifetime in farming go to waste, instead battling to and changing priorities. These discussions show development phase. Amongst the farmers who keep the farm surviving. that there is an urgent need to improve the we interviewed there was concern expressed communication between the farming community about the immense range of skills being lost “The main thing is pure stupidity. I’ve struggled and some representatives of public agencies. by succeeding generations. The knowledge of my whole life to own it, and I don’t want to Opportunities are therefore needed for both landscape, weather, seasons, wildlife and ecology Crumbling walls © PDNPA let it go. It’s as simple as that. And it wouldn’t parties to better understand each other’s drivers in addition to specific farming/land management take many mistakes to let it go. That’s what and viewpoints. skills may be lost by succeeding generations Restoring dilapidated farm buildings was also motivates most farmers of my era.” as increasing mechanisation may sever the mentioned as a priority for the area by several Volunteers perceived link between nature and farming farmer interviewees. These buildings were seen Skills around financial planning and diversification Whilst there are opportunities for volunteering productively. This was expressed as a need to get as an iconic part of the landscape, and some were lacking, notably about understanding the in the area, there is no coordinated cross-partner young farmers back walking the land with ‘feet on farmers appeared saddened to see them in procedures involved. A frequently mentioned programme for developing volunteers’ skills. the ground’ or getting out of their tractor cabs. states of disrepair. One interviewee saw them as barrier to diversification opportunities Different partners have their own local groups It was also felt that a loss of skills in managing/ a solution to the housing shortage in the area, was a perceived resistance from the Peak of volunteers such as the Peak Park Conservation handling stock could be dangerous. There is a while a couple of other interviewees insisted that District National Park Authority. Whilst not Volunteers, the Staffordshire Wildlife Trust need for greater training and awareness-raising they should be restored but remain as agricultural all interviewees had tried, there is clearly a volunteers and those who take part in the now of more complex issues around, for instance, buildings. commonly-held perception that being granted annual ‘peregrine watch’ at the Roaches. biodiversity losses. planning permission for changes to buildings “It’s a shame there isn’t more money for doing is very difficult and tends to come with many The National Park has programmes for volunteer The need for improved skills, training and these old stone barns up. Even if only just for conditions attached (that apparently make the rangers and for junior rangers. Prospective apprenticeships for young farmers was weather-proofing. Because once roofs start cost increasingly prohibitive) (Brook Lyndhurst, volunteer rangers are interviewed, allocated a suggested to be ‘crucial’ to the future of the going on them, it isn’t long before they’re dying. 2015). mentor from existing ranger staff, visit ranger area. Many courses, qualifications and tests (e.g. And them stone barns, they weren’t built with briefing centres and are trained in the role of the trailer tests, spraying courses) were seen as machines, they were built with the sweat of Despite small financial margins and perceived ranger and national parks, biodiversity in the Dark prohibitively expensive for young people. It was somebody’s brow. They were craftsmen they difficulties diversifying income sources, the vast Peak, biodiversity in the White Peak, countryside also suggested that training in the types of skills were.” majority of farmers interviewed did not convey safety and navigation. needed to diversify farming to consider new any particular desire for external business support audiences such as ‘wildlife tourists’ would be Prioritisation and succession planning were or advice. Junior rangers are young people aged 11–18 who beneficial. areas of skill lacking amongst many of our work alongside the National Park rangers and the farmers surveyed. Most operated on a day-to- Conservationists can also benefit by listening to Learning and Discovery team to help look after There was a very strong desire amongst a lot day basis keeping things ‘ticking over’ rather the views and ideas of farmers who have decades the special qualities of the National Park through of the interviewees to see walls rebuilt. Many than looking ahead or prioritising. Age and of intimate knowledge of the ecology of the doing practical tasks and engaging with members interviewees saw walls as an important heritage succession plans were also central to many landscape and its wildlife. There is felt to be a of the public. and aesthetic asset as well as a practical interviewees’ motivations and goals. Some older serious lack of communication. Conservationists boundary. There was a feeling across interviewees interviewees without any succession plans had are accused of not listening to the expertise We are aware of a few local interest groups such that there was a lot of walling that was in need of reduced the amount of stock they farmed to a of farmers who understand the complexity of as Hollinsclough History Live who are fairly active repair, as walls had fallen down the list of priorities bare minimum, and rented out much of their land grazing regimes and connection to the survival with monthly meetings with speakers on a variety for farmers due to other time and cost pressures. for other farmers’ livestock to graze. A couple of of rare species of flora and fauna. Several farmers of topics; the village website also has a message Supporting a project for walling was not as interviewees were also considering selling up their expressed distrust and a culture of blame from board devoted largely to ancestry and history straightforward for many as simply providing farms at the time of interview. agencies that have the role of policing with of the village and its surroundings. The Longnor grants, however, as this had not led to long term diktats from above. Action Group is an active community group employment for wallers who had developed skills. “We have three sons… we keep this farm running Interviewees commonly questioned what trying to improve their village for the benefit of A couple of interviewees therefore stressed that and ticking over just in case one of them has qualified those undertaking agri-environment the community. Butterton History Group, formed any trades promoted through projects should cover a a change of heart and comes back. That’s scheme inspections. It was often reported that by ten history buffs in 2012, is focusing on local number of skills and have a long term employment or something else we think about.” inspectors were inexperienced, and had not church and family history. The Swythamley progression plan. experienced enough ‘real’ farming to make Historical Society has an active Facebook page accurate judgements. and is similarly interested in old photographs and records of the parish. Added to these examples

82 83 Current Management Current Management are active parish councils and village hall Evidently there are skills and interests in parts Whilst one person has experienced a “lack of committees, WIs and Young Farmers Clubs. of the local community which can be developed understanding by people who have retired to their further and supported by the Landscape 'rural idyll' that other people may enjoy the South A dedicated band of people in the area are Partnership. West Peak differently e.g. via footpaths or other interested in archaeology and history; Eric and rights of way running adjacent to said rural idyll” Margaret, both retired and long serving volunteer another notes that “the area has a wide variety of rangers, have been out surveying lime kilns and Stakeholders attributes which suit a wide variety of interests.... hollow-ways. They are also part of the Tudor A little give and take is required from all users.” farming project in Sheen which delivered a series There are numerous parties with an interest in this of educational days for local primary children landscape; often these stakeholders do not agree to help them understand how people might on the threats and opportunities within the area. have lived there around the 1530s. Children were Very strong views are held by some landowners encouraged to take part in activities including regarding the effect of predators on wildlife and cooking pottage, butter making, weaving, farm livestock, notably the impact of TB on cattle and dyeing wool to making a dead hedge and and the number of badgers in the area is an issue ploughing with oxen. In 2014 the Tudor farming of major concern for cattle farmers in particular. project won the national Bayer/FACE award For the large moorland owners, their interests and for innovative learning. The Tudor Farming concerns focus on the impact which mammalian Interpretation Group is now running a new HLF- and avian predators have on ground nesting birds funded archaeology project called ‘Peeling back such as red grouse (for the impact on commercial the layers’. grouse shoots) and waders.

National Park residents were recently asked to Farmers also have concerns about recreational complete a survey which included questions access to their land, complaining about gates about volunteering; of those who responded being left open, dogs off leads and people (across the whole National Park) 42% regularly wandering off the designated footpaths. Some of (at least monthly) take part in unpaid or voluntary these complaints have been countered by people work for clubs or organisations, the majority who point out that if access furniture and signage of this was community based volunteering. better maintained there would be fewer problems 27% of residents were aware of opportunities with people straying off paths and so forth. to become involved in the management of heritage features. Of those people who were Some respondents to our community e-survey interested in volunteering 70% were interested in highlighted bad agricultural practices such as surveying wildlife and 58% assisting with practical taking four silage cuts a year (which impacts conservation tasks. The more testing question of on ground nesting birds) or farmers building whether people were prepared to give money for or taking down buildings without planning causes received a poor response; however, those permission; while others sympathised with the who were prepared to give were most interested decreasing farm work force meaning fewer in conservation projects and rights of way. people to maintain walls and hedges; or noted While these figures are for the whole National that “poor farm returns continue to put pressure Park there is no reason to assume the response on farmers to use cheaper, less labour-intensive differed in the South West Peak. Just under half alternatives, such as barbed wire or field of the respondents in our community e-survey amalgamation.” were interested in getting more involved with the Landscape Partnership; of these 35% were Concerns were expressed about the impact of interested in habitat surveys, 15% in social media, wind turbines in and around the area. Farmers 15% in local history information, 12.5% in providing were seen by some as “trying to exploit wind advice on farming issues, 10% in archaeology, and turbines, putting up ever bigger barns and 12.5% in other activities such as rights of way and cashing in on other renewables such as solar the Duke of Edinburgh award. panels that blight the countryside”; others had a more pragmatic view: “we are not of the opinion that wind turbines are always unacceptable because if we insist on having modern conveniences then we have to make some sacrifices, better these than the use of nuclear power.”

84 85