OUR COMMON CAUSE: OUR UPLAND COMMONS Landscape Conservation Action Plan

November 2019

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

1

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Contents PART 1: The Scheme Plan ...... 5 Executive Summary ...... 5 1 Introduction ...... 8 1.1 Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons ...... 8 1.2 LCAP Process and Planning ...... 11 2 Understanding Our Project Area ...... 13 2.1 Our Project Commons ...... 14 2.2 Landscape Character of Upland Commons ...... 15 2.3 Summary of key features and characteristics of our Upland Commons ...... 16 2.4 Landscape Management Mechanisms ...... 33 3 Statement of Significance ...... 43 3.1 What is significance? ...... 43 3.2 The Significance of our Commons Heritage ...... 43 3.3 The Significance of Commoning ...... 45 3.4 Sense of place – people’s attitudes and feelings about significance ...... 47 3.5 A Brief History of Upland Commons in England ...... 51 4 Threats & Opportunities for Upland Commons & Commoning ...... 54 4.1 Threats facing upland commons ...... 54 4.2 Opportunities for upland commons ...... 58 4.3 Summary of Threats and Opportunities in relation to the special qualities of common land ...... 61 5 The People – Our Activity Plan ...... 64 5.1 Our commitment to engaging the public and the relationship between commons and people ...... 64 5.2 How we have created the Activity Plan and who has been involved in developing the ideas within it? ...... 65 5.3 Current and potential audiences for commons’ heritage ...... 66 5.4 Barriers to engagement for upland commons ...... 68 5.5 Current activity offer and trialling activities for engagement ...... 69 5.6 Our Public Consultation: Process and results ...... 71 5.7 How have these findings been used to inform delivery projects and the activity plan? ...... 78 6 Our Partnership Vision for Upland Commons ...... 80 6.1 Aims & Objectives ...... 82 7 Our Common Cause: Project Overview ...... 86

2

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

7.1 Strand A: Collaboration ...... 86 7.2 Strand B: Resilience ...... 88 7.3 Strand C: Commons for All ...... 89 7.4 Strand D: Commons for Tomorrow ...... 91 7.5 How will Our Common Cause achieve HF outcomes? ...... 93 7.6 Project timetable ...... 93 7.7 Overall financial summary ...... 94 7.8 Stage 1 and Stage 2 Comparison ...... 96 8 Our Common Cause Partnership and delivery of the Project ...... 98 8.1 Our Common Cause Partnership & Local Area Groups ...... 98 8.2 Staff Team ...... 101 8.3 Risk Assessment ...... 104 8.4 Financial Arrangements ...... 107 8.5 Procurement strategy and arrangements with delivery partners ...... 109 9 Sustainability: Management and Maintenance of Benefits ...... 110 9.1 Developing an Exit Strategy ...... 110 9.2 Management and Maintenance Plan for Specific Elements ...... 111 10 Evaluation Framework for Delivery ...... 113 PART 2: Project Plan summaries (as separate documents) ...... 116 PART 3: Full Project Plans (as separate documents) ...... 116

List of Appendices (as separate documents)

Appendix 1: Maps of the 12 Project Commons

Appendix 2: Activity Plan: Action Plan

Appendix 3: Detailed Budget, Cash-flow Forecast and Timetable

Appendix 4: Income and Spending Forecast

Appendix 5: Staff Team Job Descriptions

Appendix 6: Procurement Strategy and Contract briefs

Appendix 7: Management & Maintenance costs and evidence

Appendix 8: Example Third Party agreement for equipment and contract example

Appendix 9: Template Landowner Agreement for capital works

3

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Appendix 10: National Trust FCR Calculation

Appendix 11: SSSI/SAM Consents letters

List of Supporting Documents (as separate documents)

SD1: Commons Charter

SD2: Commons Visions

SD3: Commons Management Plans

SD4: Commons are for All Report, Resource Guide and Case Studies (John Muir Trust)

SD5: Social Cohesion Study for Dartmoor and Yorkshire Dales (Somewhere-Nowhere)

SD6: Peat & Wetland Restoration Study (Yorkshire Peat Partnership)

SD7: Follow-up Feasibility Study & Peatland Restoration Plan for Holne Moor (YPP)

SD8: Bracken Management Study (Agrifood Technical Services) (not completed in full)

SD9: Clee Liberty Feasibility Study: Bracken Management (Arbor Vitae)

SD10: Clee Liberty Historic Environment Study (Fearn Heritage & Archaeology)

SD11: Branding Guidelines (Tricolor Associated)

SD12: Communications Plan (Tricolor Associates)

SD13: Interpretation Strategy (Tricolor Associates)

SD14: Evaluation Framework (Resources for Change Ltd)

SD15: Signed Memorandum of Cooperation (Partnership Agreement)

SD16: Legal Agreement between FCL/NT as joint applicants

SD17. Funding confirmation letters

SD18. Letters of support

4

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

PART 1: The Scheme Plan

Executive Summary Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons is a landmark project that will conserve, enhance and broaden understanding of the cultural and natural heritage of commons and commoning in upland England, working in the Lake District, Dartmoor, the Yorkshire Dales and Shropshire Hills.

This project comes at a critical time when common land faces the biggest change in agricultural policy support for three generations, and when there is an urgent need to rectify past ecological damage and create resilience in the face of climate change. Commons are too small in number and in economic impact to register within national policy and planning, yet the landscapes and cultural heritage commoners manage are of disproportionately high value for biodiversity, water supply, carbon storage, historic environment, natural beauty and public access.

A system of commoning for the 21st century must be co-created to secure the authenticity of pastoral grazing systems alongside being responsive to current ecological and climate crises. This is what Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons seeks to do; build a nature rich and culture rich future for common land, commoning and communities

Working on the ground across 12 commons, we will ‘demonstrate by doing’ and so change attitudes and behaviours, build collaboration and bring people together. The projects we deliver at a local scale will demonstrate and influence how we can deliver positive change regionally and nationally. Sharing our learning amongst our partners and stakeholders within, between and beyond our four local areas will be a key outcome of this project.

Our Partnership Vision, developed as a result of our Commons Charter and individual Commons Visioning, is for Vibrant, Thriving and Healthy Commons fit for the 21st Century. Principally, our Partnership recognises that upland commons are important and valuable places for nature and for people, and for the public goods which they provide. If we are going to achieve the best outcomes for our commons, especially in a period of uncertainty, we need to understand different perspectives and passions, we need effective collaboration and we need trusted facilitation to promote fruitful discussion and build consensus.

The project has four central aims reflected in four thematic strands of activity:

• Secure and support collaborative management of Common Land;

• Ensure that the health of commons is secured by supporting resilient commoning in a fast-changing world;

• Reconnect the public with the natural and cultural heritage of Common Land;

• Enhance the environmental and ecological benefits offered by Common Land.

5

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons will deliver 14 sub-projects across the thematic strands of Collaboration, Resilience, Commons for All and Commons for Tomorrow. The strands have been designed to deliver the overall aims of the project and each sub-project will deliver a range of outcomes for heritage, people and communities. Our project proposals have been refined and developed during Stage 2 as a result of engagement, consultation and research, and to reflect the significance and special qualities of commons as well as the threats and opportunities we have identified.

Theme A: Collaboration There is only one thing which makes upland commons different from any other piece of upland farmland and that is the collaboration intrinsic in the ancient tradition and practice of commoning. Securing and supporting this collaborative management is vital to the sympathetic management of commons and preservation of the heritage they hold. When collaborative management breaks down, land and communities suffer.

Collaboration includes three sub-projects: • A1. Stronger Together - collaborative projects • A2. Shared Spaces - commons infrastructure • A3. Sharing the benefit - widening the Visions

Theme B: Resilience If Common Land is to thrive, and a way of life is to continue, Commoners must have the skills and support they need, and policy must recognise how the grazing of Common Land works. The activities in this strand tackle these challenges.

Resilience includes three sub-projects: • B1. Hill Livestock Health • B2. Schemes & Skills • B3. Commons Resilience Fund

Theme C: Commons for All Most people have little knowledge of Commoning, or Common Land, including the millions who enjoy visiting our Protected Landscapes. The ‘visiting public’ miss the history and meaning of landscapes they explore. If more, and a wider range of people, engaged with Common Land and what it has to offer the public, the public could play a greater role in understanding, supporting and benefitting from Common Land.

Commons for All includes three sub-projects: • C1. Enjoy - Interpretation programme • C2. Learn - Learning resources and activities • C3. Do - Activities and events programme

Theme D: Commons for Tomorrow Multiple public benefits are provided by sympathetically managed Commons: rare habitats and species, ancient monuments, and conservation of soil and water. Yet where

6

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Commoning has declined, or common land not been adequately managed, these benefits are not realised.

Commons for Tomorrow include five sub-projects: • D1. Carbon • D2. Historic Environment • D3. Habitats • D4. Water • D5. Biodiversity

Within the Commons for All strand there is a strengthened emphasis on outreach, both into urban areas surrounding our commons and in order to engage with new audiences for commons and commoning. This is as a direct result of our audience development work into missing audiences and some strong current policy drivers such as the Glover Landscapes Review of National Parks and AONBs.

A further significant development between Stage 1 and Stage 2 proposals is the desired extension of the Project timeframe to three and a half years (42 months) with an anticipated start in May 2020, and completion October 2023.

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons is a national partnership project. The broad- ranging and inclusive Partnership is convened by the Foundation for Common Land as the Lead Body, with the National Trust as the Accountable Body. The national Partnership represents a broad range of statutory, charitable and special interest organisations at a national and regional level with a stake and interest in commons and commoning. The multiple uses of common land are reflected in the Partnership,

The Project budget has grown at Stage 2 to £3,068,866. We have raised over £690,000 cash funding from our project partners, national and local Charitable Trusts and Foundations. This increased funding allows the project to do so much more to achieve our aims and objectives in supporting upland commons and commoning. We are extremely appreciative and immensely proud of the breadth of partnership support for the project which this funding demonstrates.

The project will be delivered by a core team of six people comprising: • National project manager (0.8FTE) • 4 x Area Project Officers (0.8FTE) • Admin & Finance Officer (0.6FTE) The team will be supported by a national Communication support contract worth £56,950 +VAT.

The Project team will be managed by the Foundation for Common Land Executive Director and will be hosted in partner offices. The Project Manager and Admin & Finance Officer will be employed by the National Trust with the Project Officers either employed by National Trust or one of the area protected bodies (as appropriate).

7

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

1 Introduction

1.1 Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons is a landmark project that will conserve and enhance the cultural and natural heritage of commons and commoning in upland England, working in the Lake District, Dartmoor, the Yorkshire Dales and Shropshire Hills. It will directly improve the management of almost 30,000ha of upland fragile ecosystems.

This project comes at a critical time when common land faces the biggest change in agricultural policy support for three generations, and when there is an urgent need to rectify past ecological damage and create resilience in the face of climate change. Commons are too small in number and in economic impact to register within national farming policy and planning, yet the landscapes and culture commoners manage are of disproportionately high value.

This project is needed now to test innovative approaches and disseminate learning both on the ground and to input to new environmental schemes and support mechanisms. No one party, whether Defra, a water company or an environmental organisation, can deliver this alone as change on common land is complex and often contested. Our Partnership, of 24 organisations, works locally, regionally and nationally to deliver positive change.

Delivery of Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons will enable us to ‘demonstrate by doing’ and so change attitudes and behaviours on common land. Developing ownership and pride in the delivery of public benefits will build trust between commoners and environmental organisations. The projects we deliver will reverse declines in biodiversity, increase carbon storage at a local scale and demonstrate how we can deliver positive change regionally and nationally.

Lake District Yorkshire Dales

Shropshire Hills

Dartmoor

8

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

What is the heritage Our Common Cause focusses on?

Commoning is an ancient land management practice that dates back to 1215, building on principles first set out in the Magna Carta.

It involves a group of farmers – from one or two to over 100 – having “commoners rights” to graze their animals (mostly sheep but also cattle, pigs, horses…and even ducks) on a shared piece of land – the common – without fences or boundaries between them.

The sheep don’t need fences, through flock memory passed down through the generations they stay on their patch of the common, known as a heaf or heft in northern England, and a lear in the south west.

The sheep belong on their heaf. The commoners belong on their family farms, and the commoners’ rights belong with the farm. The common itself belongs to a private individual or a charity or a utility company, or a combination of these. And the National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty where our commons sit are designated as ‘protected areas’ by and for the nation.

But the heritage of commons isn’t just about commoners and livestock, it’s about some of the UK’s most spectacular landscapes, its most valuable biodiversity, its geology and pre- history, and its history of settlement and industry. And beyond that it’s also about natural systems such as the water and carbon cycles, which shape and support our everyday lives locally, nationally and internationally.

So who does the heritage belong to? And who must look after it? And how? And who for?

This project will tackle all of those questions, and will also show how a centuries’ old farming practice is unexpectedly relevant to many of our 21st century challenges – physical and mental wellbeing, rural economic sustainability, food quality and security, flood management and climate change…

Looking from the other direction we will see how some of these issues present challenges for commons and commoning, and show how stakeholders in commons – owners, commoners and agencies – can work together to agree how to tackle them.

Working together is important, as commons have always been shared – and sometimes contested – spaces; relationships on some commons are comfortable and enabling whilst on others there is disagreement. Commons encapsulate the many different aspects of decisions around land management – and agendas can be single issue – ‘it can only be about nature’, ‘it must be about trees’, ‘save farming’, ‘abandon farming’, ‘my right to roam’, and the desire to fundraise for health and environmental causes can be detrimental to the very environment we seek to conserve. But as is often the case, it is the middle way bringing together all of these options which is likely to be the most productive and sustainable long term.

Commons are extensive (now making up 3% of England’s land cover but they are disproportionately significant in terms of their value for natural and cultural heritage) and generous in their hosting of publicly-appreciated heritage such as biodiversity – over 45% of upland commons in England and Wales are nationally important for wildlife.

9

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

The nation’s historic environment also thrives on commons – the unploughed soils of common land and grazings support tens of thousands of archaeological sites, including 3,000 scheduled monuments.

More broadly, commons can be the providers of shelter against climate change locally and regionally in their ability to hold floodwater that otherwise scours our towns and cities. They contribute to clean drinking water too – over 10% of all Britain’s water derives from common land.

They can support flourishing and with-nature farming systems to provide superb home- grown meat without food miles or unnecessary animal transportation.

Nationally and internationally they offer an unrivalled opportunity to trap carbon to help slow down climate change through the careful management of peatlands – Britain has 12% of Europe’s peatland and 12% of the World’s Blanket Bog. Around 200,000ha of England’s peat soils are located on common land.

Locally and nationally they offer thousands of square miles of mental and physical health promoting open spaces and fresh air – 40% of access land in England is common land - with the potential to offer massive health benefits to those living locally and from more urban communities nearby.

And finally, in these days of identity politics and the pressure for young people to choose who they are at an ever-earlier age, not to mention escalating conflict between them in our inner cities, the issue of “belonging” has never been more pertinent. It is a key element of the National Curriculum PSHE programme (both Primary and Secondary) and commoning has much to offer through its messages of local and group identity, collaboration and mutual support.

In the past commons were the backbone and the rock (literally) of our civilisation, and the turn of these quiet sentinels has come again. We must protect them, for their intrinsic value but just as importantly, for what they can offer to people who may never visit them. This is heritage writ large; as commons provided for our ancestors so they can provide for our descendants, and once again we must work with our environment to shape and secure our future.

Through this project, careful management of landscape heritage will contribute to the fight against climate change and help to mitigate its effect, which in turn protects the landscape heritage – you could not wish for a more virtuous circle.

We have selected twelve commons in three National Parks and an AONB to serve as examples, but they could equally be any other commons across the UK, so archetypal are the challenges, opportunities and possible solutions. The twelve commons and four areas have been intended as case studies to learn through delivery to help improve commons management more widely across England. Through this project we are dovetailing two approaches - demonstrating and trialling approaches in a single area which can be documented and the learning applied elsewhere, and in a few cases delivering projects across three or four areas where we want to show immediate impact.

10

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

1.2 LCAP Process and Planning The development stage work has been coordinated by a national Project Development Manager Joy Howells, working with Area Facilitators in each of the Local Areas of Dartmoor, Lake District, Shropshire Hills and Yorkshire Dales.

The Project Development Manager (PDM) has been employed by National Trust and seconded to Foundation for Common Land between January 2018 and November 2019 and managed by FCL Executive Director Julia Aglionby. The PDM has managed a wide range of consultancy contracts as well as overseeing the team, managed all project finance and administering/reporting to the Partnership Steering Group and Project Board.

The Area Facilitators have been contracted in a freelance capacity between March 2018 and October 2019 and have been managed by the Project Development Manager. Area Facilitators during the Development Stage have been:

• Tracy May, Dartmoor • Jenny Willis/Viv Lewis – Lake District • Cath Landles – Shropshire Hills • Liz Sutton – Yorkshire Dales

The Area Facilitators have been responsible for engaging and working with local stakeholders and partners to develop projects alongside public consultation as well as input to a number of national consultancy contracts to develop specific areas of the project. The Area Facilitators have liaised closely with the Area Leads and have reported to the Local Area Groups.

A wide range of individuals and groups have been involved in the Development Phase consultations. These have included

• Landowners of all commons • Active graziers (commoners) on each common • Statutory and special interest organisations at a national and local level through individual involvement and via the Partnership and Area Groups • Organisations who have contributed to development of particular projects.

The consultation process is detailed in Section 5 and lists of those most involved are included in Section 5.2.

The LCAP has been informed by:

• Work at Stage 1 to identify 12 project commons across four areas of upland England, and to consult on, develop and cost an initial outline project • Development of the Commons Charter (Supporting document 1) with the Partnership, at an early stage in the development phase, which lays the foundation for collaborative and respectful working on commons • The Visions developed for each common as a key part of the Area Facilitators work (Supporting document 2) • The Management Plans developed for a selected common in each local area (Supporting document 3)

11

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Statement of Significance for the project commons (see Section 3) which has highlighted and drawn together the geological, natural and cultural features of interest and significance for our Commons • Consultation with a wide range of stakeholders including our partners at a national and local level through the Partnership, Steering Group and Local Area Groups, and public consultation in communities of geography and interest surrounding our Commons (see Section 5) • Research and survey work/contracts completed by external consultants into particular aspects of commons and commoning – these have covered: o Commons are for All John Muir Award development (John Muir Trust) o Social Cohesion Study Dartmoor and Yorkshire Dales (Somewhere-Nowhere) o Peatland & Wetland Restoration Study (Yorkshire Peat Partnership) o Bracken management study (Agrifood Technical Services Ltd) o Branding, Communications Plan and website development (Tricolor Associates Ltd) o Interpretation Strategy (Tricolor Associates Ltd) o Evaluation Framework (Resources for Change Ltd) o Smaller contracts have delivered specific development support and advice in local areas including Historic Environment Study of Clee Liberty (Fearn Archaeology & Heritage, Biodiversity data collation and coincidence mapping (Dave Green), Bracken feasibility and management study (Arbor Vitae), UAV surveys for Ingleborough and Kinniside (YPP), Peatland Restoration Plan for Holne Common (YPP), Social science input to Joint Monitoring Project design (3KQ Ltd/Rachel Woodward), Case for Commons research and development (Life Goes on Learning).

The above documents are appended in the Supporting Documents and should be read in conjunction with this LCAP document.

The project rationale, thematic strands and sub-projects were approved by the Partnership Steering Group (meeting 27.9.19) and the LCAP document by the Project Board (8.11.19). The LCAP will form the Delivery Plan for the Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons Project over three and a half years between May 2020 and October 2023.

The LCAP has been devised using Heritage Lottery Fund Guidance (Feb 2013), and is formed into three Parts: Part 1: The Scheme Plan Part 2: Non-technical Project summaries Part 3: Full Project Plans

Appendices and Supporting Documents supply further detailed information and these are referred to and cross referenced in the document text.

12

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

2 Understanding Our Project Area This section is about the landscape character of our upland commons and the heritage that contributes to the distinctiveness and special qualities of these landscapes and ‘sense of place’.

Upland commons, defined as commons above the moorland line over some 1000ft, were once widespread in our landscape occupying about half of Britain’s land cover. Now commons make up just 3% of England’s land cover but they are disproportionately significant for the environmental and cultural benefits which they offer.

The special importance of common land has developed following centuries of farmers grazing their livestock on stable, unploughed soils, free from chemical input. This has provided ideal conditions for the protection of thousands of ancient monuments, ranging from henges and stone circles to hill forts, and for the conservation of wildlife, Map of England’s upland areas including some of Britain’s rarest birds. Tens of (British Geological Society) millions of visitors each year come to upland commons for the leisure, health and wellbeing benefits which they offer, and in doing so, contribute significantly to the tourist industry and to local economies. Lowland commons extend into cities, including London - examples being Hampstead Heath and Wimbledon Common - where they provide scarce opportunities for relaxation and play.

13

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

The vast majority of commons in the UK are found in the uplands. Extending to one million hectares, they form some of our most iconic landscapes, closely associated with National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Upland commons have a significant role in mitigating climate change, having peat soils which store millions of tons of carbon. Upland commons are also important in water provision and flood management. Their peat soils and mosses are sponges which prevent the rapid release of water which can cause floods downstream. Over 10% of all drinking water comes from common land.

The Foundation for Common Land believes that commons provide more public benefits and make a greater contribution to the environment than any other farmland in Britain.

2.1 Our Project Commons Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons will be working on the ground in four English upland areas - Dartmoor, the Lake District, Shropshire Hills and Yorkshire Dales. Prior to and during Stage 1 we worked with local organisations and key stakeholders to select three commons in each of these areas that we would continue to work with in Stage 2 and during delivery. These commons represent a cross section of upland commons throughout England and were chosen to represent a range of ownerships, management and natural capital features and qualities. In choosing these twelve commons it was important that the owners, commoners and key stakeholders were on board and willing to engage with the project and could envisage some of the opportunities and benefits which might arise from being part of a national project to support upland commons.

The commons which will form our project are:

• Bampton Common. Lake District. Grid ref NY472161. Owned by United Utilities and the Lowther Estate. Includes part of Naddle Moor SSSI.

• Brant Fell. Yorkshire Dales. Grid ref SD661966. One private landowner. No statutory designations.

• Bridestowe and Sourton Commons. Dartmoor. Grid ref SX552880. Owned by the Duchy of Cornwall and the Leawood Estate. Within the Dartmoor SAC and the North Dartmoor SSSI.

• Clee Liberty. Shropshire Hills. Grid ref SO 5838 8454. Owned by Clee St Margaret Parish Council. Nordy Bank - Scheduled Monument.

• Derwent Common. Lake District. Grid ref NY231170. Owned by the National Trust. Part of Lake District High Fells SAC, and within Buttermere Fells – Maiden Moor SSSI.

14

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Grassington Moor. Yorkshire Dales. Grid ref SE028667. No legal owner, vested in YDNPA. Includes Black Keld SSSI and part of SM 1018333 Multi-period lead mines and processing works.

• Harford and Ugborough Moors. Dartmoor. Grid ref SX649620 and SX656615 respectively. Within Dartmoor SAC and partly within South Dartmoor SSSI. Privately owned (four landowners) with part owned by the Duchy of Cornwall.

• Holne Moor. Dartmoor. Grid ref SX677704. Two private landowners, Dartmoor National Park Authority and South West Water. Within Dartmoor SAC and within South Dartmoor SSSI.

• Ingleborough (Clapham) Common. Yorkshire Dales. Grid ref SD747729. Owned by a family Trust. Within Ingleborough Complex SAC, Ingleborough SSSI and SM 1008876 Ingleborough Hill. Ingleborough (Ingleton) Common. Yorkshire Dales.

• Kinniside Common. Lake District. Grid ref NY085116. Owned by the National Trust. Includes part of River Calder SSSI.

• Long Mynd. Shropshire Hills. Grid ref SO 4310 9405. Owned by National Trust. Largest SSSI in Shropshire and holds a number of habitats supporting special plants and animals. Also listed as a geological SSSI, with Ashes Hollow designated as a Regionally Important Geological Site. Over 20 Scheduled Monuments.

• Stiperstones. Shropshire Hills. Grid ref SJ 3719 0028. Owned by Natural England. The Stiperstones Common makes up a large part of the Stiperstones National Nature Reserve (NNR). Four Scheduled Monuments. SAC - designated for European dry heaths (primary reason for selection) and old sessile oak woods (qualifying feature).

Maps of the 12 Project commons within the four local areas are included at Appendix 1.

2.2 Landscape Character of Upland Commons During the mid-1990s, the Countryside Agency worked with English Nature and English heritage to produce The Character Map of England. This provided an analysis of landscape character at a broad, national scale and resulted in the definition of 159 different Regional Character Areas. Landscape character can be defined as “a distinct, recognisable and consistent pattern of elements in the landscape that makes one landscape different from another, rather than better or worse”1. These National Character Areas are then reflected in more local Landscape Character Assessments.

A Landscape Character Assessment includes information about the six components that define landscape character – geology, landform and soils tell us about the physical character, whilst settlement pattern, tree cover and land use tell us about the cultural

1 Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage. 2006. Landscape Character Assessment: Guidance for England and Scotland.

15

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

dimensions of landscape. These LCAs set out valued landscape attributes for each distinct character area or ‘type’.

Whilst our four areas are geographically dispersed they represent four of England’s most iconic upland landscapes each with a strong ‘sense of place’ and well-known cultural associations. Here we explore some of the similarities in the landscape character of each area as well as some of the distinctive qualities and cultural dimensions, those interactions between people and place.

Our four areas are all protected landscapes – three National Parks and one Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty – and as such are recognised as landscapes of national importance, protected under the 1949 National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act and updated in the Environment Act 1995.

2.3 Summary of key features and characteristics of our Upland Commons

Dartmoor Description

At 954 square kilometres (368 square miles), Dartmoor is the largest open space in southern England. It has wild open moorland, granite tors and wooded river valleys. At its edge is a landscape of small fields enclosed by stone walls and hedge banks.

Dartmoor has been a stock-grazing area for at least 4,000 years and it is, in the main, this kind of farming that has made the Dartmoor landscape worthy of National Park status. Of the 95,573 ha in the National Park, 35,301ha is designated common land divided between 86 common land units (c. 37% of the park area) with approximately 850 registered commoners. Commoning plays an integral role in the National Park’s culture.

Commoning has been continued for generations on Dartmoor, the link between the farm and the common, and the infrastructure in place to support that system, is now of significant landscape and cultural value. Significant features include stone walls, pounds and driftways that were used to manage and move stock onto and off the commons.

The Dartmoor Commons Act provided a right of access on foot and horseback to the registered common land on Dartmoor, the National Park Authority is responsible for managing access, and under the Act, the Dartmoor Commoners Council is responsible for representing the commoners, making regulations about matters affecting the management of the commons and the welfare of stock on the commons, and enforcing the Dartmoor Commoners' Council Regulations.

The commons of Dartmoor comprise a range of national and internationally important habitats; blanket bogs; heather moorland; western heath and valley mires. The high moor commons are the source of many of Dartmoor rivers. Key species associated with those habitats include Dunlin, Ring ouzel, Southern damselfly, Pearl and high bordered fritillary,

16

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Dartmoor's landscape is also among the richest in western Europe in terms of its archaeological remains. There are over a 1,000 Scheduled Monument’s on Dartmoor many of which are on common land. The earliest visible monuments date from the Neolithic period c.6000 years ago; from virtually all periods since then human activity has left its imprint on the moor.

The reason why so many archaeological sites survive on Dartmoor is twofold. First, intensive modern agricultural improvement failed to penetrate into much of the open moorland and secondly many of the archaeological sites are constructed from granite.

Entire archaeological landscapes have survived which contain sites from several different periods. It is possible in many places to see sites and landscapes of an early period surviving beneath those of a later one. This is known as the Dartmoor palimpsest. To recognise this the moorland vision for Dartmoor identified Premier Archaeological Landscapes, these reflect some of our best archaeology, significant at a landscape scale.

Dartmoor Commons landscape character is characterised by two character types including

• Unsettled High Upland Moorland (Bridestowe & Sourton) • Upland Moorland with Tors (Harford & Ugborough Moor, Holne Moor)

The Unsettled High Moorland contains the highest and most remote land in Dartmoor rising to 621 metres. Large expanses of heather and grass moorland form broad, uninterrupted skylines broken only by the occasional tor and rock outcrop. The landscape is crossed by a network of streams and valley mires fed by thick deposits of peat and blanket bogs on the plateaux tops – forming the source of many of the major rivers of Devon.

High levels of tranquillity and remoteness are occasionally interrupted by sounds relating to the longstanding military use of the moor, whilst the strong time depth of the landscape is reflected in a rich archaeological resource tracing human activity over many millennia. The high, open moorland scene affords expansive and panoramic views across the surrounding lower landscapes within the National Park and beyond.

17

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Valued landscape attributes of this character area

• Open and expansive landscape with extensive views. • Isolation and exposure – a wild, bleak, remote and empty landscape. • Undeveloped, smooth skylines with rounded profiles contrasting with rocky tors. • Rich and varied semi-natural habitats of high nature conservation value, grazed by Dartmoor ponies and native breeds of cattle and sheep and supporting distinctive wildlife species. • Strong time depth – numerous historic features found scattered across the landscape. • Sense of remoteness and tranquillity with dark night skies.

Upland Moorland with Tors is a large-scale moorland landscape sweeping below the high plateaux and summits of the Unsettled High Moorland. Smooth outlines are punctuated by many tors and jagged rock outcrops, with slopes often strewn by granite boulders and ‘clitter’. Areas of open moorland grazed by free-roaming livestock are fringed by a strong pattern of newtakes marked by granite walls containing rough grazing land. The landscape contains numerous sites and features of archaeological significance, scattered within a mosaic of heather and grass moorland punctuated by wetland habitats of international importance. Small villages and hamlets occupy sheltered locations, often associated with streams and rivers draining from the moor.

Valued landscape attributes of this character area

• Dramatic moorland landscape, with wide open spaces, panoramic views and a strong sense of tranquillity. • Traditional upland farming communities with the moorland grazed by Dartmoor ponies and native hill breeds of sheep and cattle. • Valued wildlife habitats including blanket bogs, mires and heather moorland – home to rare upland birds. • Hill tops dominated by granite tors and other geological features. • Rich archaeological heritage with numerous archaeological remains.

18

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Unifying granite local vernacular displayed in farmhouses, bridges, stone walls and settlements linked by deep lanes. • Valued area for recreation, with large tracts of open access land.

National Character Area Profile 150. Dartmoor includes the following Statements of Environmental Quality which are all relevant to the Our Common Cause Project:

SEO 1: Protect, manage and enhance Dartmoor’s extensive open moor, its sense of wildness and remoteness, the internationally important habitats and species it supports, and the carbon and water stored in its deep peat –

Key opportunities are identified as: • There is an opportunity to protect and manage the unique landscape character through land management practices, working with stakeholders, • Promoting and supporting sympathetic management of Dartmoor’s blanket bogs, peat and upland habitats, restoring hydrological function of blanket bog, and raising awareness of the importance of these habitats • Working with farmers and local communities to ensure that necessary skills and knowledge are maintained • Encourage use of hardy breeds to appropriately graze the moors • Promoting and managing sustainable recreation to ensure that sense of isolation, tranquillity and wilderness are maintained

SEO 2: Protect, manage and enhance Dartmoor’s rich cultural heritage and its strong connection with granite and associated minerals, providing inspiring information to promote understanding of the landscape.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Protecting and appropriately managing the rich and internationally important cultural heritage of Dartmoor • Promoting understanding and appreciation of the landscape’s archaeology and support opportunities to increase understanding of the historic environment • Providing guidance and inspiring interpretation to enhance public understanding and enjoyment of the area’s geodiversity • Protecting the distinctive field patterns of the moorland fringe (newtakes) and surrounding farmland by managing the hedgebanks and walls that define them • Encouraging and supporting initiatives that develop and enhance the traditional skills involved in the use of local materials and the understanding required to maintain and manage historic features.

SEO 3: Protect, manage and enhance the enclosed, tranquil character of the pastoral landscape, encouraging the management of boundary features, including granite walls, and of semi-natural features to strengthen local distinctiveness and connectivity. Create opportunities for quiet, informal recreation, particularly around settlements.

Key opportunities are identified as:

19

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Improving the condition of heritage assets

SEO 4: Protect and manage Dartmoor’s network of streams, leats and rivers; and enhance the contribution they make to landscape character, recreation and biodiversity, while managing water flows, quality and supply.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Promoting management at a catchment scale, encouraging good environmental management of semi-natural habitats to aid water retention and connectivity.

Lake District Description

The Lake District National Park is England's largest National Park (2292 sq.km) It is a mountainous area, with high fells divided by narrow radiating glaciated valleys, most containing slender lakes fed by steep rivers and becks. It is a living and working landscape. Hill livestock farming is the predominant land use and has been for at least a thousand years.

The Lake District contains the largest concentration of common land in the United Kingdom (645 sq.km) within one of the largest areas of unenclosed grazing land of any farming landscape in Western Europe. This distinctive communal hill farming landscape, its management system and associated cultural heritage are all attributes of Outstanding Universal Value for the English Lake District World Heritage status, achieved in 2018. Distinctive native breeds of sheep, including Herdwick, graze the Commons. Traditional communal activities, such as fell gathering and shepherd’s meets continue to be important practical and social parts of the annual Commons calendar. Traditional management practises are still essential for managing sheep flocks on common land, including maintaining a hefted flock through breeding and maintaining traditional sheep marking with links back to the Norse influence in the 10th century. There is a high degree of continuity of family succession amongst the farming families dating over hundreds of years. Commoning in the Lake District has continued unbroken for 700 years and in the last 30 years there has been an increase in formal governance, which now includes around 35 Commons Associations. The Federation of Cumbria Commoners was established in 2003. Since the Commons Act 2006 the Federation has explored with commoners the potential of a Commons Council, which would be a statutory body run by commoners to manage Common Land. Over the past 20 years national agri-environment schemes have become increasingly influential on commons grazing management, a relatively recent and new challenge for commons management and governance. In 2011 over 95% of Common Land by area was in an agri-environment scheme.

The Lake District was designated as a National Park in 1951 and the English Lake District World Heritage Site status was designated in 2018.

Our Common Cause commons – Derwent, Bampton and Kinniside – are all given their own Areas of Distinctive Character and associated Landscape Character Types within the Lake District National Park Landscape Character Assessment and Guidelines (2008, updated 2018)

20

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

There are five relevant Landscape Character Types covering the Lakes commons. These are: • High Fell Fringe (Kinniside, Bampton) • Rugged, Craggy Volcanic High Fell (Bampton, Kinniside, Derwent) • Upland Valley (Bampton, Derwent) • Upland Limestone Farmland (Bampton) • Rugged, Angular Slate High Fell (Kinniside, Derwent)

Rugged, Craggy Volcanic High Fell is the predominant Landscape Character Type, found on all three Commons. This is the largest Landscape Character Type and covers land above the fell wall, encompassing a broad band running east to west across the central part of the Lake District. The underlying geology is the Borrowdale Volcanic Group of igneous rocks, with areas of granite to the west. At the largest scale, this type has a dome-shaped topography, with the highest point being Scafell Pike. From the highest point, ridges radiate out, with the landform gradually lowering towards the edges of the Lake District. Uplifting panoramic external views from the fell summits, including the Cumbria Coastal Plain, Irish Sea, Isle of Man and Morecambe Bay from western and southern fells, the North Pennines, Howgills and Yorkshire Dales from the Helvellyn Range and eastern fells. Superimposed on this are complex topographical patterns caused by glacial and fluvial erosion. Land cover is generally either bare rock, scree or low-growing vegetation, with low-density sheep grazing occurring over much of the area. There are scattered tarns and a complex network of becks. Woodland cover is most extensive along the valley margins, with important areas of juniper and native oak woodland (particularly extensive in Borrowdale), and small areas of commercial conifers (particularly in the west). The fell wall marks the edge of the open land, with remains of archaeologically earlier enclosures and field systems within upland areas. Settlement above the moorland line is limited to isolated farms, with hill farming the main form of activity, with very few occupied buildings. Archaeological remains of settlement and industrial sites are scattered within the Upland Fell landscape.

21

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Bampton Common (Area 26)

This Area of Distinctive Character is located at the eastern side of the Lake District National Park, between Ullswater and the Lowther valley. It forms the eastern slope of the northern part of the High Street ridge.

Distinctive characteristics for Bampton Common: • Open expanses of acid grassland, rough heather moorland and blanket bog form a plateau with a feeling of emptiness and isolation – these are vulnerable to overgrazing and inappropriate burning; • The smooth ridge of High Street on the western horizon sets the mood of the landscape, depending on weather and qualities of light; • Views east across the settled and broad Lowther Valley give a strong contrast to the desolate moorland; • Upland farms, surrounded by semi-improved and improved pasture, appear as pockets of bright green in the moorland landscape; • On lower ground, a complex patchwork of walled fields containing moorland, marshy ground, grazed fields and gorse give a mosaic of colours and textures in the landscape; • Clusters of trees associated with farm buildings and large numbers of infield and boundary trees; • The number of scattered farms, combined with the lack of visitors or tourist facilities gives this area a sense of a working landscape rather than a recreational one; • Predominantly a very tranquil landscape due to the openness and perceived naturalness of the heather moorland and valley. There is also a relative absence of settlements, minimal sources of artificial noise and few obvious signs of human influences; • Overall strong sense of remoteness, isolation and tranquillity.

Kinniside Common (Area 28) This Area of Distinctive Character is located in the west of the Lake District National Park, and extends across the National Park boundary.

Distinctive characteristics of Kinniside common: • A gradual transition in the form of the landscape from high crags in the east to a smoother profile in the west; • An expansive, wild upland landscape, with very few trees outside of the conifer plantations in the west. Views are unbroken by built features; • The fells are covered in moorland with patches of blanket bog and bracken on the lower slopes and valley bottoms, which in places are heavily grazed; • There are virtually no boundaries or enclosures as the whole area is grazed as a common; • Worm Gill, with its wide boulder-strewn valley bottom is a highly mobile and dynamic river system and an extremely important geo-morphological feature of the area;

22

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Archaeological evidence of previous settlement contrasts with the lack of development in the area today; • Blocks of forestry in the western part of the area fit awkwardly with the surrounding landscape; • Predominantly a very tranquil landscape, with a strong sense of wildness, due to the openness of the hills, relative absence of dwellings, minimal sources of artificial noise and few signs of human influence.

“Here the rocky scenes and mountain landscapes are diversified and contrasted with all that aggrandizes the object in most sublime style, and constitutes a picture the most enchanting of any in these parts.” Thomas West, ‘Guide to the Lakes’ (1778)

Derwent Common (Newlands Area 15)

The Newlands Valley is on the western side of the Lake District National Park between Derwentwater and Buttermere.

Distinctive characteristics of Derwent Common:

• The distinctive profile of Cat Bells, Maiden Moor and High Spy separates Newlands valley from Derwentwater, with the path erosion running along the ridge; • The three-branched form of the valley, with each branch containing its own stream, joining mid-way down the valley; • A settled upland valley, in its lower part, with deciduous vegetation, giving a sense of shelter and enclosure from the surrounding fells; • Settlement pattern of distinctive, vernacular hamlets and farmsteads on the edges of the valley floor with dry stone walls making an important contribution. • Upstream the valley becomes wilder, the open bare upland valleys devoid of habitation gently sloping upwards to the valley heads of. Newlands Pass and the Valley Head area; • Extensive areas of common land and strong traditions of Herdwick sheep farming; • The twisting Newlands Pass, over Newlands Hause, historic route into Buttermere; • A long history of mining and mineral extraction; • Predominantly a very tranquil landscape especially on the Derwent Fells away from the road crossing over Newlands Pass, due to the relative absence of dwellings and minimal sources of artificial noise.

National Character Area Profile 8. Cumbria High Fells includes the following Statements of Environmental Quality most of which are relevant to the Our Common Cause Project:

23

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

SEO1: Manage and enhance the expansive areas of fell and fell edge, for their world- renowned sense of place, the internationally important habitats and species they support, their historical and cultural heritage, and to protect soils, carbon stores and water resources.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Promoting sustainable and resilient pastoral upland farming systems and businesses that provide multiple benefits (including food, clean water, carbon storage, biodiversity and access) and strengthen landscape resilience to climate change. • Encouraging and promoting sustainable commons management, through a whole fell approach, with active collaboration of all common owners and rights holders to deliver multiple benefits, including hefted flocks. • Enhancing the full range of Lakeland fell habitats and species (heaths, blanket bog, grasslands, springs, flushes, valley mires, juniper and montane willow scrub, woodland, rock ledge and scree vegetation and suites of arctic alpine plants) through grazing regimes, that protect sensitive habitats and provide well vegetated swards to reduce rates of water run-off and prevent soil erosion. • Increasing grazing diversity via mixed grazing systems, including cattle, where appropriate. • Restoring blanket bog and other wetlands to store and sequester carbon, through extensive grazing and re-wetting (including grip blocking) to enable resilience to climate change. • Protecting the rich historical evidence of past settlement, farming and industry. • Restoring Schedules Monuments at risk, for example through managing vegetation and preventing erosion or vehicle damage. • Promoting the restoration and management of paths on popular routes, to benefit users and avoid soil erosion. • Protecting the tranquillity, remoteness, openness, night skies and views both inwards and outwards of the Cumbria High Fells.

SEO2: Manage and enhance the valleys, to improve the habitat network of pastures, meadows, wetlands and woodlands, within a matrix of improved pasture, and to protect traditional buildings and field patterns of drystone walls, hedges and boundary trees.

SEO3: Manage and enhance the water catchments, rivers, lakes, tarns and reservoirs for nature conservation, public enjoyment, recreation, water supply and flood management.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Managing fells, river banks, floodplains and wetlands for a robust vegetation cover, that reduces soil erosion and water run-off, through appropriate grazing regimes. • Encouraging woodland creation on areas at risk of soil and coarse sediment erosion, or of benefit to downstream flood amelioration, for example gills, steep slopes, river corridors and flood plains. • Restoring blanket bog and other wetlands through extensive grazing and re-wetting (including grip blocking) to ensure resilience to climate change.

24

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

SEO4: Manage existing woodlands, restore and expand native woodlands, trees and shrubs, for their nationally and internationally important habitats and species, cultural and historical heritage, and to help deliver climate change adaptation and mitigation, protect soils, improve water quality and supply wood fuel and other wood products.

SEO5: Improve opportunities for enjoyment and understanding of the landscape and promote local involvement in the planning and management of the Cumbria High Fells.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Increasing the public and professionals’ awareness of the role of the areas farmers in sustainably managing internationally important habitats that can provide food, clean water, protect soils, store carbon and provide access for recreation. • Increasing educational opportunities for visitors and local businesses, which lead to their support of the natural environment • Managing, improving and promoting access and recreational opportunities to land and water, ensuring that the special qualities of the area are maintained. • Promoting the management of development pressure and access to protect the sense of remoteness and tranquillity.

Shropshire Hills Description

The Shropshire Hills AONB is the largest area of upland in England between Exmoor and the south Pennines. Bordering the more extensive uplands of mid Wales, the Shropshire Hills comprise a number of distinct and contrasting hill areas, as a result of an unusually varied geology. The Long Mynd, Stiperstones and Clee Hills hold sweeps of moorland which are large in the local context, but relatively small compared to those in northern England. Many more hills are even more compact but are striking local landmarks and hold rough grassland and fragments of heathland among a gentle and beautiful enclosed landscape.

The AONB has 52 registered commons comprising 4,131ha (5% of the AONB), of which the largest five upland commons make up around 90%, most of the remainder being very small. The larger commons hold small but locally important populations of upland species including curlew, merlin and grayling butterfly. Woodlands, streams, ponds and wet flushes add diversity to both landscape and wildlife. The AONB’s upland streams form most of the headwaters of the River Teme catchment, which is a sub-unit of the Severn. The hills hold important archaeology, with a concentration of prehistoric hillforts, and in places the relics of former mining and quarrying.

Farming in the AONB includes much sheep and cattle, along with some mixed farming, arable and poultry. In a county where uplands are the minority, hill farmers arguably have less well-developed networks and support than in more extensive upland areas.

The accessibility of the Shropshire Hills and what they offer in a regional context makes them popular for recreation, though the area is off the well beaten tourist trails and many parts remain very quiet.

25

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

The Shropshire Hills Commons are found within only one landscape character type:

• High open moorland (Long Mynd Common, Stiperstones Common, Clee Liberty Common)

High open moorland is found only within the Shropshire Hills within Shropshire; on the tops of the Clee Hills, across much of The Long Mynd and the Stiperstones ridge, and to a more limited extent on nearby hills. These are largely unenclosed upland landscapes, notable for their extensive tracts of moorland. They derive from harder rocks including Precambrian and Ordovician sedimentary rocks and, on the summits of the Clee Hills, igneous Carboniferous dolerites. These give rise to shallow, impoverished soils, including peat, and block scree, which support a mosaic of heathland and rough grassland plant communities. Typical species include Heather and Common Bell Heather, Bilberry and grasses such as Red Fescue and Common Bent.

Further ecological diversity is added by the localised bogs and wet flushes, which often form stream sources. Tree cover is restricted to limited areas of scrub on some slopes, and regular blocks of conifer plantations towards the southern end of The Long Mynd and the eastern flanks of Brown Clee Hill. Consequently, these landscapes have a large scale and open character, which means that, from the ridge crests and gently undulating plateau tops, there are panoramic views. On the lower slopes, and particularly within the narrow steep sided valleys that occur in some places, known locally as ‘batches’ or ‘beaches’, views are often framed and the scale of the landscape is smaller.

Within the open moorland, barrows and other prehistoric earthworks survive well, as a result of the low intensity of historic land use. During the Middle Ages all of the areas where this type occurs within Shropshire were covered by forest law, which reserved the right to keep deer for the king. In most cases the moorland associated with them were intercommoned by the surrounding settlements. These common rights survived their eventual ‘disafforestation’ (i.e. the removal of their legal status as a forest) in the 14th century. Although some parts of the Long Mynd were temporarily brought into cultivation between the late 17th and early 19th

26

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

centuries, they remain largely unenclosed. However, limited areas of ancient fields and later smallholdings sometimes occur towards the edges of these landscapes, especially lower down the slopes and within some of the batches.

Signs of habitation are restricted to the scattered cottages and small farms associated with these field systems. On the Clee Hills these landscapes also contain extensive industrial remains associated with mining and quarrying. These industries first emerged in the Middle Ages and exploited the areas coal and ironstone deposits and, latterly, the local ‘dhustone’ (dolerite). Mining remains, related to the south-west Shropshire lead industry, can also be seen in places on the Stiperstones ridge.

Valued landscape attributes of this landscape character

• Upland plateau and slopes with extensive tracts of heathland • Largely unenclosed landscape with few signs of habitation • Large scale landscape, offering open views • Scattered prehistoric barrows and other earthworks • Narrow, steep sided valleys

National Character Area Profile 65. Shropshire Hills includes the following Statements of Environmental Quality some of which are relevant to the Our Common Cause Project:

SEO 1: Protect and enhance the unique character of the Shropshire Hills NCA – with its distinctive landforms, outstanding geology and diverse historic environment – to provide and maintain a sense of place, enhance biodiversity, and promote an enhanced understanding and enjoyment of the area.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Working with land managers and farmers to support food production – this, too, can have multiple benefits for biodiversity, soil quality, carbon storage, water quality, water availability and the landscape.

SEO 2: Create (where appropriate) significant amounts of characteristic woodland, wetland and grassland habitats to enhance and extend the strong habitat network, and to improve soil quality and the regulation of water.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Managing grassland and wetland favourably, through extensive grazing, to increase adaptation to climate change.

SEO 3: Conserve, manage and enhance the areas diverse historic environment, including its features and their settings (archaeological sites, buildings in a wide range of vernacular styles, and landmark features such as castles and hill forts).

27

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Key opportunities are identified as: • Encouraging land management practices and other proposals that conserve and enhance archaeological features, especially those identified as being at risk.

SEO 4: Promote – and enhance understanding and enjoyment of – the area, increase learning and educational opportunities, and manage recreation at well used and high-value locations to retain their conservation value and tranquillity, and to support sustainable tourism.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Maintaining and enhancing opportunities for access throughout the area, but particularly at popular destinations such as the Long Mynd, the Stiperstones….

Yorkshire Dales Description

The Yorkshire Dales National Park contains some 46,590 of registered common land which is some 26% of the current YDNP area. Significant areas of common land are also to be found in the adjacent Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the North Pennines, Nidderdale and the Forest of Bowland as well as the recently confirmed extensions to the YDNP in Cumbria and Lancashire.

A high proportion of this common land is designated as Site of Special Interest, Special Area for Conservation or Special protection Area, and most is in an agri-environment scheme agreement. The main habitats are blanket bog and wet and dry heath. Significant areas of deep peat are found on the commons and the Yorkshire Peat Partnership has restored some 12% by blocking drainage grips and revegetating bare peat.

Virtually all commons are utilised for grazing livestock, in the main Hill breeds of sheep mainly Swaledale, Dalesbred and Rough Fell, although a small proportion of commons have grazing cattle and ponies on them. Many are used for grouse shooting, particularly those in the north and east of the YDNP and are managed by rotational burning and have predator control undertaken through gamekeepers employed on the estates.

The commons are significant in the landscape of the YDNP forming the high ground between the Dales and are open access land since the CROW Act. They also contain a significant number of Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Historic Environment Record features, particularly associated with lead mining, although monuments dating from the prehistoric period to the second world war are found on the commons.

The Yorkshire Dales Commons are found within only one landscape character type:

• Moors and Fells (HDO) and then sub-divided into three further Landscape Character Areas; o 35.Southern Howgill Fells (Brant Fell) o 37. Three Peaks and Central Moors and Fell (Ingleborough) o 38. Eastern Gritstone Moors and Fells (Grassington Moor)

28

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Character Area 35. Southern Howgill Fells (Brant Fell) – Key characteristics:

• Massive, wild, open, and inaccessible upland, composed of Silurian rock overlain by moorland vegetation types and rock screes. • A series of velvet smooth, distinctive, well defined closely spaced ridges fan out from dome shaped fells to create long, steep sided dales and steep dark rocky gullies with occasional steep, tumbling waterfalls. • Many of the gills are steeply incised and cut through the overall smooth form of the fells, creating a sharp contrast in the form of gills and fells. • Virtually treeless; where trees occur, they cling to occasional exposed rock edges and rocky • valley sides • Expansive and exposed, the moorland provides largely unenclosed grazing for sheep and wild ponies. • Almost total absence of roads and settlement. • The smooth, deeply folded form of the uplands play host to a pattern of light and shade. • Long range views are available from the fell tops to the summits of Helvellyn to Ingleborough, and from Morecambe Bay to Cross Fell.

Character Area 37: Three Peaks & Central Moors and Fell (Ingleborough) – key characteristics:

• Elevated stepped hills formed by differential erosion of layered Yoredale Series limestones and sandstones, often with pronounced flat plateau tops, sub-divided by and overlooking the central dales. • Exposed peak sides are marked by sandstone and limestone crags and screes, sometimes forming dramatic, steep-sided, upstanding plateau peaks (e.g. Pen-y- ghent and Ingleborough Hill). • Deep drift deposits often mask underlying geology but are cut through by gulleys on steep hillsides to reveal stepped rock bands which often form waterfalls. • Isolated pockets of limestone karst scenery are exposed within the surrounding drift and along valley sides, creating areas of brighter grassland and typical limestone features including pavements, cliffs and screes. • Broadleaved tree cover is confined to scattered trees clinging to cliffs and rock outcrops in gulleys or on hillsides, or occasional small woodlands. At lower elevations tree cover increases in gills and along dale heads. • Extensive coniferous plantations form dark, alien intrusions across the centre of the area. • Moor tops are uninhabited. Occasional upland farms of traditional construction with some modern buildings are found on the dale fringes and at dale heads, usually close to rivers and roads and often associated with isolated pockets of limestone grassland.

29

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Drystone walls extend from the dale fringes to enclose rough pasture and sometimes sub-divide wider areas of moorland. Stone types are mixed, often changing in accordance with outcropping geology. Occasional isolated walled meadows associated with upland farms and field barns are found in limestone pockets. • Roads and footpaths are isolated in character with panoramic views of the central dales and Three Peaks, the Howgill Fells, Cumbrian Fells, west across the Bowland Fringe, Bowland Fells and north west to the Lake District.

Character Area 38: Eastern Gritstone Moors Moors and Fells (Grassington Moor) – key characteristics:

• Narrow band of elevated gritstone moorland, falling north and south from a central highpoint and forming the western edge of the much larger Nidderdale Millstone Grit plateau. • The main plateau comprises gently rounded hills with occasional stepping, giving way to more pronounced, lumpy knolls in the south of the area. • Gritstone crags and screes punctuate the rounded landforms, and are most prominent on the western edge of the plateau. • An exposed pocket of limestone geology forms a miniature karst landscape at Trollers Gill, with cliffs, screes, limestone grassland and ash/sycamore tree cover. • Steep-sided or rocky gills are cut through the gritstone, exposing underlying limestones and forming small waterfalls where rock ledges are crossed. In areas of deep drift deposits frequent erosion gulleys give hillsides a ribbed appearance. • Streams are shallow and rocky with steep, eroded sides of grass/heather covered banks, broadening to small rocky rivers at lower elevations. • Landcover is primarily acid grassland with extensive areas of upland heath, which are managed for grouse shooting and of international nature conservation value. • Tree cover is often absent from the open moors, with scattered oak, mountain ash and birch on lower slopes or contained within sheltered gills. Linear stands of alder line watercourses at lower elevations. Conifer plantations create an alien effect at the northern and southern edges of the area.

30

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Settlement is sparse primarily comprising farmsteads along road corridors, and also around Grimwith Reservoir and on the dales fringes. Buildings are a mixture of traditional and modern with associated tree cover, walled pasture and meadow and infrequent field barns. • Grimwith Reservoir forms a large-scale man-made feature in the centre of Appletreewick Moor but is broadly in sympathy with the open character of the moors. • The remains of lead mining, in the form of waste tips and disturbed ground, are strongly evident on Grassington and Conistone Moors and to a lesser degree in other areas at Trollers Gill and along the B6265 corridor. • With the exception of the busy A59 and, to a lesser extent the B6265, roads and footpaths are isolated in character with panoramic views of the eastern dales, southern dales fringe and east across the Nidderdale AONB. • Drystone walls enclose the dale fringes giving way to larger areas of moorland enclosure or open moor, which is contiguous with the Nidderdale Moors. Walls are constructed from gritstone except where exposed limestone geology is crossed where limestone is used.

National Character Area Profile 21. Yorkshire Dales includes the following Statements of Environmental Quality most of which are relevant to the Our Common Cause Project:

SEO 1: Protect the glacio-karst landscape and important geological sites, as well as the historical environment, including drystone walls and field barns, to retain sense of place and the strong relationship between the landscape and the underlying geology.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Preventing damage to archaeological and geological features from people, livestock or land use, by encouraging sympathetic land use/management and managing public access with suitable information. • Encouraging specialist groups (such as cavers and climbers) to help with monitoring difficult- to-reach sites and associated species. • Maintaining through appropriate land use, and where appropriate restoring, the area’s distinctive and well-preserved archaeology of land use, settlement and industrial activity, • Managing semi-natural habitat to enhance the visibility and condition of distinctive geological and archaeological features.

SEO 2: Protect and enhance the distinctive pastoral character of the dales with its network of semi-natural habitats to enhance water quality, strengthen connectivity, support rare species and allow for adaptation to climate change.

Key opportunities are identified as: • Protecting, enhancing, extending and linking semi-natural habitats, particularly upland hay meadows, calcareous grasslands and native woodland, to form resilient, well-functioning habitat networks.

31

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Designing and using future environmental schemes in such a way that existing meadows and other habitats can be preserved and extended, and use of traditional breeds supported, while allowing farmers to run viable businesses. • Restoring wetland habitats such as fens, wet grassland and water meadows to create areas that will not only support rare species of plants, birds and invertebrates but will also help to hold back floodwater, filter water pollutants and provide seasonal grazing for livestock. • Controlling the spread of invasive species which are a threat to native species and habitats.

SEO 3: Protect, enhance and restore the open moorland and blanket bogs to conserve their internationally important habitats and species, strong sense of place, history and remoteness, and peat soils, with their ability to sequester and store carbon and contribute to water quality.

Key opportunities are identified as:

• Restoring areas of blanket bog and wet heath by grip blocking, revegetating bare areas and encouraging establishment of sphagnum, thereby reactivating peat formation processes. • Enhancing the full range of moorland habitats by working with land managers to develop moorland management plans that provide for sustainable land management which secures a network of habitats that: are ecologically robust; have optimal resilience to climate change; support livestock production and sporting use; preserve the valuable archaeological record; and support the internationally important habitats and bird species for which they were designated. • Working with land managers to secure sympathetic management of adjacent land and habitats will also help to improve the condition of moorland and provide the range of habitats needed by priority species. • Encouraging and managing responsible recreational use so as to minimise soil erosion, disturbance to wildlife and wildfire risk, while increasing understanding of the moorland environment. • Maintaining open, undeveloped moorland areas to retain the tranquillity, sense of remoteness and panoramic views by encouraging maintenance of hefted flocks and considering the landscape impact before introducing new fences, tracks and other infrastructure.

SEO 4: Plan for and sustainably manage high visitor numbers to maintain access to and enjoyment of the Dales landscape, while maintaining a living, working landscape, and protecting the tranquillity valued by visitors and local residents.

Key opportunities are identified as:

• Enhancing signage, paths, parking and other facilities to minimise congestion, erosion and other problems, as well as continuing to provide information to help visitors to understand the importance and vulnerability of the area. • Encouraging and facilitating more recreational and educational visits from groups which are poorly represented among existing visitor numbers.

32

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Encouraging people to use the Dales as an ‘Outdoor Classroom’ for schools and colleges by supporting outdoor activity centres, educational access farm visits. • Encouraging voluntary groups and local people to help with monitoring climate change and its impacts on local wildlife.

SEO 5: Protect, enhance and extend, as appropriate, existing native woodland in this largely unwooded landscape in order to improve habitat connectivity, benefit wildlife, improve water quality, reduce flooding and soil erosion, sequester carbon and provide wood fuel.

What do our Upland Commons have in common?

From the descriptions of Landscape character and valued attributes it is very clear that all our project commons reflect similar landscape character attributes and key qualities. These can be summarised as:

• Climate defined by higher altitude and exposed areas – high winds, cool air and high levels of precipitation • Open, windswept upland moors with far reaching views and a sense of remoteness and wildness • large expanses of grass and heather moorland, blanket bogs, and valley mires providing habitats for distinctive wildlife • a varied geology, which is the basis for the habitats above ground and the source of a wide range of valued minerals including tin, copper and lead • timelessness and tranquility - places spared many of the intrusions of modern life, with dark night-time skies, peace and quiet • unrivalled opportunities to roam at will over the extensive open moorland, and frequently an exceptional access network for walking, riding and cycling • traditional farming practices, using the commons for extensive grazing of hardy cattle, sheep and ponies including locally distinctive breeds • clean water and carbon storage - the catchment areas for many rivers and streams – the blanket bog and valley mires store carbon as peat and provide an important water store helping to regulate the flow of water • some of the most important archaeological landscapes in western Europe • inspirational landscapes alive with legends and myths that have inspired art and literature through the centuries and which continue to inspire today.

2.4 Landscape Management Mechanisms Although our project area encompasses land in four geographically dispersed parts of England, the management mechanisms which determine how the land is managed, who is responsible for its management and the strategies which are in place to support this will largely be the same across all areas.

33

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

A common misconception about Commons is that they are publicly owned and therefore available as a ‘public’ resource. Commons are in fact privately owned by a wide range of individuals, organisations, charities and indeed companies – some examples, just taking our project commons include private individuals and large estates (including the Duchy of Cornwall for example), the National Trust, Natural England, Parish Councils, National Park Authorities, South West Water, United Utilities. This ownership is an important factor in how commons are managed and maintained today.

Each common then has a specified number of ‘rights in common’ which are owned by individual commoners to graze livestock (usually sheep, cattle and ponies), although in different parts of the country this could include the right to graze pigs, collect timber or turfs for fuel, to fish or the rights to extract minerals from below the ground. These rights are held within the ownership of the surrounding farms and are passed on with generations of farmers or when the ownership of a farm changes. The register of common rights is held and managed by Local Authorities or in the unique case of Dartmoor by the Dartmoor Commoners’ Council (under the Dartmoor Commons Act 1985). Individual commoners are supported in most cases by a Commoners Association for an individual common, and by a County based Federation of Commoners (e.g. Federation of Cumbria Commoners, Federation of Yorkshire Commoners) or Commons Council (e.g. Dartmoor Commoners’ Council).

This complexity of land ownership and the collaborative nature of commoning (with many having the right to use the same area of land) is what makes the management of commons so interesting but also such a challenge. The objectives of management may be quite different say, between one or more of the owners on adjacent bits of common, between the owner and the commoners, or indeed between the commoners on the same common. This complexity is at the heart of what Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons is trying to achieve with our aim to secure better management and increased public understanding of upland commons.

Not withstanding the complexities of land ownership and management of commons there are a raft of public bodies and strategies that seek to support the effective management of commons and the particularly relevant ones are summarised below.

Current and proposed Defra Agri-Environment support schemes

The current farming and agri-environment support - in the shape of Basic Payments and Stewardship Schemes (Higher Level Stewardship) are changing. Basic Payments are disappearing under current Government policy in a phased reduction, disappearing entirely by 2027, and current Stewardship Schemes which support environmental outcomes are completing within the next couple of years – most of our commons have schemes finishing this year or in 2020. There is reluctance in some cases to apply to the replacement Scheme, Countryside Stewardship due to uncertainty over the introduction of new schemes. This changing funding regime will have a fundamental impact on upland commons and the farmers who manage them alongside the home farms which surround them. Upland farmers, commoners amongst them, are the most vulnerable to changes in support as their farming systems and livelihoods are already marginal and heavily reliant on payments.

34

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

New Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS) are planned to come on line in 2024, although Government guidance states that ELMS won’t be available to all until probably 2028. There is further discussion on this in Section 4 Threats and Opportunities.

The Protected Area Bodies (supported by Defra) form one of the main additional support mechanisms and influencers of land management within each of our four areas. Their key Plans are mentioned below.

Dartmoor National Park Management Plan 2014-2019

The Dartmoor National Park Management Plan is the strategic plan for the National Park, guiding decisions affecting Dartmoor’s future over a 5-year period. The current Management Plan is being reviewed and updated during 2019.

The Management Plan places farming and grazing at the heart of the plan, stating that Dartmoor has been a stock-grazing area for at least 4,000 years, and that it is this kind of farming that has made the Dartmoor landscape worthy of National Park Status.

Dartmoor’s Special Qualities are listed as: • Open moors • Sheltered valleys • Enclosed farmland • Varied geology • Timelessness and Tranquillity • An exceptional rights of way network • Traditional farming practices • Clean water • One of the most important archaeological landscape in western Europe • Historic buildings, structures and townscapes • Resourceful rural communities • An Inspirational landscape • Opportunities for discovery, challenge and adventure for all

Some relevant drivers for change and challenges facing the Park are given as: • Ensuring the future viability of farming on Dartmoor including farm succession • Under-grazing in some areas of the moor leading to dense vegetation, in places changing the open character of the landscape, affecting habitats and impeding access. • Intensive grazing (and recreational pressure) on parts of the moor leading to degradation of heathland habitats. • Decline in the number of active graziers managing the commons. • The importance of good land management on Dartmoor to maintain clean water supplies • Uncontrolled burns (wild fires) affecting water quality and loss of carbon stored in peat.

35

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Animal and plant health, including the spread of non-native species and increases in disease • Some habitats and wildlife under threat from inappropriate management, fragmentation, invasive non-native species and climate changes. • Loss of tranquillity due to light pollution, increased traffic, large-scale events and active sports. • Heritage assets at risk including threats to archaeology from increased vegetation on the moor, climate change, poor condition of listed buildings, and loss of character of conservation areas. • Loss of cultural heritage such as threats to local fairs and traditions • Improving understanding and appreciation of Dartmoor by a wide range of people.

Lake District Management Plan 2015-2020

The Lake District National Park Management Plan 2015-2020 sets out how the partners are working together to proactively and effectively manage the Lake District as a National Park and as a [prospective] World Heritage Site. World Heritage Site status gained in 2018, recognises the area as one of the most important cultural landscapes in the world. This status comes with a set of obligations that have influenced the directions of management set out in the Plan. At the heart of this is the requirement to maintain and enhance the Outstanding Universal Value of the Site which is the cultural and, or natural significance which is so exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity. As such, the permanent protection of this heritage is of the highest importance to the international community as a whole.

The English Lake District’s Outstanding Universal Value comes from a landscape which reflects an outstanding fusion between a distinctive communal farming system (including common land, hefting, stone walled field and the field system) that has been present for at least a millennium and a “designed landscape” with improvements of villas, picturesque planting and gardens during the 18th and 19th centuries.

The Special Qualities of the Lake District National Park are listed as: • World Class Cultural Landscape • Complex Geology and Geomorphology • Rich Archaeology and Historic Landscape • Unique Farming Heritage and Concentration of Common Land • The High Fells • Wealth of Habitats and Wildlife • Mosaic of Lakes, Tarns, Rivers and Coast • Extensive Semi-Natural Woodlands • Distinctive Buildings and Settlement Character • A Source of Artistic Inspiration • A Model for Protecting Cultural Landscapes • A Long Tradition of Tourism and Outdoor Education • Opportunities for Quiet Enjoyment

36

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

As well as being specifically mentioned as a Special Quality of the Lake District in itself, alongside farming heritage, Commons are a significant aspect of some of the other Special Qualities too, including rich archaeology and historic landscape, wealth of habitats and wildlife, opportunities for quiet enjoyment.

The Plan refers to an evolved pastoral system still in continuation today which includes the largest concentration of common land in the United Kingdom (64,544ha) – Hefted grazing, collective management of land, traditional breeds including Herdwick sheep and hardy cattle, communal gathers, shepherds meets, agricultural shows, and local dialect create a unique heritage.

The following have been identified as key risks to the LDNPA being able to develop its Vision by 2030: • Climate change • Reconciling the tensions between managing the cultural landscape and enhancing the natural environment • Biodiversity decline • Disease and pests, including non-native species • Visitor management • Impacts of development • Decline of rural communities and rural isolation.

The Plans Strategy for ‘Spectacular Landscape, Wildlife and Cultural Heritage’ gives support to the maintenance of traditional upland farming in the Lake District based on the open fell grazing of local breeds of livestock including the Herdwick sheep. This includes support for coordinated commons management, breeders’ associations, and the culture and traditions which underpin this farming system to ensure these attributes which demonstrate Outstanding Universal Value are retained. It also supports initiatives and land management practices that specifically adapt to and mitigate the predicted effects of climate change, by reducing the Lake District’s carbon budget whilst also sustaining the Special Qualities and attributes of Outstanding Universal Value.

Shropshire Hills AONB Management Plan 2019-2024

The AONB Management Plan is a place-based plan derived through local partnership and consensus. It seeks to define the approach to conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the AONB through the application of local solutions to local challenges that also respect the national and international importance of the AONB.

The character and quality of the Shropshire Hills landscape are of high importance but under increasing pressure. The condition of some of the special qualities of the AONB is declining. Improvements resulting from much conservation activity, e.g. on Sites of Special Scientific Interest and through agri-environment schemes, are accompanied by some declines in biodiversity and failure to make meaningful progress with certain water quality and

37

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

catchment management issues. The Plan emphasises that farming, especially in the uplands, is at an important crossroads as we head towards new UK policy and funding regimes.

The hills define the identity of the area and are the backbone of the landscape. They contain commons, heath, moorland and rough grasslands, and are home to a variety of upland birds including curlew, red grouse and merlin.

The following have been identified as the key issues for the AONB: • The future of farming - new UK policy and funding for land management and the Shropshire Hills response • How to achieve more, bigger, better and joined up wildlife habitats and resilient ecosystems • Pressure for economic development and growth, and risks of loss of sustainability • Better care for the historic environment, enhancing its potential to benefit society • The need to gain support for public benefits from the landscape • The changing public sector and increasing need to harness volunteer effort and funds • Need to raise awareness of the AONB and of work to look after it • Need for a stronger structure and robust governance for the AONB organisation, and stable delivery for the AONB team

Specifically, on hills and common land the Plan points out that upland heathlands and grasslands are some of the largest areas of high-quality habitat within the AONB facing a number of threats including marginality of upland farming, recreation pressure and climate change. Priorities for action for common land include grazing to maintain open habitats in good condition, enhancing wetlands and wooded areas.

Yorkshire Dales National Park Management Plan 2019-2024

The Management Plan is described as the single most important document for the National Park – setting out the Vision, strategic policies, and outcomes for the Park over the long term. It has as a guiding principle that it will be delivered working with, and through, local people. The Plan sets itself in the context of Brexit and the Government’s recent 25 Year Environment Plan.

Special Qualities of the Yorkshire Dales national Park are listed as: • Natural Beauty - including fells which rise to over 700 metres and a traditional pastoral landscape • Wildlife - including 57,000ha of nationally and internationally important wildlife habitats - the largest area of any English National Park, and extensive areas of moorland containing upland heath, blanket and raised bog • Cultural heritage – including livestock farming with its distinctive sheep breeds and a strong tradition of upland cattle rearing, and an exceptional range of archaeology

38

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Enjoying the experience of being here – expansive views and a true sense of tranquillity, remoteness and solitude, dark night skies, an historic and extensive access network and extensive areas of public access.

The Plan includes the following relevant objectives of management under six elements of its overall vision: • During Brexit transition, support farmers and landowners to continue to deliver a range of public benefits through national agri-environment scheme agreements • Help local people to restore and repair nationally important historical sites, buildings and structures to reduce scheduled monuments and listed buildings At Risk • Develop a locally tailored, locally delivered outcome-focused environmental land management scheme to maintain, restore and improve outstanding natural capital of the Park • Provide people from under-represented groups with activity days that enable them to access the special qualities of the National Park • Work with organisers of large-scale events to ensure they are well run and contribute to maintenance of the Park’s natural capital • Develop and launch annual farm open day programme to enable more people to experience and understand the role of farming • Support farmers and landowners to restore and manage landscape-scale mosaics of priority habitats • Work with farmers and landowners to achieve and maintain stable or increasing populations for 90% of priority species • Support landowners to create at least a further 450ha of native woodland, with priority given to projects which strengthen habitat networks, increase carbon storage and help to reduce flooding • Restore all degraded blanket bog/ deep peat habitat to ecologically and hydrologically functioning bog • Work with farmers and landowners to deliver landscape-scale natural flood management • Support land managers to create more resilient landscapes through strategies that reduce the risk and spread of invasive non-native species and respond to threats from pests and diseases that threaten the environment of the National Park • Develop and promote new events, festivals and attractions based on the National Park’s special qualities.

National Trust key strategy - LON Framework

Robert Hunter, one of the founders of the National Trust, wrote the National Trust Act 1907 - the original constitution which created the National Trust as it is today - with the protection of common land in mind. He created in the Trust a body which could not only own common land, but was also both required to keep it as public open space and prevented from building on it (except in very limited ways). Coupled with the Trust’s ability to declare their land inalienable they could guarantee that common land under their ownership would be held for the enjoyment by the public forever.

39

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

The National Trust looks after almost 50,000ha of common land (20% of its overall land ownership) in England and Wales including three of our 12 project commons - the Trust’s Land, Outdoors and Nature (LON) Framework is particularly relevant in terms of how the Trust plans to manage upland commons in its ownership. The LON Framework is the starting point for determining how the Trust will deliver its strategic ambition to restore a healthier, more beautiful natural environment. It has objectives to improve the condition of 100% of A/SSSIs and existing priority habitats within its ownership (features for ‘Nature and Wildlife’ scoring ‘High’ or ‘Very High’) and to ensure all Trust land is managed to a High Nature Status (land scoring 1 or 2 in Land Condition Assessment). Management of upland commons is therefore a significant area of activity for the organisation to influence if it is to achieve its strategic ambitions around the Land, Outdoors and Nature Programme. If not tackled through a programme like this, commons could well be a barrier to achieving the Trust’s ambitions in the uplands in forthcoming years.

Beyond these, are strategies from non-government bodies and from national government which pave the way for emerging policy on land management which will affect how our upland commons will be managed in the future, and what public benefits the public will expect to see them provide.

State of Nature Report 2019

The State of Nature Report 2019 (State of Nature Partnership) documents how human impacts are driving sweeping changes in wildlife in the UK. It presents an overview of how the country’s wildlife is faring, looking back over nearly 50 years of monitoring as well as a focus on what has happened in the last decade.

The report finds that the abundance and distribution of the UK’s species has, on average declined since 1970 and many stats suggest this decline has continued during the last 10 years. Key findings are given as:

• 13% decline in average species’ abundance • 5% decline in average species’ distribution • 41% species have declined in abundance • 53% of species showing rapid changes in abundance • 15% of species threatened • By 2020 most international Convention on Biological Diversity targets will not be met

The report cites the main causes of this overall decline as:

Agricultural management – identified as the single most significant factor in driving species’ populations downwards.

Climate change – identified as the second most significant factor, causing range and population change in sensitive species, alongside landscape-scale alteration to vulnerable habitats.

40

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Urbanisation – the end result of greater urbanisation is that habitat is reduced and that species are separated from the habitats they rely upon to survive; although urbanisation is not always found to result in biodiversity loss.

Pollution – a wide range of pollutants, from many sources, threaten wildlife and have an impact on all habitats.

Hydrological change – species reliant on the range of wet habitats affected by these changes have seen long-term declines and face ongoing pressures of unsustainable water extraction and the continuing drainage and conversion of wetlands to other uses.

Invasive Non-Native Species, Pests and Pathogens – as humans continue to move species around the globe and release them into the wild, so the consequential economic, environmental and social impacts will grow.

Woodland – the area covered by woodland continues to increase from very low levels a century ago, but its integrity in under threat from invasive plants, pests and diseases. Nature in woodland is under pressure from a lack of management, overgrazing by deer, increasing recreational disturbance, nitrogen pollution, infrastructure and housing development.

The report goes on to conclude that actions to help nature, to mitigate against the worst human impacts and nurture recovery are valuable, and should include-

• conserving special places (nature reserves and designated areas); • restoration at a landscape scale (more, bigger, better and joined up); • focusing on species when landscape-scale conservation is not sufficient; • broader and better integrated environmental policy; and the • necessary resources for conservation.

Government 25-year Plan for the Environment

The 25-year plan published in 2018 sets out the Government’s ambitions to help the natural world regain and retain good health. It aims to deliver cleaner air and water for our cities and rural landscapes, protect threatened species and provide richer wildlife habitats. It calls for an approach to agriculture, forestry, land use and fishing that puts the environment first.

The Plan sets out action on a number of fronts – and gives 6 areas where action will be focused:

• Using and managing land sustainably including policies to improve how we manage and incentivise land management (designing and delivering the new environmental land management system), to improve soil health and protection of our peatlands, and to expand the use of natural flood management; • Recovering nature and enhancing the beauty of landscapes including policies to protect and recover nature, conserve and enhance natural beauty (reviewing National Parks and AONBs) and respect nature in how we use water;

41

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Connecting people with the environment to improve health and wellbeing including policies to help people improve their health and wellbeing by using the natural environment and encouraging children to be close to nature; • Increasing resource efficiency, and reducing pollution and waste; • Securing clean, productive and biologically diverse seas and oceans; • Protecting and improving the global environment including policies to tackle climate change.

Glover Landscapes Review of National Parks and AONBs 2019

The Glover Landscapes Review of National Parks and AONBs carried out over 2018-2019 is the most significant review of designated landscapes in England in many years, and has sought to make recommendations which, if implemented, will help them to deliver much more. It leads with the strapline ‘We want our national landscapes to work together with big ambitions, so they are happier, healthier, greener, more beautiful and open to everyone.’ and focuses its recommendations around five key areas:

• Landscapes Alive for Nature and Beauty • Landscapes for everyone • Living in Landscapes • More special places • New ways of working

The following messages from the Review are of particular relevance to Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

- All national landscapes should be priorities for ELMS payments delivering nature recovery and other benefits through farming - Strengthened Management Plans should set clear priorities and actions for nature recovery including wilder areas and the response to climate change (notably tree planting and peatland restoration). - A stronger mission to connect all people with our national landscapes and to do much more to reach out and welcome new groups of people in particular young people, black, Asian and minority ethnic communities and to encourage health and wellbeing - National landscapes working for vibrant communities - fostering the social and economic wellbeing of local communities.

42

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

3 Statement of Significance As explained above, the project takes as examples twelve commons across the English uplands which vary hugely in terms of ownership, geology, habitat, management and visitor numbers – what they share is significant natural and cultural heritage and that they are all reliant on commoning to maintain and enhance their special qualities and significance.

3.1 What is significance? Significance is a way of valuing the qualities that make something special, and for a landscape that might be expressed in terms of a designation – a National Nature Reserve or a Site of Special Scientific Interest – or a more subjective (but no less valuable) reflection on its place in people’s lives…”there’s been a community picnic on the common on May Day ever since I can remember.”

Significance might be:

▪ Archaeological Interest – the potential of a place to yield information about past activities and so contribute to an understanding of the past ▪ Historical Interest – the way in which past people, events or activities can link to current people, events or activities ▪ Landscape Interest – landscape value including geological importance of a site ▪ Environmental Interest – the potential of a place to mitigate the effects of climate change ▪ Biodiversity Interest – the extent to which a place supports priority species and habitats ▪ Cultural Interest – how a place supports aesthetic or physical or intellectual pursuits ▪ Community and Social Interest – the meanings of a place for people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in collective experience or memory including perceptions of identity and distinctiveness

Significance under each of these categories can be:

▪ INTERNATIONAL: anything that is considered important globally ▪ EUROPEAN: anything that is important in a European context ▪ NATIONAL: anything that is nationally important or protected by UK statute or designated in some way ▪ REGIONAL: anything that is important or designated within a regional context ▪ LOCAL: anything that is important locally

3.2 The Significance of our Commons Heritage Eleven of the twelve project commons are of national significance for their archaeological interest as a result of the Scheduled Ancient Monuments they feature, and

all twelve have further historic environment features.

43

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

All twelve are of national significance for historic interest through an unbroken lineage of commoning from the 13th century to the present day. They are also of local significance for community and social interest for the same reason.

Three are of international significance for historic interest through being part of a World Heritage Site, with the remaining nine being of national significance through being within National Parks or Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Six of the twelve are of national significance for landscape interest with one being of national significance and two of regional significance for their geological interest.

Three are of regional significance for environmental interest for their impact on drinking water quality, with two of regional significance for environmental interest for their current and potential role in managing flood water.

One is of international significance and the remaining eleven are of European significance for biodiversity interest through supporting Red List species (avian, invertebrate and mammal)

and habitats.

Two are of national significance and ten of local significance for their cultural interest through being attractive to visitors, both local and from further afield

All twelve are of local significance for community and social interest, through their role at the heart of community life for hundreds of years

Individually the commons are special in their own right, Ingleborough and Long Mynd being names many people would recognise. Even if their common land status is as yet unappreciated, their national cultural interest for recreation is well known.

Dartmoor is similarly renowned – the general population may not know that its national significance for historic interest is because there’s barely a hectare without significant archaeological remains under the soil, but its reputation as an unparalleled location for outdoor activities – most recently illustrated by Bear Grylls subjecting Gareth Southgate to “raw terror” on national TV – is well known.

The World Heritage site status of the Lake District, which includes Bampton, Derwent and Kinniside commons, recognises international significance in a landscape “shaped by farming, industry, picturesque landscape design and the conservation movement”.

44

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

And on a much smaller scale, the Small Pearl-bordered Fritillary butterflies on Clee Liberty common are of national significance due to their endangered status, but are also of huge local significance simply because people love and value them, and want to protect them on “their” common.

The challenge facing many of our commons – “negative significance”:

One of the five commons of national significance for archaeological interest is, alarmingly, on the Historic England Heritage at Risk Register (2019). This is because the number of visitors it attracts – its national significance for cultural, recreational and educational interest – is slowly and unwittingly destroying its national significance for archaeological interest.

3.3 The Significance of Commoning The project commons are primarily grazed by nine native breeds of sheep:

▪ Dalesbred ▪ Herdwick

▪ Lleyn ▪ Rough Fell ▪ Scotch Blackface ▪ Swaledale ▪ Welsh Hill Speckled ▪ Welsh Mountain ▪ Whiteface Dartmoor

Three native breeds of cattle:

▪ Aberdeen Angus ▪ Galloway ▪ South Devon

And four native equine breeds:

▪ Dartmoor Ponies ▪ Dartmoor Hill Ponies ▪ Fell Ponies ▪ Welsh Ponies

All are included in the Rare Breeds Survival Trust’s Watchlist 2019/20, which identifies “at risk” native breeds (sheep, cattle, equine, pigs, goats and poultry) based on Defra and UK Breed Society figures for pure-bred ewes and offspring.

Through being directly descended from pure-bred flocks going back many generations (in some cases over many hundreds of years), the sheep on the project commons are of national significance for their historic interest. Also nationally significant – and unique to our country – is the hefting system, where sheep are aware of and keep to their own distinct areas of a common without the need for fencing.

45

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Looking after these flocks are several hundred active commoners, equally hardy and determined to make a living off some of the poorest and most challenging pasture in the UK.

For commoners what they are doing isn’t heritage of course, it’s the job that underpins their way of life. It just happens to be a job that happens in the same place, using the same sort of sheep, using tools and techniques – with the exception of quad bikes – that haven’t changed over centuries.

Heritage for the commoners is in their flock, where carefully-managed bloodlines go back generations, and where the health and vigour of their sheep is evidence of the care of their own forebears.

Commoners and commoning are of local significance for their historical interest, as in most cases the commoners’ rights have been handed down with the family farm. They are also of local significance for their community and social interest, for their role at the heart of local and regional communities.

Commoners’ rights are of national significance for their historical interest because they are a tangible contemporary illustration of a largely invisible (to the layman) ancient agricultural system and are also of local significance for their cultural and community interest because of the long-standing links they reveal between families, farms and land.

All of the above – sheep, commoners, commoning and rights – are considered heritage at risk: on most of the project commons the number of active commoners has dropped significantly over the last 20 years, in some places by as much as 50%. And with regard to the land itself, in December 2018 the Ministry of Defence pushed through the de-registration of 3,230 hectares of common land in Cumbria, despite protest from local communities, commoners and the Foundation for Common Land.

46

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Sheep numbers on many of the project commons have also dropped by 50%, and whilst it could be argued that in some areas less intensive grazing is no bad thing, the lowering of sheep numbers has a direct effect on the viability of farms, making the already marginal activity of commoning even more economically precarious.

And if the farm stops commoning, or fails altogether, the impact is not just on the farm; Ingham and Yorke, land agents for the Ingleborough Estate in the Yorkshire Dales, explained that productive commoning is also essential to the land outside the common, because farmers graze that in addition to the common land – the combined use of the two (sometimes with the addition of farmers’ own land) are what make hill farming viable. So, if the farms weren’t viable then the wider Estate wouldn’t be either; the financial and community wellbeing of the Estate and the village at its centre – the lives of all the families in the many tenanted cottages, the primary school and local businesses (related to farming and not) – are thus directly related to the efficient functioning of the common.

3.4 Sense of place – people’s attitudes and feelings about significance Designations and statistics aren’t the only measure of significance of course, and can only tell us so much; just as important are more personal and subjective attitudes and feelings:

“It’s open space. It’s got a tradition of people using land that

doesn’t belong to them. It’s an amazing thing, a public good

that’s better for the whole of society, that is being looked after for

everybody’s benefit.”

‘It’s so important. How can you put a value on that? This area is the green lung for so many “I scrambled up to the top just people.” as the mist lifted. I nearly

cried at the beauty of it.”

“…commoning is the thread that runs through all of this. Our common has active commoners who want to continue grazing their livestock, but commoning is a marginal business and vulnerable to external forces and the heritage may be lost…”

47

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

“Didn’t know we could come to this sort of

place…thought it was private and we might get shouted at…but it’s great, so much space…I’m going to bring the kids…”

“It feels satisfying. You feel you’re doing something good. It’s quite a noble cause, is feeding the nation, even on our small scale, and looking after the landscape…following in the footsteps of those who have gone before.”

“I’ve even seen a sundew on Ingleborough and I’ve never seen a sundew anywhere else”.

“I mean there’s nothing more natural and better for the environment than a lamb coming off Ingleborough, going through the food chain, and being eaten in Ingleton or Bentham or within 10 miles. That’s a sustainable food process.”

“On my bit of the moor…there is a lot of peat restoration going on, grip blocking. Managing land for “I’d love to take my animals into breeding waders involves mainly Leeds, there’s a square right in the rush control – creating a middle and we could set ourselves patchwork and mosaic” up and show people what we’re about…and then maybe they could come to us later, for lambing and gathers and so on…”

48

Table of project commons showing designations and other markers of significance

Bampton Brant Fell Bridestowe Clee Liberty Derwent Grassington Harford & Holne Ingleborough Kinniside Long Mynd Stiperstones and Sourton Moor Ugborough

World Heritage Site x x x National Park x x x x x x x x x Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty x x x Biosphere Reserve x Special Area of Conservation x x x x Site of Special Scientific Interest x x x x x x x x x x x

National Nature Reserve x x x Geological Conservation Review & RIGS x x x Heritage at Risk Register x Scheduled Ancient Monument x x x x x x x x x x x

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Bampton Brant Fell Bridestowe Clee Liberty Derwent Grassington Harford & Holne Ingleborough Kinniside Long Mynd Stiperstones and Sourton Moor Ugborough

Historic environment x x x x x x x x x Landscape value x x x x x x x x x x x x Water quality

x x x x x x Natural Flood Management x x x x

Priority Habitat* x x x x x x x x x x x x Priority species* x x x x x x x x x x x x Heritage stock x x x x x x x x x x x x Cultural, recreational and educational x x x x x x x x x x x x interest Community and social interest x x x x x x x x x x x x

*included in either Birds of Conservation Concern Red List or Section 41 Natural Environment and Rural Communities BAP list.

50

3.5 A Brief History of Upland Commons in England Below is a brief historical description of the development of commons in the form of a timeline. This illustrates the ancient origin of commons and commoning which has existing from the Domesday Book to the current day and shows some key dates in their history and development.

Also described is a historical perspective of trends in commons and commoning, illustrating a decline in number and size of commons and changes in tradition of commoning.

A timeline of Commons Legislation and key historical dates2

“There is a law of neighbourhood which does not leave a man perfect master on his own ground” … “ancient custom is always reckoned as law”.3 As noted here, most commons are based on ancient rights under British common law that pre-dates laws passed by parliament.

1086 the Domesday Book: some common land referenced here survives as common land today.

1217 communal grazing rights were recognised and enshrined in the Charter of the Forest and administered locally in manorial courts.

1285 Commons Act: Statute of Merton 1235 and statute of Westminster 1285 embraced the principle that there remained “sufficient pasture on the wastes‟ for their tenants.”4

1593: legal access to specific areas of common land began in London.

1750 – 1850 Enclosure Acts: a series of private Acts of Parliament which facilitated the enclosure of large areas of common, especially arable, hay-meadows and better pasture land.

1876 Commons Act: some 36 commons in England and Wales were regulated. The act also enabled the confirmation of Orders providing for the enclosure of common land or common fields.

1896 rebellion: the last rural rebellion in England of rural peasants trying to prevent further loss of the commons.

1925 Property Act: required that Commons give rights of “air and exercise” to the public - pedestrians and horse-riders. This had been taken for granted for centuries.

Commons Act 1899: provides a mechanism of enabling district councils and National Park authorities today to manage commons where their use for exercise and recreation is the prime consideration and where the owner and commoners do not require a direct voice in the management, or where the owner cannot be found. There are at least 200 schemes of management made under the 1899 act.

2 Much of the information in this section is drawn from Humphries, 2019 and Edwards, 2017. 3 Edmund Burke, 1796. Cited in Humphries, 2019 4 H&H Bowe, 2008.

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

1925 Property Act: forms the core of English property law, has two provisions for common land:

▪ Section 193 gave the right of the public to "air and exercise" on Metropolitan commons and those in pre-1974 urban districts and boroughs. This constituted about one fifth of the commons, but the 1925 Act did not give this right to commons in essentially rural areas (although some urban districts had remarkably rural extent, such as the Lakes Urban District), which had to wait for the 2000 CROW Act.

▪ Section 194 restricted the enclosure of commons, which would now require Ministerial consent.

1955 - 1958 Royal Commission: established to “recommend what changes in the law if any are desirable to: promote the benefit of those holding manorial rights; the enjoyment of the public; and where little or no use is currently made – to recommend other desirable purposes”. The outcome included a proposal to establish a database of facts about common land, its extent, location, ownership together with a register of right-holders and their rights. This was to be followed by management legislation as a second stage.

1965 Commons Registration Act: required that all Commons and common rights be registered before a certain date after which, if they had not done so, the rights would be extinguished. The Act was problematic as it required that all commoners registered specific numbers, despite the fact many held “sans nombre” rights. Numbers were registered with little evidence, resulting in a major setback to sustainable management as numbers were typically inflated and amendments discouraged.

1986 The Agriculture Act: recognised the importance of farming not only for food production but also for maintaining the fabric of the countryside. It required MAFF to balance efficient food production with rural socio-economic interests, the conservation of the environment and archaeology and public enjoyment of the countryside.

2000 Countryside and Rights of Way Act: commons other than those covered by the Property Act 1925, the Commons Act 1899 and certain other statutes, the public did not have the right to use or enjoy common land if they were not a commoner. This act however ensures the public have the right to roam freely on all registered common land in England and Wales.

2006 Commons Act: repealed the Commons Act of 1285 and attempted to put right anomalies of the 1965 Act. The Act seeks to protect common land, in a sustainable manner delivering benefits for farming, public access and biodiversity through commons councils which have the powers to regulate grazing and other agricultural activities. Specifically, with effect from 28th June 2005, the Act prohibited commoners to sell, lease or let their rights away from the property to which the rights are attached.

52

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Trends in commoning

While diverse, a number of general trends are detectable that impact on the current and likely future use and management of upland commons:

Ownership: traditionally the Lord of the Manor and legal descendants, typically with sporting, timber and mineral rights. Commoners were granted grazing rights and also others: peat extraction and use of stone for building though not for sale. Manorial courts were disbanded after 1925 and replaced with county courts.

At the farm level: there is a tendency towards fewer active graziers on each common and an increase in farm size. Partly as a result, the management of common land has become more time consuming and with changing grazing and milder winters, the vegetation of commons is undergoing long term change - increasing areas of scrub and bracken.5

Regulation: the manorial court that for sanction included a jury system of fellow commoners and the Steward of the Lord of the Manor.

Over-grazing: Issues of overgrazing pervade contemporary debates on sustainable upland management. Historically principles of sustainability were administered by the manorial courts and similar bodies. While some commons were ‘stinted’ and set upper grazing limits, 80% of commons were ‘sans nombre’ or without limit but with the expectation that stocking rates could be supported through the winter ‘from the farms own resources’. The agricultural depression from 1878 to 1939 mitigated overuse, which only became an issue after World War Two. Currently, opportunities to export lamb to the EU have resulted in a substantial increase in sheep numbers in the uplands.

The importance of livestock: society today perceives commons as peripheral to modern agrarian practice and rather sees that their primary function is for recreation and conservation. For this reason, they are increasingly seen as ‘open access resources’ rather than common property regimes.6 There is as a result the ‘potential for policy and legislation to further marginalise the community of commoners and their rights unless mutual understanding is established’.7 Specifically, the anticipated enactment of the Agriculture Bill, would suggest that policy directions will: encourage the optimisation rather than the maximisation of livestock numbers, in particular sheep; emphasise husbandry over production; deliver farm income through the delivery of public/ environmental goods; encourage value addition to primary produce; and enhance access and recreation as specific as opposed to incidental products of farming practice.8

The number of full-time commoners: likely to continue to decline with abandonment possible in the next generation. This threatens in some areas to reach a critical threshold below which collaborative management and the hefting of stock will breakdown.9

5 The general exception to this decline is where stewardship schemes have specifically encouraged an increase in graziers such as the New Forest and the Malvern Hills. 6 Humphries, 2019. 7 Op. cit. 8 Ibid 9 For comparison, total labour employed on Lake District farms fell from 3,307 in 1983 to 2,762 in 2009, while numbers in full-time farm employment fell from 2,386 to 1,316 over the same period.

53

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

4 Threats & Opportunities for Upland Commons & Commoning In this section we will explore what is happening to our commons heritage at present and what changes we expect to see over coming decades. It identifies the threats facing the heritage of upland commons and discusses what opportunities there are to address these threats going forwards. The section reflects what we have discovered are the characteristic and significant qualities of our upland commons, the key issues affecting these qualities/attributes and the drivers for change as identified in Section 2 and the Statement of Significance in Section 3.

4.1 Threats facing upland commons The review of plans and strategies in Section 2 identified a number of key threats or drivers for change shared by all four of our English upland areas - these are all relevant to our upland commons. These can be summarised as:

• Climate change • Unsympathetic management • Structural change in agriculture and uncertainty regarding future financial support and linked impact on social/cultural change • Recreational pressure • Public understanding and awareness • Local issues

Climate change

The State of Nature Report 2019, names climate change, caused by human activities, as one of the most significant threats to global biodiversity, and the effects are projected to become more severe over the course of this century. The evidence is that climate change is driving widespread and rapid changes in the abundance, distribution and ecology of UK wildlife.

Climate change may have a particularly severe impact on upland environments. With reference to climate change on upland commons the following are likely to be key threats:

• Potential drying out of wet heath, blanket bog and valley mires due to increased frequency of drought conditions in the summer

• Drought leading to increased risk of fires, inability to carry out controlled burning in drier summers and potential erosion damage to archaeological sites

• Higher autumn and winter rainfall, and sudden rainfall events, leading to higher water levels in upland streams and bogs, resulting in downstream flooding

• A longer growing season and increased growth of bracken, gorse and scrub resulting in decreased area of open heather moorland

• Increase in the prevalence of pests and diseases, which may affect upland plant species such as heather and bilberry and the spread of invasive and non-native

species leading to an overall loss of bio diversity.

54

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Unsympathetic management

Unsympathetic or inappropriate management on upland commons can take many forms and occurs due to a range of factors. Inappropriate management can have a detrimental effect on the special qualities of commons and on the public benefits which they offer – there can be detriment to priority habitats and species, valuable geology, archaeology and historic features, water quality and carbon sequestration and storage. Inappropriate management can take the form of over- or under-grazing, burning, drainage or damage to peat/wetland. Sometimes understandable efforts to control one form of vegetation such as bracken for example can be damaging rather than beneficial e.g. chain harrowing or inappropriate spraying. Unsympathetic or inappropriate management can come about due to differences in management objectives between stakeholders, lack of appreciation or understanding of sensitive habitats/ecology, or a lack of skills and knowledge. Different stakeholders on a common do not always agree about what is appropriate management and this can be one of the main challenges to securing collaborative management for improved multiple outcomes.

Political issues and policy change linked to social/cultural change

Common Land faces significant threats which put the heritage of commoning, and the natural and cultural heritage of commons, at considerable risk. These threats have been amplified with the uncertainty leaving the EU casts over rural funding beyond 2020. Without a significant intervention and change in approach to the management of Common Land, its natural and cultural assets face significant degradation in the next ten years:

• Common Land faces a ‘cliff edge’ in the form uncertain public funding beyond 2022.

Commoners cannot charge the public to care for landscapes, and the nature of the land imposes limits on the productivity of their farming. Commoners are therefore especially dependent on ‘Direct Payments’ (financial support, unconnected with production). The

55

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Government in the future intends to deliver a ‘more sustainable’ countryside where public money pays for public benefits. The Foundation for Common Land supports this but putting it into practice on the contested landscapes of commons is more challenging than on land under a single ownership and management.

The best-case scenario is that farm income will drop by 45% by 2024 as new environmental schemes will not fully roll out until 2028. However, there is no certainty environmental payments will compensate for the lost income as Defra’s budget is not committed beyond 2022.

These changes create immense risks for Common Land. Financial pressures could result in unsustainable farming practices that damage fragile environments, as farmers seek to make ends meet in the short term. Defra’s planned break between environmental schemes means we risk losing the opportunity to conserve and enhance the public benefits that Commoners are keen to provide for society.

• The decline in commoning threatens the collective management of the land

Commoning involves the collaborative management of land – When collaborative management breaks down land, environmental outcomes and communities suffer. The trends described in Section 3.5 suggest a reduction in the number of commoners or active graziers as the viability of upland farming is reduced. This decline in the number of commoners leads to a break in the continuity of active grazing, loss of hefted flocks and traditional hill farm breeds of sheep, cattle and ponies, and a loss of the traditional skills associated with upland farming/commoning. The social cohesion of commoning communities may be lost forever as small family farms disappear and younger generations are not willing to take on the hard work required, with long hours for little financial gain.

Our Social Cohesion Study in Dartmoor and the Yorkshire Dales carried out during the development phase by Somewhere-Nowhere during 2018/19 found that commoning and commoners are facing a difficult future. In the context of Our Common Cause, social capital – the economic, cultural, tangible and intangible resources that result from cooperating together towards common ends -is key, given the historical and practical necessity of cooperation on common land, both in terms of practical farming and land management tasks, and in terms of decision making. The report concluded with the following seven main messages:

1 Uplands Commons matter. There is widespread care and commitment to commons and commoning, to the environment and to the cultural practices that have shaped the landscape.

2 People matter. The importance of relationships and communication must not be overlooked: this comes into every area of commons management, and into the community relationships between commoners and non-commoners.

3 Changes have not always been good. There have been changes in upland farming practice, and the upland environment, in the last 50-60 years, some of which threaten environmental resilience and the continuation of the upland farming system.

56

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

4 Agri-environment payment schemes for farmers require close attention. There are issues with agreeing and administering agri- environment schemes which provide funding for farming at an individual and a commons level and are currently under review; some social cohesion has been lost because of schemes (either working poorly or no agreement being reached); schemes must be balanced with proper monitoring.

5 There’s a need for raised awareness. A need for education and understanding about different elements of managing upland commons among stakeholders, and raised awareness

among the wider public.

6 A greater balance of voices is needed. There’s a wish among farmers and others for a stronger voice for hill farmers in debates and in public-facing media, and a need for new approaches to collaborative working.

7 Optimism about the future is low. Sad but true. Without sorting out issues, through facilitating improved relationships, there is a perception that the future looks bleak for the continuation of an inter-connected system of land management that supports farming and improved environment and biodiversity in the upland commons.

Recreational pressure

There is a right of access to almost all common land, and the unenclosed nature of commons and the peace and tranquillity to be found there offers a sense of escape and freedom. 40% of access land in England is common land and much of this common land is found within protected areas – 45% of common land in England and Wales is found in National Parks, and 30% of common land in England falls within areas of outstanding natural beauty. Commons attract tens of missions of visitors each year, contributing significantly to local economies and employment from tourism and leisure related businesses. However, this footfall can create serious threats to the natural and cultural heritage of commons – to sensitive habitats and species, damage to archaeological remains from erosion and a loss of tranquillity and isolation. In particular, our consultation has raised the impact of large-scale challenge events such as the Dartmoor 10-Tors or the Dales Three Peaks Challenge, when thousands of people descend on one place over the course of a single weekend, as a major challenge to the conservation and enhancement of these special places. Duke of Edinburgh awards, when small groups of young people are dropped off in isolated places for weekend treks can also cause issues. In many respects, these recreational pressures can damage or impact on many of the special qualities that are the things we most love and value about upland commons.

57

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Attitudes and understanding

• Common Land and Commoning are neither understood nor valued by the public nor policy-makers

Most people have little knowledge of Commoning, nor Common Land, including the millions who enjoy the Lake District, Dartmoor and other well-loved areas. The ‘visiting public’ miss the history and meaning of landscapes they explore – 40% of all Open Access land is common land. The public do not appreciate where for instance their water comes from and how we can make our water supply more resilient in the face of climate change. For instance, 60% South West Water’s raw water supply comes from common land. In particular, our consultation has found that the public, in general, have very little understanding of how commons work or in fact really what they are, believing that they are publicly owned and available as a ‘public’ resource.

There is a general lack of awareness and/or in some cases indifference of the intricacies of commoning and the fact that once links are broken they will be very difficult to bring back. This is reflected in public policy as much as public understanding. For example, the rapid turn-around of agency/government staff so continuously, and a sense for commoners of having to ‘re-educate’ each new lot of officers who arrive with little knowledge or understanding of how commoning works. This causes frustration, stress and a gradual eroding of trust between the very stakeholders who should be work together to ensure sensitive and sympathetic management of commons.

Local issues

There are local issues specific to areas and to particular commons. These are many and varied but are perhaps best summarised as issues around ownership and tenure. It can relate to large landowners such as the National Trust, United Utilities or Duchy of Cornwall. for example. Issues can arise when landowners introduce new policies or strategies which impact wholesale on upland commons in that area and which may not be well understood or seen as positive by the commoning community. There can be bad feeling sometimes between landowners and commoners where objectives of management are seemingly very different and there may be a disconnect between objectives for farming and those for conservation. Facilitation and consultation are needed in these cases to ensure that trust is not eroded and bad feeling built up which affects sympathetic management of the land. Our consultation has shown that objectives may seem to be very different, but actually there is frequently also a lot of common ground, and consensus can be found if communication can be improved and time given to shared conversations and visioning.

4.2 Opportunities for upland commons Commons deliver a huge range of public benefits, but many of them are in not currently in a good condition. There is potential for much greater public benefit delivery on upland commons. However, we are on the verge of a significant period of change in farming at a time when the commons management system is already under social, economic and

58

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

environmental strain. This considerable risk also gives rise to significant opportunities to support commoners, mitigate climate change, increase the public benefits from common land and raise public awareness.

Opportunities to mitigate climate change

There are opportunities both to adapt to the effects of climate change and to mitigate its effects.

• The deep peat found on some commons is vital for the sequestration and storage of carbon and there are significant opportunities to work with existing peat restoration programmes and to add value by demonstrating and trialling new techniques and to work better with the commoning community to raise awareness of the value of peat habitats, demonstrate appropriate techniques and involve commoners in planning and delivery of restoration projects • With the current interest in farming as a serious contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, there are opportunities to research the carbon footprint of hill farms and to introduce hill farmers/commoners to measures which could reduce greenhouse gas emissions. • Tree planting and tree regeneration may be appropriate on some commons to both sequester carbon and for natural flood management/slow the flow techniques.

Opportunities to improve management of commons for improved public benefits

The opportunities to work with stakeholders to improve the provision of public benefits on commons is huge.

• Commons are complex and sometimes contested spaces where relationships between stakeholders can be fraught – and this can be as a result of lack of communication and mistrust built up over many years. Objectives can be very different but we have found that, in general, stakeholders value the same things and all want healthy, vibrant commons – but ways of demonstrating this or the detail of delivering benefits can be very different and sometimes conflicting. • Commoners can feel powerless and unheard, isolated and unappreciated by seemingly more influential landowners and agency stakeholders. There is a sense of frustration about commoners lived experience and knowledge being undervalued. Better communication, time and support is needed to secure better collaborative management to ensure that improved multiple outcomes can be achieved. There are opportunities to ensure that commoners views are listened to more and their knowledge and experience valued alongside others’ views and experience. • There is a role for facilitation between stakeholders, for training to maintain skills and knowledge for commoners, landowners and other stakeholders and to better support the organisations which support commoners including Commons Associations which are frequently fragile in terms of governance and under resourced. • There is potential to involve new people in caring for commons – such as volunteers carrying out practical recording/surveying and conservation tasks.

59

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Opportunities to support commons through structural change in agriculture

The ability to support commons and commoners through these changes may be more difficult to deliver but there is vital work to be done to put upland commons on the agenda with policy makers, to support the design of schemes and to support commoners through the many changes and new processes to come.

• Continuing our work from the development phase to create shared understanding of the value of supporting and maintaining collaborative management on commons

• An opportunity to get a clear vision agreed by all key stakeholders so that when new Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS) come into place there is clarity on what is important and what could be enhanced on individual commons

• A potential opportunity to inform and influence scheme design and to ensure that new ELMS recognise the value of Commons and the need to ensure a link with the home farm business to maintain farm and commons’ viability

• A significant opportunity to share learning between regions and nationally about new approaches to commons management, trials and demonstrations around action research and practical management, and successful existing partnerships (for example the success of Dartmoor Farmers and their contract to supply lamb to Morrisons).

Opportunities to increase the provision of public benefits from common land

• Commoners’ trust in agencies and landowners is low. Further significant declines in hefted flocks and people on the commons would damage the cultural asset and erode the human and social capital to manage commons for public benefits in the future. The opportunities for commoners are that they build better ways of working with each other and with agencies to build consensus about outcomes and management.

• Opportunity for commons to deliver much more for public benefits, and for commons and commoners to be properly valued and rewarded for delivering these public benefits, as part of a viable commons management system.

Opportunities to mitigate recreational pressure

Upland commons are a valuable recreational resource for the nation, but they are also sensitive and vulnerable to over use and exploitation, especially at honey-pot sites. Recreational pressures can damage the very qualities and attributes that people most love, value and come to visit.

• Opportunity to better manage recreational use by providing better information, signage and facilities for visitors in appropriate places

60

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Opportunities to provide information, guidelines and training to organisers of large- scale challenge/fundraising and active sports events.

Opportunities to increase public understanding and awareness

This is another area where there are huge opportunities to increase the public’s understanding and awareness of commons, leading to a better appreciation of commons’ value to society, and to support the public to access, enjoy and learn about common land. • Greater understanding and appreciation of all the public goods delivered on common land • Increased understanding of what commons are, their history and the way they are managed • Reconnect the public with the natural and cultural heritage of commons • More people taking an active part in caring for common land through volunteering • Significant opportunities to engage new audiences and a wider range of people in commons and commoning.

Opportunities to support local issues on commons

• Opportunities to support stakeholders on individual commons to communicate better, collaborate more, and value and recognise each other’s perspectives • An opportunity to try new approaches to commons management, demonstrating by doing at a local level and sharing the learning locally, regionally and nationally.

4.3 Summary of Threats and Opportunities in relation to the special qualities of common land

Feature of Commons Threat/sensitivity Opportunity Priority habitats and species Spread of invasive species Recreate, restore and conserve – rough heather moorland, such as bracken/Molinia habitats working with all acid grassland, blanket bog Climate change impacts such stakeholders Birds, butterflies, as drought, spread of pests Bracken and scrub control invertebrates and diseases Grazing regimes using heritage Inappropriate management – breeds overgrazing/undergrazing, Restoration of peatland and inappropriate burning, wetland for carbon storage and to counteract climate change Promote understanding of priority habitats/species and support opportunities to increase skills to monitor and conserve these. Historic features/ Spread of bracken and scrub Manage spread of bracken and archaeology and underlying Livestock damage/ scrub on important geology inappropriate land use archaeological sites

61

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Recreation pressure Manage semi-natural habitat to enhance the visibility and condition of distinctive geological and archaeological features Manage public access with suitable information Promote understanding of landscape archaeology/ historic environment and support opportunities to increase skills to maintain and manage historic features. Cultural and historic Slow loss of character Maintain open expanse, character: Open expanse of Changes in management unenclosed moorland, maintain, unenclosed moorland, restore traditional boundaries pastoral character, (hedgebanks and stone walls) patchwork of stone walls, Protect and manage the unique small-scale settlement landscape character through patterns land management practices, working with stakeholders Encourage and promote sustainable commons management, with active collaboration of all common owners and rights holders to deliver multiple benefits, including hefted flocks. Network of streams and Inappropriate management, Promote management at a rivers; and contribution they pollution, climate change catchment scale, encourage make to landscape creation and good character, recreation and environmental management of biodiversity - water flows, semi-natural habitats to aid quality and supply. water retention and connectivity, slow the flow.

Value for recreation – open Overuse, high visitor Providing guidance and inspiring access land numbers especially on interpretation to enhance public certain sites, erosion, understanding and enjoyment disturbance to wildlife and Enhance signage, paths, livestock parking and other facilities to minimise congestion, erosion and other problems, as well as continuing to provide information to help visitors to understand the importance and vulnerability of the area.

Increase learning and educational opportunities and manage recreation at well used and high-value locations to retain their conservation value

62

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

and tranquillity, and to support sustainable tourism. Isolation, tranquillity, dark Development and Maintain sense of remoteness, skies recreational pressure, traffic isolation and tranquillity, noise manage recreational pressures. Native hill breeds of sheep, Decline of commoning and Support for continued communal cattle and pony collaborative management/ grazing with appropriate breeds. communal grazing Lack of understanding of qualities of these breeds/suitability to landscape and habitats Traditional hill farming Loss of commoners, decline Training for young commoners, knowledge and skills, active of commoning and support of commoners grazing, collaborative collaborative management/ groups/associations, support for management communal grazing commoners. Commoning Decline of commoning, loss Support to continue traditions/culture of associated traditions and social/traditional gathers, culture festivals and events Promote public awareness, understanding and enjoyment.

63

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

5 The People – Our Activity Plan This section outlines our work on audience development and to engage and consult people in our development phase about the sorts of activities and involvement they would like to see in delivery. We explain our thinking on existing and potential audiences for commons, barriers to engagement and how we plan to increase both the number and range of people involved in our delivery projects.

5.1 Our commitment to engaging the public and the relationship between commons and people Our intention at 1st Round was always to involve as many people as possible in commons’ heritage, but at that point we were uncertain how best to do that and although proposals were broad and inclusive they understandably lacked depth.

The development phase has been an opportunity to investigate who and how and how much – balancing an array of opportunities and ambitions against budget and timescale. The desire to create outputs with enough depth and integrity to really deliver our priority outcomes has been our yardstick, rather than offering a sprinkling of activities that are superficially attractive but spread too thinly to be meaningful.

In addition to liaison with a wide range of individuals with both a professional and personal interest in commons’ heritage (see list below), and asking for feedback at a range of consultation events, we have commissioned two pieces of work:

• A Social Cohesion study looking at commons and commoning from the commoners’ perspective • An interpretive strategy incorporating a review of existing audiences and recommendations for new ones

All the conversations, the feedback and both studies have influenced the way the project overall has developed, and within that the Activity Plan; what has become clear is that a significant proportion of the project needs to be activity-based, and “doing things together” is one of the major strengths of our proposals. In doing, so the Plan deliberately builds on recommendations from Better Outcomes for Common Land, a report written by the Foundation for Common Land in 2015, which examined the challenges of commoning and identified one unifying solution “Danby Moor Common has just as many issues as any other moor but it is the attitude with which they deal with those issues which makes it successful.”

Further changes to be made during project delivery

We intend to continue working in much the same way – shaping and taking forward ideas with those best placed to deliver them. This puts commoners in the vanguard of the project, working with each other, with other stakeholders and with the public – commoning is at the heart of everything we are proposing, whether because of its own heritage or its ability to deliver the myriad of other heritage associated with commons.

We are therefore not intending any noteworthy change to the spread of projects, but what is likely to change is the depth, as those for whom commoning isn’t heritage but a way of life take their place at the centre of the scheme. This enhanced integrity can only be enriching.

64

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

We have been careful not to raise expectations until funding is confirmed, and so the Delivery Phase will be an opportunity to work much more closely with communities who don’t currently have access to commons’ heritage – whether for reasons of confidence, or finance, or simply through not knowing that it’s there and available to them.

This continuity of approach, but at greater depth, echoes priorities in the Dartmoor Management Plan 2014-19, the Lake District Partnership’s Plan 2015-20, the Shropshire Hills AONB Management Plan 2019-24, the Yorkshire Dales National Park Management Plan 2019-2024, the strategies of the three National Parks and the AONB where our project commons sit. Most recently, the Glover Landscapes Review of National Parks and AONBs 2019 and the State of Nature Partnership’s State of Nature 2019 have also provided context and reinforced momentum.

5.2 How we have created the Activity Plan and who has been involved in developing the ideas within it? As outlined above, the Activity Plan has come about through many conversations – ours and other people’s – which have made it very clear what needs to be done, and how. The unifying theme is always “communication” – people talking to each other – whether that’s stakeholders on a site, commoners talking to each other, or commoners and other stakeholders talking to the public.

On that basis it’s fair to say that the Activity Plan has “grown” rather than been created, and as a result what has emerged is powerful and has the potential to be change-making.

Who has been involved in discussions?

Commoners: Dawson Family, Robert Stockdale, David White, Tom and Sarah Hoggarth, Andrew Pratt, Tom Lloyd, Dave Jones, Brian Lloyd, Heighway and Dahn families, Maggie Cook & Barry Laidlaw, Will Rawling, Neil Hardisty, Tom Lorrains, Martin Relph, John Edmondson, Peter Noble, David Thompson, Carl Walters, Jim Campbell, Phil Cleave, Tom Cleave, Richard Gray, David Mudge, David Gardener, Richard Parsons, Harford and Ugborough Commoners Association, mainly Ann Willcocks, David Sadler, Philip French, Russell Ashford, Matt Col, Layland Branfield, John Cooper, John Metcalfe

Landowners: Pete Carty – National Trust, Mike Hardingham – Clee St Margaret Parish Council, Phillip Farrell – Ingleborough Estate, Tom Burditt – National Trust, Caroline Holden – United Utilities, John Gorst, Kevin Cox, Donna Cox, Lis Ross, Chris Giles, John Howell, Leonard Hurrell, Robert Hurrell,

Other commons stakeholders: George Hare – Keeper, Grassington Moor Miles, Brian Rycroft – Ingham and Yorke Land Agents,

Partnership and Project Team: Phil Richards – Area Ranger Yorkshire Dales National Park, Jan Darrall – Policy Officer Friends of the Lake District, Nicola Estill – Community Engagement Officer Westmorland Dales LSP, David Evans – Scheme Manager Westmorland Dales LSP, John Waldon – Dartmoor Commons Council, Alison Kohler – Director of Conservation and Communities Dartmoor National Park, Orlando Rutter – Senior

65

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Learning and Outreach Officer Dartmoor National Park, Catherine Kemp – Education and Events Manager Yorkshire Dales National Park, Karen Griffiths – Interpretation Officer Yorkshire Dales National Park, Westmorland Agricultural Society, Rob and Harriet Fraser – Somewhere-Nowhere (Social Cohesion study), Gwendolen Powell and Sarah Dowd – Tricolor Associates, Simon Cooter – Natural England, Steph Hayes – Shropshire Hills AONB Promotions Officer, Nick Fogg and Mike Smart (Piece of String – Hill Stories), Sarah Griffiths – Educational Consultant, Phil Stubbington and Jenny Seaman – John Muir Award, Alison MacDonald and Bill Klemperer – Historic England, Les Ball – Shropshire Hills Federation of Primary Schools, Andy Wigley, Giles Carey, Hugh Hannaford – Shropshire Council Historic Environment Team, Patrick Edwards Patrick Edwards (Head Ranger), Janine Young (Senior Archaeologist), Viviana Culshaw (Community Archaeologist), Helen Selkirk & Swantje Staar- Slogrove (Visitor Experience Managers) – National Trust, Jenny Joy, Mike Williams, Dave Green, Martin Wain – Butterfly Conservation, Shropshire Wildlife Trust – Fiona Gomersall, Rob Rowe, Leo Smith – Shropshire Ornithological Society, Mike Shurmer – RSPB, Simon Cooter – Natural England, Dave Cragg – Shropshire Hills AONB, Andrew Hearle (Stepping Stones Development Manager), Frances McCullagh & Andy Perry (Ecologists), Richard Wheeldon (Farm Advisor), Simon Howard (Land Agent), Shropshire Hills OCC Area Group (all members), Yorkshire Dales OCC Area Group (all members), Lake District OCC Area Group (all members), Dartmoor OCC Area Group (all members), Jerry Hughes – The Bog Visitor Centre, Graham Price – NFU Uplands Specialist, Adrian Shepherd – Head of Land Management Yorkshire Dales National Park, Andy Crabb, Lee Bray – Historic England, Simon Phelps, Jenny Plackett – Butterfly Conservation, Helen Booker – RSPB, Richard Knott – Dartmoor National Park Authority, Matt Travis – Dartmoor National Park Authority, Claire Partridge, Melanie Hooper, David Atwell – Dartmoor Hill Farm Project, Phil Hutt – Dartmoor Preservation Association, Fiona Freshney – Moorland Bird Project, Adam Owen – Moor Trees, Dartmoor Access Forum, Okehampton College, Alison Hocking (JMA) Emily Friend, Jean Johnston – Natural England, Andrew Herbert, Liam McAleese, Eleanor Kingston – Lake District National Park Authority, Ruth Kirk, Johanna Korndorfer – Friends of the Lake District, Jamie Lund (Archaeologist), David Harpley, Simon Thomas – Cumbria Wildlife Trust, Joe Relph – Federation of Cumbria Commoners, Lorrainne Smyth – Action with Communities Together, Kate Gascoyne – Farmer Network, Adam Briggs – NFU, Rebecca Greenfield – Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority, Sarah Littlefield – Lune Valley Rivers Trust.

Volunteers: Abdon & District Community Wildlife Group. Shropshire Wildlife Trust volunteer surveyors. National Trust Wednesday Action Group (WAGs) volunteers. Pete Johnson, Phil Brown & Kate Johnson (LM film/archive). Stiperstones historic environment - Peter Cornah, John Burt, Jerry Hughes, Norman Goalby, Nicola Jones, Lorraine Gawlik. Ben Osborne (film maker and camera man), Kendal U3A,

5.3 Current and potential audiences for commons’ heritage Work undertaken to develop the Interpretation strategy reinforced our 1st Round understanding that there are three audiences for commons’ heritage:

• The “private” audience of individuals and organisations who already have access to commons through their work: landowners, commoners, statutory organisations, special interest NGO’s and charities such as RSPB, Butterfly Conservation etc, local

66

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

farming and commoning organisations, national farming organisations such as the National Farmers Union, Country Landowners Association etc, and all three tiers of local government – parish, district, and county/National Park Authority. • The “public” audience made up of local residents and workers, community and special interest groups, recreational user groups and visitors/tourists. • The “new” audiences: young people outside organised sport/recreation groups (including teenagers and young adults), low income individuals and families, and other hard-to-reach groups, including urban communities living and working in areas outside the Uplands.

This understanding came from, and was confirmed by, community data (residents and visitors) from National Park plans and surveys. Audiences were then further defined through the use of socio-economic and cultural profiling, notably through the Mosaic profiling tool which combines information from over 400 sources to create a summary of the likely characteristics of households in the UK, and through Audience Spectrum, a profiling tool created on behalf of the Arts Council to describe community engagement with arts, museums and heritage.

The profiling revealed the following:

• Our commons share similar audience demographics and profiles • Within these there are three main audience segments – ‘Trips and Treats’, ‘Dormitory Dependables’, ‘Home and Heritage’ • The local population close to all commons are predominantly white British, and to engage with more diverse audiences, particularly hard-to-reach groups will require focussed and specifically targeted work • All local audience segments rate as “medium engagement”, meaning that although they are receptive to heritage activity this will need to be presented in mainstream, popular formats • All local audience segments rate average or lower than averagely disposed to volunteering, meaning that volunteer opportunities will need to offer “have a go” experiences, and that recruitment of volunteers will need ongoing persistence • Lake District commons are likely to benefit most from local day-trippers and visitors from outside the area. • Visitors to National Parks generally are likely to be repeat visitors who may know the area well. • Visitors to commons in the National Parks and the AONB are already engaged in outdoor activities and connecting to nature.

There are therefore a range of priorities for our interpretation and activities, including:

• A need to prioritise family engagement, led by children’s interests • Prioritising value-for-money and value-for-time to attract busy families • Live performance and familiar “mainstream” activities are likely to be attractive • Digital and social media tools are successful communicators for many people in our target communities, whilst direct and face-to-face communication will appeal more to others

67

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Whilst the ‘Homes and Heritage’ audience segment believes strongly in the preservation of local heritage, they often need to be persuaded to visit outdoor attractions! • Activities that can be enjoyed whilst socialising with family and friends

5.4 Barriers to engagement for upland commons For the “private” audiences, it would be easy to assume that there are no barriers to engagement with commons’ varied heritage, but as the Better Outcomes 2015 study made clear, the exact opposite is often true; individuals (from all backgrounds) can sometimes so closely identify with their group’s/organisation’s existing perception of common land (for the RSPB the priority is birds, for Butterfly Conservation it’s all about butterflies, for archaeologists the priority is historic environment, for commoners it’s all about grazing and so on) that it can be difficult to embrace (and sometimes even acknowledge) others’ perspectives and priorities. Hence the need for activities which bring all parties together, to develop shared understanding and ambitions for the care of commons.

More straightforwardly, for the existing “public” audiences, and the desired “new” audiences, we understand the primary barriers as follows:

• Local people: a lack of understanding/appreciation of commons, and as a consequence an inability to see how common land might be relevant and contribute to their lives. Lack of knowledge of how commons work (what they would be allowed to do when they got there, or even if they were allowed to go there) is also an issue, contributing to a lack of confidence to even plan a visit. • Community, special interest and recreational user groups: not realising that the commons are available for them to visit, and what might be on offer – fresh air and wellbeing, tranquillity, wildlife, open spaces – if they did have the confidence to go there. • Visitors/tourists: like local people, a lack of understanding/appreciation of what commons could offer, and whether they are permitted to go there. • Young people, including teenagers and young adults: again, the perception of whether commons could be relevant to them or interesting is key, coupled with a lack of financial resources to get there and a lack of confidence/feeling insecure about a visit to such an unknown and “remote” location. • Low income families: as above, with the lack of financial resources inevitably to the fore; even if common land is nearby it can be impossible to get to it using limited (and sometimes costly) public transport. • Hard-to-reach groups: as above but with the perception of whether commons might be relevant to them (and whether they are “the kind of people” who go to commons) to the fore.

This understanding of our audiences’ needs is about more than just “imagining” what the issues might be, and several members of the project team have significant experience in community outreach work, including with under-represented groups, and offered the following anecdotes:

• A discussion with a community group aimed at setting up a self-guided walk (with a leaflet) taking them on footpaths through farmland less than two miles from their

68

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

homes on a new estate. Many of the group were concerned about safety – fear of getting lost, or being shouted at (or worse) by farmers, being chased or even attacked by animals, or meeting undesirable people. • A BAME group thinking – with delight – that they were “allowed” to go onto a National Trust-owned reserve (in open country) because they were there with a ranger. When she explained that the NT sign meant that they were able to go there at any time, unescorted, they were incredulous; they had thought that it meant there was no public access, or that at best, only National Trust members could go in. • An inner-city healthy walking group considering venturing out to the countryside for the first time, worrying about whether they had the right sort of clothes, and will “they” want us there? • And from the other perspective, a comment from a senior AONB Committee member responding to a request to encourage BAME groups to visit open heathland from the nearby town, “but even if they do come, will they know how to behave?”

Taking all of that on board, and with discussion within the project team/project partners refined through feedback from consultation events, the following priorities have been agreed:

• interpretive activity should concentrate on “public” audiences – making commons meaningful to people who aren’t already connected with them in some way • outreach activity should concentrate on “public” audiences but with a particular focus on “new” audiences, i.e. those who are furthest from commons both geographically and emotionally/psychologically • learning activity should concentrate on “private” audiences as well as “public” ones, to broaden and deepen understanding between stakeholders, as well as encouraging visitors (physical and virtual) to learn more about commons.

5.5 Current activity offer and trialling activities for engagement Current activity on commons is of high quality but limited – in the Yorkshire Dales for example there are just one outreach, one education, and one (part-time) interpretation officer to cover the entire national park.

Commons-specific activities in the Dales in the last twelve months were:

• Two groups from a secondary school in Bradford visiting Grassington Moor looking at the stream, lead mining, peat quality and talking about human impact on landscapes • One John Muir Award group from a local summer play scheme looking at the archaeology on Grassington Moor • A summer day trip by family groups from Bradford (60 people in total) to Grassington Moor • Two guided walks on Grassington Moor as part of the Dales’ public events programme

If this small number of staff was our only resource, public understanding of common land, and a desire to visit and value it, would be likely to remain elusive.

But it is not our only resource, as the input of Area Facilitators during the development phase revealed. Their remit of close liaison with commoners made it clear that there is a huge

69

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

untapped resource amongst the farmers involved in the scheme; from the outset there were offers to lead guided walks and host farm visits and help under-represented groups to understand farming and commoning. Equally there are good numbers of expert volunteers with an interest in topics such as biodiversity and archaeology who would be pleased to share their passion with others.

Taking the Shropshire Hills AONB commons as an example, the following activities were undertaken during development phase, both for their intrinsic value and also to evaluate what audiences already enjoy, and what they’d like us to offer more of:

• Evening talks – historic landscape of Clee Liberty, Long Mynd and Stiperstones • Guided walks (all commons) – how commons work and why they matter, butterflies and moths, habitats and plants • Community and volunteer training and surveying sessions (all commons) – historic features, habitats and plants, butterflies and moths • Caring for scheduled monuments on Long Mynd – practical conservation and scything training for National Trust volunteers and the wider community • Training session for National Trust education team about Long Mynd common, commoners and hill farming • Training & condition monitoring (classroom based) of historic features on Stiperstones, with follow-up training on the common • John Muir Award for Shropshire Hills Federation (3 schools) – Introduction, guided walk on Long Mynd, day with commoners on farms and commons, guided walk looking at recreation and visitors on commons, footpath restoration and archaeology/history day, training day for teachers and other education providers • Hill Stories youth project on Clee Liberty – a guided walk • Guided walk for Ludlow Home Education Group • Guided walk on Long Mynd for Shropshire Wildlife Trust Growing Confidence Students

70

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

A total of 638 people attended the events above, and feedback on preferences prioritised the following:

• Walks and talks • Wildlife surveys • Practical conservation • Local history and archaeology • Meet the commoner

5.6 Our Public Consultation: Process and results In our Development Phase consultation work we have carried out in-depth engagement with our key stakeholder groups as well as a lighter touch consultation with wider existing and new public audiences including local people, visitors, special interest groups and organisations. Our key stakeholders include those groups of people with a significant interest in and influence over the management of upland commons and these have included mainly:

• Common land owners • Commoners – active and non-active graziers • Statutory and Charitable organisations involved with the management of common land

The Local Area Facilitators have spent a lot of time building better relationships with and between these stakeholders. One to one conversations, site visits and small-group meetings have been a key focus of their work during development.

Stakeholder consultation

The main messages and key findings from consultation/engagement with owners, commoners and agencies has included:

• A recognition that there is value in spending time to try and bring people and elements together – trying to make the whole more than the sum of the parts…. • ….But different beliefs and business goals amongst stakeholders makes finding consensus challenging. • Some farmers want to keep trying to be engaged in discussions, even though they have had their fingers burned in the past. Others have given up. • The project provides a great opportunity to add more resource to make things happen in the area • There is value in having an independent broker (the Area Facilitator) who has the time and necessary skills to identify and bring together the relevant stakeholders and tackle issues together • Enabling collaboration is time consuming, having capacity through the Area Facilitators has provided a valuable and much needed resource. • Time spent developing and nurturing good relationships is key.

‘Relationships are everything’ Shropshire Hills stakeholder

71

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Poor communication was raised many times as a key issue between commoners and landowners, and that this is hampered because different groups use different terminology. • Staff can have a tendency to deal with the easy jobs/low hanging fruit - OCC has tackled some of the more difficult issues. • One to one meetings can seem time consuming but are valuable – allowing time to get to know each other, increase understanding and drill down into issues and concerns. • Surprising how little the different parties know about each other, e.g. graziers not understanding habitats and owners/agencies not understanding farming. • Gives commoners a voice – not usually valued or listened to, usually ‘done to’, rather than involved. • Our Common Cause has helped to put all stakeholders on a level playing field – e.g. through the visioning process. • Site visits with relevant stakeholders to tackle issues and look at problems together have been well received. • Commoners feel their story is untold.

‘On a busy bank-holiday I get more than 3,000 people going past in a day, a lot of them looking at what I’m doing. We could be talking to them’. Yorkshire Dales commoner

• This is Important work! • All stakeholders value commons highly • This project got people of different views to sit around the table and actually listen to what each other had to say and then discuss what they want and how to get there. • Commoners have a fair understanding of different species and habitats and what the different stakeholders want. • The other stakeholders have very little understanding of the practicalities of grazing livestock • All want a healthy common managed by grazing to varying degrees. • What seemed widely different views were actually not so far apart so a middle ground could be found. • Agreement that there is a need for commoners to be more engaged with the public

‘I’d love to take my animals into Leeds, there’s a square right in the middle and we could set ourselves up and show people what we’re about…and then maybe they could come to us later, for lambing and gathers and so on…’ Yorkshire Dales commoner

72

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Public Consultation

The main messages and key findings from consultation with the public through face to face conversations, country shows, and public events has included:

• People know very little about the uplands, common land and commoning but generally want to learn more. • The public are interested in the various elements of commons and commoning and there is an appetite to learn more and take part in a practical way to benefit them. • Which aspects of the common people are most interested in varies a lot… and some just want to be able to identify what they are looking at whilst others want a deeper understanding. • An appreciation that Commons provide something for everyone – e.g. archaeology, biodiversity, recreation, farming, etc. • Historically, public events on commons have tended to focus on biodiversity and the natural environment. Our Common Cause provides an opportunity to shine a spotlight on other elements e.g. commoning, farming and the historic environment. • There isn’t much access to farmers to find out what goes on/how commoning works, so this will be of interest. To the public, Farmers seem to be almost an alien species. Sometimes seen, not spoken to, a bit wary but interesting. • Many people are fascinated by the hardy life of hill farmers and their sheep but for some there is a feeling that farmers have ruined the countryside and that there would be more biodiversity if they weren’t there. • People are keen for things to do with their families. • A sense that it is important to involve local communities as well as visitors from outside the area. • People think there is a need to include young people, and Schools think young people would be interested but time/resources are very tight. • Enthusiasts for Rewilding see livestock (particularly sheep) grazing on commons in a negative light. • In light of the current interest in climate change some people are interested in learning what commons can do to mitigate its effects. • Enthusiasm about taking the common to town proposals • Intrigued by Dark Skies • The language of farming can be a barrier to understanding for the public.

‘farmers speak a different language – heft, tups, draft ewes!’

• Interest in the commoners’ stories - what they do, how they do it, a day in the life, etc. • Some commons already have significant numbers of visitors – and this can be damaging to the special features

Online consultation survey

An online public consultation survey was promoted between May-September 2019, and it received 240 responses. We asked people to tell us:

• What they value most about upland commons?

73

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• What issues they feel most affect upland commons? • What aspects of commons and commoning are of most interest? • What activities they would like to get involved in related to commons and commoning? • What methods for sharing information about and interpreting commons they prefer?

What is special about upland commons?

The word cloud here represents what people value most or think is special about upland commons:

The public value many things about upland commons but overwhelmingly the most valuable aspects were perceived to be that upland commons are wild, open spaces with wildlife, nature and public access.

Other special qualities were the landscape, freedom (to visit and to use for recreation), history and sense of place, beauty and views.

Farming, grazing and cultural traditions were also rated, and a few people did pick up on the shared management and collaboration as special aspects of commons.

74

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

What issues affect our upland commons?

The word cloud here represents what people think are the key issues affecting upland commons:

Again, many varied issues were mentioned but the key issues were perceived to be • access (both too much access and difficult access) • people (both in terms of numbers and behaviour) • inappropriate or unsustainable management/farming methods including overgrazing

Many people also picked up on environmental issues including: • development • erosion • climate change • loss of habitats and biodiversity

Management issues including: • conflict between different users • bracken • dogs • shooting • litter • fencing

What is interesting about commons – what would people like to know more about?

The responses to our survey indicated that 50% and over were interested in: • Species and habitats (79%) • Natural resources (63%) • Access and recreation (57%) • Local history (57%)

75

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• The practise and tradition of commoning (57%) • Archaeology (50%)

Around a third of people were interested in:

• Common land law (41%) • Livestock/grazing animals (35%)

What aspects of commons and commoning interest you - what would you like to know more about?

90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%

Other things that people expressed an interest in learning more about were • Flood alleviation • Geology and soils • Management of Access • Ecology • Rewilding/trees

What activities would people like to get involved in?

The most popular responses for things that people would like to get involved in were: • Practical conservation e.g. habitat restoration/creation (63%) • Carrying out wildlife surveys (46%) • Local talks and guided walks (45%) • Improving information and interpretation (38%)

76

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

What activities would you like to get involved in related to commons and commoning?

70.00%

60.00%

50.00%

40.00%

30.00%

20.00%

10.00%

0.00%

Oral history and creative arts were seemingly less supported as ways of getting involved (at least by our respondents).

How could information about commons best be shared?

The most popular ways of sharing information about commons and commoning were: • Digital resources • Downloadable resources • Themed guided tours • Information markers

Reasonably popular ways of sharing information about commons/commoning were: • Interpretation boards • Themed events • Borrowable waterproof resources e.g. activity packs/orientation equipment • Seating or shelters incorporating information

The least popular methods for sharing info about/interpreting commons were: • Creative installation • Audio guides • Solar audio posts

77

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Interactive pop-up exhibition • Geocache

5.7 How have these findings been used to inform delivery projects and the activity plan? The engagement with stakeholders has led directly to the preparation and agreement of the Commons Visions which are included as Supporting Document 2. These Visions set out agreed statements on how management for different aspects of the common and commoning should be taken forward over the next 10-20 years. The engagement work has also supported the development of a new Commons Management Plan for one common in each area where no Plan currently existed and/or where a new Plan was thought to be of benefit in building consensus. The Visions, Management Plans and wider discussions have all informed the development of Projects to go forward into delivery. In particular, they have informed projects on better collaborative working, supporting resilient commons and improving public goods and services.

Our consultation results and audience development work have overwhelmingly showed that current audiences for commons and commoning are mainly white, older age groups using commons for recreation and special interest. This has shown a clear need to reach out to new and wider audiences through our activities and through interpretation. We have strengthened our outreach and learning activities as a result, and this is demonstrated in our programme to reconnect people with commons including activities such as Taking the Commons to Town, Case for Commons, and Commons are for All John Muir Award (further details in Section 7 and Project Plans C1-3).

As listed above, within the wider partnership, and within the project team, we are blessed with a number of individuals and organisations with significant experience in developing and delivering activities of all kinds.

We are also mindful of the need to offer activities which encourage our audiences to try new activities as well as those they are familiar with.

For example Westmorland Agriculture, the Yorkshire Dales National Park outreach team and Yorkshire Wildlife Trust have advised on the development of Taking the Commons to Town: it’s not enough to state that the commons are there and expect people to come, we need to offer more than that, so this project (across all areas) will pack up farmers and livestock and displays about biodiversity and archaeology and take all of it into the centre of nearby towns and cities.

The Brant Fell commoners for example will head into central Lancaster (downstream from the fell on the River Lune) taking their animals for local families and children to enjoy and their natural flood management proposals to show how they intend to manage the common to help reduce the severity of seasonal flooding in the town.

This event will come with an invitation for local communities to attend farm open days later in the season, which in turn will invite people to come and experience “a gather”, where the

78

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

commoners and their dogs work together to bring sheep off the common for the winter, or for shearing.

Where appropriate we will provide transport, and will encourage groups to take part in the John Muir Award.

This flow of activity is specifically designed to develop under-represented communities’ confidence and ambitions one step at a time, until they get to a point where they feel able to come to the commons on their own.

This Section is supported by our Activity Action Plan which can be found in Appendix 2 and by the summary and full Project Plans to be found in Parts 2 and 3 of the LCAP.

79

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

6 Our Partnership Vision for Upland Commons As part of development work during 2018-19 the Partnership and local Area Groups have undertaken two sets of work which have helped to define our Vision for Upland Commons. In June 2018 we held a facilitated Partnership workshop which developed a Commons Charter, setting out the Partnership aspirations for how common land would be managed collaboratively through better relationships between stakeholders involved in its ownership and management.

The full Commons Charter text is included in Supporting Document 1.

80

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Subsequently, the stakeholders in our 12 commons have developed their own specific Visions for how they wish to maintain the long-term viability and environmental, social and economic health of their commons. Bought together from these two sets of work, our Partnership Vision is:

Vibrant, Thriving and Healthy Commons fit for the 21st Century.

The key messages from across these Visions that we are adopting as contributing to our Partnership Vision is of commons where:

• Everyone is working together - a collaborative approach to management involving all stakeholders in decision-making - working towards producing quality jointly-owned evidence for effective management, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and examples of best practice in demonstrating landscape-scale conservation. • Abundant and thriving biodiversity is supported by a mixed mosaic of rich habitats including heathland, acid grassland, blanket bog, and valley mire • Bracken and other invasive species appropriately managed for grazing, access and wildlife • Archaeology and historic environment features are protected and better managed • Water quality is high and being maintained • Well managed peat, stores and sequesters carbon • Healthy hardy livestock are a key feature of sympathetic and appropriate management • Thriving, next generation commoners have the skills and resources needed to manage commons for multiple outcomes • Informed and responsible visitors and local communities, able to enjoy commons for walking, wellbeing and appreciation of our iconic landscapes • The beautiful and iconic landscapes in which our commons are found continue to be appreciated and their key qualities of peace and tranquillity are maintained.

81

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

6.1 Aims & Objectives Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons Aims

Our Common Cause will conserve and enhance the heritage of Commons and Commoning in upland England, working in the Lake District, Dartmoor, the Yorkshire Dales and Shropshire Hills. It will directly improve the management of almost 30,000ha of upland common, including many fragile ecosystems, and will bring people together. The project has four central aims (which are then reflected in four strands of activity):

• Secure and support collaborative management of Common Land;

• Ensure that the health of commons is secured by supporting resilient commoning in a fast-changing world;

• Reconnect the public with the natural and cultural heritage of Common Land; and

• Enhance the environmental and ecological benefits offered by Common Land.

By doing this we aim to empower local partners and communities to undertake concrete activities which not only protect environmental assets and build local capacity, but also - through building bridges of learning across the country - enables learning and change to spread to regional and national partners.

Our Project aims, identified above were defined at Stage 1 based on the Partnership’s existing in-depth knowledge of upland commons. They have been further refined and developed during Stage 2 as a result of engagement, consultation and research, and to reflect the significance and special qualities of commons as well as the threats and opportunities we have identified. Our aims and objectives seek to deliver our Partnership Vision outlined in the previous section.

Our objectives under each aim:

Secure and support collaborative management

Over the lifetime of the project we will:

• Facilitate collaborative processes to support better commons management including development of 4 new Commons Visions, • Trial 3 ‘demonstrating by doing’ projects including Common Knowledge shared monitoring, Shepherding Service, and Delivering Our Visions • Deliver 62 shared-learning site visits/ discussion groups for Stakeholders, • Upskill at least 60 stakeholders in working collaboratively with others/survey skills for collaborative management • Establish at least two shared knowledge groups to oversee collaborative projects on commons and establish shared baselines from which to build consensus around management • Involve at least 10 commoners in practical surveys of heritage • Document and disseminate 4 shared learning processes with other upland commons • Train 100 volunteers and involve them in practical collaborative conservation projects

82

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Deliver 15 small-scale infrastructure projects to assist shepherding, gathering and livestock management on upland commons.

Ensure the health of commons is secured by supporting resilient commoning

Over the lifetime of the project we will:

• Deliver 52 training sessions on improving hill livestock health • Hold 2 shared learning events for stakeholders on hill livestock animal health • Involve 40 commoners in data collection to inform hill livestock health plans • Support 6 Commoners Associations to develop solutions to livestock disease problems on upland commons • Support the use of new/innovative technology (such as GPS trackers) to build resilience on commons • Document and disseminate two shared learning processes including hill livestock health planning and upland common Farmer-led Payments By Results (PBR) assessment with other upland commons • Support preparedness for the new Environmental Land Management Scheme across all project commons • Deliver 3 training courses delivered to at least 18 young/aspiring commoners • Hold 1 Exhibition for young/aspiring commoners to promote commoning to new entrants • Deliver at least 15 commoner- or community-led small-scale projects to promote commons resilience and commons’ ability to function well and thrive for the environment and for people.

Reconnect the public with the natural and cultural heritage of commons

Over the lifetime of the project we will: • Deliver a national core offer of digital online materials/resources as well as practical physical resources to be distributed and used at a local level, to explain and raise awareness of the many aspects of upland commons - to include: o Online Digital Diary - Commons film, blog content, photos collection, oral history/ archiving; o 16 trails based around interpretative themes, downloadable versions formatted to be printable and user friendly (4 per area); o 4 sets of Pop-up exhibition displays (1 per area); o 4 sets of Pocket postcards (1 per area); o Doodle activity pack, exploring common land themes, for children and families o Heritage sheep breeds poster to introduce traditional upland sheep breeds

• Deliver specific site-based interpretive projects in each of our four areas to introduce people to commons and to meet local needs – to include: o 35 interpretation boards across 6 sites;

83

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

o 2 Booklets o 2 interpretation leaflets o 2 new waymarked trails (archaeology trails); o 1 film/oral history archive ‘Telling the Commoners Story’ o Online content produced to support the above • Produce, disseminate and support use of a ‘Case for Commons’ educational resource and community outreach resources for new/harder to reach audiences • Produce and disseminate a set of online/downloadable event guidelines to reduce adverse impacts of recreational events on commons • Deliver 4 training events for Event organisers • Deliver at least 2 small-scale public events to involve the public in practical peatland restoration • Deliver 15 local and regional learning gathers (12 local area events and 3 national events), a series of 6 online gathers (webinars) and collection of Commons Practice Notes on specific aspects of the project • Produce and disseminate a Natural Capital Assessment for Upland Commons to evaluate and demonstrate the natural capital value of commons • Deliver a wide-ranging activities and events programme for existing and new audiences to raise awareness and engagement with upland commons o Deliver 16 training sessions to over 300 volunteers in citizen science survey/monitoring, photography and dark skies appreciation and involve 120 volunteers in practical survey/monitoring work o Deliver 45 public guided walks/talks, 38 small-scale public events and 12 large-scale ‘Take the Common to Town’ events o Facilitate and support 480 John Muir Awards with disadvantaged young people supported by a Resource Guide and Case Studies o Involve 10 young people in ‘Hill Stories’ multi-media project o Produce a set of 8 ‘Find out from the farmer’ short films showcasing commoners and their way of life.

Enhance the environmental and ecological benefits offered by common land

Over the lifetime of the project we will: • Develop a Commons proofed carbon foot printing tool and engage 15 commoners in producing individual farm carbon footprints and GHG reduction measures • Deliver 5 shared learning/training events to share learning on carbon reduction and sequestration and produce a manual on Farmer-scale peat and wetland restoration techniques • Survey/record 816ha peatland habitat in Yorkshire Dales to inform future restoration plan • 22.5ha blanket bog, valley mire, and wet flush habitat restored • Involve volunteers in investigating, monitoring, interpreting and conserving significant archaeological features and the historic landscape of project commons – including • Restore 3 Historic sites or SM, record/survey/monitor 8 Historic sites or SM, Better manage/safeguard 9 Historic site or SM

84

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Involve 96 volunteers involved in survey/monitoring/practical conservation work of natural and cultural heritage • Produce 6 Historic landscape interpretation materials • Deliver 43 volunteer training days with 662 volunteer days contributed to conservation of natural and cultural heritage • Deliver 6 Archaeological reports/ update of HER and 1 Detailed Level 2 survey undertaken • 150ha/year minimum Habitat better managed through bracken control • 27 commoners/partners trained across in use of bracken control equipment across 3 areas • Deliver Comprehensive surveys of trees across 3 Commons, giving specialist advice to support better management of trees across 3 Commons and 2,000 trees established. • Plant 1.5km kested hedges to provide natural flood management • Deliver a set of surveys on bird populations across participating commons with areas mapped with relevant habitat features including breeding sites identified for relevant species, nest monitoring activities undertaken for whinchat • Produce Information ID sheets for butterfly and moth species– 15 ID sheets – multiple print copies and online version also to be available. • Habitat improved for bird and butterfly/moth species as a result of information gathered and practical work undertaken – improvement work to be undertaken on at least 8 participating commons • Events programme – over 100 events to be run over the three years • Volunteer groups established for at least 5 commons to include at least 15 individuals trained to undertake and supervise independent surveys.

85

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

7 Our Common Cause: Project Overview Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons will deliver 14 sub-projects across four thematic strands. The strands have been designed to deliver the overall aims of the project and each sub-project will deliver a range of outcomes for heritage, people and communities.

The following gives an introduction to the project structure, an overview of the four strands, and a brief summary of the sub-projects.

7.1 Strand A: Collaboration Commoning involves the collaborative management of land – a practice that is rare in modern life. Independent farm businesses interdepend with their neighbours so they can farm remote hill areas. Commons are very large tracts of land with sensitive habitats, rare species and historical monuments: therefore, the prize for society and the environment (carbon storage, water quality, biodiversity) of effective management is very high.

When collaborative management breaks down (say over financial pressure), land and communities suffer. Farmers can only access payments if all partners comply, so once one player withdraws several farmsteads cease to be viable. The outcome is unsustainable overgrazing (to self-generate lost income) or farmers ceasing to graze at all, which allows bracken and other dominant plants to engulf the delicate ecosystems that rely on appropriate grazing.

There is only one thing which makes upland commons different from any other piece of upland farmland and that is the collaboration intrinsic in the ancient tradition and practice of commoning. Securing and supporting this collaborative management is vital to the sympathetic management of commons and preservation of the heritage they hold.

Experience proves that a shared vision for common land allows much improved management. Our Common Cause will facilitate the delivery of shared Visions for 12 areas of Common Land and develop Visions for a further four new areas, and train and engage over 100 conservationists, and volunteers who will participate in surveys and conservation work.

Collaboration includes 3 sub-projects:

A1 Stronger Together

This project will support and enable collaboration and better management of commons. It seeks to take a ‘demonstrating by doing’ approach across the four local areas – a will trial a different approach in each whilst also including an element common to all.

The project will increase understanding and build trust between stakeholders within and beyond their Sector so that all stakeholders on a site feel more comfortable working together with shared aims and ambitions after the life of the project.

• Through my Eyes (led by Yorkshire Dales and rolling out across all four areas – 12 commons) - a series of guided site visits for a mixed group of stakeholders led by one of the group sharing their particular perspective of the common and its management (e.g. commoner, wildlife manager, historic environment officer). The

86

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

site visits will lead to shared understanding, and building of consensus around management. • Common Knowledge (Lake District 1 common) - development and delivery of a Shared Monitoring scheme – involving stakeholders including commoners, landowners and agencies – to identify monitoring priorities, carry out survey work and use the results to inform and agree management. The gradual development of trust is an important element of this project. • Shepherding Service (Shropshire Hills 1 common) – this project will trial and investigate the benefits of introducing shepherding on the Stiperstones Common, comparing stock distribution before and after shepherding, whilst also raising the issue of uncontrolled dogs on grazing animals. The project will create a baseline of common stock movement in the absence of shepherding, move common grazing animals around the hill so as to encourage grazing on areas rarely reached and to see how effective shepherding is in distributing the grazing pressure across the hill. Finally, it will use the shepherd to raise awareness of dogs off-leads with dog owners. • Delivering Our Visions (Dartmoor 2 commons) - This project will enable collaborative discussions to continue around how Commons Visions can be delivered. It will pull together and share evidence/knowledge and best practice across the different commons and wider local areas but also in the context of ensuring resilient farm businesses – the business, the land and the stock in good health. Data gathered will place a value on the role of the commoner and this will be used alongside an engagement and discussion forum to finalise visons for participating commons. Its objective is to use accurate and relevant information to act as a focus against which options for environmental enhancement can be explored.

A2 Shared Spaces

This project covers refurbishment work to the commoning infrastructure (on 11 commons), much of which has not been replaced in the last fifty years due to lack of funds. Thus, permanent sheepfolds, mobile sheep yards, shedders and dipping systems will be repaired or replaced as necessary ensuring that the basic equipment for managing the commons is in place and fit-for-purpose.

Also included is an ambitious scheme to bring together commoners and local communities to repair miles of boundary structures including walls and stone-banked Devon hedges; as well as secure boundaries this will help local communities understand and value the commons, and create a skilled volunteer force to look after the boundaries long into the future.

A3 Sharing the Benefit

This project brings four further commons into Our Common Cause to complete a stakeholder engagement and Visioning process and so that they can benefit from project activities such as training, Common Practice notes (see Project C2 Learn below) and other information sharing.

87

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

7.2 Strand B: Resilience If Common Land is to thrive, and a way of life is to continue, Commoners must have the skills and support they need, and policy must recognise how the grazing of Common Land works. The activities in this strand tackle these challenges.

Resilience includes 3 sub-projects:

B1 Hill Livestock Health

This project (on six commons) will look at how Commoners’ Associations can tackle the considerable challenge of managing livestock health on shared sites. Commoners will work alongside specialist vets to design, implement and evaluate disease control programmes for their individual farms, and to learn skills such as blood and faecal sampling. Once farm health plans are agreed, the focus will switch to developing health programmes for the entire common, with buy-in from all commoners.

B2 Schemes & Skills

This project (on all twelve commons) will give commoners the knowledge and confidence to develop Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS) ready for when the new agricultural funding programmes open to applications in 2024. It is vital that commoners understand the requirements and ambitions of the new schemes, which will pay for the delivery of “public benefits” such as promoting biodiversity and mitigating the effects of climate change.

We will be trialling a Farmer-Led Habitat Assessment scheme (on one common) to see how the recent Payments by Results schemes on individual fields can be extended to common land. Supported by a specialist team from the Yorkshire Dales National Park, this will include training farmers in biodiversity (flora and fauna) ID, survey and reporting skills.

Complementary to both of these, the project will target young and/or aspiring commoners (on three commons) with a combined programme of hands-on and classroom learning, including commoning law, business planning, appreciation of biodiversity and access management, and animal husbandry.

B3 Commons Resilience Fund

This is a modest internal fund for the Project to support Commons Associations and community organisations on matters specific to their common. It might be that they need a logo, or posters to help deter off-roading, or training of some kind, or they might wish to promote lamb sales locally, or to help visitors understand grouse management on their common – anything which would be useful to help their common thrive and be better understood. We have nominally allocated up to £4,000 per common, with a maximum of £6,000 per site; it is not a grant, but will be allocated on the basis of a Project Officer’s recommendation ratified by the Area Group and the Project Manager.

88

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

7.3 Strand C: Commons for All Most people have little knowledge of Commoning, nor Common Land, including the millions who enjoy the Lake District, Dartmoor and other well-loved areas. The ‘visiting public’ miss the history and meaning of landscapes they explore. At the same time the connection between Common Land and poverty has been lost: too few people on low incomes explore Common Land, nor know it existed to provide for the dispossessed (hence ‘common’ people).

If more, and different people, engaged with Common Land and what it has to offer the public, the public could play a greater role in understanding, supporting and benefitting from Common Land.

Commons for All includes 3 sub-projects:

C1 Enjoy

This is the interpretive element of the project (on all twelve commons) at a national and local level. It includes a lively digital diary – an online film and photography-based blog – which as well as being entertaining will also help promote some of the learning outputs of the project. This is complemented by Common Land Guides – 16 downloadable trails designed to encourage visitors to explore and enjoy the project commons and their heritage – together with promotional displays, postcards and children’s activity packs. There will also be a Heritage Sheep Breeds poster/leaflet to help local people and visitors understand more about the livestock they can see on commons nearby. Finally, a suite of locally-focussed interpretive programmes (including interpretation panels, leaflets and books) will showcase the specialities of particular commons including biodiversity and industrial heritage.

C2 Learn

This project focusses on helping people to understand commons.

A Case for Commons is a bespoke education pack including resources for primary and secondary curricula, and also outreach and sensory materials for a wide variety of community groups, including those with particular needs such as Dementia groups. The resources will be designed to be used by Project Officers, partnership staff, commoners, volunteers and teachers, or any combination of those and will be rolled out on all commons.

For groups and individuals who already use commons, maybe without realising it, the project will produce downloadable guidelines (on all commons) for organisers of events – fundraising challenges, caving and orienteering clubs, Duke of Edinburgh’s Award and so on. These will explain how commoning, biodiversity and the historic environment can be adversely affected by the way people use common land, and how they can design their activities to minimise these effects without spoiling anyone’s enjoyment. To complement these guidance notes, through the communications contract we will organise face-to-face training/mentoring for key event organisers such as the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, to ensure that good practice becomes standard practice in their advice to participants.

89

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

To highlight the potential role of commons in tackling the effects of climate change, we will deliver public sphagnum planting events (on one common) to show local communities how peat soils work and thus why it’s important to conserve and manage them.

Closely linked to the Shared Monitoring element in A1 Stronger Together, and with in-kind time provided by University of Cumbria we will develop learning on the Natural Capital provided by upland commons using our Lake District Commons as case studies.

And finally, throughout the project (on all commons) there will be Learning Gathers – virtual and face-to-face learning events both national and regional – to help everyone involved in the project share their own and others’ experiences. These will be half-day and day long sessions showcasing the work on particular commons or on particular strands of the project.

Internal to the project but possibly one of the most useful learning activities will be the Common Practice Record – these are the briefing notes for each of the projects, showing what was intended, what worked well and what might be improved. Where the output is a methodology that might be useful for other people, for example the Hill Farming Carbon Footprint Calculator, that will be included in the record.

C3 Do

Across all 12 commons this is the public-facing aspect of the project and includes a variety of activities some led by commoners and stakeholders, some led by volunteers with interests such as biodiversity and archaeology, and some led by staff from partner organisations. Highlights include:

• The Great Gather (on two commons) where the public are invited to join commoners to help bring the sheep down from the hills ready for shearing. This engaging spectacle proved really popular when we trialled it during the development phase, with farmers stationed in key locations to explain to visitors what was happening, and to translate the whistled commands given to the sheepdogs!

• Open Farm Days (on two commons) where farmers offer “open house” to visitors, so that they can see how a hill farm works, help feed lambs and other stock, and generally get a first-hand feel for a way of life that at one time most people would have had experience of, but which is now unusual and therefore interesting. Many of our farmers are very keen to do this.

• Taking the Commons to Town (on all commons) will take farmers and their animals into a nearby town or city to show nearby urban residents what’s on their doorstep. Audience Development showed that communities outside rural areas often don’t have the confidence to interact with the countryside or are constrained by economic circumstance to make the journey to these wonderful sites. Whilst people are on “town days” we will invite them to come to the Gathers, or to the Open Farm Days, including organising transport where necessary.

• We will encourage people to come out onto commons after dark through our Dark Nights project (on six commons). As well as stargazing, we will undertake citizen

90

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

science work looking at light pollution, bring in experts to teach night sky photography and run a series of wildlife at night sessions.

• Hill Stories (on one common) will involve local 11-18 year olds working with digital media artists to create commons-based stories – stills, video and/or audio. These will be made available through the project’s digital diary and social media and will be brought together in an exhibition at the end of the project. The young people will be exploring their common and learning how it works for the first time.

• Find out from the Farmer (on one common) will make 90 second film clips of commoners accessible to walkers through the use of QR codes on waymarking posts on the Coast to Coast long distance route. This will help long distance walkers understand more about the land under their feet.

• Know your Common (on one common) is aimed at people who live nearby and who may not “see” the common due to its sheer familiarity. It includes guided walks, sphagnum plug planting and training to help local residents have the confidence to share their new knowledge with others through organising events of their own.

• Participation by 480 people from deprived wards in the John Muir Award through day and residential visits to project commons (all twelve commons). Activities will link to all of the work described above enabling young people to explore, discover, conserve and share about commons.

Underpinning all of these activities will be training and mentoring in how to organise and run events; to ensure that small-scale projects can be continued after the life of the project, part of embedding legacy into delivery.

7.4 Strand D: Commons for Tomorrow Multiple public benefits are provided by traditional grazing and the management of Common Land: rare habitats and species, ancient monuments, and conservation of soil and water. Yet where Commoning has declined, or common land not been adequately managed, these benefits are lost.

Commons for Tomorrow includes 5 sub-projects:

D1 Carbon This project will develop a Hill Farm Carbon Footprint Calculator to appraise how commoning and hill farming emits and sequesters carbon. Farmers will work together with Lancaster and Bangor Universities, to devise a system that records carbon use in the uplands and calculate their farms’ footprints to plan how they can come closer to being carbon neutral. It will allow farmers to promote the low carbon footprint of their lamb.

On the other side of the carbon equation the project (on four commons) will survey and restore peatlands, including trialling new farming-friendly methodologies and a series of farmer-led sessions to train other farmers in peat restoration techniques.

91

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

D2 Historic Environment This project (on eight commons) will investigate, repair and promote the care of a variety of historic structures, primarily but not exclusively Scheduled Monuments. Surveys include both traditional excavation and technological intervention (geophysical, LIDAR and OSL) with the involvement/training of volunteers and the general public in both. Then there is repair/restoration work on a number of features from Iron Age to Roman to mediaeval to 19th century, again involving volunteers and community participation as well as specialists.

D3 Habitats This project focusses on bracken and trees (on six commons). The project will supply remote-controlled mowers and other appropriate equipment for use on the steep slopes of bracken-infested commons, enhancing access for walkers, helping the gathering of sheep and creating better habitats for birds, butterflies and ground flora. Critically these paths will reduce the prevalence of disease-transmitting ticks which cause problems for both livestock and humans – Lyme’s Disease.

On other commons biodiversity will be enhanced through carefully targeted tree planting and management of naturally-regenerating saplings, informed by extensive community-led tree survey and design work.

D4 Water This project (on three commons) is concerned with slowing down or diverting the flow of water to reduce the damage it causes, either by flooding homes and other properties or through scouring historic features and access tracks. Work will include the design and implementation of natural flood management features on a common where water run-off causes significant problems for the community at its foot and further downstream, and restoration/preventative measures to reduce the water erosion problems on two others.

D5 Biodiversity This project (on ten commons) will involve specialists, local citizen scientists, and commoners in survey and monitoring work to identify and implement the management needs of endangered birds (Ring Ouzel, Whinchat, Wheatear, Woodcock, Yellowhammer), butterflies and moths (Small Pearl-bordered Fritillary, Green Fritillary, Grayling, Small Heath, Small Copper, Green Hairstreak, Large Heath, Mountain Ringlet, Argent, Sable, Welsh Clearwing, Chestnut Coloured Carpet, Northern Dart, Yellow ringed carpet, Heath Rivulet, Barred Tooth-striped and Forester).

All participants will be trained in bird and butterfly/moth ID and survey/recording techniques, with assistance from expert surveyors in the early stages of the project reducing to “hand holding” as the project progresses. Once surveys provide a meaningful level of detail to inform habitat management proposals, these will be implemented, along with community survey days, leaflets and other activities to help the public understand the wildlife value of commons.

92

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

7.5 How will Our Common Cause achieve HF outcomes? The summary table below shows how the Project will meet Heritage Fund’s outcomes for heritage, people and communities.

The summary shows that across the thematic strands and sub-projects the overall project will meet every HLF outcome. More specific detail regarding outcomes is included in the

Summaries and Full Project Plans in Part 2 and 3 of the LCAP.

In better condition Better interpreted/explained Identifed/recorded skills Developed Learnt about heritage attitudes/behaviour Changed experience an enjoyable Had time Volunteered impacts environmental reduced Negative More/wider range ofengaged people area a Local better to place work live, or visit be boosted economy will Local be more resilient will Your organisation Project / Outcome Better managed A. Collaboration A1. Stronger together x x x x x x x A2. Shared spaces x x x x x x x A3. Sharing the Benefit x x x x x x x B. Resilience B1. Hill Livestock Health x x x x x x x x B2. Schemes and skills x x x x B3. Resilience Fund x x x x x x x x C. Commons for All C1. Enjoy x x x x C2. Learn x x x x x x C3. Do x x x x x x x x D. Commons for Tomorrow D1. Carbon x x x x x x x x D2. Historic Environment x x x x x x x D3. Habitats x x x x x x x x D4. Water x x x x D5. Biodiversity x x x x x x x x x 7.6 Project timetable We anticipate that the Project will achieve Permission to Start in May 2020. The Project will deliver over three and a half years and will complete in October 2023. The table below gives a summary highlighting the anticipated key milestone dates for the delivery stage.

A detailed project timetable and cash flow is then presented in Appendix 3. This shows how the Project will deliver the proposed activities within each sub-project over the three and a

93

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

half years of the Project. The timetable/cashflow is broken down into three-month blocks (or quarters)

During the Development Phase we have decided to extend the Delivery Project duration from three years as proposed in the Stage 1 Application to three and a half years (42 months). We would like to do this to enable the individual projects to have a full three years of delivery. This extended timetable also allows for greater flexibility in managing seasonal implications which are key to this project both in terms of the farming year and seasons available for survey and monitoring of species and habitats. The extra six months allows us an extra spring/summer season for practical activity in 2023 which we will not have with a three-year (36 month) Project. We have produced a budget which allows for this extended timeframe and our greater than originally proposed cash match funding has been a significant factor in enabling us to do this.

Task Anticipated Anticipated start date end date Finalise team Job Descriptions Feb 2020 March 2020 Complete Permission to Start paperwork on approval from March 2020 April 2020 NLHF Receive Permission to Start End April 2020 Advertise and recruit Staff Team posts March 2020 May 2020 National Project Manager in post May 2020 Oct 2023 Ensure IT and office systems in place for Staff Team at May 2020 June 2020 hosted locations Admin/Finance Officer in post June 2020 Sept 2023 Area Project Officers in post June 2020 July 2023 Year 1 contract briefs reviewed and finalised June 2020 July 2020 Year 1 contracts procured Aug 2020 Sept 2020 Year 1 project delivery (and ongoing) Sept 2020 July 2021 Year 2 contract briefs reviewed and finalised April 2021 May 2021 Year 2 contracts procured June 2021 July 2021 Complete mid-term review Nov 2021 March 2022 Year 2 project delivery (and ongoing) Aug 2021 July 2022 Year 3 contract briefs reviewed and finalised April 2022 May 2022 Convene Legacy working Group to devise and agree Exit May 2022 Sept 2023 Strategy with partners / stakeholders Year 3 contract briefs procured June 2022 July 2022 Year 3 project delivery Aug 2022 Aug 2023 Complete Final Evaluation of Project June 2023 Sept 2023 Ensure Exit Strategy in place Sept 2023 Prepare Completion Report and submit final claim Beginning End Oct Oct 2023 2023

7.7 Overall financial summary The following tables give an expenditure and income summary for the Project showing the breakdown of spend across themes and projects and staffing/running costs.

94

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Our Common Cause - Stage 2 Expenditure PROJECT COSTS Net VAT Gross A. Collaboration A1. Stronger together 102,980 12,250 115,230 A2. Shared spaces 123,185 20,866 144,051 A3. Sharing the Benefit 2,000 400 2,400 Total Collaboration 228,165 33,516 261,681 B. Resilience B1. Hill Livestock Health 80,895 8,560 89,455 B2. Schemes and skills 39,815 - £39,815 B3. Resilience Fund 48,000 7,200 £55,200 Total Resillience 168,710 15,760 184,470 C. Commons for All C1. Enjoy 131,223 20,959 152,182 C2. Learn 36,831 3,467 40,298 C3. Do 153,681 23,413 177,094 Total Commons for All 321,735 47,839 369,574 D. Commons for Tomorrow D1. Carbon 103,242 20,248 123,490 D2. Historic Environment 137,820 18,470 156,290 D3. Habitats 144,198 27,400 171,598 D4. Water 85,674 16,555 102,229 D5. Biodiversity 133,593 14,949 148,542 Total Commons for Tomorrow 604,527 97,621 702,149 PROJECTS TOTAL 1,323,137 194,736 1,517,873

Staffing & running costs Staff team, coordination and mentoring 625,440 Travel & Subsistence for staff and volunteers 41,850 Office costs, resourcing, recruitment, communications and evaluation 150,288 STAFFING & RUNNING COSTS TOTAL 817,578 Non-Cash Contributions (volunteers & in-kind) 401,591 FCR 27,174 Contingency 116,773 Inflation 118,652 management and maintenance 69,225 331,824 GRAND TOTAL EXPENDITURE 3,068,866

Our Common Cause - Stage 2 Income NLHF (pending Stage 2 decision) 1,906,800 Esmée Fairbairn Foundation (secured) 200,000 Partners (secured) 301,500 Garfield Weston Foundation (secured) 150,000 Millichope Foundation (secured) 9,000 Dartmoor Preservation Association (secured) 15,000 Other cash match to specific projects 15,750 Non-Cash Contributions (volunteers & in-kind) 401,591 Management & Maintenance 69,225 TOTAL ANTICIPATED INCOME 3,068,866

95

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Detailed budgets are included in Appendix 3 and income and spending forecasts are included in Appendix 4. This includes an overall Project Budget by Heritage Fund cost headings and detailed expenditure and income forecasts broken down quarterly over the three and a half delivery years of the Project.

7.8 Stage 1 and Stage 2 Comparison A Summary Comparison table for Stage 1 and Stage 2 is provided below.

Comparison Area Stage 1 Outline Proposals Stage 2 Detailed Delivery Plan Themes Three themes: Inclusion of a fourth theme on • A. Increasing mutual Resilience: understanding of stakeholders’ • A. Collaboration interest in order to secure • B. Resilience collaborative management • C. Commons for All • B. Addressing the loss of, and • D. Commons for Tomorrow lack of understanding of, the culture and social role of commons and commoning • C. Improving the contribution of commoning to the provision of public goods and services Projects 20 sub-projects under the three 14 sub-projects under four themes themes Timetable 3 years (36 months) Extending to 3.5 years (42 months) Budget £2,690,089 £3,068,866

Staffing • Project Coordinator 1FTE for 3 • Project Manager 0.8FTE 3.5 years (36 months) years (42 months) • 4 x Freelance local • 4 x employed area Project Coordinators for 34 months, 10 Officers 0.8FTE over 38 days/month months • FCL Coordination 4 days/month • Admin & Finance Officer • Mentor support 16 days/annum 0.6FTE over 40 months • FCL Coordination 4 days/month • Mentor support 16 days/ annum • Supported by national Communications Contract

Most of the projects outlined at Stage 1 have been taken forward to a greater or lesser extent, although perhaps in a slightly different form or combined in Stage 2. A significant difference is the addition of a fourth thematic strand for Stage 2 - Strand B: Resilience, but otherwise the three original themes are taken forward. Overall there are fewer projects under each theme and project activity has been broadened and deepened. The only elements included at Stage 1 that are entirely missing from Stage 2 proposals are as follows:

• A4 Identifying and supporting commons ambassadors

96

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• B6 Establishing an 18-month, level 2 Apprenticeship Scheme for aspiring commoners

Additional items included in Stage 2 which were not included in the outline proposals at Stage 1 include:

• B1. Hill Livestock Health project • B3. Commons Resilience Fund

Within the Commons are for All strand (reconnecting the pubic with commons) in projects C2. Learn (with Case for Commons) and C3. Do (with Take the Common to Town), there is a strengthened emphasis on outreach, both into urban areas surrounding our commons and in order to engage with new audiences for commons and commoning. This element has been strengthened as a direct result of our audience development work into missing audiences and some strong current policy drivers such as the Glover Landscapes Review of National Parks and AONBs 2019.

A further significant difference between Stage 1 and Stage 2 proposals is the desired extension of the Project timeframe to three and a half years (42 months). The reasoning for this change is explained in Section 7.6 above.

Overall stage 1 costs for the Project were £2,690,089. The Project budget has grown at Stage 2 to £3,068,866. This is due to bigger than anticipated cash match funding being secured from charitable foundations and partner organisations, and a bigger than anticipated contribution of in-kind and volunteer time for delivery of projects. Our target was £545,000 of cash match funding and we have raised over £690,000. This increased funding allows the project to do more to support upland commons and commoning and to achieve our aims and objectives. We are extremely pleased and immensely proud of the breadth of partnership support for the project which this funding demonstrates, at both a national and local level.

97

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

8 Our Common Cause Partnership and delivery of the Project

8.1 Our Common Cause Partnership & Local Area Groups Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons is a national partnership project. The broad- ranging and inclusive Partnership is convened by the Foundation for Common Land as the Lead Body, with the National Trust as the Accountable Body. The national Partnership represents a broad range of statutory, charitable and special interest organisations at a national and regional level with a stake and interest in commons and commoning. The multiple uses of common land are reflected in the Partnership, including those representing farming, environment, land management, access and open space, biodiversity, water etc.

The Partnership has been developing since 2012 initially through a pilot project ‘Better Outcomes on Upland Commons’ delivered by the Foundation for Common Land. Carried out between 2013-15 and instigated by HRH The Prince of Wales, Better Outcomes looked at how working relations between organisations could be improved to strengthen the ability to safeguard and manage the uplands. The report presented data from five upland commons across England to draw out the characteristics of the successful delivery of multiple outcomes over the same area of land. The Better Outcomes ‘Attributes of Success’ infographic is included below to demonstrate the findings of that study.

The Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons Partnership undertook to take forward this work and to develop a further project to deliver outcomes focused on some of the key themes including collaboration, communication, building respectful attitudes and relationships.

98

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

“I am acutely conscious that the countryside can be a contested place, arousing strong passions amongst individual interests. Creating harmony between these interests might be easier said than done. But I am convinced that it is not only possible, but essential, to work collectively, understanding diverse points of view and ultimately deliver better outcomes for everyone. I hope that a new project, Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons, will help in this process.”

HRH The Prince of Wales- Patron of the Foundation for Common Land An extract from his speech on the unveiling of the Lake District World Heritage Site plaque (March 2018)

The Our Common Cause Partnership includes the following organisations and representatives:

Organisation Representative Role Foundation for Common Land Julia Aglionby Executive Director National Trust Mike Innerdale Regional Director - North Cumbria Wildlife Trust Stephen Trotter Chief Executive Dartmoor Commoners’ Council John Waldon Chair Dartmoor National Park Authority Ally Kohler Director of Conservation and Communities Devon Wildlife Trust Harry Barton Chief Executive Duchy of Cornwall Tom Stratton Land Steward Federation of Cumbria Commoners Joseph Relph Chair Friends of the Lake District Jan Darrall Senior Policy Officer Heather Trust Anne Gray Director Lake District National Park Authority Liam McAleese Head of Strategy and Partnerships Moorland Association Amanda Anderson Director National Farmers’ Union Tom Dracup Uplands Policy Lead National Sheep Association Phil Stocker Director Natural England Nicola Harper Senior Adviser Common Land and Access Open Spaces Society Kate Ashbrook General Secretary RSPB Patrick Thompson Senior Policy Officer (Uplands) Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership Phil Holden Partnership Manager Shropshire Wildlife Trust Colin Preston Chief Executive South West Water David Smith Upstream Thinking and Biodiversity Manager Yorkshire Dales National Park Adrian Shepherd Head of Land Management Authority Yorkshire Dales Millennium Trust David Sharod Chief Executive Officer Yorkshire Wildlife Trust Terry Smithson Director of Operations University of Cumbria Lois Mansfield Academic Director

The Partnership exists to oversee and champion the delivery of the Project and delegates management of the day to day delivery of the Project to a smaller Project Board made up of representatives of the Lead Body, Accountable Body, and the four Protected Area Bodies.

The Partnership Memorandum of Cooperation (Partnership Agreement) records an agreement between the organisations contributing to the Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons project to:

99

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• Take forward the ethos and commitments set out in the OCC Partnership Commons Charter developed during 2018 in order to improve long term working relations between stakeholders and to strengthen the ability to safeguard and manage upland commons. • Work collectively to deliver the “Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons” National Lottery Heritage Fund Grant Project in accordance with the details of the application.

The whole Partnership will meet three times a year (one meeting being face to face) to review the delivery of the Project. Meetings will be convened by and chaired by the Foundation for Common Land (FCL) as the Lead Body.

Membership of the Project Board comprises the Lead Body, the Accountable Body and one representative of each of the DEFRA family of protected areas being; • Dartmoor National Park Authority • Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority • Lake District National Park Authority • Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership

The Project Board will also be attended by the Project Mentor employed by FCL, on the request of NLHF, to support FCL and the delivery of the Project.

The Project Board is the decision-making structure for the Project to ensure delivery in accordance with the NHLF Grant conditions and delivers the collective objectives of the signatory organisations. The Project Board agrees to delegate delivery to the Project Manager who is line managed by the Lead Applicant.

Local Area Groups have been developed in each local area to support and oversee the engagement/consultation process and to contribute to project development at the local level. They will continue in the Delivery Phase to support project delivery as per the agreed LCAP and will support engagement with stakeholders. Area Groups will be Chaired by a lead officer at each of the Protected Area Bodies (except Lake District where this role will be held jointly with Friends of the Lake District). The groups are made up of local partner organisations and stakeholders including commoners. In each local area the Group consists of the following core representatives alongside others specific to the local area:

• Protected Area Body – National Park Authority/AONB Partnership (NPA/FoLD in the Lakes) • Commoners and/or Commons Associations • National Trust • Natural England • Wildlife Trust • Other organisations such as RSPB, NFU, South West Water, John Muir Trust – depending on location.

100

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

The diagram below sets out the Governance arrangements for the Project, illustrating how the Partnership, Project Board, Accountable Body and Local Area Groups interact and the main role and responsibilities of each.

A copy of the signed Memorandum of Cooperation (the Partnership Agreement) can be found at Supporting Document 15. The legal agreement between the two lead applicants (Foundation for Common Land and National Trust) can be found in Supporting document 16).

8.2 Staff Team We have given a lot of thought to the best staff team design for this project given its national geography and coverage across a number of dispersed sites. It is critical that we give as much time to the Area Project Officer roles as possible, to enable them to deliver successful projects at a local level, whilst also ensuring that there is enough staffing at the centre to ensure we have an effective national project working with our national partners and documenting and disseminating the learning more widely. The diagram below shows the basic staffing structure.

Our proposed staff structure is therefore:

• 0.8FTE Project Manager for 42 months • 4 x 0.8FTE Area Project Officers for 38 months • 0.6FTE Admin & Finance Officer for 40 months • Plus, coordination by FCL Executive Director and Project mentor (requested by NLHF in development and proposed to continue in delivery)

101

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

All staff will be employed by the National Trust (or in some cases the appropriate Protected Landscape Body) and seconded to Foundation for Common Land (PM and Admin & Finance) or in the case of the Project Officers to the lead organisation locally. Local Project Officers will be line managed by the national Project Manager. The Project Manager will be line managed by the FCL Executive Director.

The above will be supported by a national Communications Contract worth £56,950 +VAT.

Julia Aglionby, Executive Director, Foundation for Common Land

National Trust Admin /Finance Officer National Project Manager (0.6FTE) (0.8 FTE)

Area Project Officer Area Project Officer Area Project Officer Area Project Officer Dartmoor Lake District Shropshire Hills Yorkshire Dales (0.8 FTE) (0.8 FTE) (0.8FTE) (0.8 FTE)

Dartmoor Lake District Shropshire Hills Yorkshire Dales

NPA NPA AONB NPA

National Project Manager (0.8FTE, 42 months). Responsible to the FCL Executive Director Julia Aglionby. This position would be home based or based at an appropriate partner organisation by negotiation. Main scope/Responsible for:

• Overall management of the Our Common Cause Project Apr 2020 - Sept 2023;

• Manage team of 4 x geographically based Project Officers and a central Admin/Finance Officer;

• Operate within National Trust systems and according to standard processes including all HR, finance, procurement and contract management systems;

• Manage national consultancy contracts for national Interpretation elements (£70,696 +VAT), Communications support (£56,950 +VAT) and Monitoring & evaluation (£20,000 +VAT);

• Facilitate and report to National Partnership and Project Board as appropriate, and at required intervals;

• Prepare and submit quarterly claims to Heritage Fund and other funders as required;

• Manage match funding for the Project including partner’s cash contributions and volunteers and in-kind contributions.

102

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

4 x Area Project Officers (0.8FTE, 38 months) located in Dartmoor, Lake District, Shropshire Hills and Yorkshire Dales, employed by the National Trust, seconded to each of the Protected Area bodies. These POs will be managed by the national Project Manager. Main scope/Responsible for: • Manage delivery of a range of local projects on commons - working with stakeholders, owners and commoners – encompassing capital works and public engagement elements; • Operate within National Trust systems and according to standard processes including all HR, finance, procurement and contract management systems; • Facilitate continuing engagement and involvement across three commons (from Stage 1) to deliver agreed projects and ongoing collaborative working; and facilitate Visioning process with one new common within your Area; • Liaise with the Local Area Lead and work together to convene the Local Area Group, organise regular Area Group meetings to monitor and input to local project delivery; • Procure and manage a range of consultancy contracts/contractors for project and capital works; • Contribute to national level communications and interpretation elements, and deliver a local communications and interpretation offer; • Organise and deliver a public engagement and activities programme across three commons and beyond, to further engage existing audiences and introduce new audiences to commons and commoning; • Contribute to collation of data/info for quarterly reporting and funding claims, as well as for ongoing monitoring and mid-term and final evaluations of the project.

Admin & Finance Officer (0.4FTE, 40 months) to support the Project Manager, employed by the National Trust and seconded to FCL. Managed by the Project Manager and likely to be based at FCL Office at University of Cumbria or National Trust base. Main scope/Responsible for: • Operate within National Trust systems and according to standard processes including all HR, finance, procurement and contract management systems; • Work with the Project Manager and Project Officers to ensure the smooth administration of the Scheme including o Procurement of goods and services (purchase orders and invoicing) o Collation of data and info for quarterly claims, monitoring and evaluation and match funding contributions (including collating volunteer and in-kind contributions) • Support PM as appropriate with administering National Partnership, Steering Group and Project Board • Support, as appropriate, national communications work and local activities/events programmes.

The staff team will be supported by a national Communications Support Contract (£56,950 +VAT) and associated communication resources which will enable an integrated approach to communications and PR for the project, provide capacity for a centralised

103

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

learning hub and the collation and dissemination of learning within, between and beyond the four areas.

The Communications contract will include: • Producing Project summary leaflet and quarterly e-newsletter • Press releases and communications at a national level • Website updates and content management • Producing/commissioning Digital Diary interpretation elements (budget in projects) and event organiser’s guidelines/resources. • Organising annual Video Conference or series of webinars in years 2 and 3, and face to face Learning Gathers.

Further Coordination and support will be provided by Julia Aglionby, Executive Director of Foundation for Common Land as the Lead Partner. Julia will line manage the national Project Manager.

Please find full Job Descriptions for these team roles at Appendix 5.

8.3 Risk Assessment The following tables provide an Assessment of the Risks to the Project overall during delivery, including an assessment of the likelihood of the risk occurring against the impact it would have on the project, giving us a rating of significance and detailed steps which we will take to mitigate/prevent the risk occurring.

The Risk Assessment below does not attempt to show every possible risk, but to highlight the most serious. Impact and likelihood are scored according to the table below. RAG scoring is used according to the combinations of impact and likelihood, firstly with no controls and then after the proposed controls.

The Risk Assessment will be regularly reviewed, at quarterly intervals by the Project Board, and the risks will be updated as delivery progresses.

Likelihood 6. Very likely 5. High 4. Significant 3. Low 2. Very unlikely 1.Almost impossible 1.Insignificant 2. Marginal 3. Critical 4.Catastrophic Impact

104

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

1. Issues with management systems and IT systems for delivery - set up of team members within different organisations and IT systems Impact of uncontrolled risk Existing controls Further action required 1. Staff team cannot work 1. Project Board aware of Further consideration of efficiently potential risk and issues between development 2. More work for Project considering options to and delivery Manager to sort out issues mitigate/manage Solutions in place for start of 3. Delays to project delivery delivery 4. Frustrated/stressed staff team Uncontrolled Risk Score - Residual Risk Score - Lead Responsibility/Owner Impact = 3 Impact = 3 National Trust lead/FCL Exec Likelihood = 5 Likelihood = 4 Director Uncontrolled Risk Score = 15 Residual risk = 12

2. Governance - Failure or breakdown of the lead partner/accountable body relationship. Impact of un-controlled risk Existing Controls Further Action Required 1.Delays in project delivery 1.Legal agreement between Maintain close dialogue and 2.Partnership perceived as two organisations regular meetings between weakened 2.Support at high level within FCL/NT 3.Potentially unable to NT complete delivery phase 3.Regular meetings between FCL and NT 4.Development phase completed successfully Uncontrolled Risk Score - 16 Residual Risk Score - 4 Lead Responsibility/ Impact =4 Impact = 4 Owner Likelihood = 4 Likelihood = 1 FCL Executive Director/ NT Uncontrolled Risk Score = 16 Residual risk = 4 Lead for accountable body

3. Financial – consultancy/contract work not delivered to time or to sufficiently high standard Impact of un-controlled risk Existing Controls Further Action Required 1.Inability to deliver approved 1.Tightly defined briefs with clear Inception meeting for each purposes of delivery timeline and reporting contract clearly outlining 2.Inadequately delivered requirement timetable and reporting project 2.Contract paperwork in place requirement 3. Reputational damage to following confirmation of the work Review at Interim report Partnership and project 3. Effective contract management stage

Uncontrolled Risk Score - 12 Residual Risk Score - 9 Lead Responsibility/ Impact =3 Impact = 3 Owner Likelihood = 4 Likelihood = 3 Project Manager Uncontrolled Risk Score = 12 Residual risk = 9

4.Partners not having time to support delivery adequately or lack of common understanding of expectations and commitments of all partners

Impact of uncontrolled risk Existing controls Further action required 1. Lack of support for project 1. Partners engaged during Work with partners at start of delivery in local areas development delivery to re-engage on 2. Project delivery is delayed 2. Partners aware of project expectations and or does not achieve design through Area commitments anticipated Groups outputs/outcomes

105

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Uncontrolled Risk Score - Residual Risk Score - Lead Responsibility/Owner Impact = 3 Impact = 3 FCL Exec Director/Project Likelihood = 4 Likelihood = 3 Manager Uncontrolled Risk Score = 12 Residual risk = 9

5. Compliance - Failure to comply with law or regulation. Acting in breach of trust. Impact of un-controlled risk Existing Controls Further Action Required 1. Disruption to activity 1.Need for statutory or Review regulation 2. Projects delayed or landowner consents highlighted environment before letting undelivered in project descriptions contracts or commencing 3. 2. Reputational damage 2. Consents in place where works possible. possible Ensure all consents in place 3. Proforma for Landowner before work starts Agreements in place Landowner Agreements in place before work starts Uncontrolled Risk Score - 12 Residual Risk Score - 8 Lead Responsibility/ Impact = 4 Impact =4 Owner Likelihood = 3 Likelihood = 2 Project Manager Uncontrolled Risk Score = 12 Residual risk = 8

6. Staffing – Staff member leaves before end of fixed term contract Impact of uncontrolled risk Existing controls Further action required 1. Key project staff member 1. Regular Project Board to Ongoing line management leaves before end of support PM and support to PM and POs Delivery 2. ongoing line management Accept some level of risk is 2. Delivery is delayed through FCL inevitable with fixed term 3. Loss of knowledge 3. support through NT inc contracts Business/Finance Partner Uncontrolled Risk Score - 12 Residual Risk Score - 6 Lead Responsibility/ Owner Impact = 3 Impact = 3 FCL Executive Director/NT Likelihood = 4 Likelihood = 2 Lead Uncontrolled Risk Score = 12 Residual Risk = 6

7. Financial – Poor Financial Management - Large programme with multiple projects and more than one funding stream. - Failure of staff to understand and deliver reporting requirements of projects and funders Impact of un-controlled risk Existing Controls Further Action Required 1.Risk of claw-back or financial The partners are experienced Monitor and report quarterly to penalties. in delivering large complex Partnership and funder against 2.Heavy demands on staff programmes with multiple target outputs and budget resources to resolve. funding streams. Accountable allocations. 3.Damage to FCL & NT body has strong financial and Maintain close working with reputation and to Partnership. monitoring systems in place. NT finance team. Appropriate management & systems being used. Uncontrolled Risk Score -12 Residual Risk Score - 6 Lead Responsibility/ Owner Impact = 4 Impact = 3 National Trust with Project Likelihood = 3 Likelihood = 2 Manager Uncontrolled Risk Score = 12 Residual risk =6

8.Failure of good practice from project becoming embedded in individuals’ and organisations’ culture and working practises. We fail to share the learning or make the most of a national project. Impact of uncontrolled risk Existing controls Further action required

106

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

1. Failure to deliver anticipated 1. Strong Partnership with Careful management of the project outcomes breadth of representation Project to prioritise and 2. Failure to make most of 2. Collation and dissemination resource shared learning funding investment of learning built into delivery during delivery phase 3. Reputational damage to plan and resources Engage partners in lead organisations and to available dissemination of learning the Partnership Uncontrolled Risk Score - Residual Risk Score - Lead Responsibility/Owner Impact = 3 Impact = 3 Project manager/Project Likelihood = 4 Likelihood = 2 Officers Uncontrolled Risk Score = 12 Residual risk = 6

9. Staffing – failure of project team to deliver the project successfully due to poor performance or lack of capacity/resources

Impact of uncontrolled risk Existing controls Further action required 1. Delays in delivery of 1. Regular Project Board and Ongoing line management project. line management by FCL and support to Project 2. Additional work load for 2. Exec Director to monitor Manager other staff. Project Manager Ongoing line management/ 3. Inability to deliver the performance and capacity support of Project Officers, project within timescale or 3. Monitoring of Project regular reporting against to standard required. Officers delivery by timetable and main work quarterly reporting and areas regular contact through Building in ‘face to face’ time Project Manager. for the team to support teamwork and effective management. Uncontrolled Risk Score - 9 Residual Risk Score - 6 Lead Responsibility/ Owner Impact = 3 Impact = 3 FCL Exec Director / Project Likelihood = 3 Likelihood = 2 Manager Uncontrolled Risk Score = 9 Residual risk = 6

8.4 Financial Arrangements The Project is being managed financially by the National Trust, which will act as Accountable Body and will bank roll the project. All financial management will take place within the Trust’s current systems including those for employment/human resources, procurement, invoicing and payments.

The Trust will accept all third-party contributions of match funding from partners and grants from other Charitable Trusts and Foundations and claims and reporting for these will be managed by the Project Manager. The Project will be supported by a National Trust Finance Business Partner and a Business Support Officer – for which Full Cost Recovery will be claimed. Full Cost recovery calculation can be found in Appendix 10.

An Internal Business Case was submitted to the National Trust’s Investment Board on 15th October 2019 and formal Gate 2 approval was given. This represents the Trust’s internal approval for the organisation to act as the Accountable Body for the Project and for the Stage 2 Heritage Fund application to be made in its name (jointly with Foundation for Common Land).

107

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

Match funding

The table below provides a summary of all match funding secured by the project. This funding package shows the breadth of representation and support for this as a national project, with significant funding secured from our partners at both a local and national level, as well as major charitable foundations. We are proud, and grateful, that this wide range of organisations have chosen to show their commitment and support to the project by making a financial contribution.

Total Funder Amount National Lottery Heritage Fund £ 1,906,800 Esmée Fairbairn Foundation £ 200,000 Garfield Weston Foundation £ 150,000 National Trust £ 60,000 Lake District National Park Authority £ 30,000 Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority £ 30,000 Dartmoor National Park Authority £ 30,000 Shropshire Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty £ 24,000 Duchy of Cornwall £ 24,000 South West Water £ 22,500 Lake District Foundation £ 10,000 Yorkshire Dales Millennium Trust £ 30,000 Open Spaces Society £ 7,500 Cumbria Wildlife Trust £ 7,500 Shropshire Wildlife Trust £ 7,500 Yorkshire Wildlife Trust £ 7,500 Devon Wildlife Trust £ 7,500 Federation of Cumbria Commoners £ 1,500 Dartmoor Commoners Council £ 2,000 Millichope Foundation £ 9,000 Dartmoor Preservation Association £ 15,000 Area Individual Project Cash Contributions £ 15,750

Volunteer and in-kind non-cash contributions £ 401,591 Management & Maintenance costs £ 69,225 Total £ 3,068,866

Approach to in-kind recording/monitoring

The project will also receive substantial contributions of volunteer and in-kind time and resources as match funding. During development we have put in place a system for regularly collating and monitoring these contributions which will continue into delivery. All voluntary and in-kind contributions are recorded at the local level by the area Project Officers and sent in quarterly to be collated for national level claims and reporting. This will be a significant part of the role played by the Admin & Finance Officer supported by the wider team.

108

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

8.5 Procurement strategy and arrangements with delivery partners A number of internal and external contracts will be let to partners, consultants and contractors for work to support delivery of the Project. These contracts will encompass:

• Specialist advice and delivery support to particular projects • Survey and mapping of flora and fauna, and historic environment features to support particular projects • Habitat restoration works • Contract works for access improvements • Interpretation specialist • Communications specialist • Monitoring and evaluation specialist.

Procurement will be managed within the Trusts standard procurement system and procurement strategy and will abide by Heritage Fund procurement guidelines summarised as:

• For goods and services under £10,000 quotes will be sought from appropriate providers

• All goods and services of a value over £10,000 will be competitively tendered

• For goods and services over the threshold for the EU Public Procurement Directive (currently £181,302) for goods and services the appropriate EU procurement regulations will be followed. We do not anticipate any contracts of this size for this project.

• In a number of cases there will be a preferred contractor for a specific piece of work, either where this is a particularly bespoke task or where a project partner has been heavily involved in development of the project and is judged to be the most appropriate delivery partner – in these cases a single tender action will be used.

See Procurement Strategy in Appendix 6. This sets out how we anticipate managing procurement of goods and services associated with the various projects including:

• Details and scope of the contract • Required outputs • Anticipated value • Timeline • Procurement method • Preferred supplier if known.

Also included in the Appendix is the National Trust’s procurement process guidelines, a template Contract Brief, and draft Briefs for national contracts for Communications Support, Interpretation elements and Evaluation.

109

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

9 Sustainability: Management and Maintenance of Benefits This section looks at how the benefits from the Project will be managed and maintained once the funded project ends in 2023, in terms of who will take on responsibility for maintaining key elements of the project. The section will also look more generally at sustainability of outputs/outcomes and how the Partnership will put in place a planned Exit Strategy for the Project.

9.1 Developing an Exit Strategy The exit strategy will be developed with partner organisations and volunteers at a project and local Area Group Level. There are a number of options available for thinking about how projects or elements of projects might continue after the end of the funded project. The flow chart below represents a possible decision-making process for deciding on the best option for each part of the Project as part of the overall Exit Strategy. The main options being to take forward successful work either through mainstreaming with existing organisations, continuing to support volunteer/stakeholder led initiatives and, where necessary, taking work that cannot be funded within existing budgets or capacity and considering options for future project funding. Equally important is to identify work that has not been so successful, to learn from it and to move on.

110

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

An external consultant will be contracted to conduct a short mid-term review as part of the Evaluation Framework (see Section 10 for more details) and this will help to inform development of the Exit Strategy over the remaining 18-months or so of the Project. A national Legacy working group likely to be made up of representatives from each of the local Area Groups plus one or two members of the Project Board will convene from the beginning of Year 3 (anticipated May 2022) to assist with this process. A key role of this working group will be to assess the effectiveness so far of the Shared Learning elements of the Project and the degree to which learning has been disseminated and shared within, between and beyond the four local areas to a national platform. This will ensure that any steps needed to improve this shared learning and dissemination and to make the most of the national project can be made at this point with plenty of time left to make changes and/or increase planned activity.

The Our Common Cause Partnership represents a strong and broad base of organisations on which we can build to ensure the legacy of the project. There is much that our partners will be able to do to build some of our activities, particularly in relation to public engagement and awareness raising, into their Business as Usual. This will be the starting point for our legacy plans. There will also be continued partnership working at a national level through existing sector stakeholder groups such as the Defra Common Land Stakeholder Group and the Uplands Alliance. Indeed, the project will not stand alone in a vacuum, but will exist within a body of work where learning can be shared and built upon. These structures include those of the four protected areas, county-based Nature Partnerships and Local Enterprise Partnerships.

9.2 Management and Maintenance Plan for Specific Elements In Appendix 7 we include a table setting out how we anticipate that specific elements of the Project will be maintained and kept in good condition for 5 years after Project completion. We note that a focus of this Plan will be ensuring that heritage is kept in a better condition: that physical improvements to natural and cultural heritage be maintained into the future. The M&M Plan considers:

• What M&M is required (inc consideration of risks) • Who will take the lead and support management and maintenance • What resources/ capacity are required • Cash budget required to deliver management and maintenance - over 5 years • In-kind/voluntary time required to deliver management and maintenance -over 5 years.

The Plan looks at how both the capital elements will be maintained but also at how we can continue to resource or support engagement activities in the longer term.

The costs of M&M over 5-years post project completion are calculated as £12,750 for cash input and £56,475 for in-kind/voluntary input, totalling £69,225 overall.

Key partners have committed to these management and maintenance costs and evidence is supplied in Appendix 7.

111

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

A template Third Party Agreement is included in Appendix 8. This sets out an example of how purchased equipment and/or machinery of a significant value can be gifted to appropriate Constituted organisations such as Commoners Associations to ensure security of investment. An alternative arrangement in the form of a Contract for a lease arrangement is also included. Both these examples have been sourced from other recent Heritage Lottery funded projects.

A template Landowner Agreement is supplied in Appendix 9. This Agreement confirms the ownership for the land in question and clarifies the work to be carried out and an agreement that the landowner will not damage or remove that work/feature during the terms of the grant. The Agreement will be signed by all landowners before any work is commenced.

112

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

10 Evaluation Framework for Delivery We have considered how the project will be monitored and evaluated in delivery including defining the purpose of the evaluation, the proposed evaluation approach and the focus of the evaluation.

Defining the Purpose of the Evaluation

We anticipate that the following is what we will want the Evaluation to do to meet both our Partnership’s needs and those of our funders.

Project delivery and development: • To find out if the Project delivery is happening as planned • To support development of the Partnership Project • To help to achieve ‘best practice’ delivery delivery & • To make connections with relevant plans, development policies, programmes & legislation • To help with legacy, to find a way forward after the Project. What Learning & difference What difference the Project is making: sharing the Project • To find out if the intended outcomes are is making being achieved • To find out if there are any unexpected outcomes (positive or negative).

Learning and sharing: • To disseminate findings and learning to people who have been involved and more widely • To enable the Project and its stakeholders to learn from one another • To be able to demonstrate the successes of the Project as a way to attract more people to engage.

Proposed Evaluation Approach Several key features have been identified for the intended evaluation approach: • For each project within a theme, there will be a description of the situation before the work, together with that project’s intended outcomes and legacy. This will be a key resource for the evaluation. • The Project has essential on-going reporting requirements to meet its obligations to its main funder, NLHF. The Area Project Officer for an individual project will be required to report on that project’s elements to the Project Manager as a minimum. However, they will also be encouraged to carry out ADDITIONAL standardised monitoring, gathering other information which relates directly to the evaluation and which will therefore increase the quantity and quality of information available for evaluation analysis. In this way, they will contribute to improving the robustness of the evaluation by gathering more timely and detailed information than would be possible by an external evaluator alone.

113

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

• There will be an external evaluator/evaluation team, who will provide an independent outside view. They will lead on the evaluation, carrying out some primary research and also making use of the monitoring data gathered by the Project (secondary research). They will: design and deliver two evaluation interventions, i.e. a mid-term and a final evaluation and facilitate simple annual reviews in the years where there will be no other evaluation intervention. • The Project partners, delivery staff and evaluator will work together to promote the purpose and value of the evaluation, with the assumption that when people understand why monitoring and evaluation is important and how it can be of use to them in their role, they are more likely to get engaged and active. • The evaluation will describe what happens with the Project, including what is delivered, which target audiences get involved and what happens as a result of the Project’s activities, and it will also analyse these descriptive findings, aiming to explain why something has happened, whether the way of working was the most effective approach, what can be learnt from the work etc.

Evaluation Focus The Project includes work by several partners and external organisations covering a wide variety of activities, aiming to achieve a big The ways in which vision. In order to be constructive, the the Project evaluation needs to be well targeted, providing contributes to information and analysis about topics that will NLHF's intended outcomes help the Project Manager and partners to deliver the Project efficiently and effectively, inform Area Project Officers and partners about what has been achieved, and enable Outcomes that partners and the delivery team to learn from How well the are unique to their work. Project is Our Common delivered It is therefore proposed that there will be a Cause deliberately limited number of topics, based around three main areas of interest. These will form the basis for all monitoring and evaluation activities.

Evaluation Timetable The table below illustrates how we envisage that monitoring and evaluation will work during the lifetime of the project including: • Ongoing monitoring of outputs and project delivery • Interim evaluation (completed by January 2022) • Final Evaluation (completed by October 2023)

114

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

WHAT WHEN LEAD RESPONSIBILITY Output data monitoring Quarterly Area Project Officers – project data collection & submission for submission to NLHF to Project Manager Project Manager supported by Admin/Finance Officer – collation and submission to NLHF Additional monitoring to Data collection as appropriate, on a Area Project Officer – data collection and submission to support the evaluation – project-by-project basis. Admin & Finance Officer within Project team to agreed collection & collation Data submission to Project team timetables quarterly. Collation of project information by Admin & Finance Officer Inclusion of collated data within within Project team. interim and final evaluations Review of collated datasets by external evaluator Interim evaluation Halfway through project delivery External evaluator, with guidance from Project Manager and Project Board Final evaluation Shortly before the end External evaluator, with guidance from Project Manager and Project Board Annual reflection session Agenda item within a Partnership Facilitated and written up by Project Manager or external meeting evaluator

The Evaluation Framework has been supported by a development phase consultancy contract with Resources for Change Ltd. The Evaluation Framework can be found in Supporting document 14.

115

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

PART 2: Project Plan summaries (as separate documents) Part 2 of the LCAP (provided separately as individual documents) are Project Summaries for the 14 sub-projects. These provide a brief summary of the projects including:

• Aim of the Project • Project lead • Other organisations who will support • Project location • Short description/activities • Baseline – a picture of now and why the project is needed? • Outputs and outcomes • What success will look like? • Target audience and beneficiaries • Timeline – start and finish • Total Budget • Alignment to Our Common Cause Objectives & Vision

PART 3: Full Project Plans (as separate documents) Part 3 of the LCAP (provided as separate individual documents) are the full delivery plans - these contain enough information to enable a third-party or new staff member to deliver the project. They will be updated by the staff team as delivery progresses, this is expected to be on an annual rolling basis.

116

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

List of Appendices (as separate documents)

Appendix 1: Maps of the 12 Project Commons

Appendix 2: Activity Plan: Action Plan

Appendix 3: Detailed Budget, Cash-flow Forecast and Timetable

Appendix 4: Income and Spending Forecast

Appendix 5: Staff Team Job Descriptions

Appendix 6: Procurement Strategy and Contract Briefs

Appendix 7: Management & Maintenance costs and evidence

Appendix 8: Example Third party agreement for equipment and contract example

Appendix 9: Template Landowner Agreement for capital works

Appendix 10: National Trust FCR Calculation

Appendix 11: SSSI/SAM Consents letters

List of Supporting Documents (as separate documents)

SD1: Commons Charter

SD2: Commons Visions

SD3: Commons Management Plans

SD4: Commons are for All Report, Resource Guide and Case Studies (John Muir Trust)

SD5: Social Cohesion Study for Dartmoor and Yorkshire Dales (Somewhere-Nowhere)

SD6: Peat & Wetland Restoration Study (Yorkshire Peat Partnership)

SD7: Follow-up Feasibility Study & Peatland Restoration Plan for Holne Moor (YPP)

SD8: Bracken Management Study (Agrifood Technical Services) (not completed in full)

SD9: Clee Liberty Feasibility Study: Bracken Management (Arbor Vitae)

SD10: Clee Liberty Historic Environment Study (Fearn Heritage & Archaeology)

SD11: Branding Guidelines (Tricolor Associated)

SD12: Communications Plan (Tricolor Associates)

SD13: Interpretation Strategy (Tricolor Associates)

117

Our Common Cause: Our Upland Commons

SD14: Evaluation Framework (Resources for Change Ltd)

SD15: Signed Memorandum of Cooperation (Partnership Agreement)

SD16: Legal Agreement between FCL/NT as joint applicants

SD17. Funding confirmation letters

SD18. Letters of support

118