UK Biosphere Reserves: Status, Opportunities and Potential

UK Biosphere Reserves: status, opportunities and potential

A preliminary review and assessment of opportunities and potential with particular reference to the criteria set out in Article 4 of the Statutory Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves

Moor House-Upper Teesdale and the North Pennines

A Report by Hambrey Consulting for DEFRA/UKMAB April 2009 www.hambreyconsulting.co.uk

1 Contents

1 Summary ...... 3 2 Introduction ...... 5 2.1 The origin and nature of biosphere reserves ...... 5 2.2 Status of BRs in the UK ...... 6 2.3 Purpose and structure of this report ...... 6 3 The status and functioning of the existing Biosphere Reserve ...... 7 4 Alternatives and opportunities for a future Biosphere Reserve in the area ...... 8 4.1 Overview of the area, people, economy and ecology ...... 8 4.2 The existing Biosphere Reserve...... 9 4.3 Upper Teesdale and South Tynedale ...... 9 4.4 Weardale and the northeast ...... 10 4.5 Eden Valley ...... 10 4.6 North Pennines AONB and Geopark ...... 10 4.7 Outcome of the scoping meeting – interest in taking this forward ...... 11 4.8 Possible alternatives in terms of area and scope ...... 12 5 Assessment of alternatives against Article 4 Criteria ...... 15 5.1 Ecological systems ...... 15 Existing BR ...... 15 Teesdale District ...... 15 Teesdale and Wear Valley ...... 16 AONB + area ...... 16 5.2 Biodiversity ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Existing Biosphere Reserve ...... 16 Teesdale District ...... 17 Teesdale and Wear Valley ...... 17 AONB + area ...... 17 5.3 Regional sustainable development ...... 17 Overall ...... 17 The existing Biosphere Reserve ...... 18 Teesdale District ...... 18 Teesdale and Wear Valley ...... 19 AONB + area ...... 20 5.4 Size and functions ...... 21 5.5 Zonation ...... 22 5.6 Organisation ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Teesdale and Weardale ...... 24 AONB + area ...... 24 5.7 Additional necessary provisions ...... 25 5.8 Summary ...... 26 6 Potential social, economic and environmental benefit of a BR in the area ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 6.1 Assessment against sustainability criteria ...... 27 6.2 Strengths and weaknesses of future alternatives ...... 31

Annex 1: Report of scoping meeting ...... 33 Annex 2: Description of ecological features and systems of existing and possible extended Biosphere Reserve ...... 37 Annex 3: Social and economic characteristics ...... 42

2 1 Summary

1. The existing Biosphere Reserve at Moor House-Upper Teesdale in the North Pennines no longer meets the revised UNESCO criteria. Although of exceptional ecological quality it fails to encompass sufficient gradation of human intervention or opportunity for sustainable development.

2. There is however good potential to re-designate a Biosphere over a larger area, with the existing Biosphere Reserve serving as the core area, nearby Natura 2000 sites or SSSI serving as buffer zone, and a wider transition zone encompassing a range of land use types, villages and towns.

3. The report makes a preliminary assessment of the potential of three alternative extended areas in terms of rating against the UNESCO BR criteria, and in terms of potential social, economic and environmental benefit:

a) Upper Teesdale extending down the valley to include Barnard Castle; b) Upper Teesdale and Weardale, encompassing also Barnard castle and Bishop Auckland; c) The area encompassed by the existing Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) but including also significant communities which were excluded from the AONB.

4. All of these areas have strengths and weaknesses which are discussed more fully in the report. Upper Teesdale and Barnard Castle has the advantage of a strong sense of identity and economic coherence. Bringing in Weardale increases the opportunity for including more deprived communities and the range of possibilities for sustainable development initiatives, but may be less coherent and more complex to manage. The AONB has the advantage of encompassing a major ecological system and with a ready made management partnership. However, to bring in more people and increase opportunities for sustainable development, some of the towns around its periphery currently excluded from the AONB would have to be included, adding complexity in terms of management arrangements and increasing transaction costs. 5. The potential added value of a biosphere reserve in the North Pennines include:

a) A general enhancement of the image and profile of the area as a place of high environmental quality where innovative sustainable development is actively encouraged; b) Strengthened sense of pride and ownership of the high environmental values of the area, particularly amongst those currently outside the AONB, and especially those in more deprived areas; c) Strengthened educational and sustainable development opportunities through this sense of pride; d) Improved access to funding and investment opportunities related to sustainable development; e) Quality labelling initiatives for products from the BR.

The degree to which such benefits might be realised through BR designation, and the best organisational structures to deliver them require further research.

6. There already exist in the North Pennines a large number of organisations and management mechanisms to promote biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. The key to a successful BR here would be to add value to these existing structures and mechanisms while avoiding any unnecessary layers of bureaucracy. In this sense the designation could be seen as an accolade for existing environmental quality management and sustainable development initiative which might further strengthen these through awareness, pride and opportunity.

3 7. A possible organisational model is offered by some of the Regional Parks in France which rely on a charter – or set of agreed principles – as the basis for agreement between public bodies and stakeholders. Multi-layered and detailed strategies and management plans are not required and would be counter-productive.

2 Introduction

2.1 The origin and nature of biosphere reserves The origin of Biosphere Reserves goes back to the "Biosphere Conference" organized by UNESCO in 1968, the first intergovernmental conference to seek to reconcile the conservation and use of natural resources, thereby foreshadowing the present-day notion of sustainable development1. In 1973, the concept of Biosphere Reserves was formally established within UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere (MAB) programme. Their functions were to conserve biodiversity and provide facilities for research, education and training.

The MAB philosophy and programme was substantially revised at the 1995 Seville Conference which created a "Statutory Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves” and associated criteria for designation. According to Article 3 of this framework, Biosphere Reserves (BRs) are expected to be “sites of excellence to explore and demonstrate conservation and sustainable development on a regional scale”. BRs are expected to combine three functions: conservation; sustainable development; and logistic support (education, training, exchange etc)

Management of BRs is conceived within a threefold zonation – a core zone of high biodiversity value subject to some form of legal protection; a buffer zone managed in such a way as to secure the qualities of the core while at the same time encouraging sustainable use; and a transition zone, which may include urban areas, in which the ethos of sustainable development can be pursued more broadly, and where the links and inter-dependencies with the core and buffer zones can be explored and demonstrated.

The most recent interpretation of the nature and purpose of biosphere reserves is to be found in the Madrid Action Plan (MAP: UNESCO, 2008), which includes the following vision statement: “The World Network of Biosphere Reserves of the Man and the Biosphere Programme consists of sites of excellence to foster harmonious integration of people and nature for sustainable development through participation, knowledge, well-being, cultural values and society’s ability to cope with change, thus contributing to the [Millennium Development Goals]”.

The term Biosphere Reserve is therefore a misnomer: the designation is neither restrictive nor exclusive, except in so far as a legally designated core zone is required. Taken as a whole it is not a protected area as defined by IUCN. Rather it is the only global designation – or accreditation – for an area demonstrating excellence in sustainable development in practice.

Governance of Biosphere Reserves is highly variable, ranging from relatively autonomous facilitating teams, through a variety of representative and participatory structures, to relatively formal and powerful institutions – and there is no international consensus or indeed guidance on the best governance model. This diversity has been allowed, if not encouraged by UNESCO to maximise the opportunities for learning and demonstration. There is one key proviso however. The Statutory Framework specifies the need for participatory decision-making structures, involving a wide range of stakeholders, as well as provisions for a “management policy or plan for the area as a biosphere reserve”.

1 UNESCO MAB “Biosphere Reserves in a nutshell”.

5 2.2 Status of BRs in the UK

In 1976, the UK Government put forward thirteen National Nature Reserves to be part of the global Biosphere Reserve network. All were designated by UNESCO.

A UK review was carried out in 1998 and published in 1999, following which 4 reserves were de-listed because it appeared unlikely that they could meet the revised criteria in the Statutory Framework. The remaining Biosphere Reserves in the UK are:

Taynish, Scotland Beinn Eighe, Scotland Silver Flowe/Merrick Kells and Cairnsmore of Fleet in Galloway, Scotland Loch Druidibeg, Scotland Dyfi Valley, Wales Moorhouse-Upper Teesdale, England North Norfolk Coast, England Braunton Burrows-North Devon, England

Of these Braunton Burrows has been was expanded and developed to meet the new criteria and was officially re-designated in 2002. An expanded Dyfi Valley Biosphere Reserve, Wales is now in advanced stage of re-designation under the new criteria. Several feasibility studies have been undertaken in respect of a new style BR based around Silver Flowe/Merrick Kells and Cairnsmore of Fleet, and there is significant local interest in progressing this to full UNESCO designation/accreditation.

The remaining 5 “Biosphere Reserves” have been neither delisted nor redeveloped in line with the new criteria, and are in a sense “in limbo”.

2.3 Purpose and structure of this report This report and associated exercise for DEFRA/UKMAB are designed to assess the current status and activities of the 5 “lapsed” BRs, and the degree to which there is the desire and potential to expand, redevelop and re-designate these remaining BRs to meet the new criteria; or whether they should be delisted.

A primary purpose of this report is to present a preliminary assessment of the area, and alternative possibilities for taking forward a biosphere reserve, against the standard “Seville” criteria. This should serve as a resource for both local people and MAB and inform any possible initiatives. The assessment should also serve as a starting point for a full proposal to UNESCO, should local people and organisations decide they wish to progress the concept.

The report offers: • a brief overview of the history and status of the existing reserve; • a resume of some of the views and perspectives expressed at the scoping meeting at the Teesdale Hotel, Middleton, Teesdale, on 25th November 2008; • a preliminary assessment of alternative areas and possible management structures against the standard UNESCO criteria; • A summary assessment of possible social economic and environmental benefits which might arise from BR designation.

6 Official documents relating to the setting up and establishment of BRs can be found at: http://portal.unesco.org/science/en/ev.php- URL_ID=6949&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

3 The status and functioning of the existing Biosphere Reserve

Moor House/Upper Teesdale Biosphere Reserve lies in the SW corner of the North Pennines upland massif – some 10km NE of Appleby and 25km NW of Barnard Castle. As currently constituted it comprises two adjacent National Nature Reserves (NNR) separated by Cow Green reservoir, adding up to 7,399 ha.

It is England’s highest and largest terrestrial NNR, and is also designated as a European Special Protection Area. Its altitude ranges from 290 to 850 m and includes a large part of the catchment of the River Tees, from its source near Great Dun Fell to High Force waterfall.

The Moor House NNR was designated in 1952 - one of the first group of NNRs created in England. It extends from the upper edge of enclosed land in the Eden Valley, over the Great Dun Fell (848 m) to the upper end of Cow Green Reservoir on the River Tees. The geology is a key feature of the site, with alternating strata of carboniferous limestone, sandstone and shale into which intrudes the dolerite of the Great Whin Sill. These features underpin many of the ecological features of the site. The eastern slopes are covered in glacial till, overlain with 2-3 m of peat and blanket bog. The western slopes are steeper and the soils and vegetation more variable.

The Upper Teesdale NNR was designated in 1963, and extended in 1969 to protect arctic-alpine plants and other flora and fauna. From Cow Green Reservoir it extends to the summit of Mickle Fell (788 m) and eastward to High Force waterfall. A key feature of the site is the 'sugar limestone' soil, created from limestone by the heat of igneous intrusions, and supporting many of the rarer plant species.

The combined NNR comprises a range of habitats from low lying woodland and hay meadows, rough grazing, juniper woodland, limestone grassland, blanket bog and summit heath. It is perhaps most famous for its post glacial flora – a range of arctic- alpine plants known as the “Teesdale Assemblage”. Of particular note is the rare spring gentian, alpine meadow rue, mountain everlasting, alpine bistort and false sedge. More common but nonetheless attractive herbs thrive on the limestone soils, including tormentil, thyme, heath bedstraw, heath dog-violet, daisy, harebell and mountain pansy. It is also a fine habitat for moorland and farmland birds including golden plover, skylark, meadow pipit, curlew and lapwing. Black grouse is also a notable feature.

Moor House is owned by English Nature, and Upper Teesdale is in private hands. The NNR is managed through a partnership between Natural England, Raby and Strathmore Estates, and local farmers. Management activities include heather burning over a 15-20 year cycle to create favourable conditions for red grouse, controlled sheep grazing and hay meadow management. More specific management is aimed at regeneration and management of juniper and willow, rush management to maintain the botanic diversity of wet meadows.

The NNRs have a long history of research, with many scientific papers based on research in the area, going back as far as the 1930s2. There is a small field lab available for researchers, and an automated weather station generating a continuous stream of data available on the web. Research has been undertaken on land use change, climate change, deposition of pollutants and the functional processes of blanket peatland and streams. The area was intensively studied as part of the International Biological Programme in the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1990s it became a flagship site of the Terrestrial Initiative in Global Environmental Research (TIGER).”3

Education and outdoor experience is also a key feature of the site. The NNR organises a wide range of conservation activities, walks and talks. The Pennine way passes through both “halves” of the NNR – securing its function as a recreational as well as educational and conservation resource.

At the present time the Biosphere Reserve status is known amongst the scientific community, but is not actively promoted or marketed more widely. Although the NNR is well known, few locals or visitors would be aware that this is a Biosphere Reserve.

4 Alternatives and opportunities for a future Biosphere Reserve in the area

4.1 Overview of the area, people, economy and ecology The North Pennines is a relatively distinct area of fell and moorland lying between the Cumbrian Mountains in the West and the major cities and cultural centres of Northeast England - Newcastle, Sunderland, Durham. It is designated as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and is also a UNESCO Geopark. Historically it functioned as a major part of the industrial economy, being an important area for mining of lead, iron ore and minerals. For many years it was the world’s most important source of lead.

Three major rivers rise in these uplands: the River South Tyne, The Wear, and the Tees. All of these flow east, and lie at the heart of the history and economic development of the Northeast. In a similar way, most of the economic connections are with the east. To the West, the River Eden flows Northwest to Carlisle and the Solway Firth. The existing Biosphere Reserve itself straddles the watershed between Eden and Tees, and indeed between East and West.

The bulk of the land area is now managed for sheep and grouse, but the dominant sectors in the wider economy (i.e. including the ring of small towns around the periphery of the uplands) are manufacturing, tourism/recreation and public services (see Annex 3). The upland area is of particular importance as a “day out” destination from the major urban centres to the East.

The area is also notable for some hi-tech and knowledge based industries, and this is a strategic development area for the relevant district councils. It has the substantial

2 Publications since 1993 associated with the site can be found at http://www.ecn.ac.uk/Publications/MHUT%20Pubs%20List.pdf 3 http://www.ecn.ac.uk/sites/moorh.html

8 advantage of being close to major cities and infrastructure, while at the same time boasting a high quality environment.

Examination of the index of multiple deprivation shows large variations within the area (Annex 3). There are pockets of significant deprivation (<20% of the English ranking) in parts of Bishop Auckland. At the other extreme Barnard Castle and the rural areas west of Darlington have indices more than 80% of the English ranking. Most of the area however is close to the average, at between 40 and 60%.

Population structure is broadly in line with the English average, although the proportion of retired persons tends to increase, and the proportion of working age tends to decrease in the more rural areas.

Governance is rather complex. Five District Councils cover the area at the present time: Tynedale in the North, Teesdale in the South, Eden Valley in the West, Wear Valley in the centre/east and Derwentside in the Northeast. However, this is likely to change in the near future with the introduction of unitary authorities. Some influence is also exerted by the AONB partnership over the predominantly rural and upland areas of the N Pennines.

4.2 The existing Biosphere Reserve The existing Biosphere Reserve is virtually unpopulated, though the land is actively managed for sheep, grouse and hay meadows – by the two estates (Raby and Strathmore), by local tenant farmers, and by Natural England. The NNR receives many visitors, and as noted above is host to a variety of conservation, recreation, educational and research activities.

4.3 Upper Teesdale and South Tynedale Upper Teesdale itself is a picturesque valley dominated by fine stone buildings and sheep farming, set against a backdrop of wild moorland. The land is almost all owned by two Estates: Raby and Strathmore who focus primarily on grouse management. The farms are predominantly run as tenancies. Although this is mainly hill country the farmers do finish lamb and mutton. In some areas the signs of the lead mining of the past can be found, but there are no specific interpretation centres or associated attractions in Teesdale itself. The valley has several hotels and receives more than 130,000 visitors a year, mainly attracted by the impressive High Force water fall.

Middleton in Teesdale is a small town of around 1,500 residents, with hotels and cafes, a good selection of shops, some basic agricultural services, and several small businesses. Some 10 miles southwest down the valley is Barnard Castle – a significant social, cultural and economic service centre for the area with a population around 6,700 persons, and host in particular to a major Smith-Kline Beecham factory employing more than 1,000 people4. The Bowes Museum attracts 120,000 visitors a year and there is popular award winning farmers market, which also hosts an annual food and craft festival.

Travelling in the other direction North up Teesdale takes you eventually over the watershed to the small town of Alston, and on down the South Tyne valley to Haltwhistle. Here there is more evidence of the mining past, with a partly restored narrow gauge railway.

4 A proposal has recently been put forward to cut 200 jobs at this plant

9 The Pennine way passes through this area - up through Teesdale, across the NNR and down to Dutton in Eden, before climbing back over Great Dun Fell, through to Alston and down the South Tyne valley.

Overall the area is relatively prosperous, with high employment and a good educational system. Compared with the national averages there is a high density of business activity (businesses/head of population) and particularly high levels of home working (16.5% compared with the UK average of 16.5%). However, like many rural areas it is characterised by an ageing population and significant outmigration of young skilled workers – related to both high property prices and lack of opportunity.

There are some relatively small areas of relative deprivation – especially in the old industrial and mining villages of Staindrop, Evenwood and Cockfield (see Annex 3).

4.4 Weardale and the northeast To the North of Teesdale is Weardale – similar in many respects to Teesdale, being dominated by high wild moorland managed mainly for grouse – but with a stronger sense of an industrial past. Old lead mine workings and quarries are more apparent. A railway line goes well up the valley to Stanhope and Eastgate. There are also two major visitor attractions which offer underground tours through the old mines.

To the North east the moors fall away more gently through the Allen and Derwent valleys towards Hexham, Newcastle and the old mining town of Consett. The 405ha Derwent Reservoir is a significant recreational destination (picnics, fishing, sailing) and nature reserve.

4.5 Eden Valley Lying between the Cumbrian mountains and the N Pennines – and between a National Park and AONB – lies the Eden Valley. This is more of a farmed landscape with several significant market centres including Appleby and Penrith. Historically this area is more closely allied, economically and culturally, with Cumbria and Carlisle.

4.6 North Pennines AONB and Geopark The North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, designated in 1988, covers an area of almost 2000 square kilometres, with a population of around 12,000 (some 50% of that in the heyday of farming and lead mining).

“The North Pennines form a distinct upland block bordered by the Eden and Tyne valleys, the Durham lowlands and the Yorkshire Dales. It is characterised by high uninhabited heather moorlands dissected by a series of dispersedly settled river valleys which radiate north and east from the central area. The North Pennines have many impressive natural features which result from the varied geology of the area. Cross Fell is the highest point in the Pennines and features periglacial landforms such as stone stripes and polygons. The whin sill, a resistant volcanic rock is exposed to form dramatic features at High Cup Nick, Cauldron Snout and High Force, the largest waterfall in England. Attractive river gorges, shake holes, caves and pavements form where the limestone outcrops, and localised sugar limestone supports specialised plant communities. The area’s rich mining heritage stems from veins of lead and zinc which have been deposited in fissures in the limestone. On much of the high Pennines a layer of peat blankets the bed rock and this supports many of the important moorland habitats. In contrast to the large expanses of upland moorland, the semi-improved pastures and hay meadows of the low-lying dales

10 contain flower-rich meadows with attract snipe, redshank, curlew and lapwing. Alder, ash and oak woodland are found in sheltered areas, gorges and valley sides. ”5.

A statutory management plan for the area is developed by the North Pennines AONB Partnership, an alliance of 22 organisations, supported by a small secretariat or staff Unit. The Staff Unit seeks to implement the plan and takes action to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the area, and helps to co-ordinate the work of others. The AONB area is also a UNESCO Geopark – the first in the UK.

“This is one of England's most special places - a stunning landscape of open heather moors and peatlands, attractive dales and hay meadows, tumbling upland rivers, wonderful woods, welcoming communities, intriguing imprints of a mining and industrial past, distinctive birds, animals and plants and much, much more”6

The AONB area is host to • 40% of the UK’s upland hay meadows • 30% of England’s upland heathland and 27% of its blanket bog • 80% of England’s black grouse • 36% of the AONB designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest • Red squirrels, otters and rare arctic alpine plants • 22,000 pairs of breeding wading birds

The relatively small population of the area reflects the fact that the AONB specifically excludes most significant population centres (see map in Annex 4).

4.7 Outcome of the scoping meeting – interest in taking this forward This was an introductory meeting, with a small group representing Natural England, AONB, the local Council, Enterprise Company, marketing organization and local farmer. Not represented were the major landowners in the area (Raby and Strathmore Estates) and other local business. It should be emphasized therefore that the following are the views of a very small group convened in Upper Teesdale. A more comprehensive consultation would no doubt generate a broader range and perhaps a different balance of opinion. Nonetheless, discussions were wide ranging and provided an insight into the possible interest in and potential for an extended Biosphere Reserve.

Much of the meeting was taken up with clarifications of what a “new style” BR could mean for the local people and economy, and it is far too early to ascertain views in any comprehensive sense. This is a learning process and requires much discussion and thought before local views are crystallized.

5 English Nature, August 1997. The North Pennines. An assessment of the nature conservation resource of the North Pennines - a Natural Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Draft report for consultation with key partners. English Nature August 1997

6 http://www.northpennines.org.uk/

11 farming community were seen as less tangible, although there might be opportunities related to the Teesdale Farmers Market and Food and Craft Festival. Some questioned whether the designation would add anything to what can already be achieved under existing designations (AONB; Geopark; other sustainable development initiatives).

There was significant discussion as to whether the various designations would clutter, compete or complement in terms of possible benefit to the area. Broadly speaking there was a feeling that the designation could generate benefit, and certainly would do no harm. It chimes well with existing local initiatives such as the LEADER strategy and the Sustainable Community Strategies, as well as with the wider AONB and Geopark designations and associated strategies.

There was less agreement on possible scale. On the one hand there was a feeling that the designation should be restricted to a reasonably small area – perhaps upper Teesdale down to Barnard Castle – an area connected by services, infrastructure, commuting etc. This would ensure a greater degree of “exclusivity” to the designation, and a stronger community focus. On the other hand there was a view that a much greater area could benefit – perhaps corresponding to the AONB, but extended also to include some of the Eden Valley – especially since the existing core area straddles the watershed. This would allow it perhaps to strengthen and complement the existing AONB and Geopark designations. Needless to say there might be intermediate approaches – such as Teesdale and Weardale.

Several possibilities were also aired for organizational structures. For a relatively smaller area the existing Leader Action Groups might serve as a starting point. For a larger area, the existing AONB partnership might serve as the focus for organization.

4.8 Possible alternatives in terms of area and scope Taking into account the UNESCO criteria (see below), the geography, demography and economy of the area, and the views expressed in the scoping meeting, the following appear to be the options in terms of expanding the existing Biosphere Reserve.

Option 1: local BR – Teesdale District. This would be a small to medium sized BR based on the existing Teesdale District. This covers an area of some 325 square miles and a population of 25,000. It has a very high coverage of nature conservation designations. It would have the advantage of linking an upland watershed directly to a modest market town, with significant social and economic ties and a strong sense of identity. In governance terms it might correspond roughly to the existing Teesdale District Council, although local government restructuring is likely to change this.

Option 2: Intermediate BR: Teesdale and Wear Valley This would be roughly double the size, encompassing the two adjacent valleys, and also taking in the settlements of Stanhope, Wolsingham, Crook and Bishop Auckland. Although more disparate in terms of economy and society, it would bring in some of the more deprived communities around Bishop Auckland, offering perhaps more opportunities in terms of sustainable development, recreation and education. Boundaries could be within the existing Teesdale and Wear Valley District Councils.

Option 3: AONB area extended to include the surrounding communities

12 A larger AONB – extending to more than 3,000 km2 could be envisaged, bounded to the south and south west by the A66 and A67 and to the north and north-west by the A686 and A689. This might bring in the major communities which lie along these routes, and therefore encompass a far larger population. This area has the advantage of encompassing a major ecological system and the communities within and surrounding it. On the other hand it is large, impact would be spread thinly, and the cultural and economic diversity may compromise any sense of shared ownership.

Option 4. Moving further outward and eastward to the industrial areas of Darlington and conceivably beyond could encapsulate a major watershed from the summit of Great Dun fell to the mouth of the River Tees – at the heart of England’s industrial history. While this could be highly effective in terms of delivering the objectives of a new style Biosphere Reserve, the lack of cohesion and identity would greatly increase transaction costs and probably reduce impact, and we do not consider it further in this report.

13 Map of Moor House – Upper Teesdale and North Pennines

5 Assessment of alternatives against Article 4 Criteria

5.1 Ecological systems

Criterion 1. It should encompass a mosaic of ecological systems representative of major biogeographic regions, including a gradation of human interventions

Overall assessment. The existing BR scores reasonably against both parts of this criterion. A larger area would score very well, especially if it covered a “transect” from upland habitat to lowland river valley and more intensive land-use.

The North Pennines area is a mosaic of ecological systems representative of upland Britain, and its importance as such is recognised by the very high degree of national and international nature conservation designations. More detail on the ecology of the area, and citations for the various SSSI can be found in Annex 2.

Existing BR Moor House-Upper Teesdale NNR/BR encompasses a range of habitats typical of the North Pennines, ranging from the summit heaths of the high fells, through blanket bogs, limestone grassland and juniper woods to rough grazing and hay meadows and riparian willow woodland in the valley.

Its importance as representing an ecological system is explicitly recognised through the research which is being undertaken on the functional processes related to peat as an ecological system.

There is human intervention in terms of heather moor management for grouse and sheep, and on-going management is through an active partnership between Natural England, the Raby and Strathmore Estates, and the local farming community. The Pennine way passes through the Reserve and there are Nature Trails. High Force water fall on the edge of the NNR is a major visitor attraction.

Teesdale District This area encompasses all the representative ecological systems of the area from high moorland through to lowland meadow. The number and coverage of NNR, SSSI, and Natura 2000 designations is testament to the quality and diversity of the ecological systems in the area. It is particularly notable for the limestone pavement, limestone sugar soils and montane arctic alpine flora found in the NNR. There are also important hay meadows and pastures, and high densities of breeding waders. The area is also noted for some rare invertebrates.

Human intervention is relatively limited over the upland areas, and mainly restricted to grouse and sheep grazing management. Further down the valley the farming becomes steadily more intensive, initially in terms of meadow and pasture management, and finally in the form of more intensive lowland farming practice, including arable production.

15 Teesdale and Wear Valley Wear Valley exemplifies many similar ecological systems, and again the high coverage of SSSI and Natura 2000 sites is testament to its qualities. While less significant in terms of arctic alpine flora, it is particularly important for its blanket mire, dry heath, upland grassland communities and breeding bird populations, particularly merlin and golden plover.

Human intervention is now relatively limited over the upland areas, and mainly restricted to grouse and sheep grazing management. However there is much more evidence of past intervention in terms of mine and quarry workings and spill, and moving down the valley industrial activity increases more generally. As for Teesdale, farming becomes steadily more intensive further down the valley, initially in terms of meadow and pasture management, and finally in the form of more intensive lowland farming practice, including arable production.

AONB + area A “Natural Area Profile” is available for the North Pennines7 and this area roughly corresponds to that of the AONB.

“Nearly 80% of the area comprises some form of seminatural vegetation and plantation woodland whilst only 20% has been significantly agriculturally improved and only 0.6% of the area can be considered built up. Of the seminatural habitats acid grassland (17.5%), blanket bog (26.6%) and heathland (15.6%) comprise the most extensive habitats, whilst scrub (0.2%) and semi-natural woodland (0.9%) reflect the scarcity of some of the habitats.”

In addition to the range of habitats described above for the smaller areas, the AONB brings in more woodland and ravine vegetation, and lower lying marsh and pasture. The area is particularly important for wildfowl, waders, and predators such as short-eared owl and merlin.

5.2 Biodiversity

Criterion 2. It should be of significance for biological diversity conservation.

Overall assessment: The BR as currently constituted scores well against this criterion. If extended to include the rest of Upper Teesdale, or a greater part of the North Pennines it would score highly.

Existing Biosphere Reserve The NNR leaflet is unequivocal: “Nowhere else in Britain is there such a diversity of rare habitats in one location. Of special significance is the flora which colonised the High Pennines at the end of the last ice age and has survived here ever since”.

7 English Nature, August 1997. The North Pennines. An assessment of the nature conservation resource of the North Pennines - a Natural Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Draft report for consultation with key partners. English Nature August 1997

16 Teesdale District The conservation and biodiversity interest has already been covered in section 4.1

Teesdale and Wear Valley See section 4.1

AONB + area See section 4.1

5.3 Regional sustainable development

It should provide an opportunity to explore and demonstrate approaches to sustainable development on a regional scale.

Overall assessment: The area as currently designated offers limited opportunity in this regard. Teesdale District is a relatively coherent/identifiable geographic area with a strong sense of place, and there is ample opportunity for sustainable development at a regional scale. It could score well against this criterion. Including Weardale creates more opportunity for sustainable development and a greater number of people might benefit. The AONB area itself offers rather limited potential, since it excludes population centres, but if surrounding communities were included it would score highly.

Overall There is a strong steer from regional and county level local government to promote sustainable development over wide areas by strengthening cities in parallel with promoting market towns as rural service centres and foci for new “knowledge based” industries. These should attract skilled labour and inward investment through a high quality environment8. There is a clear regional need to restructure the economy in this way to counter the significant problems associated with industrial decline in the Northeast.

Key areas for investment and development in rejuvenated rural areas are seen as tourism, culture, leisure, renewables and environmental technology, creative and knowledge based enterprise, and agricultural diversification. A key underpinning to all these ambitions is a high quality natural environment – generating a diversity of products and services, attracting people and enterprise, and ensuring an environment in which these “post-industrial” enterprises can flourish.

The North Pennines and surrounding communities in many ways exemplify these opportunities for rural regeneration. There is a clear opportunity to cross link the recreational, educational and inspirational qualities of the high moorlands and dales with revitalised rural service centres based on the old market towns. There is also a major market for local produce and recreation/tourism in the relatively nearby urban centres to the east.

8 See for example Northeast Regional Economic Strategy; Northeast Regional Spatial Strategy; Teesdale/Weardale/Eden etc Local Plans; Centre for Rural Economy, 2005 : City Regions and Rural Areas in North East England.

17 Broadly speaking, these regional planning aspirations and opportunities chime well with the concept of a Biosphere Reserve.

The existing Biosphere Reserve The existing BR offers limited opportunity for sustainable development on a regional scale. Conservation rather than sustainable development is the main objective of the existing NNR – though coupled with sheep and grouse management. While it is an important feature in the overall vision for the area, and contributes to tourism, research and education, it is too small and too sparsely populated to offer a focus for significantly increased activity – in terms of making existing activities more sustainable, or in terms of promoting new forms of sustainable economic activity. It would score poorly against this criterion.

Teesdale District As noted above, there is a wider vision for regenerated rural economies based on old market towns as rural service centres, diversified knowledge based enterprise, and tourism/recreational service provider to the urban centres. Barnard Castle is specifically cited as an example of a rejuvenated market town in some of these policy documents. A biosphere reserve based roughly on the existing Teesdale District and encompassing both Middleton and Barnard Castle might on the one hand offer a banner under which to promote and implement these policies, and equally, be strengthened as a concept by those policies, in terms of opportunities to promote sustainable development.

A variety of policies are already in place at District level which align closely with a vision of regional sustainable development. The “vision” for Barnard Castle for example is for a “thriving market town, 21st century rural service centre, destination of regional significance, ideal location for high value investment”. There is also strong emphasis on developing a local produce network9. The quality of the environment is an underlying theme in most of these documents. Thus:

“Teesdale will be a place where people want to live, work and visit while we protect and enhance our valuable environment; where we use opportunities to strengthen our economy; where our communities are vibrant and prosperous; and where our people are safe and healthy, and able to realise their full potential”10

This area takes in a very wide range of habitats and economic activities, ranging from grouse and sheep on the moorland and meadows, accommodation in the valley, through to rural service provision and modern manufacturing in Barnard Castle. The district covers an area of 842 km2 and a population around 25,000. Including communities such as Staindrop, Evenwood and Cockfield offers the opportunity to bring benefit to more deprived communities.

A BR in this area might seek to:

• Promote production and value of local agricultural products through strengthening the healthy/environment friendly image of local produce; • Promote and enhance sustainable tourism and outdoor recreation through a high quality brand image; • Related to this increase the number of overnight stays by increasing the attractiveness of the area to those from further afield;

9 Teesdale Local Development Framework 10 Teesdale Sustainable Community Strategy

18 • Promote/enhance education and research services focused on the NNR and other designated areas in the district; • Promote investment in hi-tec and knowledge based industries through emphasis on quality of life; • Promote/enhance sustainable living and working initiatives – such as home working/reduced commuting; • Promote/enhance renewable energy initiatives; • Promote understanding of the links between urban and rural areas with longer term benefit in terms of enhanced environmental stewardship and management.

A key question is the extent to which a BR could add value to the many existing initiatives to promote the above. Added value may derive from:

• increased awareness; • increased incentive (e.g. codes of conduct associated with BR backed marketing labels); • increased support and facilitation (through institutional or project funding); • enhanced image – in terms of the quality of the environment and the initiative of the local population - underpinning a range of economic activity.

The degree to which this may occur will depend on local “buy-in”, and the extent to which the designation/accolade is used by all the relevant organizations as a key tool in the marketing and promotion of the area as a vibrant post-industrial economy. The words biosphere reserve are not particularly helpful in this regard, although the UNESCO/international accolade probably is. A good name for the area, clearly linked to the UNESCO designation, would probably be the most effective way forward in marketing terms.

The pattern of landholding – mainly tenant farmers – may limit some opportunities in terms of farm development and diversification.

Teesdale and Wear Valley A larger BR, covering the two adjacent valleys and several significant communities, including Barnard Castle and Bishop Auckland, would offer most of the opportunities described above. It could however encompass a much higher population (up to 90,000 in the two districts as currently constituted) and several areas of significant deprivation. Wear Valley District covers an area of 500km2 making the total for the two districts more than 1300km2

A BR based on this area would have a much more industrial feel, and bring in areas of significant decline and deprivation (see Annex 3) around Bishop Auckland. It would also extend the upland and areas substantially, encompassing the Weardale villages of Stanhope and Wolsingham.

“Traditionally employment in the eastern part of the district centred on coal mining, whilst engineering and manufacturing is important today. In the rural west, agriculture and mineral extraction are still important. Tourism is a growing industry for the whole district, particularly Weardale.11

Though different in some respects from Teesdale, Weardale has many features in common – notably the transition from grouse and sheep moor, and old lead mining workings in the upper dales, through the meadows in the lower dales to old

11 Local Authority Area profile Wear Valley

19 coalmining communities and industrial areas to the southeast. The industrial heritage is more apparent in Weardale, with many quarries and mine workings highly visible, and several visitor centres, including underground tours.

The structure of the Weardale District economy is broadly similar to that of Teesdale with employment opportunities mainly in public services, distribution, hotels/restaurant, manufacturing and construction sectors, and very little in financial services.

The local government vision for Weardale also places strong emphasis on the quality of the environment and opportunities in new knowledge based industries. This is exemplified in a major initiative for a renewable energy village at Eastgate in Weardale. This ambitious development aims to create at least 350 jobs for local people and new opportunities for local businesses. The idea is to demonstrate five forms of renewable energy – including geothermal energy – and use this as a focus for housing and business accommodation, a hotel, a renewable energy education centre and tourist attractions, including hot springs and spa using geothermally heated water. A range of recreational activities – including mountain biking – will be promoted in the surrounding areas.

Box 1: Vision for Wear Valley in 2021 (Wear Valley Economic Strategy 2007 -2021) It is 2021. Over the past 15 years, the economy of Wear Valley has witnessed a remarkable renaissance. It is now considered a major driving force in the economy of the sub-region and region, and is continuing to witness rapid growth in population, employment, educational attainment and rates of business start-up.

Economy and Business: A Successful Local Economy in a Globalised World One of the major drivers of the Wear Valley economy over the past 15 years has been the new energy economy. The Eastgate development acted as a major catalyst for this- it acts as a unique demonstration for all forms of renewable energy, including wind, solar, biomass, hydro and geothermal, it attracted inward investment from a number of businesses in the new energy sector, it served as a test-bed for renewable energy, and it became the location for University research activity. Building on this, a one-stop shop for businesses seeking a sustainable low carbon environment was established, and a taskforce was set-up to investigate and promote supply-chain opportunities for existing businesses. Wear Valley is now a recognised centre of excellence in renewable energy and related sectors and the District has set out its Vision to become a carbon neutral economy by 2030.

A Biosphere reserve based on this larger area would offer a greater range of opportunities and challenges and would probably reinforce the existing sustainable development initiatives. The key challenge will be to link the new initiatives in rural development with improved quality of life and opportunity for those in the more deprived parts of the area.

There are both strengths and weaknesses of extending the scale to these two valleys. On the one hand more opportunities are created, and a greater number of people might benefit. On the other hand the sense of place and identity may be diluted, and the transaction costs associated with crossing two administrative boundaries might be increased. This would need to be assessed more fully once the reorganisation of local government is accomplished.

AONB + area The obvious alternative to the above would be to build on the existing AONB, with a greater emphasis on the more rural uplands of the whole North Pennine region.

The AONB management plan contains 37 objectives and more than 150 corresponding actions many of which are closely aligned with the aims and

20 objectives of Biosphere Reserves. They include, for example, objectives and actions related to:

• promotion of agri-environment schemes and farm diversification; • quality local produce linked to conservation and sustainable management objectives; • tourism development; • education, skills, awareness interpretation; • biodiversity conservation – at species, habitat and landscape scales; • affordable housing; • access, recreation and visitor management etc12.

There is also emphasis on sustainable development, with a “sustainable development fund” which offers grants of between £3,000 and £30,000. Projects which are likely to generate social, economic and environmental benefits have the greatest chance of success.

All of this chimes in well with the objectives of a Biosphere Reserve. However the AONB boundaries are necessarily related to the quality of landscape, and this means that many surrounding communities are excluded – and in particular the most deprived areas. This is a predominantly rural designation with a characteristic economy and society dominated by agriculture and tourism, and demography characterized by a high proportion of second homes and retired people. And while the plan does emphasise sustainable development, it does not “set out to deal with all of the issues facing the North Pennines. Rather it addresses, in keeping with the purpose of AONB designation, the conservation and enhancement of natural beauty and those social and economic activities which in themselves contribute to that aim”13. In other words, the primary objective – quite rightly - is conservation and enhancement.

To add value to the existing AONB designation would probably require extension to encompass some of the surrounding villages and towns – so that sustainable development on a more regional scale could be promoted, within a more representative economy. While this would increase the “score” against this criterion, it would complicate management (see criterion 6 below) and would require new mechanisms to include representation of these communities within any management organization or procedures.

5.4 Size and functions

Criterion 4. It should have an appropriate size to serve the three functions of biosphere reserves, as set out in Article 3 14.

Overall assessment: The existing boundaries significantly limit opportunities in

12 terms of the three functions, and especially sustainable development. A larger BR basedhttp://www.northpennines.org.u on any of the alternativesk/getmedia.cfm?mediaid=388 presented above should meet this criterion. 13 http://www.northpennines.org.uk/index.cfm?articleid=13477

(i) conservation - contribute to the conservation of landscapes, ecosystems, species and genetic variation; (ii) development - foster economic and human development which is socio-culturally and ecologically sustainable; (iii) logistic support - support for demonstration projects, environmental education and training, research and monitoring related to local, regional, national and global issues of conservation and sustainable development. From Article 3 of the Criteria for the Statutory Framework of Biosphere Reserves

The three functions are conservation, development, and support for research and education. The BR as currently constituted is large enough to have a conservation function and fulfill many research and educational needs but is not big enough to encompass significant development, or to effectively link development with conservation, research and education. A viable BR under the new criteria needs more people.

Upper Teesdale and Barnard Castle represents a manageable minimum size to meet this criterion. Extending to include Weardale and Bishop Auckland, increases the population and includes more deprived areas, arguably enhancing opportunities to pursue and link all three functions. Of particular interest would be the opportunities to link schools and other educational establishments in the lower watershed/more urban areas with the outdoor experience and educational opportunities in Upper Teesdale and the NNR. There may also be opportunities for schools to contribute to some of the research. In addition it might be possible to strengthen local food campaigns by making urban populations in the lower watershed more aware of – and proud of - the food and other products from elsewhere in the BR. While these ideas could be taken forward irrespective of inclusion of urban communities within the BR, there is little doubt that being a part of the BR would enhance the sense of pride and ownership, and awareness of the links and opportunities afforded.

The AONB area as a whole offers tremendous opportunities in terms of the logistic and conservation functions, but as noted above offers less opportunity in relation to sustainable development, and in particular rather limited opportunity in terms of linking people and sustainable development with conservation, research and education. A BR which encompassed surrounding communities (whether formally or through the “fuzzy boundary” approach15) would be more than large enough to fulfill all three functions.

5.5 Zonation

Criterion 5. It should include these functions, through appropriate zonation, recognizing: (a) a legally constituted core area or areas devoted to longterm protection, according to the conservation objectives of the biosphere reserve, and of sufficient size to meet these objectives

Assessment: The existing NNR/BR of Moor House-Upper Teesdale would serve as an excellent core zone as part of a larger Biosphere Reserve and score well against this criterion.

The current Biosphere Reserve at Moor House (Great Dun Fell, Widdybank Fell) is legally constituted as a National Nature Reserve and SSSI and makes a fine core area in its own right. The wider area comprises the North Pennines Moors SPA and the North Pennine Dales Meadows SAC. Taken together these are more than adequate to constitute one or more significant core areas for any of the options considered.

15 Biosphere Reserves have been established with “fuzzy boundaries” although there are some problems with this approach

22 Criterion 5(b) a buffer zone or zones clearly identified and surrounding or contiguous to the core area or areas, where only activities compatible with the conservation objectives can take place

Overall assessment: The existing BR meets this criterion through protection of much surrounding land under SSSI, SPA and SAC designation. In general the degree of designation over the whole North Pennine area (a total of 36% is designated as SSSI) and the AONB designation itself is such that identification of both core and associated buffer areas would not be a problem for a larger BR, and would not imply any additional management or restriction.

The nature, location and extent of any buffer zones would depend on the overall scale of any BR, and would require round the table discussions. However, the extent of existing designation and management initiatives (NNR, SSSI, SPA, SAC, Environmentally Sensitive Area (farm grant schemes), AONB) suggests that there would be no need for any new designation or regulation in order to deliver effectively functioning buffer zones. Furthermore, Natura 2000 Sites (were they to be core areas) already have effective buffer zones, since there is in place a legal requirement for such sites to be protected from impacts resulting from activities outside the site boundaries.

A range of specific options for buffer zones could be explored which would generate clearly deliminated and effectively managed buffer zones:

• Use the existing NNR as core with SSSI in the wider areas as buffer; • Use the whole designated AONB area as buffer zone; • Draw buffer zones within but around the edge of existing designated areas such as SSSI and Natura 2000 sites; • Use areas where agri-environment schemes are currently in place as buffer zones

Criterion 5(c) an outer transition area where sustainable resource management practices are promoted and developed.

Overall assessment: The existing BR does not comprise such a zone. There are several possibilities for such a zone ranging from Upper Teesdale to the whole North Pennine region outside the buffer and core zones already discussed.

The transition zone is the wider area of the BR within which sustainable development can be promoted and demonstrated. In practice it is everything outside the core and buffer areas but within the wider BR boundaries.

The options for this wider area have been discussed above in relation to sustainable development, size and functions. Broadly speaking a transition zone which encompasses significant population, need, and opportunity would score better against this criterion. This could be achieved either through increasing overall area, or through specific inclusion of areas of need and opportunity.

23 5.6 Organisation

Criterion 6. Organizational arrangements should be provided for the involvement and participation of a suitable range of inter alia public authorities, local communities and private interests in the design and carrying out the functions of a biosphere reserve.

Overall assessment: The BR as currently constituted has arrangements for the management of land within the NNR. It does not have a more inclusive and locally driven system specifically designed to develop, promote and manage a wider BR area. There are several options for the creation of such an organization, which will depend on the area and scope of any possible future BR.

The nature of the institutions to develop, promote and realize the aims of a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve are critical to future success, and there is no standard model. However, certain characteristics are important, including:

• simplicity; • a sense of local ownership and identity; • strong links to local land/resource use and local business; • strong links upward to more strategic organizations; • dynamic individuals to lead or facilitate the process of realizing the potential.

Two suggestions were made at the scoping meeting, and these and other options would need to be carefully appraised if a reinvigorated BR were to be taken forward. The following is a very preliminary assessment of options.

Teesdale and Weardale If a future BR were to be based on either Teesdale-Barnard Castle and/or Weardale- Bishop Auckland, the obvious lead organizations would be the existing District Councils. These are about to be absorbed into the single unitary authority of County Durham. While the new County Council might lead and facilitate, there would still be a need for some form of local participatory management – perhaps building on existing local partnership organizations such as LEADER Local Action Groups, local strategic partnerships, or some form of committee of local councilors.

AONB + area The AONB already has an appropriate management organisation in place – based upon a partnership supported by a small secretariat or executive. This would be the obvious organisation if a BR were to be based on existing AONB boundaries.

If however communities outside the existing AONB area were to be included (as would be necessary to score well against sustainable development criteria), then mechanisms would have to be put in place to include these in some form of extended partnership or standing committee. This could be complex: the surrounding communities come within three County administrations: Durham, Northumberland and Cumbria. The number and nature of communities included would therefore have to be considered very carefully in order to ensure effective but simple representation of interests, and a strong identity for the new BR.

Overall

24 In all cases, the key to success would be to make organisational arrangements as simple as possible – and not add yet another administrative layer. A possible model here is that used in France for some of the “Regional Parks”. In this case there is no significant management organisation, rather a “Charte” or Charter – a set of agreed principles which all the various parties and partners agree to. The detail of implementation is left very much to individual actors. The only sanction is that of peer pressure – and the option for the other partners to exclude partners who fail to adhere to the Charte principles16.

5.7 Additional necessary provisions

Criterion 7. In addition, provisions should be made for: (a) mechanisms to manage human use and activities in the buffer zone or zones; (b) a management policy or plan for the area as a biosphere reserve; (c) a designated authority or mechanism to implement this policy or plan; (d) programmes for research, monitoring, education and training.

Overall assessment: The BR as currently constituted does not have such provisions. However, many of the elements are already present, associated with other designations or management and development initiatives.

Under 7(a) mechanisms will depend on buffer zone(s) chosen. However, as noted above there is a range of mechanisms already in place to manage human use across large tracts of the N Pennines, including a range of designations and associated management agreements, incentives and restrictions. It is likely that – packaged appropriately - these would be more than adequate to meet this criterion.

With respect to 7(b) there also exist a range of existing plans and policies broadly in line with the objectives of a BR, including • The existing NNR and associated designations management objectives and plans AONB strategy and plans The “Geo-Park” strategy and plans The LEADER strategy and delivery plan Local Sustainability Partnerships (LSPs) and Sustainable Community Strategies.

With respect to 7(c) we have already identified possible organizational structures which might take on responsibility for delivery.

The existing BR/NNR is already well known for its research. An impressive list of publications is associated with the site. Newcastle, Durham and Lancaster Universities are all associated with the site. The NNR is also active in terms of field trips and interpretation with a full programme of events. Durham Wildlife Trust has developed a small visitor centre between Middleton and High Force. An extended BR would offer even more potential in terms of special interest and educational experiences. This is particularly the case given its proximity to areas of high

16 Examples and discussion of this approach can be found in Hambrey Consulting, 2008. A review of relevant experience of coastal and marine national parks. Scottish natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 271 (ROAME No. RO7NC). Report available at http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/Report%20No271.pdf. Individual case studies available from Hambrey Consulting.

25 population. An extended and reinvigorated BR here is therefore likely to score very highly on criterion 7(d).

5.8 Summary Table 1: summary assessment against article 4 criteria

Criteria Existing Teesdale Teesdale AONB (+) BR District + Weardale Districts Mosaic of ecological moderate good excellent good systems/gradation of human (excellent) intervention Significance for biological diversity excellent excellent excellent excellent Opportunity to explore and poor good excellent good demonstrate sustainable (excellent) development on a regional scale Adequate size to promote poor good excellent good conservation, sustainable (excellent) development and education/research Opportunities for agreed zonation poor good excellent excellent Opportunity for moderate excellent excellent good community/stakeholder participation Management mechanisms good good moderate Good (poor)

26 6 Potential social, economic and environmental benefit of a BR

In this discussion we are making the assumption that the BR, if the community decide to go ahead with one, would have Moor House-Upper Teesdale NNR as the core area, a buffer zone comprising other designated sites, and a transition zone which includes at minimum Barnard Castle, but which might also include many of the communities which lie on the edges of the N Pennine dale and moorland Area.

Social and economic benefits would depend almost entirely on how the idea was “sold”, both to the local community and to the tourist market, and the extent to which local businesses could increase their turnover and profits by making effective use of the designation. Environmental benefits would be limited, but only because the core and buffer zone is already well protected by statutory designation and existing management plans.

6.1 Assessment against sustainability criteria The following assessment of potential benefit is based on a framework developed in previous work undertaken by Hambrey Consulting on Biosphere Reserves for DEFRA17.

Table 2: Analysis of potential benefits using a sustainability framework

Key: • grey: significant marginal benefit unlikely • cream: * limited benefits possible • amber: **potential for benefit • dull green: ***modest benefit likely • bright green: ****significant benefit likely

17 Hambrey Consulting 2008. The Potential for Biosphere Reserves to achieve UK social, economic and environmental goals. CR 0393 DEFRA Research. Available at http://www.hambreyconsulting.co.uk/recent-reports-g.asp

Dimensions Criteria/potential benefit Identified benefit * A healthy environment species diversity, range and This is well catered for by existing designations and management initiatives. It is unclear that the abundance designation will add significant value This is well catered for by existing designations and management initiatives. It is unclear that the habitat extent and condition Biodiversity designation will add significant value ***This may be partly addressed through RDP and in provisions within the AONB management plan. structural diversity and However, there is potential to focus the conservation function of the BR in this area adding value to connectivity the existing conservation management which remains very site and species/habitat specific. character, condition and ***This largely catered for through the existing AONB. However, a BR might focus especially on Landscape qualities linking structural diversity and connectivity with landscape quality and character. **Water and air quality is well catered for through the Environment Agency, the Water Framework quality and productivity of soil, Directive and other major environmental management programmes. Soil quality is an area often water, air neglected and there may be some opportunities to add value in this area. **Again this is largely catered for through the Water Framework Directive, though there may remain efficient drainage opportunities to integrate that work with initiatives related to landscape and biodiversity as described Ecosystem services above **This relates closely to issues of drainage, water quality, landscape and ecological erosion resistance connectivity/diversity **This relates closely to issues of drainage, water quality, landscape and ecological carbon sinks connectivity/diversity other ecosystem services

A healthy society **** A “biosphere reserve” sounds like a healthy place to be, and the brand could well help business development in this area. Depending on the scale of the BR this would cater to active recreation those living both within and outside the BR, but especially to the people in the urban Recreation and access northeast. access Limited. Access and access management is already a specific issue for the NNR and AONB. passive recreation and **** There already exist books and photos of the area which inspire. The BR designation is inspiration likely to strengthen and promote media production of all kinds. ****The existing NNR/BR and AONB/Geopark do a fine job in raising awareness and Understanding and awareness understanding and awareness understanding. A BR which encompassed more urban areas could significantly strengthen this work and extend it to a far greater number of people from more diverse backgrounds. ***The existing NNR/BR puts significant effort into engaging with the community, but is necessarily limited by its statutory obligations and more limited remit. The AONB extends this engagement with community over a wider area and in relation to broader objectives and with a relatively small community. A BR which encompassed more communities and in particular urban settlements might add significant value in terms of this criterion. **Establishing a BR would require involvement of the community. In this sense it would either add value, or fail. It is likely that greater engagement of the local community will be achieved Community involvement of community for an initiative whose primary objective is sustainable development, rather than the more conservation orientated objectives of the NNR. A BR which encompassed urban communities would also offer new opportunities for community involvement. Vitality and enterprise are key objectives for local government over all the areas considered above, and it is unclear that the designation would add value. However, it may reinforce a vitality and cohesion sense of place and a sense of pride – both key underpinnings to a dynamic economy. It is more likely to do this over smaller areas, and/or where there is some history of a sense of place and a clearly identifiable local culture. near environment (greenspace) **This is largely dealt with under landscape above The quality of places to live houses and gardens There may be opportunities here if the BR were to encompass significant urban areas *The values of the existing NNR are largely appreciated and realised by scientific equitable access to, and professionals and generally middle aged/mid-income tourists. An extension into urban areas Environmental justice utilisation of, environmental raises the opportunity to promote and facilitate access across a much broader age and socio- benefits economic spectrum.

A healthy economy ***The BR designation, if properly promoted, would enhance the image and profile of the area as a location for innovative sustainable economic enterprise in an area with outstanding natural qualities. direct employment and income It is likely to significantly reinforce existing initiatives in this area. It could also reinforce initiatives in the area of tourism development, especially those associated with education and adventure. Employment and income indirect employment and ***ditto income job quality ***ditto It is difficult to envisage any loss of jobs associated with the designation. No new regulation or income and jobs foregone restriction is envisaged business opportunities and ***As for direct/indirect employment and income constraints short term investment ***Could well attract investment – if well promoted and marketed Business long term investment ***As above *Insofar as there are opportunities for education, training and business development it should human resources strengthen human resources; more generally benefits in this area are rather intangible. conservation of resources with *These are largely addressed through existing management provisions in respect of water, forestry an economic value and fisheries. There may be more novel initiatives relating to e.g. soils and peat. Resource use conservation of resources with No obvious benefits here, although the designation might promote better planning outwith current potential economic value designations for e.g. effects of increased tourism, recreation, mountain biking etc

*assuming designated area as buffer zone, good business and community involvement and cost-effective marketing.

30 6.2 Strengths and weaknesses of future alternatives

Table 3: Strengths and weaknesses of future alternatives in terms of geographic scale

Teesdale/Barnard Castle Teesdale/Barnard Castle + AONB + surrounding communities Weardale/Bishop Auckland Strengths & • Excellent core area. • Several options for excellent core • Many options for excellent core areas. opportunities • Several options for good buffer zones areas. • Several options for good buffer zones implemented through existing • Several options for good buffer zones implemented through existing designations. implemented through existing designations. • Relatively small transition area would designations. • Existing AONB partnership and concentrate effort. • Relatively larger transition area affords secretariat in place with broadly • Relatively small area might promote opportunity for more, and greater complimentary objectives and sense of ownership and community variety of positive impact. management capacity. cohesion. • Larger area with much greater • Easier to get consensus for action population - and in particular deprived across key stakeholders. population - could lead to access to • Comes within a single local authority greater resources. (County Durham) and historically • May be economies of scale in corresponds to Teesdale District. administrative terms. • Comes within a single local authority (County Durham)

Weaknesses & • Relatively small transition area would • Relatively larger transition area could • Relatively large and thinly populated threats limit number, type and extent of dilute effort. transition zone offers limited opportunity possible benefits. • Relatively larger transition area could for sustainable development and • Small number of people involved might compromise sense of identity and environmental justice (unless significant limit skills and time available, and may cohesion communities and areas of deprivation increase per capita administrative • Relatively larger transition area could outwith the AONB area could be costs. make consensus and agreement on included). priority more difficult to achieve. • If communities outwith the existing boundaries are included, participation and management institutions may be complex. • Comes under three separate County Councils (Durham, Northumberland, Cumbria)

Overall a BR based on Teeside and Weardale, and encompassing the Market town of Barnard Castle and the more urban and deprived areas around Bishop Auckland, appears to have greatest potential as a Biosphere Reserve, and would be of great interest as an experiment – and challenge - in binding rural and urban areas together around the common themes of sustainable development and community participation.

The smaller option of Teesdale/Barnard Castle also has much to commend it. This could well be easier to get up and running, and would have a stronger immediate sense of cohesion and identity. The more limited population and relative lack of deprivation would however restrict opportunities and limit impact.

A larger BR based on the existing AONB boundaries would appear to add rather little value to the high profile of the area in terms of environmental quality, and to the management partnership and associated initiatives already underway – although it is an “extra” international designation. A BR which extended beyond the current boundaries to encompass some of the surrounding communities would be stronger in terms of opportunities for sustainable development and impact, but would be weaker in terms of identity, organization and management.

32 Annex 1: Report of scoping meeting

Held at the Teesdale Hotel, Middleton, Teesdale, on 25th November 2008

Present: Chris McArty, Moorhouse NNR Reserve Manager Sean Stewart, Bishop Auckland Enterprise/Local Strategic Partnership John Barret, Natural England Sue Berrisford, Teesdale District Council, Economic Development Chris Woodley Stewart, N Pennines AONB Richard Betton, Farmer, Upper Teesdale Agricultural Support Service Hazel Corpach, Teesdale Marketing, (Barnard Castle)

John Hambrey, Hambrey Consulting Andrew Bell, UK Man and Biosphere Committee Chair

Also copied in on proceedings but unable to attend the meeting, were: Tony Laws, Natural England Team Manager Rob Rose, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Lancaster Environment Centre

Views of meeting participants This was an introductory meeting, with a small group representing Natural England, AONB, the local Council, Enterprise Company, marketing organization and local farmer. Not represented were the major landowners in the area (Raby and Strathmore Estates) and other local business. Others (listed above) have been asked to comment, and their comments have been incorporated in the bullet points below. It should be emphasized therefore that the following are the views of a very small group convened in Upper Teesdale. A more comprehensive consultation would no doubt generate a broader range and perhaps a different balance of opinion. Nonetheless, discussions were wide ranging and provided an insight into the possible interest in and potential for an extended Biosphere Reserve.

However, participants were interested in the idea of maintaining the BR designation and expanding/developing it to a wider area to meet the new criteria. The benefits were seen primarily as a marketing “tag”; and part of an on-going process of image building with potential to reinforce other sustainable development initiatives in the area, and in particular tourism. More immediate and direct benefits to the local farming community were seen as less tangible, although there might be opportunities related to the Teesdale Farmers Market and Food and Craft Festival. Some questioned whether the designation would add anything to what can already be achieved under existing designations (AONB; Geopark; other sustainable development initiatives).

33 Community Strategies, as well as with the wider AONB and Geopark designations and associated strategies.

Questions raised and key points made

We did not know there was a Biosphere Reserve here.

Local economy and visitor attractions Main local attractions are High Force (>130,000 visitors), the Bowes Museum, Barnard Castle (120,000 visitors); and Hamsterley Forest visitor centre and associated walks and cycle routes. The head of these valleys are in reality brown field sites! – big industry (lead, silver)

Relationship with other designations and initiatives Management of the existing NNR is an active partnership between Natural England, Strathmore and Raby Estates and local farmers Does this complement or compete with the AONB designation? The “Geo-Park” has very similar objectives and mechanisms. Also the AONB already does all of this. What is the added value? The Geopark is the “younger brother” of BR The LEADER strategy and delivery plan have core values very similar to those presented here. Local Sustainability Partnerships (LSPs) have developed Sustainable Community Strategy – also relevant. The Area Tourism Partnership (ATP) sells the whole region. A percentage of RDP funding is dispersed under LEADER A lottery bid is in on “routing to market” (?)

Possible benefits - general This is an interesting possibility and complements the growing adventure tourism. It certainly wouldn’t do any harm. I’d be more positive. It’s an incremental thing. It adds to what we have. We should make use of a global designation. But we don’t use what we already have. We don’t use the Geopark and AONB designations as effectively as we should. The World Heritage status of Durham Cathedral is a huge pull. “UNESCO” has kudos. Probably more of an attraction than “Biosphere Reserve”.

34 The name not so important. It’s the meaning/associations. Concentrate on the values (wildlife, food, adventure). Use accolades to reinforce local values. It’s a tag that will attract some people. In a sense the more tags the better – we appeal to a range of niche markets – so long as the tags are complementary. However ….we also need a simple message. Tags need to be meaningful – e.g. we have a certification scheme for produce at farmers market, but people are not aware of the difference, and what is genuinely “local”. People need to understand what qualities and values are associated with the BR designation. If this is to be used as a branding exercise we need a better understanding of the market: what people want; what excites them. We need to look at who we are seeking to attract or what we are trying to sell. The broad brush marketing is hard. It’s easier to do the niche marketing. Take a target group then work outward using their connections. Do we start from the community or the user? This could add value if managed by the right people with the right remit. This could help explore and demonstrate sustainable development, the nature/role of ecosystem services, and promote interdisciplinary research between social and natural scientists. It may be that a BR designation adds no value if the existing designations and opportunities are better embraced by local and regional bodies such as the Area Tourist Partnerships.

Possible benefits: specific This area has complimentary values: landscape; outdoors; wildlife; history – probably a ready audience for the BR. The key to greater benefit is to increase overnight stay and extend the season (average overnight spend of £43). Overnight stay has significant local impact: where do the eggs and bacon come from? Opportunities related to designated origin? There are local food initiatives – Teesdale Farmers Market at Barnard Castle and the Food Festival. BR designation could be attractive to some cyclists (Hamsterley Forest etc) It might help with “scripting of space”. Urban people can be intimidated by rural areas – where can we go; what can we do. In a town all of this is clear. What about the role/potential of renewables? Big opportunities here – especially for small scale local projects Middleton has a very high carbon footprint. An objective could be to get that down. Promote small is beautiful schemes.

Constraints There are significant constraints on increasing overnight places: o If tenant farms do B&B the rent goes up; o Planning is generally negative; o No camping or caravans W of Middleton; o I.e. the infrastructure is limited. Regional development organisations have been poor at using the existing accolades (Geopark; AONB).

Possible area? Perhaps include parts of the Eden valley. A geographic focus on Teesdale would be arbitrary given that the current BR is partly in Cumbria. The NNR/core site straddles the watershed and they often get left out – poor brother to the Lake District. UNESCO would look for significant population within the BR.

35 Should we include Darlington? No. Coherence and identity would be lost. We need exclusivity. If a BR were extended to the full AONB area, this would water down exclusivity. Better if we restrict it to Upper Teesdale We have two adjacent LEADER areas that could be a starting point. Durham/North Pennines; Teesdale Relate boundaries to service use and economic links? Most of the links are up-down the valley rather than between. This simply reflects roads and access to services. People get hung up on boundaries. BR boundaries can be woolly. How can you guarantee exclusivity? The reality is that there are relatively few existing BR sites. All must have an outstanding core area. How to decide on area? Get everyone to draw circles on map and then take the strongest circle?

Management/organisation What kind of day-to-day management is envisaged? How does it all work? In Devon…Countryside Rangers are the executive organisation – designation helped keep them. The BR accolade can be a reinforcing mechanism – e.g. the carbon neutral college. Please…not another management plan! In Devon we used the existing ICZM plan The LEADER Local Action Groups(s) might be a starting point. The AONB Partnership could also be a starting point. LEADER LAG is not an organisation; the AONB Partnership is. The latter would therefore be better.

Information and relevant work already done Much background information is already available in the LEADER strategy. The Local Authority also has “local profile”. Local Sustainability Strategy. Centre for Rural Economy, Newcastle University.

36 Annex 2: Description of ecological features and systems of existing and possible extended Biosphere Reserve

A “Natural area profile” is available for the N Pennine Area18. Natural Areas are “biogeographic zones which reflect the geological foundation, the natural systems and processes and the wildlife in different parts of England, and provide a framework for setting objectives for nature conservation”19 . Some of the key summary passages from this profile are presented below.

The Natural Area (2186 square kilometres) and the AONB (2000 square kilometres) broadly cover the same geographical area. Nearly 80% of this area comprises some form of semi natural vegetation and plantation woodland whilst only 20% has been significantly agriculturally improved and only 0.6% of the area can be considered built up. Of the semi natural habitats acid grassland (17.5%), blanket bog (26.6%) and heathland (15.6%) comprise the most extensive habitats, whilst scrub (0.2%) and semi-natural woodland (0.9%) reflect the scarcity of some of the habitats.

The North Pennines is considered to be outstanding in respect of both upland habitats (blanket bog, heath, scrub, and associated arctic alpine plant and upland bird communities), and lowland grassland (i.e. hay meadows and unimproved pastures below the fell wall. The best examples in the North Pennines Natural Area are SSSIs and a number occur within the Upper Teesdale NNR.

The whole area is subject to a very high degree of designation - 36% of the AONB area is under SSSI designation. The major sites are listed in table A2.1 and extracts from the relevant citations are provided below.

18 English Nature, August 1997. The North Pennines. An assessment of the nature conservation resource of the North Pennines - a Natural Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Draft report for consultation with key partners. English Nature August 1997

19 Biodiversity: The UK Steering Group Report, HMSO, 1995.

37 Table A2.1 Nature Conservation designations in the North Pennines

NNR SSSI SAC SPA Teesdale • Moor House-Upper • Upper Teesdale • Moor-House – Upper • North Pennine Teesdale • Moor House and Cross Fell Teesdale Moors • Appleby Fells • North Pennines Dales • Teesdale Allotments Meadows • Bollihope, Pikestone, Eggleston & Woodland fells • Frogwood Bog

Weardale • Bollihope, Pikestone, • North Pennine Moors SAC Eggleston & Woodland fells • Muggleswick, Stanhope, Edmundbyers Common and Blanchland Moors • Hexhamshire Moors • Allendale Moors

Tyne/Allen/Blanchland • Whitfield Moor • Tyne and Allen River Gravels • Plenmeller and Ashholme Commons • Geltsdale and Glendue Fells • Derwent Gorge

Note. This is not an exact allocation. Several of the designations cross district boundaries

38 Reasons for Designation: The following (in alphabetical order) are extracted from the official SSSI citations on the Natural England Website. The nature conservation interest described here is also encompassed in the European Designations. Full citations can be found at the web sites referred to.

Allendale Moors (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/2000292.pdf) This is one of the most extensive areas of blanket mire in the north of England and there are also considerable areas of heath, flush and upland grassland communities. The site supports a nationally-important assemblage of moorland breeding birds and is part of the North Pennine moorlands which are of international importance for their breeding bird populations.

Bollihope, Pikestone, Eggleston & Woodland fells (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/2000133.pdf) The upland block encompassing Bollihope, Pikestone, Eggleston and Woodland Fells has been identified from recent comprehensive surveys of the North Pennines as one of the most extensive areas of dry heath. In particular it demonstrates the west to east transition from blanket mire to dry heath which is characteristic of these uplands. The presence of wet heath, acid grassland, flushes, relict juniper woodland and small open water bodies increased the habitat diversity of this moorland. As a result, the area supports a nationally important assemblage of moorland breeding birds. These blocks form part of the North Pennines Moorlands proposed Special Protection Area which is of international importance on account of its breeding bird populations, particularly merlin and goldenplover.

Derwent Gorge and Horsleyhope Ravine (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1000964.pdf) An area of sheltered undisturbed woodland with a rich flora and fauna

Frogwood Bog (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1005558.pdf) Frog Wood Bog is an important example of mire vegetation associated with which are areas of neutral and acid grassland and secondary woodland. Mire vegetation of this type is scarce in County Durham, being vulnerable to damage by drainage for agricultural and forestry operations.

Geltsdale and Glendue Fells (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1001510.pdf) Habitats represented within the site range from fell-bottom meadows and woodlands to elevated moorlands reaching an altitude of 627 m O.D. Most of the higher moorland is covered by a typical Pennine blanket bog community, managed for both sheep and grouse and codominated by a heather Calluna vulgaris and hareÕs-tail cottongrass Eriophorum vaginatum community in which the more unusual species, cowberry Vaccinium vitis-idaea, cranberry V.oxycoccus and cloudberry Rubus chamaemorus are locally abundant. On better drained ground there are areas of dry heather moor and acidic grassland and, where the thin bands of limestone outcrop, there are some small patches of base-rich grassland and calcareous flushes. On the lower ground, habitats include several blocks of woodland varying from ash Fraxinus excelsior, wych elm Ulmus glabra, sessile oak Quercus petraea, hazel Corylus avellana dominated types on dry basic soils to birch Betula pendula and B. pubescens, hazel associations on more acidic sites with alder Alnus glutinosa more frequent where drainage is impeded. Also at lower altitudes there are some interesting old hay meadows and a small lake, the former supporting a rich flora including lesser butterfly orchid Platanthera bifolia. The diversity of habitats supports a large number of bird species many of which breed. The meadows and marshy pastures around the northern fringe of the area, together with the lower moorlands, support numerous wading birds with curlew and redshank being particularly dominant. Ring ouzels are frequent in the rock outcrops along the water courses. Nesting golden plover are patchily distributed on the blanket bogs. Predatory species such as shorteared owl and merlin are recorded. The woodlands of Upper Geltsdale are of local importance for their breeding birds and Tindale Tarn is of comparable significance, being the winter haunt of wildfowl including mallard, tufted duck, pochard, goldeneye and whooper swan.

Hexhamshire Moors Hexhamshire Moors comprises moorland and enclosed grassland lying to the east of the River East Allen. It has been identified from comprehensive surveys of the North Pennines as one of the most extensive areas of blanket mire and heathland in the north of England. There are also significant areas of both flush and upland grass communities. The site supports a nationally important assemblage of moorland breeding birds and is part of the North Pennine Moorlands which are of international importance for their breeding bird populations.

Moor House and Cross Fell (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1005550.pdf) The importance of the area lies in its rich variety of representative upland habitats with associated animal and plant species. Communities of particular interest are those of blanket bog, sub-montane and montane heathland, montane bryophyte heath, limestone grassland and flushes, and some of the ledge communities. Other habitats of subsidiary interest are areas of acid grassland, acidic flushes, open water, scree and metalliferous spoil sites.

Muggleswick, Stanhope and Edmundbyers Commons and Blanchland Moor (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/2000173.pdf) The upland block encompassing Muggleswick, Stanhope, Edmundbyers Commons and Blanchland Moor has been identified from recent comprehensive surveys of the North Pennines as one of the most extensive areas of dry heath in the north of England. The presence of wet heath, acid grassland, flushes, relict juniper woodland and small open water bodies increases the habitat diversity of this moorland. As a result, the area supports a nationally important assemblage of moorland breeding birds. These blocks form part of the North Pennines moorlands which are of international importance on account of their breeding bird population, particularly merlin and golden plover.

Old Moss Lead Vein (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1000465.pdf) At its exposure beside the Killhope Burn the Old Moss Lead Vein is a readily accessible outcrop of a mineral vein which provides an important teaching locality showing mineralisation typical of the inner flourite zone of the North Pennine Orefiel

Teesdale Allotments (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1006958.pdf) Teesdale Allotments forms part of an extensive area of enclosed upland grazings in two blocks among a larger area of rough grazings on the north side of the Tees Valley near Middleton-in-Teesdale and are of national importance for their breeding bird assemblage. The bird community includes lapwing, snipe, redshank, curlew, golden plover and black grouse, all species which with the exception of curlew are declining nationally due to changes in land use, particularly agricultural intensification. In terms of breeding wader densities the populations in Teesdale District of Durham are the most significant in the uplands of England and the Teesdale Allotments with the Upper Teesdale SSSI and parts of the tributary valleys of the Lune and Balder are the most important areas for these birds. Outside the North Pennine dales, important concentrations are restricted to a few sites in the lowlands specifically managed for their bird populations.

Upper Teesdale (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/1003630.pdf) Upper Teesdale is an extensive upland area within the North Pennines which contains a number of nationally rare habitat types as well as a rich variety of representative habitats and associated plant and animal communities. The site includes enclosed hay meadows and pastures in the dale bottom as well as large tracts of moorland and mountain and ranges from 265 metres AOD at Wynch Bridge to 790 metres AOD on Mickle Fell. Upper Teesdale is one of the most important botanical sites in Britain supporting a flora exceptionally rich in nationally rare species and including a relict arctic-alpine element. There is a diverse avifauna with internationally important breeding populations of wading birds and a number of rare invertebrate species are present. The site also includes a series of locations of national geological importance.

Whitfield Moor Plenmeller and Ashholme Commons (http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/2000165.pdf) The upland block encompassing Whitfield Moor and Plenmeller Common has been identified from recent comprehensive surveys of the North Pennines as one of the most extensive areas of blanket bog and dry heath in the north of England. The presence of acid grassland, flushes, relict juniper woodland and small water bodies increases the habitat diversity of this moorland. The area supports a nationally important assemblage of moorland breeding birds. The site is part of the North Pennines moorlands which are of international importance on account of their breeding bird population which includes merlin and golden plover.

41 Annex 3: Social and economic characteristics

The following data has been collated from statistics produced by the Office of National Statistics 20 , and from NOMIS official labour market statistics.

The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 21 combines a number of indicators, chosen to cover a range of economic, social and housing issues, into a single deprivation score for each small area in England. There are seven domain indices, combined into a single score using the following percentage weightings: • Income (22.5%) • Employment (22.5%) • Health Deprivation and Disability (13.5%) • Education, Skills and Training (13.5%) • Barriers to Housing and Services (9.3%) • Crime (9.3%) • Living Environment (9.3%)

This allows each area to be ranked relative to one another according to their level of deprivation. Indices of Deprivation 2007 have been produced at Lower Super Output Area level, of which there are 32,482 in the country. The Indices are used widely to analyse patterns of deprivation, identify areas that would benefit from special initiatives or programmes and as a tool to determine eligibility for specific funding streams. Though the Indices for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland use similar methodologies, it is not valid to compare them.

20 http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/

21 Department of Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2007. http://www.communities.gov.uk/communities/neighbourhoodrenewal/deprivation/deprivation0 7/

42 Annex table 3.1 Population and Index of Multiple Deprivation 22 for Teesdale and North Pennines

Ward LSOA* IMD rank (2006) % out of 32,482 SIMD ranking Middleton in Teesdale E1020866 15613 48.07 Barnard Castle East E1020852 16790 51.69 Barnard Castle North E1020853 19704 60.66 Startforth - Barnard E1020854 26771 82.42 Castle Eggleston - Barnard E1020857 20402 62.81 Castle Ronaldkirk E1020865 20949 64.49 St Johns Chapel E1020889 12575 38.71 (Wear Valley) Stanhope (Wear E1020891 13094 40.31 Valley) Wolsingham and E1020906 17518 53.93 Witton (Wear Valley) Bishop Auckland E1020860 5133 15.80 Honsterley (Teesdale) E1020864 18181 55.97 Evenwood (Teesdale) E1020861 12070 37.16 Lynesack (Teesdale) E1020855 28195 86.80 Staindrop (Teesdale) E1020856 9537 29.36 Tynedale E1027512 9767 30.07 Allendale (Tynedale) E1027477 14607 44.97 Slaley and E1027505 20433 62.91 hexhamshire (Tynedale) South Tynedale E1027506 17823 54.87 East of Barnard E1020867 17358 53.44 Castle (Teesdale) Warcop (Eden) E1019340 18751 57.73 Long Martin (Eden) E1019323 16293 50.16 Hartside (Eden) E1019314 14289 43.99 Alston Moor (Eden) E1019305 15838 48.76

* Lower Super Output Area.

22 Department of Communities and Local Government, Indices of Deprivation 2007. View at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/communities/neighbourhoodrenewal/deprivation/deprivation0 7/

43 Index of multiple deprivation in N Pennines

100

% of SIMD ranking SIMD % of 30

) ) e ) le th y) or ale) East alley) sdale nedale sdale) esdale) tle Valle uckland rd Castle r (Eden) yned Ty Ronaldkirk Te rtin (Eden) ide (Eden) uth Tynedale arcop (Eden) o Moo n in Teesdal arts W rley (TeesdaleS (Wear Valley) g Ma H pe (Wear V wood (Tee Bishop A mshire (Tyneda on dleto indrop (Tee arnard Castle N nste Lon Alston hapel (Wear Lynesack (Teesdale) ha B Barnard Cas Allendale (T Even Sta Ho Mid tanho arnard Castle ( S ns C Startforth - Barnard Castleggleston - Barna E f B St Joh ngham andEast Witt o Slaley and hex si Wol

Sources: Neighbourhood Statistics, Office of National Statistics 23. http://www.imd.communities.gov.uk/InformationDiscovery.aspx

23 http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/

44 Region: North East, Local Authority: Teesdale DC

Region: North East, Local Authority: Wear Valley DC

45 Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 thematic map for Tynedale DC

Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 thematic map for Eden DC

46 Annex table 3.2 Population structure for North Pennines by district council area.

Area Total % Children % Working % Pension population Age Age (thousands) England * 50762.9 19 62 19 Teesdale DC * 24.8 17 60 23 Wear Valley DC * 62.3 19 60 21 Eden DC * 51.7 17 60 23 Tynedale DC * 59.5 18 60 22

Sources: Derived from Office of National Statistics, population estimates mid-year 2006, absolute figures. Percentages are rounded and derived for the purpose of this report. They do not correlate directly to figures in table 3.3.

47 Annex table 3.3 Population structure for Teesdale and North Pennines

Ward LSOA* Total % 0-15 % 16 to % population pensionable Pension (thousands) Age Middleton in E1020866 980 15.7 82.3 23.0 Teesdale Barnard Castle E1020852 1729 17.2 55.2 27.6 East Barnard Castle E1020853 1504 17.3 54.7 28 North Startforth - E1020854 2522 14.6 65.8 19.6 Barnard Castle Eggleston - E1020857 1445 18.2 57.8 24.0 Barnard Castle Ronaldkirk E1020865 1324 15.0 55.9 29.1 St Johns Chapel E1020889 1474 13.6 61.3 25.1 (Wear Valley) Stanhope (Wear E1020891 1675 16.1 58.9 25.0 Valley) Wolsingham and E1020906 1630 16.6 58.4 25.0 Witton (Wear Valley) Bishop Auckland E1020860 1038 20.0 63.7 16.3 Honsterley E1020864 2032 15.2 62.1 22.7 (Teesdale) Evenwood E1020861 1199 15.4 58.5 26.1 (Teesdale) Lynesack E1020855 1154 15.6 53.1 31.3 (Teesdale) Staindrop E1020856 1570 16.0 60.3 23.7 (Teesdale) Tynedale E1027512 1104 15.0 65.4 19.6 Allendale E1027477 1317 17.2 61.5 21.3 (Tynedale) Slaley and E1027505 1395 18.1 67.8 18.1 hexhamshire (Tynedale) South Tynedale E1027506 1175 18.3 63.4 18.3 East of Barnard E1020867 2164 19.1 56.4 24.5 Castle (Teesdale) Warcop (Eden) E1019340 1345 16.9 58.6 24.5 Long Martin E1019323 1218 16.7 57.1 26.2 (Eden) Hartside (Eden) E1019314 1113 18.6 59.8 21.6 Alston Moor E1019305 2105 16.7 60.8 22.5 (Eden)

*Lower Super Output Area. Source: Lower Layer super output Area population estimates for England and Wales, mid 2007. These are published as experimental statistics and have been converted to percentages where appropriate for the purpose of this report. They do not compare directly with Scottish age band figures.

Annex table 3.3 Employment by Sector, Teesdale and north Pennine area.

Industry Teesdale Weardale Tynedale Eden England [1] % DC % DC % DC % % Agriculture & fishing <1 2 3 4 <1 Energy & water <1 <1 <1 2 <1 Manufacturing 24 13 10 10 11 Construction 9 6 5 8 5 Distribution, hotels and 24 26 24 33 23 restaurants Transport and 4 4 4 6 6 communications Banking, finance & 9 8 21 10 22 insurance, etc. Public admin., education 25 35 25 23 26 & health Other services 5 6 7 4 5

Employment by sector: Teesdale and N Pennine Area

100%

90%

80%

70% Other services Public admin., education & health 60% Banking, finance & insurance, etc. Transport and communications 50% Distribution, hotels and restaurants Construction 40% Manufacturing Energy & water Agriculture & fishing 30%

20%

10%

0% Teesdale % Weardale % Tynedale% Eden % England %

Source NOMIS under licence. From Annual Business Inquiry employee analysis 2007. [1] Derived from an aggregation of super output areas Teesdale 001 (incl Eggleston and Staindrop), Teesdale 002 (incl. Middleton in Teesdale and Ronaldkirk) and Teesdale 003 (Barnard Castle). Rounded to whole numbers. Annex 4: Maps