Bassenthwaite Habitats Delivery Plan 2011-16

Bassenthwaite Vital Uplands - Ecosystem Services Pilot Project Bassenthwaite Habitats Delivery Plan 2011-16

The Delivery Plan sets out actions for the next 5 years which could maximise the provision of ecosystem services within the Bassenthwaite area. Bassenthwaite catchment provides a wide range of ecosystem services for people who live in and way beyond the area. These include food, timber, water provision, water quality, carbon storage and sequestration, flood regulation, recreation, tourism, education, historic environment, biodiversity and health benefits.

As one of three national ecosystem services pilot projects, the Delivery Plan aims to demonstrate through integrated working with partners, farmers and other land managers, how multiple public benefits can be delivered at a catchment scale. Bassenthwaite Vital Uplands is part of the Bassenthwaite Lake Restoration Programme, with the Delivery Plan developed through workshops and individual meetings with partner organisations. Management actions to deliver ecosystem services were identified at a Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) prioritisation workshop. Potential areas for the land management actions were mapped with reference to a broad range of existing map data (see Bassenthwaite Vital Uplands Baseline Document).

Implementation of the Delivery Plan is dependent on the voluntary uptake of HLS and other funding by farmers and other land managers. Traditional livestock farming in this pilot area can provide many multiple benefits in addition to food. To deliver multiple benefits farmers need to be able to balance management for food production with HLS schemes providing wider benefits. As such the delivery of ecosystem services can only be achieved where it forms a part of economically viable farm businesses. Farmers‟ views on the provision of ecosystem services and how delivering these can be incorporated within their farming businesses, has been sought through a questionnaire jointly with the University of Cumbria (10% of all farmers in catchment responded) and two farmer workshops. These workshops provided farmer input to the Delivery Plan (see Appendix 2).

Land Management Actions The Delivery Plan identifies two key land management actions that could improve the provision of ecosystem services in the pilot area: 1. increase woodland cover 2. achieve sustainable grazing

5 further land management actions have been identified to enhance the delivery of ecosystem services: 3. sustainable river management 4. restore Scheduled Monuments at Risk 5. improve access 6. manage nutrients on improved grassland 7. improve biodiversity of valley habitats

Note: Deep and shallow peat areas have been used to identify blanket bog and upland heath areas. The condition of these habitats is not shown. 1

All 7 land management actions are detailed in Table 1. The management actions in the Delivery Plan also incorporate more specific targets from the following initiatives in the catchment, where Land Management Ecosystem Services and Benefits Partner Objectives these significantly enhance the provision of ecosystem services: Action

 River Restoration Strategy for River Derwent and Tributaries SSSI (Natural

England/Environment Agency) Action 3

 Scheduled Monuments at risk – recommendations to halt the decline (Lake District National

Park Authority led) Action 4

 Rights of Way Improvement Plan – implementation of selected improvements (Lake District

National Park Authority led). Action 5

 Diffuse Water Pollution Plan for River Derwent and Tributaries SSSI and Bassenthwaite

Lake SAC (Natural England/Environment Agency) Action 6 SCaMP2

 Catchment Sensitive Farming initiative (Natural England/Environment Agency) Action 6 Biodiversity

Waterquality

Foodand fibre

ErosionControl

teChange adaptation

Waterprovision HeritageRisk at

SSSI SSSI PSAtarget

FloodRegulation lesof Land Management  Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) targets for valley habitats not addressed through other land spiration, educationand Health

management actions (Natural England plus biodiversity partners) Action 7 CumbriaBAP targets

Clima

WaterFramework Directive CatchmentSensitive Farming

Princip

Carbonstorage and sequestration CatchmentFlood Management Plan

District Lake National ParkPartnership

Improved accessto natural environment

Cultural landscape,Cultural historic environment LandscapeCharacter Assessment targets

Partnership Delivery Recreation,in Many partners have a vital role to play in delivering and supporting the actions in the Delivery Plan. 1. Increase Key partnerships are: Woodland x x x x x x x x x X X X X X X X X  Bassenthwaite Lake Restoration Programme – actions to be embedded within 1 year and 5 Cover

year business plans. 2. Achieve Sustainable x x x x x x x X X X X X X X X X  Lake District National Park Partnership – proposal to embed actions within Partnership Plan Grazing which incorporates the actions of 26 partners. This plan and the partnership provide a clear 3. Sustainable framework for integrated delivery of ecosystem services in the Lake District National Park. River x x x x x X X X X X X X  Lake District Environment Land Management Service (ELMS) - a delivery partnership for Management agri-environment agreements with farmers in the National Park. It coordinates the staff of 4. Restore Scheduled Natural England, Lake District National Park Authority, National Trust, RSPB and Forestry x x x x X X X X Monuments at Commission to provide a combined service for farmers. Risk  Borrowdale Whole Valley Planning Group - a collaborative approach to land and community 5. Improve x x x x x x X X planning by farmers and other stakeholders. The group is currently focussed on short term Access solutions to river management but in the medium term aims to “develop a business model 6. Manage Nutrients on for farming which builds on the emerging market for water and carbon management; the x x x x x X X X X X need for national food security; and the recreation needs of the visiting community”. Improved Grassland 7. Improve Other delivery mechanisms/groups are detailed under the 7 management action descriptions, Biodiversity accompanying the maps, below. x x x x X X X X X X of Valley

Habitats

Funding for Delivery Renewal Year of ESA Agreements  Higher Level Stewardship – The majority of farms within the pilot area are in Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) schemes due to expire in 2012-13. This provides an opportunity for delivering ecosystem services through replacement by the multiple objective HLS. The Delivery Plan identifies those areas which could deliver the most ecosystem services. This informs the prioritisation of potential HLS agreements through the HLS planning pipeline. Numbers of agreements will depend on resources (both budget and staffing capacity) for HLS in future years.  England Woodland Grant Scheme – Forestry Commission grants for creation and management of woodland including for biodiversity, resource protection and wood fuel.  SCaMP2 – United Utilities (UU) Sustainable Catchment Management Plan, is providing additional private funding (on top of HLS) to tenant farmers on UU land in the Thirlmere catchment, for capital works to improve water quality, store carbon and enhance biodiversity.

Future Funding  Nurture Lakeland‟s Visitor Pay-Back Scheme – Visitor Pay-Back provides a mechanism through which tourism businesses and visitors can contribute to environmental projects. See Appendix 3 for Nurture Lakeland pilot work, with 35 businesses in the Bassenthwaite catchment, on how visitor pay-back could be developed and linked to payment for ecosystem services.

Other Actions:  Progress recommendations from Nurture Lakeland report to further develop the use of visitor pay-back linked to ecosystem services delivery (Natural England).  Produce guidelines for woodland creation and the historic environment (Lake District National Park Authority).  Provide Historic Environment advice for potential HLS agreements in Bassenthwaite catchment (Lake District National Park Authority).  Develop recommendations for community and stakeholder engagement on catchment management to reduce downstream flooding; using findings of modelling woodland to reduce flooding in the Derwent catchment report (Natural England, Environment Agency, Cumbria Woodlands).

Action 1: Increase Woodland Cover ACTION 1: Increase Woodland Cover

Target Area: 1140 ha, potential areas on bracken beds (600 ha), gills (100 ha), previous woodland sites and steep slopes with eroding soils. Specific and broader areas of search are shown on the map. The 1140 ha target for woodland creation could be achieved with 50% coverage in specific areas and 10% coverage on broader areas of search.

WHY? Native woodland creation is a single action that can deliver multiple benefits for the future supply of ecosystem services, particularly carbon storage, reduced soil erosion and gravel supply from gills, improved water quality and wildlife. To achieve multiple benefits, the proposals are for creation of native broad leaf woodland with species selection based on soil type, position and ground vegetation. Planting with wide spacing and random clusters creates a seed source that supplements natural regeneration.

Ecosystem Services: Water provision, timber, wood fuel, climate change regulation, flood regulation, erosion control, water quality, recreation (water based including angling), cultural heritage, sense of place, inspirational, spiritual and aesthetic values and biodiversity

WHERE? Woodland planting is aimed at the least agriculturally important areas, such as bracken beds, which were past woodland sites and often support remnant woodland ground flora. The potential areas are based on mapped data and local partner knowledge. Extensions to and connections between existing woodlands are included to develop woodlands adapted to climate change. Targeting avoids areas of deep peat (originally blanket bogs or lowland raised bogs) which are important for carbon storage and sequestration. Soil erosion risk maps target woodland which also contributes to improvements in water quality (sediment/nutrient load and colour). Gill woodlands are a priority to reduce coarse sediment transport and subsequent deposition on agricultural fields during floods. Hydrological modelling work being undertaken by Atkins, due for completion April 2011, will identify locations where reductions in flood flow, through woodland creation, could reduce downstream flood risk.

Map Information Sources: Bracken beds from Land Cover Map 2000, (Centre for Ecology and Hydrology), National Inventory of Woodlands and Trees, BAP habitat inventories, deep and shallow peat soils (BGS/Cranfield University), soils at high and medium risk of soil erosion (Lancaster University and Forest Research)

HOW? Fitting in with farming: Detailed design of individual woodland creation sites to fit with farming and other land management is essential. Successful creation of woodland in the pilot area in the last 3 years has been achieved through effective joint working with farmers and commoners. Future management of woodland could provide opportunities for production of timber and in particularly wood fuel as markets and the supply chain develop. Partnership Delivery:  Environmental Land Management Service (ELMS)  RSPB Futurescapes  Forestry Commission Carbon Task Force  BLRP Woodland Task Group  BLRP River Corridor Group – for riparian woodlands  Derwent Rivers Trust – for riparian woodlands  Catchment Sensitive Farming Funding for Delivery:  Higher Level Stewardship – for woodlands <3 ha and on common land  England Woodland Grant Scheme – for woodlands >3ha not on common land  SCaMP2 – within United Utilities land holding  Nurture Lakeland Visitor pay-back

Action 2: Achieve Sustainable Grazing ACTION 2: Achieve Sustainable Grazing Target Area: First priority: fells with winter and summer stocking levels >1.5 ewes plus followers/ha to be reduced to a maximum of 1 ewe plus follower. Also SCaMP 2 areas that contribute to improved quality of public water supply. First priority areas include 2205 ha on deep peat soils and 1089 ha on shallow peat soils.

Second priority: Areas where some reductions in grazing has already occurred. Further adjustments needed. Including 372 ha on deep peat soils.

Third priority: Areas identified as potentially important for breeding waders or hen harriers. 924 ha on deep peat soils.

Double the number of holdings grazing hardy cattle. WHY? Sustainable grazing can deliver multiple benefits particularly recovery of blanket bog for carbon storage, reductions in soil erosion and compaction, improvements to water quality (including drinking water) and increased resilience to climate change.

Fell cattle grazing is included within the management actions to deliver multiple benefits. Cattle do not graze as closely as sheep and are less selective, preventing a dominance of unpalatable species like mat grass, heath rush and bracken. Cattle grazing and trampling can increase surface roughness and reduce surface water flow. Ecosystem Services: Food, water provision, climate change regulation, flood regulation, erosion control, water quality, recreation (water based including angling), cultural heritage and biodiversity WHERE? To deliver multiple benefits the sustainable grazing proposals are based on existing mapped data, including stocking data, and local knowledge. First priority areas include those with the highest grazing levels of over 1.5 ewes plus followers/ha.

Stocking levels for sustainable grazing are linked to the capacity of the habitats present. Blanket bogs can support the lowest levels of grazing due to wet conditions and sensitive mosses on the bog surface. Removal of grazing is required on some damaged bogs and exposed peat, particularly for the sequestration and storage of carbon. Through reference to soil erosion risk maps, sustainable grazing is targeted to reduce soil erosion and improve water quality. Surface water flow can also be reduced through increases in soil and vegetation depth, infiltration and surface roughness. Winter stocking level maps help to target grazing outside of the growing season, when soils and vegetation are most susceptible to damage. Breeding waders require specific grazing management that creates a tussocky sward structure whilst preventing nest trampling. Map Information Sources: Summer and winter stocking levels on fells, BAP habitat inventories, deep and shallow peat soils (BGS/Cranfield University), soils at high and medium risk of soil erosion (Lancaster University and Forest Research), SSSI condition maps, RSPB Futurescapes HOW? Fitting in with farming: The challenge of sustainable grazing is to find stocking levels for food production and other multiple benefits that ensure the continuity of viable hill farming. Farmers have taken on this challenge over the past 10 years. Stocking levels on adjacent unfenced commons have been considered, to ensure a balance for hefting of flocks. Sustainable grazing can result in increase in weight of individual sheep and an increased likelihood of twins. Partnership Delivery:  Environmental Land Management Service (ELMS)  RSPB Futurescapes Funding for Delivery:  Higher Level Stewardship SCaMP2 – within United Utilities‟ land holding

Action 3: Sustainable River Management ACTION 3: Sustainable River Management

Target Area: 9 river reaches (11.4 km) identified as sites suitable for “assisted natural recovery” by River Restoration Strategy.

Seeking at least one „major restoration „ demonstration site. WHY? Lake District rivers have a long legacy of intervention and river management. Straightening and embankments have resulted in sediment (normally deposited in meanders) being deposited in the channel, potentially raising it above the surrounding flood-plain. As the river attempts to meander, bank modifications are put under pressure and require long term maintenance.

Sustainable river management results in improvements in physical river structure, biodiversity and sediment processes. Reconnection of river and flood plain can contribute to downstream flood alleviation. Long-term sustainable management can also lower the risk of damage during extreme weather events, when the river attempts to find its natural course.

Ecosystem Services: Water provision, climate change regulation, flood regulation, erosion control, water quality, recreation (water based including angling) and biodiversity

WHERE? Management actions and potential areas are taken from the River Restoration Strategy for the River Derwent (Natural England and Environment Agency), which identifies options for more sustainable river management. The drivers for the River Restoration Strategy are Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) favourable condition and the Water Framework Directive.

Derwent Rivers Trust are seeking opportunities where farmers and land managers may be interested in setting up a demonstration site. This aims to show how sustainable river management might work. Restoration options vary between stretches, with assisting the river to naturally recovery being the most practically viable solution. This includes removal of some modifications, accompanied by fencing and tree planting in a 5m wide strip of river corridor (10m on eroding bends).

Initial work of the Borrowdale Whole Valley Planning Group is seeking solutions to river management with a gravel management plan being developed, to provide a whole river approach to gravel management.

Map Information Sources: River Restoration Strategy for River Derwent and Tributaries SSSI.

HOW? Fitting in with Farming: Historical straightening of rivers maximised the limited area of the best agricultural land (inbye) in the valley bottoms. Previously modified rivers presents a major challenge to farmers on their inbye land, particularly in terms of collapsing structures and gravel deposition. Sustainable river management provides an alternative option for long term management of these rivers. Partnership Delivery:  Derwent Rivers Trust  BLRP River Corridor Group  Environmental Land Management Service (ELMS)  Catchment Sensitive Farming Funding for Delivery:  Higher Level Stewardship  Environment Agency (Flood Risk Management, Water Framework Directive)

Action 4: Restore Scheduled Monuments at Risk ACTION 4: Restore Scheduled Monuments at Risk

Target Area: 8 Scheduled Monuments identified as being at high or medium risk (see list below) WHY? Scheduled Monuments are part of the cultural heritage of the Lake District landscape; a source of inspiration since the Romantic era and key attraction for tourists. Ecosystem Services: erosion control, recreation and tourism, cultural heritage, sense of place, inspirational, spiritual and aesthetic values WHERE? Risk Principal Trend Risk Factor Reference number and description

32877 Force Crag Mines and Barytes Mill and Med-high Neglect Stable Prehistoric Cairnfield

23799 Bowl Barrow on Brund Fell High Bracken Declining growth 34954 Goldscope Copper and Lead Mines and High Vehicle Declining Remains Of Associated Dressing Floors, Stamp Mill, damage, Dressing Mill, Reservoir and Leats erosion and bracken 23792 Castle How Hillfort Medium Gorse Declining growth 34952 Dale Head Copper Mine 300m North East of Medium Natural Stable Dale Head erosion Walkers‟ 34951 Dale Head Copper Mine Dressing Floors and shelter built Associated Buildings 400m North of Dale Head

23680 Slight Univallate Hillfort on Castle Crag Medium Plant Growth Declining

34953 Long Work 16th and 17th Century Copper Medium Beck erosion Stable Mines, 400m North West of Waterfall Buttress of spoil tip

Map Information Sources: Scheduled Monuments at Risk, resurveyed (2010) by Lake District National Park Authority volunteers HOW? Fitting in with Farming: Scheduled Monuments and other historic sites attract visitors keen to understand the history of the landscape. Effective management of visitors can ensure that they have an enjoyable experience which does not impact on the farming of the site, and understand the role of farmers in preserving these assets. For some sites, such as mines, the restoration of Scheduled Monuments at risk is beyond the scope of what can be done by farmers through HLS. Partnership Delivery :  Environmental Land Management Service (ELMS) Funding Mechanisms:  Higher Level Stewardship  Land owner action (United Utilities, National Trust, Forestry Commission)  Lake District National Park Authority  Environment Agency (Force Crag)

Action 5: Improve Access ACTION 5: Improve Access

Target Area: 11 Rights of Way Improvement Plan (ROWIP) Proposals, 46.2 km

WHY? Rights of Way Improvement Plans are included within the plan to enhance access. ROWIP is about access improvements for walkers, cyclists and equestrians that are over and above statutory maintenance or definitive map responsibilities. The aim is to make the network fit for today and the future, integrating countryside access with the health agenda, local economy and sustainable tourism, social inclusion, education, sustainable transport and the environment. Ecosystem Services: erosion control, recreation and tourism, inspirational, spiritual and aesthetic values and health benefits. WHERE? ROWIP was produced in this area in partnership by Cumbria County Council and the Lake District National Park Authorities, with the full involvement of Local Access Forums. Local Access Forums are independent advisory bodies with members from a broad representation of interests, such as land managers, user groups and nature conservation. Production of the ROWIP is a requirement of the CROW Act. Ref. Description and status Length no. km

C872 Cycleway/bridleway over Dunmail Raise (in progress) 1.3

C617 Round Thirlmere Cycleway (active project) 17.1

L1129 Upgrade of forest road to bridleway (not implemented) 1.6

L1133 Bridleway circuit of High Rigg (in progress) 5.7

L2264 Public footpath from Seatoller to Seathwaite Bridges (requires consultation) 1.1

L711 Upgrade footpath to bridle way to link to Honister Pass bridleway (requires 1.7 consultation) L2256 Off-road footpath, Rosthwaite to Red Brow bridleway (not implemented) 1.0

L753 Miles without Stiles route along east shore Derwent Water (investigate) 5.5

C1309 Upgrade Newlands to Buttermere footpath to bridleway (not implemented) 3.0

C1305 Upgrade permitted path to cycleway, west shore of Bassenthwaite (in progress) 5.1

C858 Upgrade permitted path to cycleway, Dancing Gate to Dodd Wood (active project) 3.1

Map Information Sources: Rights of Way Improvement Plan proposals. HOW? Fitting in with Farming: Managing Rights of Way can help visitors enjoy the local landscape and minimise any impacts on farming. Full consultation with farmers and local communities is required over Rights of Way Improvement Plan proposals. Partnership Delivery:  Environmental Land Management Service (ELMS)  Localism – community led projects Funding Mechanisms:  Land owner (Forestry Commission, National Trust, United Utilities) action  Local funding pots e.g. for public realm, extend beyond Keswick  Lake District National Park Authority 8

Action 6: Manage nutrients on improved grassland ACTION 6: Manage Nutrients on Improved Grassland

Target Area: Nutrient management on c. 800 ha of improved grassland

WHY? Managing nutrients on improved grassland helps to improve water quality for angling, water based recreation, water supplies and biodiversity. Nutrient management ensures that nutrient applications are taken up by grass growth without excess lost in run-off. Reduced artificial fertiliser applications can reduce farm costs and carbon emissions.

Ecosystem Services: Climate change regulation, erosion control, water quality, recreation (water based including angling), cultural heritage, sense of place, inspirational, spiritual and aesthetic values and biodiversity

WHERE? The map identifies areas that are a priority for nutrient management on improved grassland, through Environmental Stewardship, either Higher Level Stewardship or Upland Entry Level Stewardship options.

The Environment Agency and Natural England joint River Derwent and Tributaries and Bassenthwaite Lake Diffuse Water Pollution Plan identifies a number of measures required to reduce diffuse pollution. Managing nutrient inputs on improved grassland through Environmental Stewardship is one of these measures.

The diffuse pollution plan also identifies measures targeted at non-agricultural sources of diffuse pollution.

Map Information Sources: Catchment Sensitive Farming priority areas for nutrient management on improved grassland.

HOW? Fitting in with Farming: Effective management of nutrient inputs by avoiding excess application on improved grassland can help farming, by reducing costs, and the local environment by improving water quality. With the Catchment Sensitive Farming project, farmers in the Bassenthwaite catchment have been changing management practices to reduce the risk of diffuse pollution from agriculture. Environmental Stewardship agreements, to manage nutrient on improved grassland, supplement the CSF project provision of farm advice (including nutrient, manure and slurry management plans), soil testing and capital grants. Following soil testing, management of nutrient applications can help with grass growth. This includes achieving the right balance, from all nutrient applications, of nitrate for grass growth and phosphate for clover. Partnership Delivery:  Lake District National Park Plan  Bassenthwaite Lake Restoration Programme (BLRP)  RSPB Futurescapes  Environmental Land Management Service (ELMS)  Borrowdale Whole Valley Planning Group  National Trust Whole Valley Planning  Catchment Sensitive Farming Funding for Delivery:  Higher Level Stewardship (HLS)  Upland Entry Level Stewardship (UELS) – resource protection options for grassland.

Action 7: Improve Biodiversity of Valley Habitats ACTION 7: Improve Biodiversity of Valley Habitats

Target Area: Unmanaged native woodland into management c 600ha Restoration of raised bog 16 ha Management of hay meadow and wetland County Wildlife Sites WHY? The valleys support the most valuable farm land in the pilot area; however the remaining less agriculturally improved areas provide additional ecosystem services. Management of woodland can provide multiple benefits including timber, wood fuel and enhancement for wildlife. Appropriate management of lowland wetland sites is vital for carbon storage in deep and shallow peat. Traditionally managed meadow and pastures form part of the cultural and historical landscape. Connectivity of habitats is critical for climate change adaptation with robust habitats providing an effective vegetation cover that reduces risk of soil erosion. Ecosystem Services: Timber and wood fuel, climate change regulation, cultural heritage, sense of place, inspirational, spiritual and aesthetic values and biodiversity WHERE? The management actions target habitats that are not addressed by other proposals within the Delivery Plan. Valley habitats found within the catchment which are identified as being in need of action by the Cumbria Biodiversity Action plan are as follows:  Lowland Meadows  Lowland Dry Acid Grassland  Fens  Native Woodland  Lowland Raised Bogs For meadow and wetland habitats that are not SSSI the best available information is from the Cumbria Wildlife Trust Hay Meadows and Wetlands Projects. The sites identified by these projects are included in the Delivery Plan.

Management of 50% of unmanaged woodland for wood fuel, biodiversity and resource protection is a Forestry Commission priority. Map Information Sources: National Inventory of Woodlands and Trees, BAP habitat inventories, SSSI condition, County Wildlife Sites as identified by Wetland and Hay Meadow Projects (Cumbria Wildlife Trust). WHY? Fitting in with farming: Improved grassland in the valley bottoms is a critical part of the farming system for the production of food. However some fields are managed more traditionally as wetlands, meadows and pastures; important for wildlife and other benefits. The management of woodland has the potential to supplement farm income, particularly through wood fuel. Farmers are keen to overcome the challenges of difficult access and the development of an effective supply chain for woodland products. Partnership Delivery:  RSPB Futurescapes  Environmental Land Management Service (ELMS)  Forestry Commission Carbon Task Force  Other BAP funding: Cumbria BAP, Cumbria Wildlife Trust, EA, NE.  Cumbria Woodlands under-managed woodland Project and Previous Ancient Woodland Site Project. Funding for delivery:  Higher Level Stewardship  England Woodland Grant Scheme (Woodland Improvement Grant for BAP 50% funding, wood fuel proposed 60%)  SCaMP2 – within United Utilities land holding 10

Glossary of Terms and acronyms: Appendix 1: Map Data used for development of the Delivery Plan

Summer and winter stocking levels on fells (Natural England) BAP: Biodiversity Action Plan National Inventory of Woodlands and Trees (Forestry Commission) BGS: British Geological Society BLRP : Bassenthwaite Lake Restoration Programme Deep and shallow peaty soils - Mapping derived from 1:50,000 scale BGS digital data (Licence 2006/072, British Geological Survey © NERC). National Soils map © Cranfield University (NSRI) CFMP: Catchment Flood Management Plan 2008/09 BAP Habitat mapping (from OS derived data © Crown copyright. All rights reserved 2010.

CSF: Catchment Sensitive Farming Sites of Special Scientific Interest unit condition (Natural England)

EA: Environment Agency Soil vulnerability to erosion (Lancaster University/Forest Research)

ESA: Environmentally Sensitive Area Biodiversity Action Plan Habitat Inventories (Natural England)

ELMS: Environmental Land Management Service (partner work to deliver HLS, including Lake District National Park, National Trust and RSPB) Scheduled Monuments at Risk (English Heritage)

HLS: Higher Level Stewardship Cumbria Rights of Way Improvement Plan (Lake District National Park Authority)

LDNPA: Lake District National Park Authority County Wildlife Sites (Cumbria Wildlife Trust) NE: Natural England Futurescapes (RSPB) ROWIP: Rights of Way Improvement Plan (LDNPA) River Restoration Strategy for River Derwent and Tributaries SSSI (Environment Agency/Natural England) RSPB Futurescapes: Royal Society for Protection of Birds landscape-scale partnership project for Lake District High Fells.

SCAMP 2: Sustainable Catchment Management Plan

(U)ELS: (Upland) Entry Level Stewardship

UU: United Utilities

VP: Visitor Pay-Back

Appendix 2: Farmers Views from Workshops NB This is a note of the views expressed by 19 farmers present at two workshops on the key land management actions identified by the Bassenthwaite Vital Uplands project.

Sustainable grazing:  Balance needs to be found between farming sheep and the provision of multiple benefits. If farmers are reliant on payments, we need to get the balance right for long term continuity of Sustainable River Management hill farming.  With tighter budgets Environment Agency are not managing rivers as they used to when  There is a minimum number of animals to make sheep farming viable; farmers want to gravel was regularly removed. continue the tradition of sheep farming. Putting a few sheep out is not farming; farmers  Gravel has a value as a resources e.g. for construction. need to be interested in livestock  A whole valley planning approach (as piloted in Borrowdale and involving farmers, local  Natural England needs to recognise what sheep farmers provide in terms of food. community and other key stake holders) helps with sustainable river management.  Carbon storage requires a secure market for carbon trading. More information is needed,  Local knowledge is really important for rivers – need to have local confidence in the science. including over whether ownership of carbon is with tenants or landlords.  Better management of water in the catchment is important. Keeping the water and  Carbon storage can be provided for in combination with food production. preventing hose-pipe bans.  HLS needs to be adaptable to farm scale. Small farms struggle to get into HLS and can  There is potential for hydro-power for electricity. have less area that is not focussed on food production.  How can the catchment help with downstream flooding? Flooding is occurring more frequently bringing down more gravel. Building downstream on the floodplain is an issue. Woodland creation and management  Past modification of rivers has separated them from flood plains and accelerated the flow.  Careful design of woodland planting is needed - the right tree in the right place. Land management, including wetland areas, for flooding is important to reduce downstream  Need to focus on the areas that may be agriculturally difficult (e.g. bracken beds) and design flooding. woodlands to fit with sheep gathering.  Need to learn from different locations; in the Alps rivers have a series of step dams.  Can lose benefits if woodland is not managed properly. Fences and young trees need  Existing bridges may limit how the river is managed. maintenance. Need to learn from past lessons. What will happen to woodland when fences go in 10 years? Scheduled Monuments at risk  Grants are needed for the long-term management of woodlands.  Better communication is needed of where Scheduled Monuments are and what condition  Woodlands are for future generations; future commercial management may include wood they are in. fuel.  Bracken control may be needed.  Woodland use for wood fuel needs a supply chain and market to link up growers,  Some works to restore Scheduled Monuments are beyond HLS. processors and users.  Creation of co-operatives may assist woodland management. Nutrient Management on Inbye  Access to manage woodland is an issue.  Flooding of land can cause nutrient run-off even with careful management.  Need to seek a balance with the mess that can be caused by woodland management;  Water pollution from farming needs to be put into the wider context of the pollution from management by horses may be needed in places. sewage works, septic tanks, mines, salt from roads.  How does woodland creation balance with food production when food security is needed?  Catchment Sensitive Farming soil sampling can help with nutrient applications for grass Need moderation. growth. A balance is needed between phosphate for clover and nitrate for grass growth.  Planting with trees can change the landscape for tourists – do tourists want this?  Within (?) the Environmentally Sensitive Area scheme, fertiliser use is low.  Loss of Single Farm Payment was previously a problem with new woodland creation.  Farm woodlands need to be able to fit with the scale of the farm e.g. streamside woods on small farms.

Appendix 3: Nurture Lakeland Visitor Pay-Back Scheme  Widely promote the businesses who are participating in the scheme in order to bring more Recommendations from pilot work with 35 businesses in the Bassenthwaite Catchment joiners on board  Ensure that VP is entirely at no cost to the business  Ensure that VP systems are easy to adopt by the business Whilst Visitor Payback (VP) provides long term sustainable growth, the typical progress of VP can  Ensure that there is adequate support and help for the businesses to operate VP be quite slow and spasmodic; a few businesses are taken on board to support a particular project, once they are up and running, a few more businesses are engaged for another project and so on. The approach which works best: Some of this is process driven and some of it driven by available resource.  Valley based/whole catchment What this pilot has demonstrated is that with a well carried out strategic plan and an adequate  Wholesale approach over a short period initial investment progress and uptake for the scheme can be quite rapid.  Phased support Knowledge gained from this process indicates that VP is most likely to have a rapid and  Intervention to check on progress  Regular scheduled follow up widespread uptake when the following conditions can be applied: Technology: 1. Its „cheap and easy‟ for the businesses to operate  Better use of contemporary technology in particular the development (or better utilisation) of 2. There are no joining or membership fees „apps‟ for mobile phones, both for „visitor giving‟ and for information and education.  Better understanding of the cost of web development for businesses operating VP and the 3. High quality promotional material is available opportunity to provide or pay for this web development in order to incentivise the businesses 4. Cutting edge use of technology is applied to the fundraising to operate VP  Integration of VP into existing online & commercial bookings engines 5. There is a catchment or whole valley approach

6. There is high quality regular scheduled follow up What is needed to grow Visitor Payback into a sustainable funding source?

Strategic initial investment is the key to successful implementation of VP. This may mean putting Eco system services up the cost of a full time member of staff and the cost of marketing & PR in the short term (possibly for up to 2 years). Conveying the message Replicating the conditions of the pilot over a 12 month period ought to secure the participation of  Repackage the complex information around 100 businesses. With all of these fully implementing VP, income should reach around  Bite size chunks £76,000 per annum by Year 2. This could provide a secure investment for Year 2 and fund some  Build on existing interest projects.  Focus on tangible outputs or projects  Capture subscribers and provide them with ongoing information Based on the level of funds returned in this pilot, if 30% of funds raised were used to administer  Use the business owners as the gateway to the sector and grow the scheme, then a total income of around £125k per annum would be required to  Ensure that VP isn‟t „just about the money‟ sustain one member of staff and all other project costs.

As well as staff there is a clear need to invest in technology, both in order to be able to easily Operating VP integrate VP into existing bookings systems and to make better use of recent technological developments. Securing business participation: Much of the technology and development needed are generic and the cost of development could  Provide professional high quality information at a standard that businesses are happy to be shared by a number of organisations operating VP. display on their premises