UK Data Archive

Study Number 6791

Foundations for the future: learning from the past, 2007-2010

USER GUIDE

Review of the historical environmental changes in the UK uplands relevant to management and policy

Dr. Althea Davies School of Biological & Environmental Sciences University of Stirling Stirling Scotland FK9 4LA

Funded by the ESRC & RELU April 2008, updated January & July 2009

Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Contents

Summary ...... 4 Acknowledgements ...... 6 Aims and objectives of the review ...... 7 Why the uplands? ...... 7 Why look back? ...... 8 What are the obstacles? ...... 9 Structure of the review ...... 9 Data sources ...... 10 1. Moorland management & dynamics: farming in fluctuation ...... 11 1.1 Moorland management legacies: intensity of use ...... 11 1.1.1 ‘Traditional’ grazing ...... 11 1.1.2 Regulated burning ...... 12 1.1.3 Implications & gaps: traditions of grazing & burning ...... 12 1.2 Management & moorland dynamics ...... 13 Case study 1: Calluna decline ...... 13 Case study 2: Heather stability & spread ...... 14 Case study 3: Grasses on mires & moors: dynamic cycles to invasions ...... 14 1.2.1 Implications & research gaps: heather & grass dynamics ...... 15 2. Degraded lands & thresholds of stability ...... 17 2.1 Erosion ...... 17 2.1.1 Drivers of erosion ...... 18 2.1.2 Implications: erosion ...... 20 2.2 Pollution ...... 20 2.2.1 Lake acidification ...... 21 2.2.2 Atmospheric pollution in terrestrial systems ...... 22 Case study 4: the loss of Sphagnum ...... 22 Case study 5: heavy (trace) metal storage ...... 23 2.2.3 Eutrophication ...... 23 2.2.4 Implications & research gaps: pollution ...... 23 2.3 Carbon sequestration ...... 23 2.3.1 Implications & gaps: C sequestration ...... 25 3. Upland diversity: the legacy & role of management ...... 26 3.1 The attrition of diversity ...... 26 3.2 Agricultural abandonment & wild land ...... 27 3.3 Managing biodiversity: positive management ...... 28 3.4 Implications & gaps: wildness & management benefits & deficits ...... 29 4. Resilience & restoration management ...... 31 4.1 Peatland resilience & restoration management ...... 31 4.1.1 Natural hydrological variability: acceptable limits of change ...... 31 Case study 6: Peatland responses to environmental variability ...... 32 4.1.2 Legacies of change: threats to peatland & moorland resilience ...... 32 4.2 Woodland management & creation in the uplands ...... 33 4.2.1 Climate change, the fate & future of upland woods ...... 33 4.2.2 ‘Ancient’ & ‘semi-natural’ woodlands: management & diversity ...... 34 Case study 7: Management legacies in oak- & pinewoods ...... 35 4.2.3 Woodland-grazing dynamics ...... 35 4.2.4 New woods: restoration & multi-purpose resources ...... 36 Case study 8: Planning for new pinewoods & expanding the old ...... 36 4.2.5 Implications: woodland restoration & creation ...... 37

2 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

4.2 River management & restoration ...... 38 5. Climatic & economic change: rural risk & resilience ...... 39 General implications ...... 41 Appendix 1: references ...... 42

3 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Summary 1. This review draws together information on the historical processes and drivers which underlie the current state of the uplands in order to illustrate the range of accumulated legacies which threaten or enhance the resilience of upland habitats and rural communities. The target audience for the review includes ecologists, conservationists (in research and practice), land managers and policy-makers. 2. Why look back? Short-term (annual to decadal) perspectives remain pre-eminent in policy and management, despite frequent mention of the role of the past in shaping current landscapes and values, and the time-implications underlying many ecological, conservation, restoration and policy issues. • A longer-term perspective (centuries to millennia) shows that the origins of many trends of current management importance lie well beyond the duration of observational records. • By providing a critical evidence-base for assessing naturalness, disentangling natural and cultural drivers, and establishing the limits of acceptable change underpinning ecological thresholds, a historical perspective can be used to test the applicability and sensitivity of baselines and targets derived from short- term knowledge. This provides a more scientifically and socially defensible and robust basis for making sustainable policy and management decisions. 3. What are the barriers? At present, inevitable constraints on time and funding, institutional and communication barriers, limits to the expertise of individuals, and the perceived limitations of long-term data limit the extent of information sharing and opportunities for discussion and collaboration with those involved in policy and ecology. This review is a first attempt to draw together relevant long-term information in order to raise awareness of the potential for collaboration in the context of the UK uplands. 4. Why the uplands? Upland environments are sensitive to change and are an important environmental, conservation, social and economic resource on national and global levels. The future of the UK uplands is uncertain owing to changes in agricultural production, energy provision and climate, pressures which need to be balanced with increased recreational use and growing conservation concern. It is therefore essential to foster long-term sustainable management strategies which reflect the full range of threats and uncertainties. 5. Review structure & sources: The review is structured around issues of current concern, derived from policy documents, journal articles and information on stakeholder views (especially land managers). The long-term information presented derives from published palaeoenvironmental and historical articles and reports relevant to upland environmental, habitat and management change. The review is divided into five main thematic sections, each beginning with a summary of the key implications for management and policy. 6. Theme 1: Farming in fluctuation - moorland management & dynamics • Baselines must be influenced by evidence that the intensity and cumulative impact of grazing and burning has increased to unprecedented levels over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, in addition to erosion and pollution legacies. Over-reliance on 20th century baselines is thus often inappropriate. • Heather losses are far more prolonged than conventional ecological records suggest, with implications for restoration and biodiversity, although not all heather-dominated systems have a long history. Grasses are a natural part of many moorland systems, but a former grass/heath balance has been lost through management intensification over the last two centuries.

4 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

• More work is required to understand the extent of past variations in burning and grazing regimes and their effects on current moorland mosaics, floristic and faunal diversity. 7. Theme 2: Degraded lands & thresholds of stability • Some peat- and moorland sites may have crossed thresholds of stability as the current extent of erosion and pollution lies outside historic limits of variability. • The risk of drought damage and associated release of pollutants stored in organic soils and peats is particularly high in more marginal and damaged moors, and the likelihood of recovery is difficult to predict due to complex feedback mechanisms between climate, erosion and management. Novel strategies and alternative restoration targets need to be considered. • Sensitive management is critical for maintaining a favourable carbon balance and preventing the release of stored pollutants, although this is hampered by the shortage of data on the long-term effects of management on C balance. 8. Theme 3: Upland diversity – the legacy & role of management • Cultural legacies are so intrinsic to current upland values that ‘good’ agricultural management is essential for achieving biodiversity and restoration goals. • Policy has a key role since much attrition over the last c.250 years at least has been driven by market opportunity and subsidy. • Abandonment and ‘wild land’ are not logical alternatives to agricultural management or mismanagement, as the outcomes are inherently unpredictable and idealised in ecosystems shaped by centuries of human activity. 9. Theme 4: Resilience & restoration management • Misconceptions and value judgements detrimental to the resilience and conservation values of peat and woodland habitats are inherent in restoration. Management visions based on current appearances and narrow definitions of ‘normal’ conditions are restrictive and threaten the resilience of the habitats they seek to restore and maintain. • Uncertainties relating to future climatic impacts on peatlands and woodlands are not sufficiently integrated into current restoration strategies. 10. Theme 5: Climatic & economic change: rural risk & resilience • Analysis of past climatic risk to farming emphasises the extent to which economics outweighs climate as a driver of upland agriculture. • The reliance of agricultural communities on economic incentives and support mechanisms limits opportunities for local diversification and increases the vulnerability of rural communities. 11. General conclusions: • A longer-term perspective emphasises the extent to which 20th century baselines, and narrow targets and norms underestimate the extent of ecological change and the vulnerability of many upland habitats. • Due to the accumulated impacts of past management, climatic and pollution change, some habitats may already have crossed critical thresholds, and may not respond as expected to management, making it increasingly impractical to maintain or restore current values. • Management based on misguided views threatens the inherent adaptability and flexibility of upland ecosystems. Growing recognition of the need to manage for change requires more flexible definitions, and realistic targets which can accommodate change and distinguish between critical thresholds and acceptable limits of variability.

5 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

• Many positive attributes derive explicitly from cultural interactions, so management strategies (rather than mimicking natural processes) are essential for maintaining habitat continuity. This provides a positive foundation for incorporating conservation into agri-environmental schemes. By contrast, uncertainty is implicit in non-intervention and ‘naturalistic’ management strategies. • Routine use of long-term sedimentary records in current management and policy regarding freshwater lakes provides a model for the wider integration of long-term sources to other environments. • There is scope and impetus for better communication between long- and short- term sources of information: an informed approach requires evidence which spans diverse spatial and temporal scales, and this can only be achieved by combining the strengths of different disciplines and practical knowledge to minimise risks and uncertainties that face upland ecosystems, rural communities and the wider populace who rely on the products and ecosystem services derived from them.

Acknowledgements This review was written as part of a RELU-funded fellowship examining the scope for better communication and research to bridge the gaps between the short-term approaches used in conservation, management and policy-making, and longer-term environmental histories. Thanks to Alistair Hamilton and Colin Legg for comments on the draft review. I would be grateful for any further comments, particularly regarding any inadvertent errors or omissions, or to follow up the themes and issues presented in this review.

6 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Aims and objectives of the review • The primary objective of this review is to make existing information on the historical processes and drivers which underlie the current state of the uplands available to a wider audience, including ecologists and conservationists (in applied and research spheres), land managers and policy-makers. To best serve this wide target audience, each thematic section of the review begins with a summary of the key findings, before reviewing the underlying evidence. • The review deals with interactions between environmental, ecological and management changes in the UK uplands over the last c.300-500 years. The uplands are readily acknowledged to be cultural landscapes, so the last few hundred years (rather than pre-anthropogenic, ‘natural’ ecosystems) are of most direct relevance to the current state of the UK moors and mountains. The review does not summarise the environmental history of the UK or of moorlands, for which readers are referred to other sources (e.g. Stevenson & Birks 1995, Smout 2000, Simmons 2001, 2003). • Understanding the historical trajectories shaping current conditions is a secure starting point for responding to future change since the legacies of past human activities and climate change affect the status, sensitivity and resilience of current upland habitats, but the exact nature of these interactions is seldom used to inform policy or management decisions. • The review also indicates gaps in our current understanding of how environmental change and land management, in particular, have shaped the uplands and the implications for management.

Why the uplands? ‘Behind the face of scenic beauty… the English uplands are suffering from economic crisis, social change and environmental degradation’ (English Nature 2001) Upland environments and their future are important for environmental and socio- economic reasons: they are sensitive to environmental change and serve a wide range of values and uses (e.g. Bragg & Tallis 2001, Milne & Hartley 2001, Moore 2002). UK peat- and heathlands are an important environmental, conservation, social and economic resource on national and global levels (Thompson et al. 1995b, Tallis 1998, Moore 2002). As a result of increased recreational use and conservation concern, upland ecosystems are becoming more highly valued, but they and rural communities are also facing significant threats and uncertainties, associated with changes in agricultural production, energy provision and climate (e.g. Foresight 2008). It is therefore essential to minimise uncertainties involved in monitoring and managing future change, especially in view of the changes, instabilities and damage already evident in many upland areas. Numerous recent and ongoing reviews of upland policy and management are indicative of the pressing need to deal with these threats (e.g. Defra 2006, Land Use Consultants et al. 2006, Reid 2007, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds 2007, Royal Society of Edinburgh Inquiry 2007).

In ecological terms, the uplands are generally defined as the areas lying above the upper limits of improved or enclosed agricultural ground. However, this belies the importance and extent of hill management and the diversity contributed by adjacent and interspersed farmland, particularly in northern Britain, where the higher latitude compresses altitudinal effects, lowering the upper limits of many upland communities. In addition, rural communities and land management are integral to the origin, character and value of these areas and, for the purposes of this report, relatively

7 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy unimproved hill ground and upland farms are therefore included in the definition of the uplands.

Why look back? ‘Management of our environment must be informed by past, present, and predicted change.’ (Scottish Natural Heritage 2002a) Policy and conservation documents frequently acknowledge the role of past land management in altering and shaping our current landscapes and conservation values, but detailed knowledge of these past legacies is seldom used to inform current policy or set appropriate baselines, beyond the sphere of built heritage. Longer-term evidence indicates that the origins of many trends of current management importance lie well beyond the duration of observational records and over-reliance on shorter- term views can generate a ‘shifting baseline syndrome’: the progressive change in standards as each new generation bases their expectations on their own experience (Pauly 1995), or on the prevailing political situation. In addition to the uncertainties present in ecology and the value judgements and myths inherent in conservation (Sutherland et al. 2004), this imposes the very real risk of generating inappropriate targets or insensitive monitoring standards which may bias future policy and management, and even the future sustainability or resilience of upland ecosystems. In this context, short-term is defined as ranging from seasonal to the last c.60 years.

With the need to meet targets and adapt to climatic changes, the speed and magnitude of which are unparalleled in our history or that of most upland systems (Tallis 1998, Huntley & Baxter 2002), we do not have the luxury of being able to learn from mistakes or manage changes as they occur. • A long-term view (defined as ranging from 100-10000 years) can allow the benefits of hindsight to be incorporated into upland management as the past effectively forms a series of ‘natural experiments’, which provide more opportunities to test hypotheses and received wisdom regarding ecological responses to change than is possible through adaptive or experimental management (cf. Sutherland et al. 2004, Sutherland 2006). • Long-term perspectives can help assess naturalness, the vulnerability and resilience of current habitats or ecosystems, the status of endangered and invasive species, and can indicate processes of change, including forcing and feedback mechanisms (e.g. Birks 1996, Bragg & Tallis 2001, Ellis & Tallis 2001, Gillson & Willis 2004, Dearing et al. 2006, Holden et al. 2007a). They also help define relevant timescales and disentangle natural or ‘normal’ variability from climatic and cultural trends, both of which are impossible using short-term data, and establish the processes and limits of acceptable change underpinning ecological resilience and thresholds of concern (Swetnam et al. 1999, Parr et al. 2003, Willis et al. 2005, Willis & Birks 2006). • A historical perspective can thus be used to test the applicability and sensitivity of currently accepted baselines, indicators and targets derived from short-term knowledge, and provide a greater appreciation of the extent of natural and human- induced variability, in space and time (Huntley 1991, Willis et al. 2005). • This approach can provide a more scientifically and socially defensible and robust basis for making decisions about sustainable development, land management, economic viability, conservation and restoration (Barber 1993, Birks 1996, Charman 1997, Chambers et al. 2006, Willis et al. 2007b), so helping to reduce uncertainties and providing a tool for understanding vulnerability, predicting

8 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

responses to change and validating ecosystem modelling (e.g. Swetnam et al. 1999, Anderson et al. 2006, Dearing et al. 2006). • While acknowledging that there may be no past analogues for many current environmental and socio-economic issues, all of these concepts provide valuable insights and guidance for future sustainability. • Longer perspectives can also provide a forum for debate about best practice, providing an opportunity to involve a wider stakeholder audience. Land managers, for example, which frequently feel excluded and frustrated by the emphasis on science in conservation, yet are also the vehicle for carrying out conservation management (Johnston & Soulsby 2006).

What are the obstacles? There is a sizeable and growing literature advocating the importance and value of incorporating longer-term palaeoecological perspectives into ecology, but this has yet to become commonplace in conservation and sustainable management (e.g. Foster et al. 1990, Birks 1996, Parr et al. 2003, Dearing et al. 2006, Willis & Birks 2006, Willis et al. 2007a). This stems from a combination of the disjunctions between policy, research and practice (including communication), inevitable constraints on time and funding, limits to the expertise of individuals (which is usually confined to a single discipline) and the perceived imprecision and limitations of information on the past (Swetnam et al. 1999, Willis et al. 2005, 2007a). Developments in palaeoenvironmental techniques and the growth of environmental history as a field of research to study the mutual interactions between people and their environment through time (Simmons 1993) provide scope for more productive collaborations across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, particularly with the growth of interest in ecosystem goods and services. A framework for communication and networks of exchange are thus required to build collaborative bridges between policy, applied management, ecology, environmental economics, and fields of historical and long-term research. This review is a first attempt to draw together relevant long-term information in order to increase awareness of the potential for such collaboration regarding the UK uplands.

Structure of the review To ensure that the relevance of environmental history for upland management and policy-making is clear, the review is structured around issues of current concern, and emphasises the linkages between the patterns and drivers of change. These themes were derived from policy documents, journal articles and the limited number of published sources which detail the views of stakeholders (land owners, managers and residents). Some themes, such as the impacts of climate change and management, recur throughout the review.

The review is divided into five main thematic sections, each of which begins with a summary of the key implications for management and policy, and current research gaps. The first section deals with farming in fluctuation, particularly as regards the dynamics of heather moorland, with which upland farming long has been closely associated. This is followed by an examination of extent of ‘degradation’ and the fragility of the uplands due to legacies of climate change, exploitation and atmospheric pollution. Then evidence for the benefits of active management are presented, firstly by contrasting the role of agriculture in supporting biodiversity with abandonment and ‘wild land’ values, and then by presenting long-term insights into

9 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy habitat restoration and resilience, focusing on peatland and woods. The fifth section examines human resilience, particularly in the face of climatic and economic change. Several case studies are presented to illustrate selected themes. The review ends with general conclusions and a list of references can be found in the appendix.

Data sources The information in this review is derived primarily from published literature of relevance to upland environmental, habitat and management change, and from unpublished reports and surveys commissioned by stakeholder organisations. Data derive largely from palaeoenvironmental sciences, using written evidence to understand the socio-economic and management drivers behind ecological and environmental change. The palaeoenvironmental data relate primarily to plant ecology and atmospheric chemistry, rather than faunal communities which are harder to study and for which less detailed information is available.

10 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

1. Moorland management & dynamics: farming in fluctuation ‘[H]eath landscapes were ‘cultural’ not only in their origins but also because in time they often became associated with a distinctive way of life for those who lived and worked in them’ (Gimingham 1995) • Heaths and moorlands are readily acknowledged to be cultural landscapes, created and maintained by land managers (Thompson et al. 1995a, Smout 2000, Simmons 2003), although the frequent emphasis on ‘naturalness’ in upland conservation creates tensions with land managers (e.g. Johnston & Soulsby 2006). • The value of ‘traditional’ agriculture is also frequently commented on in conservation and policy documents, but is seldom clearly defined (e.g. Land Use Consultants et al. 2006, Scotland Rural Development Programme 2008, cf. Sutherland et al. 2006). With a continuing move towards integrated agri- environment schemes, it is essential that we understand the long-term ecological impacts of different farming systems to shape best practice in balancing conservation and production. • Furthermore, unless the impacts of mid-20th century agricultural change are assessed relative to mid-19th century intensification we risk promoting unsustainable and impoverished moorland ecosystems in agricultural, conservation and restoration management.

Key findings & uncertainties: • Baselines based on 20th century data may be set at levels that are not sustainable in the long-term since the intensity of grazing and burning has increased to unprecedented levels over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries. • While heather losses are far more prolonged than conventional ecological records suggest, with implications for the feasibility of restoring Calluna and associated biodiversity, it is essential to recognise that grasses are a natural and not wholly invasive part of many moorland systems, and that not all heather-dominated systems have a long history. • More work is required to understand the extent of variation in burning regimes and how this has affected moorland mosaics and biodiversity, including plants and invertebrate faunas since this has implications for many bird populations.

1.1 Moorland management legacies: intensity of use • Grazing and burning are the primary drivers responsible for the creation and maintenance of many moorland landscapes, and debate continues as to the merits of differing regimes for managing and maintaining productive, diverse and high conservation value upland habitats, and best practice for controlling erosion, carbon loss and the spread of trees, grasses and bracken (Thompson et al. 1995b, Holden et al. 2007b).

1.1.1 ‘Traditional’ grazing • Written sources question numerous stereotypes and supply some of the details missing from often vague definitions of ‘traditional’ agriculture and also contribute to debates over the value and future of grazing for maintaining upland values. • Foremost is the very different scale and impacts of pre-19th century upland livestock systems compared with modern hill grazing regimes. Stocking densities were well below modern rates (although calculations must be treated with caution as they are based on non-standardised data).

11 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

o E.g. In 9 Perthshire townships, stocking densities rose from 0.0625-0.125 livestock units [LU]/ha, from 1727-c.1870s, taking into account smaller livestock sizes, rising to 0.3-0.6 LU/ha by the 1870s (Dodgshon 2004). o E.g. In N Wales, medieval monastic holdings of c.0.12-0.59 ewe units/ha and 0.07 cattle units/ha had shifted to 0.35 ewe units/ha and 0.17 cattle units/ha by the 16th century, before rising to 3.7 ewe units/ha by 1867 (Hughes et al. 1973). • Before the 19th century, most hill grazing was neither year-round nor systematic relative to the full extent of available hill ground (Winchester 2000, Dodgshon & Olsson 2006). Consequently, vegetational impacts were more limited, potentially within the limits of resilience of the system, and most complaints about degradation begin in the 19th century, under sheep-dominated systems, although some upland soils were sensitive to even relatively light grazing pressures (Case study 1: Heather: stability & spread and 2.1 Erosion).

1.1.2 Regulated burning ‘[W]e do not sufficiently know enough about the historical burning practices that have produced different vegetation communities. This can make it difficult to establish modern ‘good management practice’.’ (Holden et al. 2007a) • The large extent of rotationally burned heather is unique to UK and Ireland, and the long-term effects contribute to current heathland composition (Hobbs & Gimingham 1987, Thompson et al. 1995b, Holden et al. 2007b). However, there is a lack of information on the extent, history and effects of burning practices, particularly serial, rotational burning, to make informed management decisions on upland burning (Stewart et al. 2005, Yallop et al. 2006). • Charcoal in peat profiles indicates that recurrent fires have been a long-term characteristic on blanket and raised mires over centuries and millennia, although it is difficult to distinguish between natural and deliberate causes, and to quantify the frequency and intensity of burning (e.g. Tallis & Livett 1994, Edwards et al. 2000, Stevenson & Rhodes 2000). • Regulated burning extends back at least into the medieval period, challenging the notion that regular burning regimes arose during 19th century intensive sheep grazing and grouse management (e.g. Yallop et al. 2006, Holden et al. 2007b). References to ‘muirburn’ occur as early as 1400 in an Act of Scottish Parliament and similar strictures were restated into the 17th century, stipulating no moor burning from March until September/harvest to manage heather and grass, and to protect trees (Smout 2000, Dodgshon & Olsson 2006). • Similarly, patch burning was clearly known before the 1911 government enquiry into fluctuating grouse populations, which has been put forward as the origin of this practise (e.g. Holden et al. 2007b). For example, strip/patch burning systems on a minimum 10 year rotation were stipulated in 1895 on the Sutherland Estate (National Archives of Scotland Acc10853/427). • In combination with other stresses, increased burning over recent centuries has contributed to unprecedented impacts on moorland vegetation, erosion (Sections 1.2 & 2.1) and C storage (Section 2.3).

1.1.3 Implications & gaps: traditions of grazing & burning • Current concerns over the potential impacts of falling stocking levels must take into account the centuries of lower grazing pressures pre c.1850 and the

12 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

unprecedented stocking levels that have become the norm over the last c.100-250 years (Sections 1.2 & 3.0). • While data from recent decades indicate that upland burning has intensified since the 1970s in some areas (e.g. Yallop et al. 2006), longer-term data show that this represents the most recent phase of intensification in a much more prolonged series of changes. In many cases, burning has increased over the last c.100-250 years, with a further rise at some sites around 1900, due to agricultural intensification (Rhodes & Stevenson 1997). The 1970s thus represent a midpoint and not a baseline for monitoring the extent or impacts of burning in the uplands, with variations across the UK even on a 20th century scale (e.g. Hester & Sydes 1992). This emphasises the limitations to current management and conservation approaches for setting limits to burning. • This long-term and historic information needs to be linked with detailed experimental and written records which record different intensities, frequencies and seasons of burning, to inform practical management.

1.2 Management & moorland dynamics • A longer-term perspective can establish whether 20th century changes in the relative abundance of heather and grasses lie within the acceptable limits of change for moorlands or whether they have reached thresholds of concern.

Case study 1: Calluna decline • The loss of distinctive heather moorland communities and spread of grassland are significant concerns for the conservation status, biodiversity, productivity and landscape value of UK heather moorlands (Thompson et al. 1995b). The loss of heather is known from observation over the last c.50-100 years (Anderson & Yalden 1981, Thompson et al. 1995b, Tudor & Mackey 1995). • However, a 1940s benchmark for restoration is inadequate as many heaths had been depauperate for at least 100 years by this time as the origins of heather contraction range from pre-1700 into the 20th century, with a concentration during the later 18-19th centuries (Stevenson & Thompson 1993, Tallantire 1997, Chambers et al. 1999, 2007, Tipping 2000, Hendon & Charman 2004, Yeloff et al. 2006, Davies & Dixon 2007). • While is no single cause can be recognised at a national level, grazing practices are most strongly implicated: with the intensification in farming around c.1750- 1850, the body size, hardiness and number of sheep rose, as did the grazing burden on higher ground, particularly during winter, since grazing became year- round rather than seasonal and low-lying farmland was saved for wintering or fodder crops (Hughes et al. 1973, Whyte 1981, Stevenson & Thompson 1993, Tipping 2000, Dodgshon & Olsson 2006; 1.1 Moorland management legacies). This also increased pressure in largely unfenced upland woods, which provided winter shelter for livestock and deer (Mitchell & Kirby 1990). o Within c.50-100 years of these changes in stocking, heather was in decline, dry grassy heaths were converted to species-impoverished grassland (possibly the Nardus communities present now) (Tipping 2000, Davies & Dixon 2007), and blanket peats were increasingly affected by the spread of grasses like Molinia (Stevenson & Thompson 1993, Chambers et al. 1999, 2001, 2006, 2007; Case study 3: Grasses on mires & moors). • The long-term impacts of burning on heather are no more clear-cut in the past than in the present: moor-burning ceased on dry heaths in the Cheviots as Calluna was

13 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

replaced by species-impoverished grassland (Tipping 1998a, 2000, Davies & Dixon 2007), whereas increased burning contributed to some heather losses on blanket peat, acting in combination with grazing, air pollution and climate change (Stevenson & Rhodes 2000), as has occurred due to severe moorland fires in the 20th century, where burning has also contributed to peat erosion (Maltby et al. 1990, Mackay & Tallis 1996, Yeloff et al. 2006). • Most heather losses post-date the period of increased climatic variability around 1100-1800, which caused peat and soil erosion (2.1 Erosion). In combination with sheep grazing, atmospheric N deposition may be continuing to exacerbate losses, favouring grasses (Chambers et al. 1979, 1999, Holden et al. 2007a, b, Hughes et al. 2007).

Case study 2: Heather stability & spread • In view of the evidence in Case study 1, past land-uses which favour diverse heather moorland, including conditions which maintain a balance between grasses and heaths, are relevant to current moorland management. • Grazing was the main mechanism for encouraging and maintaining heather prior to the 19th century. This is clearest on better-drained soils around the Cheviot (SE Scotland & Northumberland): heather was only a minor component until it spread in species-rich grassland (possibly an Agrostis-Festuca-type community) under sheep and cattle rearing regimes around the 12-14th centuries. More systematic, possibly seasonal grazing is thought to have been causal. Stocking densities were undoubtedly lower than in recent centuries (1.1.1 ‘Traditional’ grazing) and so species-richness remained high (Tipping 1998a, 2000, Davies & Dixon 2007). Grassland may have been burnt to encourage the spread of heather or to manage pastures after the grass-heath formed. On some blanket peats cattle-dominated grazing regimes may have contributed to the expansion of heather until the mid- 1800s, when declines set in, although this is less well understood (Stevenson & Birks 1995). • It is important to recognise that, at the same time as better known 19th century declines (Case study 1), Calluna spread on some blanket mires in the North York Moors and North Pennines, and has risen to unprecedented levels in South Wales during the 20th century. These occurred as a result of burning and erosion, at the expense of grasses, sedges and, in some cases, Sphagnum (Atherden 2004, Chambers et al. 2006, 2007), while in other cases, lower sheep densities may be responsible, alone, as part of grouse moor management or in combination with erosion or drainage, as occurred on some cotton grass moors in the Peak District between 1913 and the 1970s (Anderson & Yalden 1981).

Case study 3: Grasses on mires & moors: dynamic cycles to invasions • The spread of Molinia and Nardus in moorland habitats has negative impacts on grazing and conservation values (Welch 1986, Chambers et al. 1999, Marrs et al. 2004, Milligan et al. 2004, Littlewood et al. 2006a). However, grasses have long been part of the moorland vegetation. Molinia, for instance, has been present for hundreds of years and, on blanket mires in Exmoor and Wales composition fluctuated between Callunetum and grass moor (Chambers et al. 1999, 2001, 2007). Similarly, between the 12-14th and later 18th centuries, grass-heaths grew on drier soils around the Cheviot (Case study 2: Heather: stability & spread). • It was not until the late 18-20th centuries that the competitive balance altered, allowing grasses to achieve dominance, replacing Calluna, Sphagnum, and, in

14 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

some cases, Eriophorum, on blanket and raised mires, and dry heaths (Yeloff et al. 2006, Chambers et al. 1999, 2001, 2007). As in the present, this process was driven by combinations of anthropogenic factors, with similar end results: burning, grazing (higher stocking densities and sheep dominance), increased nutrient inputs (through more intensive stocking or atmospheric deposition), pollution and drainage (including peat-cutting) (Yeloff et al. 2006, Chambers et al. 1999, 2007, Hughes et al. 2007).

1.2.1 Implications & research gaps: heather & grass dynamics • With current concerns over heather loss, examples of expansion may be considered desirable, but the significance attached to Calluna must be tempered by the knowledge that its current dominance may have no long history at some sites and is due to conditions which are damaging the resilience of the habitat (e.g. erosion, Sphagnum loss) and occur at the expense of other valued habitats. This must be considered in the context of climate change, which may increase the extent of heather cover as some bogs become drier (4.1 Peatland resilience & restoration management) • As a result of the cumulative impacts of grazing, burning and more recent atmospheric deposition, some heather moors retain only the most resistant species, and heather abundance or (floristic) diversity may thus have become relatively insensitive stress indicators. See 3 Upland diversity for further aspects of the role of management in diversity change, including agricultural abandonment. o The loss of Calluna-dominated moorland threatens the floristic diversity of the sub-montane zone as well as many rare and threatened bird species. o The extent and antiquity of species losses in some areas means that (1) focusing on a single dominant taxon, like heather, may be a poor means of restoring the wider ecosystem unless it is considered a keystone species for the community in question (Littlewood et al. 2006b), and (2) reduced stocking alone is insufficient to restore diversity, particularly with additional competitive pressures caused by atmospheric N inputs. This reinforces the need to move away from single species to consider associated habitat changes and interactions (cf. Hulme 2005). • Where Molinia has risen to unprecedented levels in the recent past (20th century), conservation management efforts to reduce Molinia dominance are justifiable and success may be more likely as management does not have to combat long- established dominance (Chambers et al. 2001, 2007). o However, long-term grass-heather dynamism and the loss of equally endangered species-rich acid grasslands in the formation of dry grass-heaths highlights the range of possible restoration targets for moorland and valid alternatives to Calluna-domination (cf. Anderson et al. 1997). o Consequently, reference to history can broaden management vision and restoration targets where rigid adherence to contemporary vegetation classifications for setting management targets, which ignore historic precedent, may exclude potentially relevant assemblages which contribute to habitat resilience (Chambers et al. 1999, cf. Wilkinson 2001). o As experiments show, reductions in grazing pressure alone are likely to be ineffectual in controlling the spread of grasses in moorlands since this is not the sole cause (cf. Thompson 2002, Marrs et al. 2004), emphasising the potentially fragile state of heaths.

15 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

• The contrasting ecological footprints of medieval, pre- and post-19th century stocking regimes suggest that agri-environmental schemes for moorland conservation would be best served by relatively low stocking densities, using modified grazing regimes (less sheep, with lighter cattle grazing), which are seasonally controlled, in combination with reduced burning and more intensive shepherding to actively maintain heterogeneity (at landscape and community levels) (cf. Thompson et al. 1995b, Littlewood et al. 2006b). This requires the expertise present in rural agricultural communities, but must also be combined with reduced atmospheric pollution and efforts to reduce gullying to maintain hydrological integrity and so help regulate the competition balance between grasses and other mire taxa (Chambers et al. 2007). • There are insufficient data to understand the relationships between local grazing, burning and pollution histories and their effects on the composition, biodiversity and productivity of different moorland habitats (Shaw et al. 1996, Yallop et al. 2006, Holden et al. 2007a, 2007b). • Data on relationships between the history and current status of many moorland ecological groups other than plants are scarce. For example, work on invertebrates in lowland peat environments has shown significant habitat-related changes which have shaped the current diversity of invertebrate faunas (e.g. Whitehouse 2006) but very little is known regarding upland faunas (e.g. Clark 2003, cf. Littlewood et al. 2006a).

16 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

2. Degraded lands & thresholds of stability ‘Overgrazing is perceived to be a major cause of blanket mire degradation in all parts of Britain’ (Tallis 1998) ‘Climate change is a principal driver of many degradation processes’ (Holden et al. 2007a, p.20) • Upland deterioration has been a recurrent theme since the later 19th century and is often associated with declining diversity or carrying capacity on hill grazings, the spread of moorland grasses, pollution and erosion damage (Holden et al. 2007b). This concern is also reflected in the drive to halt biodiversity losses by 2010 (3 Upland diversity).

Key findings & uncertainties: • The present state of some peat- and moorland sites is outside all historic limits of change, suggesting that they have crossed thresholds of stability. Consequently, the risk of drought damage and associated release of stored pollutants is particularly high in more marginal and damaged moors and peatlands. • The complex interactions and feedback mechanisms between climate, management, hydrology, erosion and pollutants and the unprecedented severity of erosion in some areas makes it difficult to predict recovery, and suggests high costs, long timeframes and a need to consider novel strategies or alternative ‘restoration’ targets. • Management is critical for maintaining a favourable carbon balance, as well as preventing the release of pollutants stored in organic soils and peats, since abrupt vegetation shifts have strong impacts on C stocks and climatic impacts will initially occur via changes in near-surface hydrology and vegetation. • However, further research is required as there is a shortage of data on the impacts of anthropogenic activities on C balance and interacting factors needed to extrapolate from site-specific studies to landscape-scale management implications.

2.1 Erosion • Upland peat and soil erosion are widespread (e.g. Grieve et al. 1995, Tallis et al. 1997, Tallis 1998, Higgitt et al. 2001) and pose a serious threat to the large carbon stores in upland sediments and thus to climate change (Bellamy et al. 2005, Dawson & Smith 2007, Holden et al. 2007a). This is in addition to threats from historic legacies (e.g. pollution deposition; 2.2 Pollution), current land management and climate change. The impacts extend beyond terrestrial habitats, adversely affecting upland aquatic systems and water quality (e.g. Rose et al. 2004, Evans et al. 2006, Shotbolt et al. 2006, Rothwell et al. 2007a). • As the carbon cycle has a long equilibrium time, the wider impacts of erosion are unknown as yet, but the consequences of actions taken now will persist for many centuries (Scholes 1999, cited in Dawson & Smith 2006) and policies and management regimes must therefore be carefully considered. • Observational data on the extent of erosion are largely descriptive and of insufficient time-depth to provide secure insights into the origins, frequency and potential timescales of erosion, while written sources often describe only more extreme or obvious changes at a limited number of sites (Tallis 1985, Bragg & Tallis 2001, Higgitt et al. 2001). Current appearances may be misleading as re- vegetation can mask the severity, extent and timescale of erosion processes, giving the landscape a less degraded appearance, while the reactivation of erosion scars

17 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

may give an exaggerated view of current processes (Burt et al. 2002, Grieve et al. 1995, Higgitt et al. 2001). • Despite the shortage of detailed long-term studies, the difficulties of dating eroded sediments, and separating climatic and anthropogenic drivers (Tallis 1987, Ballantyne 1991, Higgitt et al. 2001), long-term records indicate that degraded bogs and eroded soils are multi-causal and that much current upland erosion is the result of nearly 1000 years of climatic and management impacts (e.g. Figure 7.1 in Higgitt et al. 2001). This contrasts with more isolated evidence for peat and soil erosion in prehistory (e.g. Bradshaw & McGee 1988, Stevenson et al. 1990, Edwards & Whittington 2001, Chiverrell 2006, Leira et al. 2007, Chiverrell et al. 2008, Foster et al. 2008). • While current efforts to halt erosion may provide a temporary stop-gap, immediately pre-industrial targets are not sufficient to restore peatland integrity and a longer perspective warns of the financial and practical feasibility and timeframes required to sustain or achieve current targets for halting and repairing erosion. • The main drivers of upland erosion/instability in the past, which are also likely to be influential in the future, are: natural (internal) factors, intensified grazing and burning, deforestation and afforestation, drainage, atmospheric pollution and climate change. Interactions between these factors can be especially damaging; this increases the difficulty of predicting erosion and the need for diverse monitoring protocols.

2.1.1 Drivers of erosion • While bog bursts may be natural (see below), the evidence for erosion as a natural feature of upland peatlands is limited, although it may have been more significant in locations which are climatically marginal for peat growth, such as the Pennines, where the formation of a naturally unstable peat mass led to the formation of drainage gullies by the 11th century (Tallis 1985, 1998, Tallis & Livett 1994). • Increased climatic variability on regional to global scales characterised the period c.800-1850 (popularly, but misleadingly, known as the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ and the ‘Little Ice Age’). An increased incidence of peat and soil erosion from northern Scotland to the southern Pennines is linked with more extreme climatic/weather events during this period. o Drier conditions: In the southern Pennines, peat desiccation around 1100-1300 caused permanent damage to the bog ecosystem by changing peat growth patterns on exposed ridges and summits and peat margins, possibly leading to gullying (Tallis 1997). This sensitised the ecosystem to subsequent perturbations, making it more susceptible to even short-term desiccation (Tallis 1995, 1997). This pattern continues since climatically-induced drought has contributed to damaging wildfires, especially in the 20th century when high sheep numbers have further limited regeneration and exacerbated peat erosion (Mackay & Tallis 1996, Yeloff et al. 2006). o Wetter, stormier conditions: Increased peat and soil erosion around 1500-1700 is attributed to climatic wetness, especially increased storminess and extreme rainfall events, both of which may increase in frequency in the future (Stevenson et al. 1990, Ballantyne 1991, Rhodes & Stevenson 1997, Curry 2000, Higgitt et al 2001, Chiverrell et al. 2008). On high plateaux, increased wind stress and prolonged snow-lie may have caused the formation of deflation surfaces in NW Scotland around 1550-1700 (Ballantyne & Morrocco

18 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

2006, Morrocco et al. 2007). Intense rainstorms, possibly coupled with anthropogenic disturbance, have triggered an increased incidence of landslides (peat slides and bog bursts) over the last c.150-200 years, again, especially during the late 20th century (Higgitt et al. 2001, Foster et al. 2008, Hatfield et al. 2008, Hatfield & Maher 2009, Mills & Warburton unpublished, cited in Holden et al. 2007a). • Climate may have triggered erosion, but human activity is the critical factor which pushed these systems towards erosive thresholds (Chiverrell et al. 2008, Foster et al. 2008, Hatfield & Maher 2009). Activities such as the removal of hillslope woods and mining (Chiverrell 2006, Hatfield et al. 2008) affected some catchments, but agricultural intensification is a main factor. Grazing (especially of sheep) has been a significant driver of upland soil and peat erosion and vegetation change over the last 1000 years, particularly in combination with other factors. o This applies even before widely documented land-use intensification in both the late 18-19th and 20th centuries; medieval grazing practices instigated or exacerbated peat and soil erosion, gullying and slope instability, especially during periods of climatic instability (Harvey et al. 1981, Harvey & Renwick 1987, Brazier et al. 1988, Curry 2000, Ellis & Tallis 2001, Reid & Thomas 2004, Chiverrell 2006, Morrocco et al. 2007). In some instances, this may be the result more systematic, year-round grazing regimes (e.g. Tipping 2000, Davies & Dixon 2007; 1.2 Management & moorland dynamics). • The effects of burning on erosion are less well researched. Burning and grazing do not necessarily cause instability since evidence for peat stabilisation in some upland lake catchments coincided with increased burning and rising grazing pressures around 1850-1950 (Rhodes & Stevenson 1997). However, damaging wildfires during periods of climatic dryness have contributed to damaging erosion, particularly in combination with grazing (Tallis 1994, Mackay & Tallis 1996, Yeloff et al. 2006). Higher charcoal quantities suggest that eroded peats pose an increased fire risk over the long-term (Tallis 1987). • Similar to modern experience of erosion caused by ploughing in advance of conifer afforestation (Battarbee et al. 1985), deforestation on hillslopes has in the past contributed to slope instability, particularly in combination with grazing and burning (Curry 2000, Ellis & Tallis 2001, Chiverrell 2006, Hatfield et al. 2008). Careful slope management will be required in the felling and planting of conifers and new native woods. Chiverrell (2006) suggests that major changes in land cover, such as woodland loss, may have been more significant than climate in causing slope destabilisation; such destabilising land-uses persist today. • The extent, ecological impacts and contribution of peat-cutting and extensive moorland drainage systems to erosion are poorly understood and often go unrecognised (Holden et al. 2007a). For example, domestic peat-cutting has removed an estimated 40-50% of blanket peat surface areas in parts of the south Pennines (Ardron et al. 1996, Rotherham et al. 2004). It is likely that these modified and artificial drainage networks accelerated peat erosion by developing into larger gullies and promoted fluvial incision on hillslopes (Tallis 1998, Foster et al. 2008). • The loss of Sphagnum from upland bogs due to atmospheric pollution post-dates the establishment of most current erosion patterns, but may have enhanced erosion by limiting the recolonisation of bare peat, further exacerbated by high stocking levels (Tallis 1985, 1987, Mackay & Tallis 1996; 2.2.2 Atmospheric pollution in terrestrial systems).

19 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

2.1.2 Implications: erosion • The erosive degradation of moorland is a result of numerous episodic processes and interacting factors, leading to pulses of enhanced erosion (e.g. Grieve et al. 1995, Rhodes & Stevenson 1997, Tallis 1998, Reid & Thomas 2004). Past legacies (e.g. grazing, pollution damage) cannot be ignored even in managing major catastrophic events since short periods of disturbance, extreme events and unpredictable combinations of events can have disproportionate impacts, especially where habitats have been sensitised by a history of erosion (Tallis 1987, Mackay & Tallis 1996, Anderson et al. 1997, Ballantyne & Whittington 1999, Higgitt et al. 2001, Yeloff et al. 2006). • Many past causal factors have intensified over the 20th century and are predicted to increase further under global warming scenarios. This includes the incidence of wildfires, intense rainfall events, more severe droughts and lowered water-tables (Charman 1997, Mackay 1997, Tallis 1998, Chiverrell 2006, Worrall et al. 2006b, Yeloff et al. 2006, Malby et al. 2007). This is particularly relevant near the margins for blanket peat formation, where climatic impacts are likely to be more intense and management impacts more severe. • Owing to the combined destabilising effects of climate and land management, it is unlikely that controlling single causal factors will be adequate to halt, limit or repair erosion damage. For example, hydrological impacts are unlikely to be reversed by drain blocking alone, which may take many decades to restore favourable hydrological conditions, even before climate change pressures are factored in (cf. Charman 1997, Hendon & Charman 2004). • Long-term accumulated erosion damage may be so severe and/or extensive that some peatlands may have crossed thresholds of resilience, especially in more southerly and easterly blanket peats in the UK. This reinforces the need to understand long-term site histories to establish appropriate management strategies and predict the impacts of future perturbation, particularly from climate change. • It may be necessary to assess whether some sites have undergone such serious, long-term erosion damage that it is no longer possible to restore functioning peatland habitats and alternative stabilisation mechanisms and management targets may need to be considered, as is already occurring in some areas (e.g. south Pennines, see http://www.moorsforthefuture.org.uk/mftf/main/Home.htm). • This may include re-evaluating the value of tree growth on peat since it may become increasingly hard to prevent tree or scrub colonisation without further damaging eroded and drying organic sediments (Chambers 1997, 2001, Mackay 1997). The potentially stabilising effects of tree growth may need to be balanced with a desire to prevent their drying effects and maintain current agricultural, sporting, aesthetic and leisure values associated with open moorland. • In serious cases, the long-term practical and financial costs of implementing restoration, and the reduced likelihood of final success will need to be balanced with environmental costs to water quality and carbon emissions from continued erosion, and the diversion of financial support from protecting other sensitive, but less severely damaged sites.

2.2 Pollution • Due to past and continuing atmospheric pollution and the enhanced deposition of atmospheric pollutants at higher altitudes, freshwater systems, in particular, have undergone acidification and eutrophication, while organic sediments act as

20 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

reservoirs for nitrogen, heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants. Existing and future damage to the integrity of these storage systems poses serious challenges for upland management since the release of stored sources may negate or even counteract atmospheric reductions in pollutants and conservation or restoration initiatives (Dawson & Smith 2006, Holden et al. 2007a).

2.2.1 Lake acidification • Strengthened by the Water Framework Directive, palaeoenvironmental records of water quality are one area where long-term ecology is an established part of policy and management, since it is recognised that many freshwater systems have been acidified since mid-19th century industrialisation, thus requiring alternative sources to define pre-industrial hydrological baseline conditions. • Before the mid-19th century, some lakes show early acidification owing to natural soil impoverishment through leaching soils derived from nutrient-poor geologies, but others show pH stability, despite long-term leaching and the development of extensive blanket peat in the surrounding catchments (Battarbee et al. 1988). In these cases, natural acidification is unlikely to have reduced the buffering capacity of lakes or increased their susceptibility to acid deposition. • Surface water acidification has occurred in upland lakes due to increased sulphur (S) deposition, which has caused reductions in pH of around 0.5 units over the period c.1800-1850 (Flower et al. 1987, Battarbee et al. 1988, 1989, 1996, Jones et al. 1989, Birks et al. 1990). Lakes in closer in proximity to industrial areas have been more strongly affected, but even remote lakes have been acidified (Battarbee & Allott 1994, Fowler & Battarbee 2005). • There is little evidence that changes in moorland grazing, burning or afforestation were causal (e.g. Battarbee et al. 1988, 1989, Kreiser et al. 1990), in contrast with the evident sensitivity of terrestrial habitats to land-use intensification during this period (1.2 Management & moorland dynamics and 2.1 Erosion). • In addition to contaminating water with lead, zinc, fossil fuel-derived soot particles and persistent organic pollutants, water acidification has caused a shift to an acid-tolerant diatom flora, a decline in aquatic insects and increased concentrations of toxic inorganic aluminium. This deterioration in water quality has, in some instances, adversely affected fish stocks and fish reproduction, with implications for higher predators, including humans (Birks et al. 1990, Kernan et al. 2005; 4.3 River management & restoration). • In some lakes, increases in pH and the recovery of algae and invertebrates, acid- sensitive plants and mosses, and fish populations following the 1970s reduction in atmospheric SO2 emissions suggests that acidification is reversible (Allott et al. 1992, Battarbee et al. 1988, 2005, Juggins et al. 1996, Ferrier et al. 2001). o However, recovery is by no means universal and is being offset or slowed due to the erosive influx of pollutants stored in catchment soils and increased N deposition, while predicted climate changes may exacerbate damage by enhancing decomposition, erosion and leaching over future decades (Jones et al. 1989, Ferrier et al. 2001, Rose et al. 2004, Battarbee et al. 2005, Fowler & Battarbee 2005, Kernan et al. 2005). o In addition, climatic conditions which favour reduced nitrate inputs from catchment sources may enhance dissolved organic carbon (DOC) influx, thus offsetting recovery from acidification (Rose et al. 2004).

21 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

o The nature of surrounding vegetation could affect recovery, since proximity to plantations may slow recovery due to the acid scavenging behaviour of conifers (Juggins et al. 1996, Harriman et al. 2003). o Direct rehabilitation techniques such as liming may help neutralise lake acidity, but the resulting algal flora is often unlike anything known in the past and may induce the invasion of new species, rather than restoring the pre- acidification ecosystem (Flower et al. 1990).

2.2.2 Atmospheric pollution in terrestrial systems • Organic soils form a reservoir for pollution-derived nitrogen and heavy metals, but evidence for the ecological impacts of atmospheric deposition on terrestrial systems is more equivocal than aquatic systems (Woodin 1988, Lee et al. 1988, Thompson & Badderley 1991, Tallis 1998). This reflects the differential sensitivities of various taxa and the difficulties involved in distinguishing atmospheric-scale influences from local (e.g. biotic) factors (e.g. Lee 1991, Thompson & Badderley 1991, Caporn 1997, Tallis 1998, Rosen & Dumayne- Peaty 2001). • Two examples illustrate the importance of understanding the impacts of historical pollution on upland resilience and the potential threats arising from a decline in ecosystem integrity: the loss of Sphagnum and the role of peat as a repository of heavy metals. These warn against any attempts to decouple atmospheric deposition from management and climatic factors (cf. Thompson 2002).

Case study 4: the loss of Sphagnum • The sensitivity of Sphagnum (especially S. austinii [formerly S. imbricatum]) to S and N pollution is well documented and the decline or disappearance of Sphagnum in peatlands is the most-cited example of historical pollution damage to British and Irish peatlands, although Sphagnum was not the only taxon affected: Racomitrium growth may have been reduced in areas of high pollution, for example (Tallis 1994, 1995). • Major Sphagnum losses have been driven by 19th century increases in atmospheric pollution, but this is not the only cause. Of particular relevance for future monitoring is evidence that interactions between climate and disturbance (e.g. drainage, peat-cutting, burning and grazing) determine when local thresholds for Sphagnum regeneration are crossed (Mauquoy et al. 2002, Yeloff et al. 2006). o For example, periods of climatically-induced wetness or desiccation combined with competition and disturbance caused asynchronous local extinctions in S. imbricatum between the 10th and 15th centuries (Tallis 1994, Mauquoy & Barber 1999, Mauquoy et al. 2002, Coulson et al. 2005, Langdon & Barber 2005, McClymont et al. 2008). Drier climatic conditions coupled with disturbance are implicated in 19th and 20th century Sphagnum losses (Mackay & Tallis 1996, Chambers et al. 2001, 2007, Coulson et al. 2005, Yeloff et al. 2006). o Although most major Sphagnum declines post-date the start of peat erosion, this has contributed to the failure of re-vegetation on peat, especially in conjunction with high stocking levels (Tallis 1985, 1987, Mackay & Tallis 1996). Palaeoeocological records show that S. austinii has re-established itself during phases of reduced human activity but it is difficult to envisage this happening in the near future (Hughes et al. 2008).

22 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Case study 5: heavy (trace) metal storage • In addition to causing freshwater acidification, industrialisation has also left a potentially harmful legacy due to the affinity of organic matter for heavy metals (Lee & Tallis 1973, Rosen & Dumayne-Peaty 2001, Coulson et al. 2005). This is in addition to enhanced soil concentrations of lead and zinc around former arable land in rural locations due to past manuring practices (Davidson et al. 2007). • While this affinity has the beneficial effect of reducing pollutant concentrations in runoff and water reaching lakes and reservoirs, peats may become future pollution sources (Yang et al. 2001, Kernan et al. 2005, Rothwell et al. 2005). This is already occurring near heavily industrialised areas, such as the southern Pennines, where lead inputs to reservoirs derive mainly from past deposition via erosion and leaching, with potential ecotoxicological effects (Shotbolt et al. 2006, Rothwell et al. 2007a). • Peat acidification and climate change may exacerbate the release of heavy metals by increasing mobilisation and leaching or erosion, thus restricting or delaying recovery from pollution (Yang et al. 2001, Rose et al. 2004, Kernan et al. 2005, Rothwell et al. 2005, 2007b).

2.2.3 Eutrophication • Despite the relatively recent history of eutrophication, the impacts are already becoming detectable in longer-term records, emphasising the sensitivity of upland ecosystems to atmospheric pollution (Curtis & Simpson 2007, cf. Britton et al. 2005). o Eutrophication is affecting even large water bodies such as Loch Ness, where major changes in the diatom flora around 1970 are attributed to nutrient enrichment (Battarbee & Allott 1994, Jones et al. 1997). o Nutrient loading by nitrogen (N) deposition may be contributing to the recent ousting of Calluna by Molinia on moorland (Chambers et al. 1999; Case study 1: Calluna decline and Case study 3: Grasses on mires & moors). • Like heavy metal sequestration, the storage of N in peats may provide a future threat, particularly to carbon storage (2.3 Carbon sequestration).

2.2.4 Implications & research gaps: pollution • Managing individual contributory factors may slow erosion and pollution impacts, but holistic approaches are essential for predicting the likely long-term impacts on upland ecosystem integrity due to feedback mechanisms between climatic and anthropogenic processes. • Reducing current levels of atmospheric pollutants will not necessarily reverse the damage to upland resilience since the store of historically-deposited pollutants in organic soils will remain a threat into the future, preventing recovery or even exacerbating acidification in freshwater systems. • Similarly, in terrestrial systems, reducing grazing levels will not offset the increase in nutrient deposition from current atmospheric deposition or erosion inputs from historic pollutant accumulations. • It is not yet clear whether pH recovery will restore the feedback mechanisms which maintained stable pHs prior to industrialisation or even exactly what these mechanisms were.

2.3 Carbon sequestration

23 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

• Carbon (C) storage has become a primary policy and management concern, but the evidence-base required to shape effective policy remains limited (Holden et al. 2007a). In addition to threats posed by erosion and pollution, future climatic warming is predicted to lead to the enhanced release of C from organic sediment stores, particularly from drying peatlands and organic soils. The impacts on water quality are already recognised (e.g. Evans et al. 2006, Worrall et al. 2007), but surprisingly little is known about the effects of anthropogenic activities on peatland C balance (Garnett et al. 2000). • Since emissions from organic substrates derive from both recent and old C, two aspects of C storage need to be considered to manage and reduce emissions: (1) the processes of long-term C sequestration in organic sediments, and (2) the response of existing C stores to perturbations, i.e. their potential to become sources (Anderson 2002). This includes managing hydrology and vegetation, to effect continued C incorporation, as well as considering the impacts of temperature and instability on existing C accumulations (Anderson 2002, Charman 2002, Belyea & Malmer 2004, Malmer & Wallen 2004, Holden et al. 2007a). • Abrupt vegetation shifts have a strong impact on C sequestration, as they alter productivity and decomposition rates (Belyea & Malmer 2004). Management has a key role in managing C stocks and water quality since vegetation composition is largely controlled by management (whether for conservation or production) (Worrall et al. 2007). • Low intensity sheep grazing had no significant effect on C mass (or vegetation biomass) over a 30 year period at Moor House NNR, but fires may cause a positive feedback by attracting sheep to recently burnt areas, so intensifying C losses by direct removal of biomass and indirectly affecting rates of net primary production (NPP), decomposition, hydrological change and compaction via trampling (Garnett et al. 2000, Worrall et al. 2007). • Rotational burning every 10 years can lead to reduced C accumulation rates on blanket peat, but it is unclear whether this acts by directly reducing C stores in burnt layers, by reducing or halting the rate of peat accumulation or by changing vegetation composition (Garnett et al. 2000, Worrall et al. 2007). • The relationship between C sequestration, peatland hydrology, and climate change is complex, and predictions thus vary. The potential impacts of future temperature and precipitation change are particularly important (Wieder 2001). o Climate change may force a system over thresholds, but is an indirect driver since C sequestration responses are mediated by changes in surface structure and developmental topography (by producing more litter or enhancing decay) (Belyea & Malmer 2004). This emphasises the need to better understand the mechanisms of change to predict future responses and manage ecosystem vulnerability (Worrall et al. 2007). o C loss is likely to be greater under a combination of warmer and drier conditions, with potentially marked impacts arising from summer droughts and severe fires (Moore 2002). Under this scenario, evidence that some peatlands are no longer resilient to drought has severe implications for C storage (Worrall et al. 2006b; 4.1 Peatland resilience & restoration management). However, warmer/drier conditions could also delay the switch from C sink to C source by increasing NPP relative to increased decay at depth.

24 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

o Increased precipitation in oceanic regions is predicted to cause the expansion of hollows in patterned peatlands, inhibiting peat formation and C sequestration, while enhancing CH4 emission (Belyea & Malmer 2004). In the past, wetter/colder climatic conditions have reduced C accumulation either by reducing NPP or through the rapid decay of aquatic Sphagna (Mauquoy et al. 2002, 2004). • In addition to climate, grazing and burning impacts on NPP, it is unclear whether increased atmospheric N deposition will (1) lead to higher rates of C and N accumulation in bogs through enhanced NPP, or (2) whether reduced C:N ratios and increased N concentrations will increase decomposition rates, thus releasing carbon from organic soils and peats (Turunen et al. 2002, Malmer & Wallen 2004, Dawson & Smith 2007, Holden et al. 2007a).

2.3.1 Implications & gaps: C sequestration • Maintaining functioning surface vegetation is essential for C storage as only 10- 13% of the C from the upper peat (the acrotelm) will be incorporated into long- term storage in the underlying waterlogged layers (Malmer 1992, cited in Anderson 2002) and responses to climate change are (at least initially) likely to occur in the acrotelm. • While climatic impacts on C sequestration are likely to increase, there is a strong role for management in maintaining C stores in organic-rich upland sediments since vegetation and surface structure are the main controls on C sequestration, and both are largely controlled by management. This is now being incorporated into agri-environmental subsidies. o Continued review of burning practices is important as the predicted increase in fire risk with climate warming will exacerbate the release of CO2 and loss of peat (Garnett et al. 2000, cf. Maltby et al. 1990, Kuhry 1994, Pitkanen et al. 1999). • There is an urgent need to understand how surface structure and vegetation interact with climate and developmental changes in peatland hydrology (Belyea & Malmer 2004). It is also necessary to understand decomposition processes, especially acrotelm interactions and the movement of C into the lower, waterlogged peat; until such processes are understood at the micro-scale, predictions at the macro-level will lack precision (Moore 2002). o Modelled C budgets for representative catchments must be underpinned by a secure understanding of the hydrological and ecological mechanisms controlling peatland carbon accumulation responses; these are central for predicting potential feedbacks and identifying appropriate management responses (Belyea & Malmer 2004, Anderson et al. 2006, cf. Holden et al. 2007a). o This requires the development of integrated models to predict future carbon flux from organic sediment under a range of climatic and management conditions, using data covering a range of spatial and temporal scales (cf. Anderson et al. 2006, Holden et al. 2007a).

25 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

3. Upland diversity: the legacy & role of management ‘The uplands, although a landscape shaped by centuries of human activity, are the nearest that England has to wilderness’ (English Nature 2001) • Preceding sections detail the cumulative impacts of land management and climate change over recent centuries, and the threats that they pose for the future ecological and socio-economic sustainability of the uplands. • Since biodiversity has become an indicator of the ‘health’ of species and habitats, as well as a key target, and intervention or changes in management are required to meet these targets, this section draws together evidence for the impacts of land management – both adverse and beneficial – and the implications for future integration of conservation aims with agricultural land management and the potential impacts of abandonment and the cessation of management, and ‘wild land’ values.

Key findings & uncertainties: • 20th century baselines for biodiversity loss due to intensification underestimate the extent of many species losses or declines. • Policy has a key role since much attrition over the last c.250 years has been driven by market opportunity and subsidy. • A retrospective view also reinforces the need to support ‘good’ agricultural management to achieve biodiversity and restoration goals. • The environmental, social and economic implications of abandonment need to be jointly considered to address current debate over changing patterns of upland land management, especially the likelihood of adverse ecological impacts associated with abandonment and ‘wild land’. • ‘Wild land’ is not a logical alternative to management or mismanagement, as the outcomes are inherently unpredictable and idealised in upland ecosystems shaped by centuries of human activity. • More detailed information is required on the processes and timescales of species loss across the full range of upland habitats.

3.1 The attrition of diversity and heterogeneity • Concerns over degradation are reflected in the drive to halt biodiversity loss and improve the condition of designated sites by 2010 under the Convention on Biodiversity, implemented through UK Biodiversity Action Plans. These must be underpinned by evidence for the full extent and timescale of losses in each habitat, since these are often more severe or protracted than is known from observation over the course of the 20th century. • After the development of extensive peat cover and extensive woodland losses in prehistory, the most significant changes to the upland landscape began around 1750 in areas with a longer history of intensive land-use, and intensified in most areas during the 19th century, when written sources record concerns over degradation (Mather 1978, Innes 1983, Smout 2000, Dodgshon & Olsson 2006). Similar concerns were repeated 100 years later, illustrating how short-term views can lower baselines (e.g. Darling & Boyd 1955, Pearsall 1971). As detailed above, intensified grazing, burning and, in some cases, atmospheric pollution and climate change/weather events emerge as common causes. • Known losses include: o the transition from diverse Calluna-grass communities to species-poor grassland in the Cheviots between 1750-1900 due to intensified sheep grazing,

26 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

leaving only the most grazing-tolerant taxa (Tipping 2000, Davies & Dixon 2007; Case study 1: Calluna decline); th o reduced plant diversity on blanket mires in northern England since the late 19 century and in Wales through the 19-20th centuries, including the unprecedented dominance of Molinia on some sites and Calluna on others, and the loss of such species as Sphagnum (especially S. imbricatum), Myrica gale, Drosera intermedia, Andromeda polifolia and Rhynchospora alba (Tallis 1964, 1998, Chambers et al. 2001, 2006, 2007; 1.2 Management & moorland dynamics); o significant changes in the composition and demography of many faunal populations, especially predatory birds and their prey (Smout 2000, Lovegrove 2007). • High altitude montane communities are limited in the UK and face even greater threats from climatic change, disturbance and atmospheric pollution (Thompson et al. 2001, 2005). Although very limited, long-term data emphasise their vulnerability and the need for a historical context to establish where critical thresholds lie and the relative legacies of natural and cultural drivers, and so avoid implementing management strategies which reduce resilience by misinterpreting such sensitivities (Thompson et al. 2001). o E.g. Intensified grazing over last c.200 years has markedly restricted grazing- sensitive montane taxa to more inaccessible locations at Caenlochan NNR (Cairngorms, NE Scotland). This includes the contraction of fern-rich and tall- herb grassland and Salix scrub from grassland habitats above the tree-line and former niches within the woods, while less accessible fern-rich screes survived and grasses expanded (Huntley 1981). By contrast, the Morrone Birkwoods NNR (Deeside, NE Scotland) currently retains a diversity of arctic-alpine and montane taxa (Huntley 1994, Birks 1997).

3.2 Agricultural abandonment & wild land • There is growing interest in ‘wild land’ in the uplands, through conservation interest in enhancing ‘naturalness’, the lesser degree of perceived human influence, the attrition of values through mismanagement and development over the last c.100 years and growing pressures on green spaces (e.g. Scottish Natural Heritage 2002c, Carver & Wrightham 2003, McMorran et al. 2006). With potentially similar social and agricultural implications, abandonment represents one extreme of the potential range of future scenarios for the uplands if there is a continued shift away from production. • This is seen by some as an opportunity for ‘rewilding’. However, wild land supporters may underplay the extent of human influence in ‘semi-natural’ habitats and promote exaggerated views of past over-exploitation (Breeze 1997, Chambers 1997, Smout 1997; 4.2 Woodland management & creation in the uplands), while abandonment poses a significant threat to valued habitats, including bird and invertebrate populations, and the character of the uplands, as well as exacerbating the loss of local knowledge, skills and rural populations (e.g. Burton 2004, Land Use Consultants et al. 2006). Furthermore, in many instances, there is a lack of ecological evidence to support decision-making, especially on the potential long- term impacts of reduced grazing pressures, while most supposed ecological benefits of ‘rewilding’ or reinstating ‘natural processes’ are, by their very nature, uncertain (e.g. Mitchell & Kirby 1990, Tallis 1998, Luxmoore & Fenton 2004, Hodder et al. 2005, cf. Sutherland et al. 2006; 3.3 Managing biodiversity).

27 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

• Although there are relatively few well-documented examples of complete historical long-term abandonment (of both settlement and land management), the impacts of reduced labour forces and extensification during the 19th and 20th centuries illustrate some possible future impacts. o The replacement of numerous small townships, practicing mixed arable/grazing regimes, to depopulated landscapes focussed on sheep grazing resulted in the ‘degradation’ of ‘green lands’ (the former infield), where less palatable grasses and mire replaced areas of species-rich improved grasslands in northern Scotland (Mather 1993, Smout 2000, Davies et al. 2006, Dodgshon & Olsson 2006). This has occurred even in areas where sheep farming declined by the end of the 19th century. o Twentieth century mechanisation and the decline in upland hay-making, for example, and the ongoing contraction of small-scale farming systems, like crofting, are repeating and exacerbating this loss of culturally-defined biodiversity and landscape character, in addition to having profound social impacts (Macdonald 1998, Brown 2006). Due to the duration and extent of long-term cultural influences, promoting natural processes through ‘rewilding’ is likely to cause similar changes in many upland landscapes. • Scrub and woodland expansion/invasion are seen as a potential outcome of reduced grazing pressures and abandonment, and concerns have been voiced about potential impacts on the productive and aesthetic qualities of the uplands (e.g. Holden et al. 2007a). History and ecology suggest that the most rapid and pronounced changes are likely to occur in upland valleys, which are also the main locations for rural settlement, since they provide better soils, seed sources and more sheltered conditions, and will be driven largely by lower grazing pressures, as was the case during periods of agricultural contraction in the post-medieval period in Lancashire and on the North York Moors (Mackay & Tallis 1994, Atherden 2004). • Debates about the potential environmental benefits of abandonment (e.g. favouring ‘natural processes’, creating ‘wild land’) are generally conducted without considering the social and economic implications for rural communities and the wider service network or ecosystem services. Past rural depopulations had far-reaching social impacts, remain contentious today and provide a potential insight into the broader consequences of abandonment (e.g. Hunter 1976, Richards 2000; 5 Climatic & economic change: risk & rural resilience).

3.3 Managing biodiversity: positive management • Conservation emphasis on designated or otherwise ‘special’ sites and the desire to repair ‘unfavourable’ conditions often gives the impression that management legacies are largely negative, leading to conflict with land managers (e.g. Johnston & Soulsby 2006). A long-term perspective provides insights into ‘good practice’ for managing diversity through land-use and can help strengthen the development of sustainable agri-environmental systems which benefit rural communities. • The value of less-intensive grazing for conservation and agri-environmental schemes is becoming more widely recognised and an increasing number of modern and historical studies across Europe indicate the positive contributions of land-use to diversity and the negative impacts of abandonment (e.g. Lindbladh & Bradshaw 1995, Bignal & McCracken 1996, Bokdam & Gleichman 2000, MacDonald et al. 2000, Maurer et al. 2006, Berglund et al. 2007).

28 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

• Conservation values benefit from the maintenance of spatial complexity and a diversity of land-uses in upland and mountain areas (Vandvik et al. 2005, Mauer et al. 2006). Small-scale farming systems helped maintain upland heterogeneity and species diversity through the agricultural intensification of the last 200 years, at least until the mid-20th century (Davies 1999, 2003, Davies et al. 2006). Systems such as crofting and ‘hobby’ farming could provide similar agri- environmental values as well as delivering social benefits (cf. Land Use Consultants et al. 2006, Scotland Rural Development Programme 2008). • It has been suggested, based on current composition, that the tendency to maintain lower sheep numbers on sporting estates had a cushioning effect and contributed to the better condition of heather on some grouse moors (Bardgett et al. 1995). However, independent long-term data required to test this inference support are lacking and associated long-term faunal changes transcend sheep/sporting moor boundaries (Smith 1993, Smout 2000, Lovegrove 2007). • In semi-natural woods, abandonment, neglect and non-intervention have resulted in a loss of arboreal diversity and simplification of woodland structure, to the detriment of natural and often poorly understood cultural heritage. A continued absence of active management may further reduce biodiversity compared with reinstating management (cf. Sutherland et al. 2006; 4.2 Woodland management & creation in the uplands). • Long-term data are largely absent for other ‘traditionally’ managed habitats, many of which are designated, including upland hay meadows, wood pastures, dunes and machair (e.g. Brown 2006, McKenna et al. 2007, Holl & Smith 2007). • ‘Traditional’, less intensive systems are valuable tools for conservation, but they are not necessarily sustainable by definition: market-driven fluctuations contributed to cycles of woodland regeneration and influenced grass- and heathland biodiversity within ‘traditional’ systems by effecting changes in stocking density (e.g. Hanley et al., accepted; 4.2.3 Woodland-grazing dynamics).

3.4 Implications & gaps: wildness & management benefits & deficits • The intensification of resource management since the 19th century has contributed to the unprecedented scale of upland ecosystem change over the last two centuries, in some cases intensifying earlier climate- and grazing-mediated changes (e.g. erosion). On a scale of centuries, these have been driven largely by economic incentives, emphasising the role of policy as a driver of environmental change. • Negative legacies are likely to be exacerbated rather than repaired by abandonment and non-intervention. This includes the uncertainties and subjectivities associated with ‘wild land’ and ‘naturalness’. • Lower-intensity management systems can provide strong support for biodiversity, including maintenance of landscape character and cultural heritage, but this requires greater recognition of the ‘cultural’ contributions underlying many current biodiversity and conservation values. • The extent to which climate change, drainage and erosion will hasten the speed and extent of tree invasion is unknown as there are few historical precedents (4.2.1 Climate change, the fate and future of upland woods). • The relative long-term impacts of sporting and different grazing management regimes (e.g. common grazings, grousemoors, deer management) are not fully understood.

29 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

• There is a pressing need for both the potential environmental and socio-economic impacts to be included in debates over of abandonment and reduced upland populations.

30 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

4. Resilience & restoration management ‘A great deal of current management practice is based on traditional techniques that did not originally have conservation objectives. Their effectiveness is often unknown and may be little more than myth’ (Sutherland et al. 2006) • More flexible management and reducing potentially damaging stresses are central to enhancing the resilience (i.e. adaptability) of species and ecosystem processes in vulnerable environments, particularly to climate change (Hulme 2005). This ‘managing for change’ approach must be underpinned by a secure understanding of the likely responses to these threats over the longer term. In many instances, this involves some element of restoration. While restoration practice is based on ecological science, a historical lens indicates the prevalence of preconceptions, myths and value judgements which may threaten the success of restoration initiatives. • Although changes in climate and habitat over time mean that restored systems may develop along different trajectories to the past, a long-term view can help assess whether recovery and restoration are feasible (i.e. within acceptable boundaries of ecological change), help shape realistic targets and monitor progress towards these, including estimates of the likely processes and timescales of change, and the effort and costs required (e.g. Parr et al. 2003).

Key findings & uncertainties: • Long-term perspectives emphasise the prevalence of misconceptions inherent in restoration, including underestimates of timescales, feasibility and the extent of intervention required to achieve current targets. • Management visions based on preconceived notions of ‘normal’ conditions are restrictive and threaten the resilience of the habitats they seek to restore and maintain. • Uncertainties relating to future climatic impacts on peatlands and woodlands are not sufficiently integrated into current restoration strategies.

4.1 Peatland resilience & restoration management 4.1.1 Natural hydrological variability: acceptable limits of change • Water-tables are integral to peatland functioning, wildlife values, maintaining C stores and erosion prevention (Bragg & Tallis 2001, Bragg 2002, Charman 2002). There is, however, a tendency to assume that many bogs should be wetter than present, and that, without human intervention, bogs would be treeless and that Sphagnum-dominated peatlands would be the ‘norm’ (Whild et al. 2001, Hendon & Charman 2004). • This downplays the extent of past variability in hydrological, climatic and disturbance regimes that has been part of the developmental history of peatlands. Management based on misguided views or ad hoc decisions threatens the inherent adaptability and flexibility of upland ecosystems, potentially increasing their vulnerability to climate variability, especially to extreme events (Holden et al. 2004, 2007a, Hulme 2005). • Peatlands have taken thousands of years to develop (e.g. Tallis 1998, Tipping 2007) and the most basic instruction from history for restoration is that extended timescales, with potentially high costs, will be required to return them to fully functioning and self-sustaining ecosystems. o E.g. The re-vegetation of bare peat under restoration may begin rapidly, but old peat cuttings in lowland Europe have taken more than 100 years to

31 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

regenerate and is more likely where the original cuttings formed a relatively small proportion of the total mire, thus providing sources for seeds or other propagules, and relatively high water-tables (Charman 1997, 2002). • Peatlands exhibit substantial spatial and temporal variability which has been lost from many extant examples and therefore potentially overlooked in local management and restoration targets. o E.g. Microtopographic differentiation of the blanket mire surface into pools, hollows and hummocks occurred through differential rates of local peat accumulation over more than 1000 years in the south Pennines (Tallis & Livett 1994). A system of pools and hummocks may have been present until relatively recent times on mires in N York Moors and N Pennines, prior to the rise to dominance by Calluna since the 19th century (Chambers et al. 2006). Many current moors provide little evidence for such diversity due to intensive erosion, pollution and land-use disturbance (Tallis 1987, 1997).

Case study 6: Peatland responses to environmental variability • Raised and blanket mires have fluctuated between wetter and drier conditions on millennial and centennial scales, primarily as a result of climatic fluctuations: these were a normal part of ecosystem dynamics (Charman 2002). • Over the last 200 years the Border Mires (N England) have experienced relatively dry conditions during the early 19th century, followed by increasingly wet conditions during the late 19th-early 20th centuries, before becoming drier since c.1930, in each instance altering surface composition (Hendon & Charman 2004). When drying was observed in the mid-20th century, it was attributed to afforestation on the surrounding peatland (most of which post-dates WWII) (cf. Battarbee et al. 1985, Shotbold et al. 1998) or the cessation of prior management. A longer view shows that these factors may be contributory but are not the sole cause. • Pre-management change data, which may be lacking in many observational datasets, are essential to understand the origins and drivers of change, and thus instigate appropriate management. Remedial management (drain blocking, tree felling) may reverse a small component of mire drying, but efforts to raise water- tables may not be effective against long-term predicted climate change (cf. Evans et al. 2006, Holden et al. 2007b; 2.3 Carbon sequestration).

4.1.2 Legacies of change: threats to peatland & moorland resilience • As current conditions for many drier moors and peatlands lie near the limits of past habitat change, these habitats may be close to crossing ecological thresholds, especially under predicted climate change scenarios which may give rise to conditions for which there is no past analogue in the last 10000 years (Mauquoy & Yeloff 2008). o Even modest climate change predictions are likely to cause significant drying in extensive wet Sphagnum carpets on ombrotrophic mires over the next 100 years, threatening highly valued conservation habitats (Charman 1997). o Reduced resilience to drought is likely to be a particular threat in some areas owing to a history of hydrological and ecological perturbations, combined with predicted future shifts. Summer droughts may be especially damaging since peatland water-tables are correlated with summer precipitation, which is predicted to decline in the future (Charman et al. 2004, Hendon & Charman 2004, Worrell et al. 2006b, IPCC 2007).

32 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

o Risks are higher where conditions for peat formation are marginal and where moorland hydrology has already been severely affected by erosion and drainage, as agricultural impacts are also likely to be greater here (Hendon & Charman 2004, Yeloff et al. 2006). This must influence strategic planning and prioritisation in conservation decisions. o Reduced Sphagnum growth and increased cover of vascular plants, including trees, are likely to result and, in some cases, may already be doing so (Mauquoy & Yeloff 2008; 4.2.1 Climate change, the fate & future of upland woods). • While drought alone poses a threat to peatlands and wetland restoration, drought coupled with other factors may prove even more difficult to predict and manage as impacts may be delayed or cumulative. o E.g. Low rainfall during the early 1900s on Fairsnape Fell (Lancashire) lowered water-tables and, in combination with an exceptional summer drought in 1921 and a decline in management during WWI, precipitated a catastrophic burn. This reduced heterogeneity, affecting invertebrate and bird populations (Mackay & Tallis 1996). Comparable circumstances have been recognised elsewhere in Lancashire, the North York Moors and South Pennines (Mackay & Tallis 1996, Yeloff et al. 2006). • This threat compounds the loss of resilience caused by erosion, atmospheric pollution by S and N, and the cumulative impacts of increased and long-term grazing on moorland biodiversity (2.1 Erosion and 3.1 The attrition of diversity).

4.2 Woodland management & creation in the uplands • Contributions on the distribution, composition and dynamics of past ‘wildwood’ have appeared in many publications on current upland and woodland management (e.g. O’Sullivan 1977, Birks 1988, Bennett 1995, Froyd & Bennett 2006, Tipping et al. 2006), and have also been the focus of the recent debates over large herbivore impacts and naturalistic grazing (Hodder et al. 2005, Luxmoore & Fenton 2005). While this pre-anthropogenic view is important for understanding woodland responses to climate change and may be relevant to ‘rewilding’ initiatives, extant semi-natural woods are largely products of cultural intervention, so the recent past is more appropriate for understanding (1) what underlies conservation current values, (2) the processes controlling wood-open ground dynamics and tree regeneration, especially interactions with grazers and climate, and (3) the most appropriate management tools, whether cultural (intervention) or natural (mimicry, non-intervention).

4.2.1 Climate change, the fate & future of upland woods • While there are likely to be more woods in the future (4.2.4 New woods), the largely treeless state of the British uplands is often held to be a defining characteristic and concerns are raised about the adverse impacts of tree or scrub invasion on the quality of grazing and grouse moors, especially in England, in addition to the drying effects of trees growing on peat (Battarbee et al. 1985, Mackay 1995, Shotbold et al. 1998, Holden et al. 2007a, Fenton 2008). • A consistent belief that bogs ‘should not’ have trees is an oversimplification (Chambers 1997, 2001, Wilkinson 2001), as is the assumption that the loss of upland woods, in general, is primarily a result of over-exploitation which can be rectified through restoration.

33 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

o Woodland growth was widespread in the uplands, forming the pre-moorland landscape, but the most extensive losses occurred in prehistory, not in the recent past (e.g. Tipping 1994, Simmons 2001, 2003). Significant changes in ecology, soils, land-use, settlement and climate in the intervening millennia pose difficulties for recreating similar woods and negate the use of historic over-exploitation to justify extensive woodland restoration. • A prehistoric perspective is invaluable for assessing climate risks to woodland stability as the relationship between upland tree regeneration and climate was complex, particularly on peat. o Future scenarios include a combination of warmer climatic conditions with more frequent drought and reduced grazing pressures. This may create more favourable conditions for upland tree growth, even on wetter areas, since discrete episodes of tree colonisation have been a feature of blanket and raised bogs when mire surfaces were drier or when grazing and population pressures declined (Bridge et al. 1990, Gear & Huntley 1991, Mackay & Tallis 1994, Tipping et al. 2006). o Although drier conditions may favour trees, this may be countered by increased climatic variability, particularly increased wetness. Increased winter wetness in particular may lead to a southward retreat in the treeline in favour of wet heaths and bog, especially in northern, oceanic climates (Crawford et al. 2003). Past increases in oceaniticity caused stress and mortality in bog- grown trees on northerly peatlands, notably pines (Gear & Huntley 1991, Clark 2003, Tipping et al. 2006). Predictions of variability in the future and current uncertainties about how seasonality may change need to be understood in order to assess the long-term sustainability of planting and restoration schemes. o Furthermore, although species ranges are also strongly influenced by climate, we cannot expect most forest plant species to closely track the expected 21st century climatic changes as new analyses suggest that even the ranges of many widespread forest plant species may still be moderately to strongly limited by postglacial migrational lag (Svenning et al. 2008).

4.2.2 ‘Ancient’ & ‘semi-natural’ woodlands: management & diversity • A high proportion of semi-natural woods in the UK are located in upland areas and these are a subject of conservation concern due to the extent of decline over the last 50-60 years and the often poor state of regeneration (e.g. http://www.forestry.gov.uk/website/forestresearch.nsf/ByUnique/INFD-63AJF7). • It is often assumed that existing woods provide an appropriate template for long- term management and that human impact has been largely detrimental. However, narrow definitions of what a native wood ‘should’ look like, using ‘present- natural’ or ‘future-natural’ approaches (Peterken 1996), data covering timescales less than a single generation of trees, or visible historical features (e.g. pine stumps in peat, veteran trees), can seriously underestimate ‘natural’ diversity and lead to the preservation and creation of impoverished woods which are less resilient to change (e.g. Tipping et al. 1999, Willis et al. 2005). Equally, if used simply as a baseline for woodland re-creation, ‘past-natural’ conditions provide little more than snapshots which will not accommodate future edaphic, climatic or biotic change (Tipping et al. 1999).

34 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Case study 7: Management legacies in oak- & pinewoods • Many semi-natural upland woods show limited regeneration under non- intervention management strategies because supposedly ‘natural’ features actually stem from past management. • The distinctive, apparently natural characteristics of internationally important Atlantic oakwoods in N England, W Scotland, N Wales and SW Ireland have no long history: they have developed since the cessation of timber and grazing management around 100-200 years ago (Edwards 1986, 2005, Mitchell 1988, 1990, Birks 1996, Sansum 2004). Many of the currently dominant oaks, if not planted, were nurtured under previous management regimes and have matured under conditions of more recent neglect. • Current appearances reflect a legacy of manipulation of woodland structure, age distribution and species composition over the last c.400-1000 years to provide products ranging from timber, coppice poles, charcoal, tanbark and grazing. These factors limited shrub growth, maintained a more open, disturbance-adapted ground flora and made timber harvesting easier, while species selection and repeated disturbance have reduced tree-species diversity (Mitchell & Kirby 1990, Mitchell 1988, Birks 1993, Sansum 2004, Edwards 2005, Davies & Watson 2007). ‘Natural’ features such as deadwood accumulation and limited numbers of shade- tolerant species have been scarce or absent for at least two centuries before 1900 owing to this management history (Sansum 2004). • Consequently, a disturbance regime is required to maintain current values and herbivore exclusion alone is unlikely to result in widespread regeneration (e.g. Palmer et al. 2004). • Bryophytes have limited value as ancient woodland indicators since the persistence of valued, rich bryophyte floras stems from the presence of ‘semi- woodland’ habitats and microrefugia (e.g. streamsides, crags), and the fact that the woods were never temporarily converted to other land-uses (Edwards 1986, Mitchell 1988, Sansum 2004, cf. Day 1993, Willis 1993). • The present single-dominant stands in many ancient Scots pinewoods are also a legacy of formerly extensive management and their subsequent relaxation. Before intensive management during the 18-19th centuries, woods in Abernethy (NE Scotland) and Glen Affric NNR (NW Scotland) contained a more diverse mix, including more birch and less heather in Abernethy (O’Sullivan 1977, Shaw & Tipping 2006). Furthermore, at least some of the apparently mature woodland stands in Migdale NNR (N Scotland) have become comparatively unstable and depauperate over recent centuries owing to the cessation of timber and grazing management (Davies & Smith in press), with similar loss of diversity in Glen Affric over the last c.200 years (Shaw & Tipping 2006). Tree-ring data emphasise the extent of demographic change and generally low recruitment in these pinewoods, particularly in unmanaged sites (e.g. Edwards & Mason 2006).

4.2.3 Woodland-grazing dynamics • Recent debates over wood-grazing interactions have focussed on extinct ‘wildwood’, ‘naturalistic’ conditions and the role of large herbivores (Hodder et al. 2005, Luxmoore & Fenton 2005). These have little in common with existing semi-natural woods, which may benefit from controlled grazing to maintain conservation priorities owing to their long management histories (Kirby 2004). Historical perspectives indicate the regeneration impacts of a broader variety of

35 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

grazing regimes than ecological data, which mostly relate to grazing exclusion (Mitchell & Kirby 1990). o Over the longer-term, variable grazing pressures have beneficial impacts on regeneration, including those arising from market-led fluctuations in livestock and timber prices (e.g. Davies & Watson 2007, see Grant & Edwards 2007 for a lowland context). While chance variability cannot be relied upon to maintain conservation values or encourage regeneration in upland woods, particularly during times of increased climatic and economic uncertainty, variable disturbance provides the basis for flexible management regimes which foster tree seedling recruitment and maturation, since grazing exclusion only has short-term benefits (e.g. Mountford & Peterken 2003). • Many semi-natural upland woods have formed under managed grazing regimes to the extent of creating wood pastures, which require grazing to maintain their distinctive open character (Mitchell & Kirby 1990, Kirby et al. 1995, Davies & Watson 2007, Holl & Smith 2007). o Remnants of wood pasture systems support high conservation value invertebrate, bird and lichen communities and are probably widespread, but there is no inventory and little historical basis for their identification, making them vulnerable to mismanagement, including overgrazing (Kirby et al. 1995, Begg & Watson 1999, Holl & Smith 2007). They are also threatened by misconceptions over naturalness, which, in other semi-natural woods, has led to the loss of conservation values through clearance and under-planting by 20th century afforestation (e.g. Truscott et al. 2004).

4.2.4 New woods: restoration & multi-purpose resources • Policy initiatives are likely to support woodland expansion to enhance biodiversity and provide multiple-purpose resources, incorporating ‘ancient semi-natural’ woodland, new native woods, forestry and perhaps ‘rewilding’ (Lee 2001, Land Use Consultants et al. 2006, Holden et al. 2007b, Slee 2007). However, this desire must balance ecological, agri-economic, archaeological and aesthetic concerns over more trees in the uplands, including the pressure this will place on moorland habitats, as well as concerns over the future sustainability of new woods (Scottish Natural Heritage 2002b, Holden et al. 2007a, b, Fenton 2008). • As indicated above, most woodland expansion cannot be justified by assuming that past human influences have been either excessive or superficial. Using past over-exploitation and pine stumps preserved in peat to justify woodland replanting risks repeating the erroneous assumptions used to justify the afforestation of the Flow Country blanket peat in northern Scotland (Huntley 1991). • A historical perspective contributes information on the biodiversity value of upland woods relative to other habitats, the potential long-term feasibility and appropriate structure for new native upland woods. Many woods were managed for multiple purposes in the past, and understanding the range of potential ecological and diversity impacts can inform the drive to establish more multi- purpose native woods.

Case study 8: Planning for new pinewoods & expanding the old • Current managers wish to expand the existing pinewoods into treeless areas around Glen Affric NNR (NW Scotland) and to link woods in the neighbouring catchments of Abernethy and Glenmore (NE Scotland) (Forestry Commission 2003, Beaumont et al. 2005, Midgley 2007). It is assumed that this will restore

36 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

more widespread former distribution, contribute to connectivity and foster resilience and diversity, frequently with the implication that people were causal in woodland contraction. • Long-term evidence suggests that the likelihood of achieving these aims is, at best, uncertain. More extensive woodland cover of the type envisaged in these proposals has been absent for nearly 4000 years in Affric, owing to climatic change, subsequently exacerbated by grazing pressures and increased peat depth, while the pass between the pinewoods in Abernethy and Glenmore has been dominated by open heath since at least the fifth millennium AD, with sparse tree growth for the last 1000 years or more (O’Sullivan 1973, Tipping et al. 2006). • Management must allow flexibility and incorporate rather than seek to replace open ground habitats: many upland woods show shifting patterns of regeneration such that only a small proportion of the Abernethy pinewoods, for example, has been continuously wooded and fluctuations between heaths and trees were essential to long-term regeneration and diversity (O’Sullivan 1973a, Smout et al. 2005, Shaw & Tipping 2006, Tipping et al. 2006).

4.2.5 Implications: woodland restoration & creation • Management decisions based on woodland appearances are frequently misleading as a historical perspective contradicts many ideas of ‘naturalness’: continuity of woodland cover should be equated with a long-valued and managed resource, not with structural or compositional stability or a high degree of naturalness. • ‘Present natural’ woods do not resemble existing woods with regeneration: human impacts are not a superficial veneer but integral to many conservation values. This subject requires re-examination comparable with that afforded to ‘naturalistic’ grazing in woods following the work of Vera (2000, e.g. Hodder et al. 2005). • Non-intervention, promoting natural processes or the pursuit of pre-anthropogenic baselines or ‘naturalistic’ systems in habitats which do not, in reality, have a high degree of naturalness may result in the loss of current conservation values and their underlying cultural histories, so increasing future uncertainties (Tallis 1998, Hodder et al. 2005, Midgley 2007, Grant & Edwards 2007). • Management policies that do not take account of the relatively recent and successional character of the present canopy of such woods may seek to preserve idealised rather than functional ecosystems (Huntley 1991, cf. Midgley 2007, Grant & Edwards 2007). • Similarly, evidence of past woodland sensitivity to climatic perturbations means that the pivotal role of climate must be integral to the management of existing and new woods if they are to outlast one generation, especially since centennial timescales will be needed to attain these goals, with a strong likelihood of further climatic variability during this period. • Patchy and scattered tree growth, not closer grown ‘woodland’, is likely to provide a more feasible and appropriate target under future scenarios, particularly on peat. • Target treelines in restoration must always be seen as a theoretical, moving target since treelines have always fluctuated in response to climatic conditions, human activity, grazing and browsing pressures (e.g. McConnell & Legg 1995, Tipping 1997).

37 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

4.2 River management & restoration • The growth of interest in river restoration reflects concerns over water quality and supply, pollution, flood prevention, the quality of fish populations, as well as habitat and biodiversity losses, strengthened by the Water Framework Directive (Scottish Natural Heritage 2002a, Land Use Consultants et al. 2006, Sear & Arnell 2006; 2.1 Pollution and 2.2 Erosion). • More naturalistic river ecosystems could help with water management, erosion and flood control, in addition to enhancing biodiversity (Brown 2002). However, data on more natural river systems are scarce owing to an extensive history of management and modification, as reflected in the high proportion of river sites designated as SSSIs that remain in unfavourable condition. This makes it difficult to define the ‘natural’ range of conditions and sensitivity to climatic and land management factors which are required to establish robust principles for river corridor and floodplain restoration and management (Brown 2002). • Channel structure affects sediment flow patterns and flood implications, and is shown to have been complex prior to extensive modification (Brown 2002, Sear & Arnell 2006). Consequently, many of the wetland communities which have been depleted or lost through floodplain modification were characterised by diversity and flexibility to respond to natural instability caused by flooding and sediment reworking. This includes formerly extensive alluvial and floodplain woods (largely relegated to prehistory in the UK; e.g. Innes & Simmons 1988, Davies 2003), as well as open and less intensely managed floodplains and river corridor habitats, such as marsh, floodplain meadow and wet grassland (Brown 2002). Work on lowland sites demonstrates the high diversity of such habitats (e.g. Brown 2002), but comparable data remain relatively scarce for the uplands. • Over the last 100 years, river catchment dynamics have been determined by land management more than climate (Owens and Walling 2002), but climate is a significant driver over decadal and longer timescales, particularly as a determinant of flood frequency (Macklin & Rumsby 2007) and therefore must be incorporated into management and restoration strategies (cf. Wilby et al. 2006). • Retrospective data are also valuable for developing and validating models of river structure, behaviour and flood risk (Anderson et al. 2006, Sear & Arnell 2006).

38 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

5. Climatic & economic change: rural risk & resilience ‘Over the next century, the climate is in predicted to change more rapidly than at any time in the recent geological past, and also to attain a state unparalleled during that same period.’ (Huntley & Baxter 2002) • The socio-economic and environmental challenges of climate change are central to current Rural Development Strategies, especially since climatic impacts are often exacerbated by management practices and economic incentives (e.g. Defra 2007, Stern 2006). A retrospective view thus helps identify conditions which contribute to the vulnerability or resilience of upland communities (e.g. Hulme 2005, Fraser 2003, 2007).

Key findings & uncertainties: • Analysis of past climatic risk to farming emphasises the extent to which economics outweighs climate as a driver of upland agriculture. • The reliance of agricultural communities on economic incentives and support mechanisms limits opportunities for local diversification and increases the vulnerability of rural communities. • This should provide a strong impetus for collaboration between social and natural scientists, policy-makers and rural stakeholders, to create more effective links between local production and management, and national policy and patterns of consumption.

• This brief section focuses on past social responses to climate change relative to economic change to emphasise warning signals and possible options for supporting rural communities. • Partial abandonment is a potential future scenario for the uplands (e.g. Land Use Consultants et al. 2006). Reference to the past reinforces the severity of the stresses currently facing upland farmers since abandonment has always been a last resort, often resulting from the disintegration or ineffectiveness of support systems, particularly policy and economics. o E.g. Instances of medieval and historic upland abandonment were caused by repeated harsh weather, severe disease and the associated failure of crops and redistribution support systems, often exacerbated by reliance on a narrow production base, as is best documented by the 1840s potato famine (Mackay & Tallis 1994, Fraser 2003, Yeloff & van Geel 2007). The constant reiteration that rural communities need to diversity reflects the continuing risk of relying on a narrow production base. • There is stronger evidence for adaptation via short-term abandonment (lasting a few years), extensification and amalgamation, i.e. abandonment of a farmstead but not necessarily of the land, as well as evidence of continuity which suggests that economic drivers or incentives at times overrode climatic difficulties (Whyte 1981, Tipping 1998b, Dodgshon 2006). o However, present conditions are more acute and pressures to diversify more intense since many past support systems are now absent: production-related economic incentives are no longer a viable means of supporting land-use, and most current upland farming systems lack social buffers or the ability to vary production to suit economic or weather conditions. • As ecological damage and biodiversity loss have often arisen during periods of high economic incentives (e.g. Hanley et al. accepted), monitoring systems must incorporate environmental/natural, social and economic criteria to avoid the risk

39 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

of crossing critical thresholds and exacerbating ecological damage whilst sustaining rural economies, and vice versa. This gives added impetus for collaboration between social and natural scientists, policy-makers and stakeholders (cf. Parr et al. 2003, Turner et al. 2003, Dougill et al. 2006, Fraser et al. 2006, Stevens et al. 2007). • It is essential not to allow the natural human tendency to downplay the severity of future risks to shape policy or management. Decisions are and were based on short-term perspectives, which tend to downplay threats during good times (e.g. leading to expansion onto floodplains or less favoured hill ground) and forget that extreme events, which are predicted to become more frequent, always exceed average expectations (Whyte 1981, Dodgshon 2004). • There has always been a strong regional component in climatically driven hardships and in the responses which ensured resilience. This must affect how policy is formulated and put into practise, as reflected in the call by land managers for local flexibility in the application of rural development strategies (e.g. FWAG 2006).

40 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

General implications • Reliance on short-term insights in upland policy and management may be detrimental to the future viability of the uplands since the origins of many current problems and values lie in the past. • The most immediate observation from hindsight regards the dynamism of upland habitats; this must be recognised and accommodated in management strategies. Reference to the past helps distinguish between acceptable ranges of variability and unprecedented changes, including situations for which there is no past analogue, and indicates the sensitivity of systems to external change under a potentially broader range of landscape scenarios than is possible through short- term and experimental datasets. This can be used to identify vulnerability as well as good practice. • Past legacies may have set some habitats on a trajectory of change, such that critical thresholds may already have been crossed, as for example, in relation to peatland susceptibility to erosion and drought, particularly on southern and eastern moors. It is likely to become increasingly difficult and costly to maintain or restore such habitats based on current or fixed values. • A non-compartmentalised approach to policy, management and research is essential due to the damaging impacts of interacting factors, as in the case of erosion in peatlands already sensitised by a history of climatic and management change, or the detrimental ecological impacts of some economic incentives. • Decisions must be underpinned by informed and flexible baselines and targets, since narrow or fixed definitions of ‘naturalness’, what a habitat ‘should’ look like or what constitutes current ‘good condition’ may generate unrealistic and inappropriate goals by excluding the natural range of variation and perpetuating misconceptions. Examples include the cultural influences behind the apparently ‘natural’ characteristics of many ‘ancient’ and semi-natural woodlands. • Many valued attributes derive explicitly from cultural interactions and management strategies, rather than mimicking natural processes, are thus required to maintain existing values. This provides a positive impetus for the integration of conservation into agri-environmental schemes, which may avoid prioritising nature conservation at the cost of rural communities and cultural heritage. • Uncertainty is implicit in non-intervention and ‘naturalistic’ management policies: considered debate is needed to assess whether these are acceptable, in view of uncertainties over the resilience of some current habitats and the need to secure sustainable livelihoods for rural communities. This applies to the feasibility of maintaining peatland water-tables against climate change and the likelihood of further woodland attrition where the extent of former modification is ignored. • More debate is required over acceptable and ecologically sound directions of change, and what alternative aims and scenarios may be achievable; this will require a reassessment of conservation and restoration baselines, targets and the underlying assumptions to move from preserving idealised landscapes to managing dynamic and resilient ecosystems. • Best practice approach must foster more interaction between ecologists and historical contributors, as the exchange of information will ensure that appropriate data are available to underpin policy and management decisions, so that the management of upland resources is sustainable for all stakeholders. • Routine use of long-term sedimentary records of nutrient and pollution status in current management and policy regarding freshwater lakes provides a model which can be applied to other aquatic and terrestrial environments.

41 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Appendix 1: references Allott, T.E.H., Harriman, R. & Battarbee, R.W. (1992) Reversibility of Lake Acidification at the Round Loch of Glenhead, Galloway, Scotland, Environmental Pollution 77, 219-225.

Anderson, D.E. (2002) Carbon accumulation and C/N ratios of peat bogs in North- West Scotland, Scottish Geographical Journal 118, 323-341.

Anderson, N.J., Bugnmann, H., Dearing, J.A. & Gaillard, M.-J. (2006) Linking palaeoenvironmental data and models to understand the past and to predict the future, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21, 696-704.

Anderson, P., Tallis, J.H. & Yalden, D.W. (1997) Restoring Moorland. Peak District Moorland Management Project. Phase III report, Bakewell.

Anderson, P. & Yalden, D.W. (1981) Increased Sheep Numbers and the Loss of Heather Moorland in the Peak District, England, Biological Conservation 20, 195- 213.

Ardron, P.A., Rotherham, I.D. & Gilbert, O.L. (1996) The influence of peat-cutting on upland landscapes: case studies from the South Pennines, Landscape Archaeology & Ecology 2, 54-64.

Atherden, M. (2004) Ecological change on the North York Moors during the last millennium and their impact on the landscape, in Society, Landscape and Environmental in Upland Britain, I.D. Whyte & A.J.L. Winchester, eds., Society for Landscape Studies supplementary series 2, 1-9.

Ballantyne, C.K. (1991) Holocene geomorphic activity in the Scottish Highlands, Scottish Geographical Magazine 107, 84-98.

Ballantyne, C.K. & Morrocco, S.M. (2006) Scottish landform example 38: The windblown sands of An Teallach, Scottish Geographical Journal 122, 149-159.

Ballantyne, C.K. & Whittington, G. (1999) Late Holocene floodplain incision and alluvial fan formations in the central Grampian Highlands, Scotland: chronology, environment and implications, Journal of Quaternary Science 14, 651-671.

Barber, K.E. (1993) Peatlands as scientific archives of past biodiversity, Biodiversity and Conservation 2, 474-489.

Bardgett, R.D., Marsden, J.H. & Howard, D.C. (1995) The extent and condition of heather on moorland in the uplands of England and Wales, Biological Conservation 71, 155-161.

Battarbee, R.W. & Allott, T.E.H. (1994) Palaeolimnology, in The Fresh Waters of Scotland: A national resource of international significance, P.S. Maitland, P.J. Boon & D.S. McLusky, eds., Wiley, Chichester, 113-130.

Battarbee, R.W., Anderson, N.J., Flower, R.J., Fritz, S.C., Haworth, E.Y., Higgitt, S., Jones, V.J., Munro, M.A.R., Natkanski, J., Oldfield, F., Patrick, N.G., Rippey, B. & Stevenson, A.C. (1988) Lake acidification in the United Kingdom 1800-1986.

42 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Evidence from analysis of lake sediments, Palaeoecology Research Unit, Univesity College London, London.

Battarbee, R.W., Appleby P.G., Odell, K. & Flower, R J. (1985) 210Pb dating of Scottish lake sediments, afforestation and accelerated soil erosion, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 10, 137-142.

Battarbee, R.W., Curtis, C.J. & Binney, H.A., eds. (2005) The future of Britain's upland waters. Proceedings of a meeting held on 21st April 2004, Environmental Change Research Centre, University College London, downloaded from http://www.freshwaters.org.uk/resources/documents/upland_waters_2005.php.

Battarbee, R.W., Jones, V J., Flower, R.J., Appleby P.G., Rose, N.L. & Rippey, B. (1996) Palaeolimnological evidence for the atmospheric contamination and acidification of high Cairngorm lochs, with special reference to Lochnagar, Botanical Journal of Scotland 48, 79-87.

Battarbee, R.W., Stevenson, A.C., Rippey, B., Fletcher, C., Natkanski, J., Wik, M. & Flower, R.J. (1989) Causes of Lake Acidification in Galloway, South-West Scotland: A Palaeoecological Evaluation of the Relative Roles of Atmospheric Contamination and Catchment Change for Two Acidified Sites with Non-Afforested Catchments., Journal of Ecology 77, 651-672.

Beaumont D.J., Amphlett A. & Housden S.D. (2005) Abernethy Forest RSPB nature reserve: managing for birds, biodiversity and people, in Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, D.B.A., Thompson, M.F. Price & C.A. Galbraith, eds., The Stationery Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 239-250.

Begg, J. & Watson, F. (1999) Glen Finglas: native woodland restoration and documentary records, Scottish Woodland History Discussion Group Notes IV, Centre for Environmental History and Policy, University of St. Andrews, 30-35.

Bellamy, P.H., Loveland, P.J., Bradley, R I., Lark, R.M. & Kirk, G.J.D. (2005) Carbon losses from all soils across England and Wales 1978-2003, Nature 437, 245- 248.

Belyea, L.R. & Malmer, N. (2004) Carbon sequestration in peatland: patterns and mechanisms of response to climate change, Global Change Biology 10, 1043-1052.

Bennett, K.D. (1995) Postglacial dynamics of pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and pinewoods in Scotland, in Our Pinewood Heritage, J.R. Aldhous, ed., Forestry Commission, RSPB & SNH, Farnham, 23-29.

Berglund, B.E., Persson, T. & Bjorkman, L. (2007) Late Quaternary landscape and vegetation diversity in a North European perspective, Quaternary International, in press, corrected proof.

Bignal, E.M. & McCracken, D.I. (1996) Low-intensity farming systems in the conservation of the countryside, Journal of Applied Ecology 33, 413-424.

43 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Birks, H.J.B. (1988) Long-term ecological change in the British uplands, in Ecological Change in the Uplands, M.B. Usher & D.B.A. Thompson, eds., Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 37-56.

Birks, H.J.B. (1993) Quaternary palaeoecology and vegetation science - current contributions and possible future developments, Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 79, 153-177.

Birks, H.J.B. (1996) Contributions of Quaternary palaeoecology to nature conservation, Journal of Vegetation Science 7, 89-98.

Birks, H.J.B. (1997) Scottish biodiversity in a historical context, in Biodiversity in Scotland: status, trends and initiatives, L.V. Fleming, A.C. Newton, J.A. Vickery & M.B. Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 21-35.

Birks H.J.B., Juggins, S. & Line, J.M. (1990) Lake surface-water chemistry reconstructions from palaeolimnological data, in The Surface Waters Acidification Programme, B.J. Mason, ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 301-313.

Bokdam, J. & Gleichman, J.M. (2000) Effects of grazing by free-ranging cattle on vegetation dynamics in a continental north-west European heathland., Journal of Applied Ecology 37, 415-431.

Bradshaw, R. & McGee, E. (1988) The extent and time-course of mountain blanket peat erosion in Ireland, New Phytologist 108, 219-224.

Bragg, O.M. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) The sensitivity of peat-covered upland landscapes, Catena 42, 345-360.

Bragg, O.M. (2002) Hydrology of peat-forming wetlands in Scotland, Science of the Total Environment 294, 111-129.

Brazier, V., Whittington, G. & Ballantyne, C.K. (1988) Holocene debris cone evolution in Glen Etive, western Grampian Highlands, Scotland, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 13, 525-531.

Breeze, D.J. (1997) The great myth of Caledon, in Scottish Woodland History, T.C. Smout, ed., Scottish Cultural Press, Edinburgh, 47-51.

Bridge, M.C., Haggart, B.A. & Lowe, J.J. (1990) The history and palaeoclimatic significance of subfossil remains of Pinus sylvestris in blanket peats from Scotland, Journal of Ecology 78, 77-99.

Britton, A.J., Pearce, I.S.K. & Jones, B. (2005) Impacts of grazing on montane heath vegetation in Wales and implications for the restoration of montane areas, Biological Conservation 125, 515-524.

Brown, A.G. (2002) Learning From the Past: Palaeohydrology and Palaeoecology, Freshwater Biology 47, 817-829.

Brown, K.M. (2006) New challenges for old commons: The role of historical common land in contemporary rural spaces, Scottish Geographical Journal 122, 109-129.

44 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Burt, T.P., Warburton, J. & Allison, R.J., (2002) Eroding upland landscape? Past, present and future perspectives, in The British Uplands: Dynamics of Change, T.P. Burt, D.B.A., Thompson & J. Warburton, eds., JNCC Report 319, 60-66.

Burton, R.J.F. (2004) Seeing through the ‘good farmer’s’ eyes: towards developing an understanding of the social symbolic value of ‘productivist’ behaviour, Sociologia Ruralis 44, 195-215.

Caporn, S. (1997) Air pollution and its effects on vegetation, in Restoring Moorland. Peak District Moorland Management Project. Phase III report, P. Anderson, J.H. Tallis & D.W. Yalden, eds., Bakewell, 28-29.

Carver, S. & Wrightham, M. (2003) Assessment of historic trends in the extent of wild land in Scotland; a pilot study, Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 012.

Chambers, F.M. (1997) Bogs as treeless wastes: the myth and the implications for conservation, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Oxford, 168-175.

Chambers, F.M. (2001) When are trees natural on bogs? in Management of water and trees on raised bogs, S. Whild, R. Meade & J. Daniels, eds., English Nature Research Reports 407, English Nature, Peterborough, 21-25.

Chambers, F.M., Dresser, P.Q. & Smith, A.G. (1979) Radiocarbon dating evidence on the impact of atmospheric pollution on upland peats, Nature 282, 829-831.

Chambers, F.M., Mauquoy, D. & Todd, P.A. (1999) Recent rise to dominance of Molinia caerulea in environmentally sensitive areas: new perspectives from palaeoecological data, Journal of Applied Ecology 36, 719-733.

Chambers, F.M., Mauquoy, D., Pearson, F., Daniell, J.R.G., Gent, A. & Cook, C. (2001) Recent vegetation change in Welsh blanket mires: a palaeoecological appraisal, Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor, Contract Science Report 420.

Chambers, F.M., Daniell, J.R.G., Mauquoy, D., Newberry, J. & Toms, P.S. (2006) A preliminary examination of the vegetation history of moorland in Northern England, University of Gloucestershire, Gloucestershire, Project Contract VT0419.

Chambers, F.M., Mauquoy, D., Gent, A., Pearson, F., Daniell, J.R.G. & Jones, P.S. (2007) Palaeoecology of degraded blanket mire in South Wales: data to inform conservation management, Biological Conservation 137, 197-209.

Charman, D.J. (1997) Peatland palaeoecology and conservation, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Oxford, 65-73.

Charman, D. (2002) Peatlands and Environmental Change, Wiley, Chichester.

Charman, D.J., Brown, A.D., Hendon, D. & Karofeld, E. (2004) Testing the relationship between Holocene peatland palaeoclimate reconstructions and instrumental data at two European sites, Quaternary Science Reviews 23, 137-143.

45 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Chiverrell, R. (2006) Past and future perspectives upon landscape instability in Cumbria, northwest England, Regional Environmental Change 6, 101-114.

Chiverrell, R.C., Harvey, A.M., Hunter, S.Y. (nee Miller)., Millington, J. & Richardson, N.J. (2008) Late Holocene environmental change in the Howgill Fells, Northwest England, Geomorphology 100, 41-69.

Clark, S.H.E. (2003) Insect faunas associated with the fossil remains of Pinus sylvestris L. in blanket peat from northeast Scotland, Scottish Geographical Journal 119, 39-52.

Coulson, J.P., Bottrell, S.H. & Lee, J.A. (2005) Recreating atmospheric sulphur deposition histories from peat stratigraphy: diagenetic conditions required for signal preservation and reconstruction of past sulphur deposition in the Derbyshire Peak District, UK, Chemical Geology 218, 223-248.

Crawford, R.M.M., Jeffree, C.E. & Rees, W.G. (2003) Paludification and forest retreat in northern oceanic environments, Annals of Botany 91, 213-226.

Curry, A.M. (2000) Holocene reworking of drift-mantled hillslopes in Glen Docherty, northwest Highlands, Scotland, The Holocene 10, 509-518.

Curtis, C. & Simpson, G., eds. (2007) Freshwater umbrella – the effects of nitrogen deposition and climate change on freshwaters in the UK, final report to DEFRA under contract CPEA17, downloaded from http://sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk /Document.aspx?Document=AQ0806_6884_FRA.pdf.

Darling, F.F. & Boyd, M.J. (1964) The Highlands and Islands, Collins, London.

Davidson, D.A., Wilson, C.A., Meharg, A.A., Deacon, C. & Edwards, K.J. (2007) The legacy of past manuring practices on soil contamination in remote rural areas, Environment International 33, 78-83.

Davies, A.L. (1999) Fine Spatial Resolution Holocene Vegetation and Land-Use History in West Glen Affric and Kintail, Northern Scotland, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Stirling.

Davies, A. (2003) Carnach Mor and Camban: woodland history and land-use in alluvial settings, in The Quaternary of Glen Affric and Kintail, R.M. Tipping, ed., Quaternary Research Association, London, 75-83.

Davies, A.L. & Dixon, P. (2007) Reading the pastoral landscape: palynological and historical evidence for the impacts of long-term grazing on Wether Hill, Cheviot foothills, Northumberland, Landscape History 30, 35-45.

Davies, A.L., Hamilton, A. & Ross, A. (2006) Back to the future: historical legacies and future implications, extended abstract from conference on the future of biodiversity in the uplands, held at Battleby, December 2006, downloaded from http://www.perth.ac.uk/specialistcentres/cms/Conferences/Documents/Back%20to%2 0the%20future.pdf.

46 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Davies, A.L. & Smith, M.A. (in press) More questions than answers? High resolution pollen records as a tool for conservation management at Ledmore and Migdale Woods, Sutherland, in Working and walking in the footsteps of ghosts: the ecology, archaeology and management of ancient woods and associated land, I.D. Rotherham, ed., proceedings from the sixth regional biodiversity conference, Wildtrack Publishing, Sheffield.

Davies, A.L. & Watson, F. (2007) Understanding the changing value of natural resources: an integrated palaeoecological-historical investigation into grazing- woodland interactions by Loch Awe, Western Highlands of Scotland, Journal of Biogeography 34, 1777-1791.

Dawson, J.J.C. & Smith, P. (2006) Review of carbon loss from soil and its fate in the environment, final report for Defra project SP08010, downloaded from http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/Project_Data/DocumentLibrary/SP08010/SP08010_ 4200_FRP.doc [no longer accessible 27/07/2009]

Dawson, J.J.C. & Smith, P. (2007) Carbon losses from soil and its consequences for land-use management, Science of the Total Environment 382, 165-190.

Day, S.P. (1993) Woodland origin and ‘ancient woodland indicators’: a case-study from Sidlings Copse, Oxfordshire, UK, The Holocene 3, 45-53.

Dearing, J.A., Battarbee, R.W., Dikau, R., Larocque, I. & Oldfield, F. (2006) Human- environment interactions: learning from the past, Regional Environmental Change 6, 1-16.

Defra (2006) Conservation of historic environments in England’s uplands, research contract BD1706 (not yet published).

Defra (2007) Rural Development Programme for England 2007-2013, EU Implementation Regulation (EC 1974/2006), downloaded from http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/rdpe/progdoc.htm

Dodgshon, R.A. (2004) The Scottish Highlands before and after the Clearances: an ecological perspective, in Society, Landscape and Environment in Upland Britain, I.D. Whyte & A.J.L. Winchester, eds., Society for Landscape Studies supplementary series 2, 67-78.

Dodgshon, R.A. (2006) The Little Ice Age in the Scottish Highlands and Islands: documenting its human impact, Scottish Geographical Journal 121, 321-337.

Dodgshon, R.A. & Olsson, G.A. (2006) Heather moorland in the Scottish Highlands: the history of a cultural landscape, 1600-1880, Journal of Historical Geography 32, 21-37.

Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E.D.G., Holden, J., Hubacek, K., Prell, C., Reed, M.S., Stagl, S. & Stringer, L.C. (2006) Learning from Doing Participatory Rural Research: Lessons from the Peak District National Park, Journal of Agricultural Economics 57, 259-275.

Edwards, K.J. & Whittington, G. (2001) Lake sediments, erosion and landscape change during the Holocene in Britain and Ireland, Catena 42, 143-173.

47 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Edwards, K.J., Whittington, G. & Tipping, R. (2000) The incidence of microscopic charcoal in late glacial deposits, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 164, 263-278.

Edwards, M.E. (1986) Disturbance histories of four Snowdonian woodlands and their relation to Atlantic bryophyte distributions, Biological Conservation 37, 301-320.

Edwards M.E. (2005) Landscape history and biodiversity conservation in the uplands of Norway and Britain: comparisons and contradictions, in Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, D.B.A., Thompson, M.F. Price & C.A. Galbraith, eds., The Stationery Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 163-178.

Edwards, C. & Mason, W.L. (2006) Stand structure and dynamics of four native Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) woodlands in northern Scotland, Forestry 79, 261-277.

Ellis, C.J. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) Climatic control of peat erosion in a North Wales blanket mire, New Phytologist 152, 313-324.

English Nature (2001) State of Nature: the upland challenge, English Nature, Peterborough.

Evans, M., Warburton, J. & Yang, J. (2006) Eroding blanket peat catchments: Global and local implications of upland organic sediment budgets, Geomorphology 79, 45- 57.

Fenton, J.H.C. (2008) A postulated natural origin for the open landscape of upland Scotland, Plant Ecology and Diversity 1, 115-127.

Ferrier, R.C., Helliwell, R.C., Cosby, B.J., Jenkins, A. & Wright, R.F. (2001) Recovery from acidification of lochs in Galloway, south-west Scotland, UK: 1979- 1998, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 5, 421-431.

Flower, R.J., Patrick, S.T., Appleby, P.B., Oldfield, F., Rippey, B., Stevenson, A.C., Darley, J., Higgitt, S.R. & Battarbee, R.W. (1987) Palaeoecological evaluation of the recent acidification of Loch Laidon, Rannoch Moor, Scotland, Palaeoecology Research Unit, University College London, London, Research Papers 29.

Flower, R.J., Cameron, N.G., Rose, N., Fritz, S.C., Harriman, R. & Stevenson, A.C. (1990) Post-1970 Water-Chemistry Changes and Paleolimnology of Several Acidified Upland Lakes in the UK, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 327, 427-433.

Foresight (2008) Foresight project on the future uses of land: 25th January2008 workshop report, obtained from Rural Economy and Land Use programme, www.relu.ac.uk; see http://www.foresight.gov.uk/OurWork/ActiveProjects /LandUse/LandUse.asp for project details.

Forestry Commission (2003) The management of semi-natural woodlands: 7. Native pinewoods. Practice Guide, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, downloaded from http://www.forestry.gov.uk/website/publications.nsf/WebpubsbyISBN/0855385863

48 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Foster, D.R., Schoonkaker, P.K. & Pickett, S.T.A. (1990) Insights from paleoecology to community ecology, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 5, 119–122.

Foster, G.C., Chiverrell, R.C., Harvey, A.M., Dearing, J.A. & Dunsford, H. (2008) Catchment hydro-geomorphological responses to environmental change in the Southern Uplands of Scotland, The Holocene 18, 935-950.

Fowler, D & Battarbee, R. (2005) Climate change and pollution in the mountains: the nature of change, in Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, D.B.A., Thompson, M.F. Price & C.A. Galbraith, eds., The Stationery Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 71-88.

Fraser, E.D.G. (2003) Social vulnerability and ecological frailty: building bridges between social and natural sciences using the Irish potato famine as a case study, Conservation Ecology 7, article 9 (online).

Fraser, E.D.G. (2007) Travelling in antique lands: using past famines to develop an adaptability/resilience framework to identify food systems vulnerable to climate change, Climate Change 83, 495-514.

Fraser, E.D.G., Dougill, A.J., Mabee, W.E., Reed, M. & McAlpine, P. (2006) Bottom up and top down: Analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management, Journal of Environmental Management 78, 114-127.

Froyd, C.A. & Bennett, K.D. (2007) Long-term ecology of native pinewood communities in East Glen Affric, Scotland, Forestry 79, 279-291.

FWAG (2006) The Farming & Wildlife Advisory Group’s (FWAG Scotland) Response to the Rural Development Programme for Scotland, June 2006, downloaded from http://www.fwag.org.uk/dr_media/fwag/sRDP_- _FWAG_response_June_2006_03-Nov-09.pdf.

Garnett, M.H., Ineson, P. & Stevenson, A.C. (2000) Effects of burning and grazing on carbon sequestration in a Pennine blanket bog, UK, The Holocene 10, 729-736.

Gear, A.J. & Huntley, B. (1991) Rapid changes in the range limits of Scots pine 4000 years ago, Science 251, 544-547.

Gimingham, C.H. (1995) Heaths and moorland: an overview of ecological change, in Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, D.B.A. Thompson, A.J. Hester & M.B Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 9-19.

Grant, M. & Edwards, M. (2007) Conserving idealized landscapes: past history, public perception and future management in the New Forest (UK) Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, DOI 10.1007/s00334-007-0100-3.

Grieve, I.C., Davidson, D.A. & Gordon, J.E. (1995) Nature, extent and severity of soil-erosion in upland Scotland, Land Degradation and Rehabilitation 6, 41-55.

49 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Hanley, N., Tinch, D., Davies, A., Barbier, E.B. & Watson, F. (accepted) What drives long-run biodiversity change? New insights from combining economics, paleoecology and environmental history, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.

Harriman, R., Watt, A.W., Christie, A.E.G., Moore, D.W., McCartney, A.G. & Taylor, E.M. (2003) Quantifying the effects of forestry practices on the recovery of upland streams and lochs from acidification, The Science of The Total Environment 310, 101-111.

Harvey, A.M., Oldfield, F. & Baron, A.F. (1981) Dating of post-glacial landforms in the Central Howgills, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 6, 401-412.

Harvey, A.M. & Renwick, W.H. (1987) Holocene alluvial fan and terrace formation in the Bowland Fells, northwest England, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 12, 249-257.

Hatfield, R.G., Maher, B.A., Pates, J.M. & Barker, P.A. (2008) Sediment dynamics in an upland temperate catchment: changing sediment sources, rates and deposition, Journal of Paleolimnology 40, 1143-1158.

Hatfield, R.G. & Maher, B.A. (2009) Holocene sediment dynamics in an upland temperate lake catchment: climatic and land-use impacts in the English Lake District, The Holocene 19, 427-438.

Hendon, D. & Charman, D.J. (2004) High-resolution peatland water-table changes for the past 200 years: the influence of climate and implications for management, The Holocene 14, 125-134.

Hester, A.J. & Sydes, C. (1992) Changes in burning of Scottish heather moorland since the 1940s from aerial photographs, Biological Conservation 60, 25-30.

Higgitt, D.L., Warburton, J. & Evans, M.L. (2001) Sediment transfer in upland environments, in Geomorphological Processes and Landscape Change: Britain in the last 1000 years, D.L. Higgitt & E.M. Lee, eds., Blackwell, Oxford, 190-214.

Hobbs, R.J. & Gimingham, C.H. (1987) Vegetation, fire and herbivore interactions in heathland, Advances in Ecological Research 16, 87-173.

Hodder, K.H., Bullock, J.M., Buckland, P.C. & Kirby, K.J. (2005) Large herbivores in the wildwood and modern naturalistic grazing systems, English Nature Research Reports 648, English Nature, Peterborough.

Holden, J., Chapman, P.J. & Labadz, J.C. (2004) Artificial drainage of peatlands: hydrological and hydrochemical process and wetland restoration, Progress in Physical Geography 28, 95-123.

Holden, J., Chapman, P., Evans, M., Hubacek, K., Kay, P. & Warburton, J. (2007a) Vulnerability of organic soils in England and Wales, final technical report to DEFRA and Countryside Council for Wales, DEFRA Project SP0532, CCW contract FC 73- 03-275, downloaded from http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=SP0532_5213_TRP.pdf.

50 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Holden, J., Shotbolt, L., Bonn, A., Burt, T.P., Chapman, P.J., Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E.D.G., Hubacek, K., Irvine, B., Kirkby, M.J., Reed, M.S., Prell, C., Stagl, S., Stringer, L.C., Turner, A. & Worrall, F. (2007b) Environmental change in moorland landscapes, Earth-Science Reviews 82, 75-100.

Holl, K. & Smith, M. (2007) Scottish upland forests: History lessons for the future, Forest Ecology and Management 249, 45-53.

Hughes, P.D.M., Lomas-Clarke, S.H., Schulz, J. & Jones, P. (2007) The declining quality of late-Holocene ombrotrophic communities and the loss of Sphagnum austinii (Sull. ex Aust.) on raised bogs in Wales, The Holocene 17, 613-625.

Hughes, P.D.M., Lomas-Clarke, S.H., Schulz, J. & Barber, K.E. (2008) Decline and localized extinction of a major raised bog species across the British Isles: evidence for associated land-use intensification, The Holocene 18, 1033-1043.

Hughes, R.E., Dale, J., Williams, I.E. & Rees, D.I. (1973) Studies in sheep population and environment in the mountains of north-west Wales, Journal of Applied Ecology 10, 113-132.

Hulme, P.E. (2005) Adapting to climate change: is there scope for ecological management in the face of a global threat? Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 784-794.

Hunter, J. (1976) The Making of the Crofting Community John Donald Publishers Ltd., Edinburgh.

Huntley, B. (1981) The past and present vegetation of the Caenlochan National Nature Reserve, Scotland. II. Palaeoecological investigations, New Phytologist 87, 189-222.

Huntley, B. (1991) Historical lessons for the future, in The Scientific Management of Temperate Communities for Conservation, I.F. Spellerberg, F.B. Goldsmith & M.G. Morris, eds., Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 473-503.

Huntley, B. (1994) Late Devensian and Holocene palaeoecology and palaeoenvironments of the Morrone Birkwoods, Aberdeenshire, Scotland, Journal of Quaternary Science 9, 311-336.

Huntley, B. & Baxter, R. (2002) Climate change and wildlife conservation in the British uplands, in The British Uplands: Dynamics of Change, T.P. Burt, D.B.A. Thompson & J. Warburton, eds., JNCC Report No. 319, 41-47.

Innes, J.L. (1983) Landuse changes in the Scottish Highlands during the 19th century: the role of pasture degeneration, Scottish Geographical Magazine 99, 141-149.

Innes, J.B. & Simmons, I.G. (1988) Disturbance and diversity: floristic changes associated with pre-elm decline woodland recession in north east Yorkshire, in Archaeology and the flora of the British Isles, M. Jones, ed., Oxbow, Oxford, 7-20.

IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B.

51 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller, eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, downloaded from http://www.ipcc-wg1.unibe.ch/publications/wg1-ar4/wg1-ar4.html

Johnston, E. & Soulsby, C. (2006) The role of science in environmental policy: an examination of the local context, Land Use Policy 23, 161-169.

Jones, V.J., Stevenson, A.C. & Battarbee, R.W. (1989) Acidification of Lakes in Galloway, South West Scotland: A Diatom and Pollen Study of the Post-Glacial History of the Round Loch of Glenhead, Journal of Ecology 77, 1-23.

Jones, V.J., Battarbee, R.W., Rose, N.L., Curtis, C., Appleby, P.G., Harriman, R. & Shine, A.J. (1997) Evidence for the pollution of Loch Ness from the analysis of its recent sediments, Science of the Total Environment 203, 37-49.

Juggins, S., Flower, R.J. & Battarbee, R.W. (1996) Palaeolimnological evidence for recent chemical and biological changes in UK acid waters monitoring network sites, Freshwater Biology 36, 203-219.

Kernan, M., Rose, N.L., Camarero, L., Piña, B. & Grimalt, J. (2005) Contemporary and historical pollutant status of Scottish mountain lochs, in D.B.A. Thompson, M.F. Price, & Galbraith, C.A. (eds.) Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, The Stationary Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 89-98.

Kirby, K.J. (2004) A model of a natural wooded landscape in Britain as influenced by large herbivore activity, Forestry 77, 405-420.

Kirby, K.J., Thomas, R.C., Key, R.S., Mclean, I.F.G. & Hodgetts, N. (1995) Pasture- woodland and its conservation in Britain, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 56, 135-153.

Kreiser, A.M., Appleby P.G., Natkanski J., Rippey B. & Battarbee R.W. (1990) Afforestation and lake acidification: a comparison of four sites in Scotland, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 327, 377-383.

Kuhry, P. (1994) The role of fire in the development of Sphagnum dominated peatlands in western boreal Canada, Journal of Ecology 82, 899-910.

Land Use Consultants & University of Sheffield (2006) The future character and function of England’s landscapes. Overview report: A literature review and commentary on research projects investigating future scenarios for England, prepared for The Countryside Agency, September 2006, downloaded from http://www.countryside.gov.uk/LAR/Landscape/CC/landscape_futures.asp

Langdon, P.G. & Barber, K.E. (2005) The climate of Scotland over the last 5000 years inferred from multiproxy peatland records: inter-site correlations and regional variability, Journal of Quaternary Science 20, 549-566.

Lee, J.A. (1991) The effects of acid deposition on blanket peatland vegetation, in The effects of acid deposition on nature conservation in Great Britain, S.J. Woodin & A.M. Farmer, eds., Nature Conservancy Council Report no. 26., Peterborough, 12-16.

52 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Lee, J. A. & Tallis, J. H. (1973) Regional and historical aspects of lead pollution in Britain, Nature, 245, 216-218.

Lee, J.A., Tallis, J.H. & Woodin, S.J. (1988) Acidic deposition and British upland vegetation, in Ecological Change in the Uplands, M.B. Usher & Thompson D.B.A., eds., Blackwell, Oxford, 151-162.

Lee, T.R. (2001) Perceptions, Attitudes and Preferences in Forests and Woodlands, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, Technical Paper 18.

Leira, M., Cole, E.E., & Mitchell, F.J.G. (2007) Peat erosion and atmospheric deposition impacts on an oligotrophic take in eastern Ireland, Journal of Paleolimnology 38, 49-71.

Lindbladh, M. & Bradshaw, R. (1995) The development and demise of a medieval forest-meadow system at Linnaeus' birthplace in Southern Sweden - implications for conservation and forest history, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 4, 153-160.

Littlewood, N.A., Pakeman, R.J. & Woodin, S.J. (2006a) The response of plant and insect assemblages to the loss of Calluna vulgaris from upland vegetation, Biological Conservation 128, 335-345.

Littlewood, N.A., Pakeman, R.J. & Woodin, S.J. (2006b) A field assessment of the success of moorland restoration in the rehabilitation of whole plant assemblages, Applied Vegetation Science 9, 295-306.

Lovegrove, R. (2007) Silent Fields: the long decline of a nation’s wildlife, Oxford University press, Oxford.

Luxmoore, R. & Fenton, J., eds., (2004) The role of large herbivores in shaping the upland landscapes of Britain. What does the science of herbivore ecology tell us? Seminar report, National Trust for Scotland, Edinburgh, downloaded from www.wildland-network.org.uk/reports_info/Large_herbivores_in_Uplands.pdf

MacDonald, D., Crabtree, J.R., Wiesinger, G., Dax, T., Stamou, N., Fleury, P., Gutierrez Lazpita, J. & Gibon, A. (2000) Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: Environmental consequences and policy response, Journal of Environmental Management 59, 47-69.

MacDonald, F. (1998) Viewing Highland Scotland: ideology, representation and the 'natural heritage', Area 30, 237-244.

Mackay, A.W. (1997) Peat erosion: some implications for conservation and management of blanket mires and heather moorland in the UK, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Wallingford, 82-87.

Mackay, A.W. & Tallis, J.H. (1994) The recent vegetational history of the Forest of Bowland, Lancashire, UK, New Phytologist 124, 571-584.

53 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Mackay, A.W. & Tallis, J.H. (1996) Summit-type blanket mire erosion in the forest of Bowland, Lancashire, UK: Predisposing factors and implications for conservation, Biological Conservation 76, 31-44.

Mackay, J.W. (1995) People, perceptions and moorland, in Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, D.B.A. Thompson, A.J. Hester & M.B. Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 102-111.

Macklin, M.G. & Rumsby, B.T. (2007) Changing climate and extreme floods in the British uplands, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 32, 168-186.

Malby, A.R., Whyatt, J.A., Timmis, R.J., Wilby, R.L. & Orr, H.G. (2007) Long-term variations in orographic rainfall: analysis and implications for upland catchments, Hydrological Sciences Journal-Journal des Sciences Hydrologiques 52, 276-291.

Malmer, N. & Wallen, B. (2004) Input rates, decay losses and accumulation rates of carbon in bogs during the last millennium: internal processes and environmental changes, The Holocene 14, 111-117.

Maltby, E., Legg, C.J. & Proctor, M.C.F. (1990) The ecology of severe moorland fire on the North York Moors: effects of the 1976 fires, and subsequent surface and vegetation development, The Journal of Ecology 78, 490-518.

Marrs, R.H., Phillips, J.D.P., Todd, P.A., Ghorbani, J. & Le Duc, M.G. (2004) Control of Molinia caerulea on upland moors, Journal of Applied Ecology 41, 398- 411.

Mather, A.S. (1978) The alleged deterioration in hill grazings in the Scottish Highlands, Biological Conservation 14, 181-195.

Mather, A.S. (1993) Protected areas in the periphery: Conservation and controversy in northern Scotland, Journal of Rural Studies 9, 371-384.

Mauquoy, D. & Barber, K. (1999) Evidence for climatic deteriorations associated with the decline of Sphagnum imbricatum Hornsch. ex. Russ. in six ombrotrophic mires from northern England and the Scottish Borders, The Holocene 9, 423-437.

Mauquoy, D., Engelkes, T., Groot, M.H.M., Markesteijn, F., Oudejans, M.G., van der Plicht, J. & van Geel, B. (2002) High-resolution records of late-Holocene climate change and carbon accumulation in two north-west European ombrotrophic peat bogs, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 186, 275-310.

Mauquoy, D., van Geel, B., Blaauw, M., Speranza, A. & van der Plicht, J. (2004) Changes in solar activity and Holocene climatic shifts derived from 14C wiggle-match dated peat deposits, The Holocene 14, 45-52.

Mauquoy, D. & Yeloff, D. (2008) Raised peat bog development and possible responses to environmental changes during the mid- to late-Holocene. Can the palaeoecological record be used to predict the nature and response of raised peat bogs to future climate change? Biodiversity and Conservation 17, 2139-2151.

54 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Maurer, K., Weyand, A., Fischer, M. & Stocklin, J. (2006) Old cultural traditions, in addition to land use and topography, are shaping plant diversity of grasslands in the Alps, Biological Conservation 130, 438-446.

McClymont, E.L., Mauquoy, D., Yeloff, D., Broekens, P., Van Geel, B., Charman, D.J., Pancost, R.D., Chambers, F.M. & Evershed, R.P. (2008) The disappearance of Sphagnum imbricatum from Butterburn Flow, UK, The Holocene 18, 991-1002.

McConnell, J. & Legg, C. (1995) Are the upland heaths in the Cairngorms pining fro climate change? In Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, D.B.A. Thompson, A.J. Hester & M.B. Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 154-161.

McKenna, J., O'Hagan, A.M., Power, J., MacLeod, M. & Cooper, A. (2007) Coastal dune conservation on an Irish commonage: community-based management or tragedy of the commons? Geographical Journal 173, 157-169.

McMorran, R., Price, M.F. & McVittie, A. (2006) A review of the benefits and opportunities attributed to Scotland's landscapes of wild character, Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report 194.

Midgley, A.C. (2007) The social negotiation of nature conservation policy: conserving pinewoods in the Scottish Highlands, Biodiversity and Conservation 16, 3317-3332.

Milligan, A.L., Putwain, P.D., Cox, E.S., Ghorbani, J., Le Duc, M.G. & Marrs, R.H. (2004) Developing an integrated land management strategy for the restoration of moorland vegetation on Molinia caerulea-dominated vegetation for conservation purposes in upland Britain, Biological Conservation 119, 371-385.

Milne, J.A. & Hartley, S.E. (2001) Upland plant communities - sensitivity to change, Catena 42, 333-343.

Mitchell, F.J.G. (1988) The vegetational history of the Killarney oakwoods, SW Ireland: evidence from fine spatial resolution pollen analysis, Journal of Ecology 76, 415-436.

Mitchell, F.J.G. (1990) The impact of grazing and human disturbance on the dynamics of woodland in S.W. Ireland, Journal of Vegetation Science 1, 245-254.

Mitchell, F.J.G. & Kirby, K.J. (1990) The impact of large herbivores on the conservation of semi-natural woods in the British uplands, Forestry 63, 333-353.

Moore, P.D. (2002) The future of cool temperate bogs, Environmental Conservation 29, 3-20.

Morrocco, S.M., Ballantyne, C.K., Spencer, J.Q.G. & Robinson, R.A.J. (2007) Age and significance of aeolian sediment reworking on high plateaux in the Scottish Highlands, The Holocene 17, 349-360.

Mountford, E.P. & Peterken, G.E. (2003) Long-term change and implications for the management of wood pastures: experience over 40 years from Denny Wood, New Forest, Forestry 76, 19-43.

55 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

O'Sullivan, P.E. (1973) Pollen analysis of Mor humus layers from a native Scots pine ecosystem, interpreted with surface samples, Oikos 24, 259-272.

O'Sullivan, P.E. (1977) Vegetation history and the native pinewoods, in Native Pinewoods of Scotland, R.G.H. Bunce & J.N.R. Jeffers, eds., ITE, Cambridge, 60-69.

Owens, P.N. & Walling, D.E. (2002) Changes in sediment sources and floodplain deposition rates in the catchment of the River Tweed, Scotland, over the last 100 years: the impact of climate and land use change, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 27, 403-423.

Palmer, S.C.F., Mitchell, R.J., Truscott, A.M. & Welch, D. (2004) Regeneration failure in Atlantic oakwoods: the roles of ungulate grazing and invertebrates, Forest Ecology and Management 192, 251-265.

Parr, T.W., Sier, A.R.J., Battarbee, R.W., Mackay, A. & Burgess, J. (2003) Detecting environmental change: science and society - perspectives on long-term research and monitoring in the 21st century, Science of the Total Environment 310, 1-8.

Pauly, D. (1995) Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of fisheries, Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10, 430.

Pearsall, W.H. (1971) Mountains and Moorlands. Collins, London.

Peterken, G.F. (1996) Natural woodland: ecology and conservation in northern temperate regions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Pitkanen, A., Turunen, J. & Tolonen, K. (1999) The role of fire in the carbon dynamics of a mire, eastern Finland, The Holocene 9, 453-462.

Reid, C. (2007) Natural England’s upland futures project, Looking to the Hills. Newsletter of the Uplands Lead Co-ordination Network, issue 15, 8-9, downloaded from http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1844.

Reid, E. & Thomas, M.F. (2006) A chronostratigraphy of mid- and late-Holocene slope evolution: Creagan a' Chaorainn, Northern Highlands, Scotland., The Holocene 16, 429-444.

Rhodes, N. & Stevenson, T. (1997) Palaeoenvironmental evidence for the importance of fire as a cause of erosion of British and Irish blanket peats, in Blanket Mire Degradation: causes, consequences and challenges, J.H. Tallis, R. Meade & P.D. Hulme, eds., Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen, 64-78.

Richards, E. (2000) The Highland Clearances: people, landlords and rural turmoil Birlinn Ltd, Edinburgh.

Rose, N., Monteith, D., Kettle, H., Thompson, R., Yang, H. & Muir, D. (2004) A consideration of potential confounding factors limiting chemical and biological recovery at Lochnagar, a remote mountain loch in Scotland, Journal of Limnology 63, 63-76.

56 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Rosen, D. & Dumayne-Peaty, L. (2001) Human impact on the vegetation of South Wales during late historical times: palynological and palaeoenvironmental results from Crymlyn Bog NNR, West Glamorgan, Wales, UK, Holocene 11, 11-23.

Rotherham, I.D., Egan, D. & Ardron, P.A. (2004) Fuel economy and the uplands: the effects of peat and turf utilisation on upland landscapes, in Society, Landscape and Environmental in Upland Britain, I.D. Whyte & A.J.L. Winchester, eds., Society for Landscape Studies supplementary series 2, 99-109.

Rothwell, J.J., Robinson, S.G., Evans, M.G., Yang, J. & Allott, T.E.H. (2005) Heavy metal release by peat erosion in the Peak District, southern Pennines, UK, Hydrological Processes 19, 2973-2989.

Rothwell, J.J., Evans, M.G., Liddaman, L.C. & Allott, T.E.H. (2007b) The role of wildfire and gully erosion in particulate Pb export from contaminated peatland catchments in the southern Pennines, U.K, Geomorphology 88, 276-284.

Rothwell, J.J., Evans, M.G. & Allott, T.E.H. (2007a) Lead contamination of fluvial sediments in an eroding blanket peat catchment, Applied Geochemistry 22, 446-459.

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (2007) The uplands – time to change? Download from http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/uplands_tcm9-166286.pdf.

Royal Society of Edinburgh Inquiry (2007) Scotland’s Hill and Island Areas, downloaded from http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/enquiries/hill_and_island_areas/index.htm.

Sansum, P.A. (2004) Argyll oakwoods: use and ecological change, 1000 to 2000 AD – a palynological-historical investigation, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 83-97.

Scottish Natural Heritage (2002a) Natural Heritage Futures: Overview, downloaded from http://www.snh.org.uk/futures/Data/pdfdocs/overview.pdf

Scottish Natural Heritage (2002b) Natural Heritage Futures: hills and moors, downloaded from http://www.snh.org.uk/futures/Data/pdfdocs/Hills_and_Moors.pdf

Scottish Natural Heritage (2002c) Wildness in Scotland’s countryside. Policy statement no. 02/03, downloaded from http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/polstat/pd-wsc.pdf

Scotland Rural Development Programme 2007-2013 (2008), downloaded from http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/04/01115039/0

Sear, D.A. & Arnell, N.W. (2006) The application of palaeohydrology in river management, Catena 66, 169-183.

Shaw, H. & Tipping, R. (2006) Recent pine woodland dynamics in east Glen Affric, northern Scotland, from highly resolved palaeoecological analyses, Forestry 79, 331- 340.

Shaw, S.C., Wheeler, B.D., Kirby, P., Phillipson, P. & Edmunds, R. (1996) Literature review of the historic effects of burning and grazing of blanket bog and upland wet heath, English Nature, Peterborough, English Nature Research Report No.172.

57 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Shotbolt, L., Anderson, A.R. & Townend, J. (1998) Changes to blanket bog adjoining forest plots at Bad a' Cheo, Rumster Forest, Caithness, Forestry 71, 311-324.

Shotbolt, L., Hutchinson, S. & Thomas, A. (2006) Sediment stratigraphy and heavy metal fluxes to reservoirs in the Southern Pennine Uplands, UK, Journal of Paleolimnology 35, 305-322.

Simmons, I.G. (1993) Environmental history: a concise introduction. Blackwell: Oxford.

Simmons, I.G. (2003) The Moorlands of England and Wales: an environmental history 8000 BC-AD 2000. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Slee, B. (2007) Social indicators of multifunctional rural land use: The case of forestry in the UK, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 120, 31-40.

Smith, J.S. (1993) changing deer numbers in the Scottish highlands since 1780, in Scotland since prehistory: natural change and human impact. T.C. Smout, ed., Scottish Cultural Press, Aberdeen, 89-97.

Smout, T.C. (1997) Highland land-use before 1800: misconceptions, evidence and realities, in T.C. Smout, ed., Scottish Woodland History, Scottish Cultural Press, Edinburgh, 5-23.

Smout, T.C. (2000) Nature Contested: environmental history in Scotland and northern England since 1600, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Smout, T.C., MacDonald, A.R. & Watson, F. (2005) A history of the native woodlands of Scotland, 1500-1920, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Stern, N. (2006) Stern review on the economics of climate change, downloaded from http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/sternreview_index.htm.

Stevens, C.J., Fraser, I., Mitchley, J. & Thomas, M.B. (2007) Making ecological science policy-relevant: issues of scale and disciplinary integration, Landscape Ecology 22, 6, 799-809.

Stevenson, A.C. & Birks, H.J.B. (1995) Heaths and moorland: long-term ecological changes, and interactions with climate and people, in Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, D.B.A. Thompson, A.J. Hester & M.B. Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 224-237.

Stevenson, A.C., Jones, V.J. & Battarbee, R.W. (1990) The cause of peat erosion - a paleolimnological approach, New Phytologist 114, 727-735.

Stevenson, A.C. & Rhodes, A.N. (2000) Palaeoenvironmental evaluation of the importance of fire as a cause for Calluna loss in the British Isles, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 164, 211-222.

Stevenson, A.C. & Thompson, D.B.A. (1993) Long-term changes in the extent of heather moorland in upland Britain and Ireland: palaeoecological evidence for the importance of grazing, The Holocene 3, 70-76.

58 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Stewart, G.B., Coles, C.F. & Pullin, A.S. (2005) Applying evidence-based practice in conservation management: Lessons from the first systematic review and dissemination projects, Biological Conservation 126, 270-278.

Sutherland, W.J. (2006) Predicting the ecological consequences of environmental change: a review of the methods, Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 599-616.

Sutherland, W.J., Pullin, A.S., Dolman, P.M. & Knight, T.M. (2004) The need for evidence-based conservation, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19, 305-308.

Sutherland, W.J., Armstrong-Brown, S., Armsworth, P.R., Brereton, T., Brickland, J., Campbell, C.D., Chamberlain, D.E., Cooke, A.I., Dulvy, N.K., Dusic, N.R., Fitton, M., Freckleton, R.P., Godfray, H.C.J., Grout, N., Harvey, H.J., Hedley, C., Hopkins, J.J., Kift, N.B., Kirby, J., Kunin, W.E., Macdonald, D.W., Marker, B., Naura, M., Neale, A.R., Oliver, T., Osborn, D., Pullin, A.S., Shardlow, M.E.A., Showler, D.A., Smith, P.L., Smithers, R.J., Solandt, J.L., Spencer, J., Spray, C.J., Thomas, C.D., Thompson, J., Webb, S.E., Yalden, D.W. & Watkinson, A.R. (2006) The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK, Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 617-627.

Svenning, J.C., Normand, S. & Skov, F. (2008) Postglacial dispersal limitation of widespread forest plant species in nemoral Europe, Ecography 31, 316-326.

Swetnam, T.W., Allen, C.D. & Betancourt, J.L. (1999) Applied historical ecology: using the past to manage for the future, Ecological Applications 9, 1189-1206.

Tallantire, P.A. (1997) Plant macrofossils from the historical period from Scoat Tarn (Wasdale), English Lake District, in relation to environmental and climatic changes, Botanical Journal of Scotland 49, 1-17.

Tallis, J. H. (1964) Studies on southern Pennine peats. III. The behaviour of Sphagnum, Journal of Ecology 52, 345-353.

Tallis, J.H. (1985) Mass movement and erosion of a southern Pennine blanket peat, Journal of Ecology 73, 283-315.

Tallis, J.H. (1987) Fire and flood at Holme Moss: erosion processes in an upland blanket mire, Journal of Ecology 75, 1099-1129.

Tallis, J H. (1994) Pool-and-hummock patterning in a southern Pennine blanket mire. II. The formation and erosion of the pool system, Journal of Ecology 82, 789-803.

Tallis, J.H. (1995) Climate and erosion signals in British blanket peats: the significance of Racomitrium lanuginosum remains, Journal of Ecology 83, 1021- 1030.

Tallis, J.H. (1997) The pollen record of Empetrum nigrum in southern Pennine peats: implications for erosion and climate change, Journal of Ecology 85, 455-465.

Tallis, J.H. (1998) Growth and degradation of British and Irish blanket mires, Environmental Reviews 6, 81-122.

59 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Tallis, J.H. & Livett, E.A. (1994) Pool-and-hummock patterning in a southern Pennine blanket mire. I. Stratigraphic profiles for the last 2800 years, Journal of Ecology 82, 775-788.

Tallis, J.H., Meade, R. & Hulme, P.D. (1997) Blanket mire degradation: causes, consequences and challenges Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen.

Thompson, D.B.A. (2002) The importance of nature conservation in the British uplands: nature conservation and land-use changes, in The British Uplands: Dynamics of Change, T.P. Burt, D.B.A., Thompson & J. Warburton, eds., JNCC Report 319, 36- 40.

Thompson, D.B.A. & Badderley, J. (1991) Some effects of acidic deposition on montane Racomitrium lanuginosum heaths, in The effects of acid deposition on nature conservation in Great Britain, S.J. Woodin& A.M. Farmer, eds., Nature Conservancy council report 26, Peterborough, 17-28.

Thompson, D.B.A., Gordon, J.E. & Horsfield, D. (2001) Montane landscapes in Scotland: are these natural, artefacts or complex relics? In J.E. Gordon & K.F. Leys, eds., Earth Science and the Natural Heritage: interactions and integrated management, Stationery Office, Edinburgh, 105-119.

Thompson, D.B.A., Hester, A.J. & Usher, M.B., eds. (1995a) Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, HMSO, Edinburgh.

Thompson D.B.A., MacDonald A.J., Marsden J.H. & Galbraith C.A. (1995b) Upland heather moorland in Great Britain: a review of international importance, vegetation change and some objectives for nature conservation, Biological Conservation 71, 163- 178.

Thompson, D.B.A., Nagy, L., Johnson, S.M. & Robertson, P. (2005) The nature of mountains: an introduction, in D.B.A. Thompson, M.F. Price & C.A. Galbraith, eds., Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, The Stationery Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 43-56.

Tipping, R. (1994) The form and fate of Scotland's woodlands, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 124, 1-54.

Tipping, R. (1997) The postglacial history of montane tall shrub communities in Scotland, in The ecology and restoration of monane and subalpine scrub habitats in Scotland, D. Gilbert, D. Horsfield & Thompson D.B.A., eds., Scottish Natural Heritage, Edinburgh, 11-19.

Tipping, R. (1998a) Towards an environmental history of the Bowmont Valley and the northern Cheviot Hills, Landscape History 20, 41-50.

Tipping, R. (1998b) Cereal cultivation on the Anglo-Scottish Border during the ‘Little Ice Age’, in C.M. Mills & G. Coles, eds., Life on the Edge: Human Settlement and Marginality, Oxbow Monograph 100, 1-11.

Tipping, R. (2000) Palaeoecological approaches to historical problems: a comparison of sheep-grazing intensities in the Cheviot hills in the medieval and later periods, in

60 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Townships to Farmsteads: Rural Settlement Studies in Scotland, England and Wales, J. Atkinson, I. Banks & G. MacGregor, eds., British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 293, 130-143.

Tipping, R. (2007) Blanket peat in the Scottish Highlands: timing, cause, spread and the myth of environmental determinism, Biodiversity and Conservation DOI 10.1007/s10531-007-9220-4.

Tipping, R., Buchanan, J., Davies, A. & Tisdall, E. (1999) Woodland biodiversity, palaeo-human ecology and some implications for conservation management, Journal of Biogeography 26, 33-43.

Tipping, R., Davies, A. & Tisdall, E. (2006) Long-term woodland dynamics in West Glen Affric, northern Scotland, Forestry 79, 351-359.

Truscott, A.M., Mitchell, R.J., Palmer, S.C.F. & Welch, D. (2004) The expansion of native oakwoods into conifer cleared areas through planting, Forest Ecology and Management 193, 335-343.

Tudor, G. & Mackey, E.C. (1995) Upland land cover change in post-war Scotland, in Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, D.B.A. Thompson, A.J. Hester & M.B. Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 28-42.

Turner, R.K., Georgiou, S., Brouwer, R., Bateman, I.J. & Langford, I.J. (2003) Towards and integrated environmental assessment for wetland and catchment management, The Geographical Journal 169, 99-116.

Turunen, J., Tomppo, E., Tolonen, K. & Reinikainen, A. (2002) Estimating carbon accumulation rates of undrained mires in Finland-application to boreal and subarctic regions, The Holocene 12, 69-80.

Vandvik, V., Heegaard, E., Maren, I.E. & Aarrestad, P.A. (2005) Managing heterogeneity: the importance of grazing and environmental variation on post-fire succession in heathlands, Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 139-149.

Vera, F.W.M. (2000) Grazing Ecology and Forest History, CAB International, Oxford.

Welch, D. (1986) Studies in the grazing of heather moorland in north-east Scotland. V. Trends in Nardus stricta and other unpalatable graminoids, Journal of Applied Ecology 23, 1047-1058.

Whild, S., Meade, R. & Daniels, J., eds. (2001) Management of water and trees on raised bogs, English Nature Research Reports 407, English Nature, Peterborough.

Whitehouse, N.J. (2006) The Holocene British and Irish ancient forest fossil beetle fauna: implications for forest history, biodiversity and faunal colonisation, Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 1755-1789.

Whyte, I. (1981) Human response to short- and long-term climatic fluctuations: the example of early Scotland, in Consequences of Climatic Change, C. Delano Smith &

61 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

M. Parry, eds., Department of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, 17- 29.

Wieder, R.K. (2001) Past, present, and future peatland carbon balance: an empirical model based on Pb-210-dated cores, Ecological Applications 11, 327-342.

Wilby, R.L., Orr, H.G., Hedger, M., Forrow, D. & Blackmore, M. (2006) Risks posed by climate change to the delivery of Water Framework Directive objectives in the UK, Environment International 32, 1043-1055.

Wilkinson, D.M. (2001) An open place? A contribution to the discussion on trees on British mires, in Management of water and trees on raised bogs, S. Whild, R. Meade, & J. Daniels, eds., English Nature Research Reports 407, English Nature, Peterborough, 19-20.

Willis, K.J. (1993) How old is ancient woodland? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 8, 427-428.

Willis, K.J., Araujo, M.B., Bennett, K.D., Figueroa-Rangel, B., Froyd C.A. & Myers, N. (2007b) How can a knowledge of the past help to conserve the future? Biodiversity conservation and the relevance of long-term ecological studies, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B 362, 175-186.

Willis, K.J. & Birks, H.J.B. (2006) What is natural? The need for a long-term perspective in biodiversity conservation, Science 314, 1261-1265.

Willis, K.J., Gillson, L., Brncic, T.M. & Figueroa-Rangel, B.L. (2005) Providing baselines for biodiversity measurement, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20, 107-108.

Willis, K. J., Gillson, L. & Knapp, S. (2007a) Biodiversity hotspots through time: an introduction, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 362, 169-174.

Winchester, A.J.L. (2000). The Harvest of the Hills. Rural life in northern England and the Scottish Borders, 1400-1700, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Worrall, F., Burt, T.P. & Adamson, J.K. (2006) Trends in drought frequency - the fate of DOC export from British peatlands, Climatic Change 76, 339-359.

Worrall, F., Armstrong, A. & Adamson, J.K. (2007) The effects of burning and sheep- grazing on water table depth and soil water quality in a upland peat, Journal of Hydrology 339, 1-14.

Yallop, A.R., Thacker, J.I., Thomas, G., Stephens, M., Clutterbuck, B., Brewer, T. & Sannier, C.A.D. (2006) The extent and intensity of management burning in the English uplands, Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 1138-1148.

Yang, H., Rose, N.L., Boyle, J.F. & Battarbee, R.W. (2001) Storage and distribution of trace metals and spheroidal carbonaceous particles (SCPs) from atmospheric deposition in the catchment peats of Lochnagar, Scotland, Environmental Pollution 115, 231-238.

62 Review of historical environmental changes relevant to upland management & policy

Yeloff, D. & Van Geel, B. (2007) Abandonment of farmland and vegetation succession following the Eurasian plague pandemic of AD 1347-52, Journal of Biogeography 34, 575-582.

Yeloff, D.E., Labadz, J.C. & Hunt, C.O. (2006) Causes of degradation and erosion of a blanket mire in the southern Pennines, UK, Mires and Peat 1, 1-18.

63 CHOICE EXPERIMENT 1 On: Management preferences informed by the past Involving: Residents living around the Peak District National Park

Preliminary questions Do you think the general appearance of the Peak District has altered much over time? Yes † No † Don’t know †

If you answered yes, which parts of the landscape do you think have changed the most? High change Some change No change Moorland Valley bottom farm land Waterways (dams, rivers) Rural buildings Other

What do you think the main causes of change are? Most influential Quite influential Not influential Agriculture Conservation management Plantations Reservoirs Tourism and recreation Other

Do you think that climate change will affect the Peak District? Yes No Don’t know The landscape As a place to live

What/who is responsible for climate change? Please tick one. Natural, cyclic climate change † Natural but also affected by people † Due mostly to people † Don’t know †

Do you think of farming in the Peak District as (please tick one box only): Traditional † Modern † Out-dated † Don’t know † Rationale (presented verbally with pictures – see below) The premise of the experiment is to assess whether/how your preferences change if you are given information to show that the Peak District landscape is not natural or stable, and that an historical perspective can show how the past has shaped the current landscape – including problems, values and character. This has implications for the type and amount of management, and therefore money, required to conserve values and prevent further damage where there has been a decline in quality over time. • Upland habitats and farming are dynamic and have undergone extensive changes in the past 200 years, driven by climate and economics, in particular. • Because of predicted climate change and on-going changes in subsidies for agricultural and the environment (i.e. economic conditions), these drivers are still relevant now. • They affect how people make management decisions which in turn shapes the way the landscape looks and functions and how vulnerable it is to change • So knowing what has happened in past can be used to help us decide how we should act to protect and manage the things (attributes) that we value in this area – it can demonstrate what has been lost, whether current habitats or features are vulnerable to change and what methods of management could help reduce damage or negative changes and improve aspects that we value • If nothing is done, quality will decline, including the range of wildlife, water quality, landscape character (e.g. drystone walls)

I want to present some information to show how landscape has changed in the past, focussing on erosion on moorland plateaux and sides, and the farming landscape in the valley bottom.

Erosion drivers and future vulnerability: • Peat under the moors (character of landscape = plants and animals) has taken thousands of years to form and build up, but has become more sensitive to change because of 1. climate change during the medieval period – more variable climatic conditions, especially desiccation, storms and intense rainfall led to formation of gullies, and 2. increased exploitation (grazing, burning) and atmospheric pollution since the 19th th century. 19 century SO2 pollution was so severe that smelting companies introduced scrubbing emissions to limit corrosion in/around mills. • Result: On the moors, these factors resulted in the loss of several plant species, especially the amount of heather (due to heavy grazing, burning, erosion, possibly exacerbated by atmospheric pollution) and the disappearance of much the bog moss, Sphagnum, a key peat forming plant (due to pollution) (Figure 4; see accompanying pdf file for photos). • Implications: 1. Erosion causes peat to dry (90% water) and has made it more susceptible to damage from drought, even short-lived droughts, as well as intensive rainfall because it has been destabilised. 2. Climate change: upland soils, peat most of all, has high C content, and drying causes release of CO2 and CH4 which contribute to climate change, but, reverse, active peat carries on storing C – one current idea is to use C offsetting payments to help block gullies and drains, to shift peat from eroding back to storing C. 3. Water quality: drying peat releases particulate material and compounds in solution which stain the water, requiring costly treatment. 4. Intensive action is required to halt and stabilise peat and to restore these to systems which filter water, trap C and sustain a range of heath, wetland and associated wildlife (Figure 5).

‘Traditional’ farming, landscape character and biodiversity: • Changes in the intensity of management since around 1600 resulted in the formation of the characteristic stone-walled landscape, with small fields for pasture, cultivation and haymaking, but • Increasingly intensive management since c.1800 led to creation of linear field boundaries (Figures 1 and 2) • This started a trend to a more homogeneous landscape, continued into 20th C, with decline in labour, in cultivation, and in hay-making, with emphasis on livestock production and (since late 20th C) growing emphasis on environmental benefits, both supported via subsidies as market prices no longer able to support farming. • Results: homogenisation, with loss of plants, and poorer conditions for wildlife due to loss of varied range of habitats required for many species through lifecycles (Figure 7). • Implications: 1. Stone walls and field barns obsolete – require active maintenance if valued part of Peak District (and elsewhere) (Figure 6) 2. Because of subsidy support, farming is increasingly managed for production and environmental benefits – wildlife, biodiversity, conservation - this includes the idea of ‘high nature value’ farming. 3. Looking to past provides examples of what species (plants especially but also birds) have declined or been lost and what type of farm management could help provide conditions for a wider range of wildlife.

Other attributes: implications for • Access – many parts of moors open to visitors now, but some parts of the moor are very sensitive to pressure from trampling – this applies especially to summit erosion but is also visible on footpaths (Figure 8), hence the need for maintenance and management to halt and repair damage. There are additional access issues during the breeding season (on farm and moor), which may benefit from access restrictions on seasonal basis. • Employment: people (locals, skilled professionals, trainees and/or volunteers) are required to carry out this work if peatland erosion is to be halted and if valley bottom management is to form part of ‘high nature value’ farming with a wider range of techniques, e.g. hayfields, repair stone walls and barns. This means provision of long-term, local jobs.

The Choice experiment is based on the type and level of management you prefer on eroding moorland and in valley bottom farmland, including labour and access implications. There are 3 options for levels of management for each: high effort (A), no change, current practice (B) and less effort, or do nothing (C) (see Information sheet below).

Tax cost: Based on the current budget to maintain existing practices and the additional support needed to implement changes. • Please make your choices only for the Peak District – additional spending would be required to implement similar plans in adjacent areas, like the North York Moors. • There are no right or wrong answers. It will help me work out your priorities and preferences as well as what you feel that society as a whole should contribute. • If you think that the amount of money involved with a choice is too expensive, simply choose the “do nothing” option

Information sheet Choices: Moorland • High effort: intensive restoration to halt erosion, maintain and enhance diversity (increasing the range of functioning wetland and moorland habitats, rich in bird and plant life) and ensure high water quality • Medium effort: is equivalent to current moorland management, with continued restoration to stabilise eroding peat and maintenance of water quality, with some improvement in diversity • Low effort: will result in worsening of current conditions, including intensified erosion, poorer water quality, declining diversity and unpredictability

Valley bottom • High effort: intensive valley bottom management to re-establish small fields, including hay-making, enhancing wildlife diversity, and actively maintaining field walls and barns as functional parts of the landscape • Medium effort: is equivalent to current valley bottom management, with mixture of sheep, dairy and beef farming, little hay making • Low effort: will result in continuation or worsening of current conditions, including extensification of farming, focussed on production, with gradual collapse of drystone walls and field barns due to lack of funding and impetus to maintain them

Community support/jobs • Job creation providing long-term local employment • Continuation of present employment opportunities • Doing nothing is likely to result in fewer local job opportunities

Leisure/access: quantity of access to Peak District moors and valleys • Increased, open access to moor and valley bottoms • Maintaining current access opportunities, i.e. focussed on the moorland • Restricted access to most sensitive areas, with seasonal restrictions in some cases (e.g. bird nesting, lambing)

Remember: Please make your choices based on the Peak District only I am interested in your priorities and preferences, and what you feel how you feel we should manage the landscape based on this historical information. There are no right or wrong answers, but if you think that the amount of money involved with a choice is too expensive, simply choose the “do nothing” option. High effort Medium effort Low effort Moorland Erosion –- Erosion – Erosion ++ Diversity ++ Diversity + Diversity - Water quality ++ Water quality + Water quality -

Valley Diversity ++ Diversity + Diversity - bottom Stone walls/buildings + Stone walls/buildings +/- Stone walls/buildings -

WHERE+ = increase - = decline PLEASE ONLY CONSIDER ONE CARD AT A TIME – each sheet is double-sided

Card 1 A B Do nothing Moorland Low effort Low effort Low effort Valley bottom Low effort Medium Low effort effort Jobs More Fewer Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Open Open Restricted Increased tax 60 92 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 2 A B Do nothing Moorland Low effort Low effort Low effort Valley bottom High effort Medium Low effort effort Jobs More Fewer Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Restricted Open Restricted Increased tax 33 78 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 3 A B Do nothing Moorland High effort High effort Low effort Valley bottom Low effort Low effort Low effort Jobs Medium Medium Fewer effort effort opportunities Access Restricted Restricted Restricted Increased tax 78 92 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 4 A B Do nothing Moorland Medium Medium Low effort effort effort Valley bottom Low effort Low effort Low effort Jobs Fewer Fewer Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Open Current level Restricted Increased tax 18 33 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 5 A B Do nothing Moorland Low effort Medium Low effort effort Valley bottom Low effort High effort Low effort Jobs Fewer Current Fewer opportunities opportunity opportunities level Access Restricted Open Restricted Increased tax 33 33 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 6 A B Do nothing Moorland Medium Low effort Low effort effort Valley bottom Medium High effort Low effort effort Jobs Fewer Fewer Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Restricted Current level Restricted Increased tax 60 60 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 7 A B Do nothing Moorland Low effort Low effort Low effort Valley bottom No change Low effort Low effort Jobs More Current Fewer opportunities opportunity opportunities level Access Restricted Open Restricted Increased tax 18 45 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 8 A B Do nothing Moorland High effort No change Low effort Valley bottom Low effort High effort Low effort Jobs Fewer Fewer Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Current level Restricted Restricted Increased tax 18 45 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 9 A B Do nothing Moorland High effort Low effort Low effort Valley bottom High effort High effort Low effort Jobs Fewer Fewer Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Restricted Current level Restricted Increased tax 60 78 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 10 A B Do nothing Moorland Low effort Medium Low effort effort Valley bottom Low effort Low effort Low effort Jobs More More Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Current level Restricted Restricted Increased tax 45 92 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 11 A B Do nothing Moorland High effort Medium Low effort effort Valley bottom Medium Low effort Low effort effort Jobs Fewer More Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Restricted Restricted Restricted Increased tax 45 78 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 12 A B Do nothing Moorland Low effort Low effort Low effort Valley bottom Low effort Medium Low effort effort Jobs Fewer Current Fewer opportunities opportunity opportunities level Access Restricted Restricted Restricted Increased tax 18 33 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 13 A B Do nothing Moorland Low effort Low effort Low effort Valley bottom High effort Low effort Low effort Jobs Current Current Fewer opportunity opportunity opportunities level level Access Restricted Current level Restricted Increased tax 18 60 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 14 A B Do nothing Moorland Medium High effort Low effort effort Valley bottom Medium High effort Low effort effort Jobs Current More Fewer opportunity opportunities opportunities level Access Current Open Restricted level Increased tax 18 18 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

Card 15 A B Do nothing Moorland High effort High effort Low effort Valley bottom Low effort Medium Low effort effort Jobs Fewer More Fewer opportunities opportunities opportunities Access Open Current level Restricted Increased tax 33 33 0 cost per household per year Please tick your preferred option

1 Landscape character Enclosure

© Peak Park Joint Planning Board

© Derrick Riley 2 Landscape character Fields 3 Landscape character Reservoirs, plantations & mining

© Peak Park Joint Planning Board 4 Peat erosion & restoration

© Moors for the Future 5 Peat erosion & restoration ‘High effort’ gully blocking & moorland mosaic

© Moors for the Future 6 Valley bottom management ‘High effort’

© www.northpennines.org.uk 7 Valley bottom management ‘Low effort’

© Alistair Hamilton

© Martin Dallimer 8 Access Footpath erosion

Left: eroded, right: maintained © Moors for the Future Using long-term views to inform upland research, management & policy-making Althea Davies, School of Biological & Environmental Science, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, [email protected] Outline and objectives The main objective of the workshop is to introduce long-term environmental, ecological and management information as an additional tool for decision-making in research, management and policy, taking the uplands as a focus. Above-decadal records are informative because many research and management issues relate not only to current and future economic or environmental factors, but must also deal with the accumulated management and environmental legacies. Furthermore, many changes may take place too slowly to be visible over a single generation. Adding longer-term data to conservation and management approaches adds to the evidence-base for how ecosystems respond to change, can help identify critical thresholds, and define viable baselines and targets which are ecologically-effective and cost-effective.

Palaeoenvironmental datasets are the focus of this workshop, including long-term vegetation, land- use, erosion and climate change from analyses of pollen, plant macrofossil, charcoal and sediment sequences. Publications using these sources often incorporate unfamiliar terms and techniques, and deal with regional to millennial scales, making it difficult to transfer the information to other research disciplines, policy or practice. To bridge this gap, the workshop will: 1. inform you of the ways in which long-term data can be applied using case studies that present this longer perspective on an equal footing with familiar sources used in upland management; this will help overcome the difficulties imposed by differing analytical and publication styles; 2. assess how you value long-term data as a source to inform decision-making as this will help improve knowledge exchange and communication across disciplines and between research, practice and policy; the workshop will also introduce you to networks designed to link ecology and palaeoecology to facilitate any future enquiries and discussion.

Is there really a need for more information in upland management? In short, yes – given the range of environmental and economic pressures affecting upland ecosystems and livelihoods, and recent criticism of the quality of the evidence-base that shapes management and policy, and the lack of critical concern in conservation over finding the most effective measures (e.g. Sutherland et al. 2004, 2006, Stewart et al. 2005, Pullin & Knight 20091). The workshop provides an opportunity to become more familiar with long-term sources in a clear format at a time when the potential evidence-base is becoming ever more complex, with an increasingly diverse range of methods and information available to inform decision-making and best practice approaches. Secure knowledge of longer-term processes and trends can put 20th century studies and current targets in context (e.g. UK Biodiversity Action Plan, Water Framework Directive, Countryside Surveys) and inform projects looking to future needs, many of which call for longer-term perspectives (e.g. Defra Foresight Land-Use Futures and Peat Ecosystem Services project, Natural England’s Upland Vision project, Environment Agency-QUEST project on uplands and climate change, and RELU reports on future policy and management needs).

Workshop format The workshop focuses on the relative merits of four different sources of evidence which can inform our understanding of how upland ecosystems function and respond to change, and how management can improve resilience; these are outlined below. You will be asked to make a series of choices using differing combinations of these sources using a ‘choice experiment’ format. This method is used to value attributes which are unfamiliar or do not have an easily defined market value (e.g. environmental resources and ecosystem services). This is a simple matter of indicating your most and least preferred choice from a series of options offered in a clear format (known as a choice card) using long-term data as a decision-making tool in contexts that you are already familiar with. Please note that your responses will be treated anonymously in all analyses.

1 For references, see http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/documents/Workshop1_references.pdf Choice experiment 1 Choice experiment 1: generic information explaining the four sources of evidence You will be presented with outlines introducing the four sources of evidence. This is the information which you will be asked to use as the basis for making choices in the next section:

I. Ecological monitoring: This is the first line of evidence used to assess progress towards and ensure fulfilment of management targets, and consists of established sets of monitoring and assessment methods and criteria (e.g. Macdonald 2003). The frequency with which these criteria are applied varies with the objective of monitoring (e.g. 6-8 yr intervals between countryside surveys, 6 yr intervals for site condition monitoring [SCM] and annual monitoring for deer management agreements). For the purposes of this workshop, you are asked to consider how the following monitoring frequencies might affect management decisions, using SCM as the standard for comparison: a. Low frequency = every 12 years b. Moderate frequency = every 6 yrs c. High frequency = every 3 years

II. Ecological research: The range of sources under this broad heading seems to be ever-increasing, including such diverse fields as chemistry (e.g. dissolved organic carbon outputs from peatlands and their impacts on drinking water) and genetics (e.g. the impact of reduced genetic diversity and gene flow on the adaptive abilities of fragmented woodland populations), in addition to complex climate change modelling, predictive ecological modelling and more conventional long- term monitoring. Admittedly, not everyone involved in policy, management or practise may be required or able to keep abreast of this evidence at first hand, perhaps responding to new evidence once it becomes part of policy rather than taking ecological research directly into applied management, for example. Whatever your level of involvement in ecological research, for the purposes of this experiment, you are asked to consider how the following levels of information might influence policy and management relating to upland resources: a. Low level = no additional ecological information is sought; preference for this level expresses the opinion that the present knowledge is adequate for decision-making. Indicated by the option ‘none’ on choice cards. b. Moderate level = use of ecological monitoring, experiments or modelling to provide information over longer timescales, in more detail or for different taxonomic groups than is provided by the ecological monitoring approaches outlined above. Indicated by the option ‘core’ on choice cards. c. High level = widening the scope of ecological research to include additional techniques with a bearing on species to ecosystems processes (e.g. climate modelling, genetics, carbon chemistry). Indicated by the option ‘diverse’ on choice cards.

III. Long-term methods: Ecosystem responses to changes in environment or management often occur over long periods; for example, ecosystems may include long-lived taxa (e.g. trees with 50-500+ year lifespans) or have critical cycles which occur over centuries and millennia (e.g. carbon accumulation in peatlands). As a result, each generation of policy-makers, researchers and managers sees only a part of this picture. With the predicted speed and magnitude of climate change (Tallis 1998, Huntley & Baxter 2002), and budget/policy plans of just 1-5 years, we do not have the luxury of time to watch and adapt as changes unfold. Under these circumstances, is it sufficient to assume that the present is sufficiently representative and provides an adequate analogue for many biological processes? Long-term records can provide an additional source to broaden the evidence-base (e.g. Davies 2008). Determining whether current systems are stable or on an active change trajectory is a very useful first step for identifying conservation goals and designing cost-effective management plans. For example, long-term evidence indicates that the origins of many trends of conservation concern pre-date observational records and can challenge contemporary ideas about ecological communities. For example, over longer timescales, communities may be ephemeral and can form assemblages for which there are no NVC 2 Choice experiment 1 analogues; pollen, plant macrofossil and fossil insect studies show the presence of numerous species which are currently regionally extinct, so questioning the validity of baselines constructed from current communities and revealing a broader range of potential targets for conservation management than is evident from current communities. Such data allow an evidence-based assessment of naturalness, vulnerability, resilience, tipping points, the role of disturbance regimes and the status of rare, endangered or invasive species (Birks 1996, Bragg & Tallis 2001, Ellis & Tallis 2001, Gillson & Willis 2004, Dearing et al. 2006). They can identify natural (as opposed to climatically or culturally forced) ecosystem variability, alternate stable states and baseline conditions, and provide a mechanism for defining early warning signs of system thresholds or selecting indicator species for future monitoring (Swetnam et al. 1999, Parr et al. 2003, Willis et al. 2005, Willis & Birks 2006). You are asked to consider what level of long-term data (i.e. >50 years) is appropriate for informing management and policy decisions, and selecting methods or datasets to shape research: a. Low level = no inclusion/information. Indicated by the option ‘none’ on choice cards. b. Moderate level = using general level information (e.g. national syntheses) on the habitat/species of interest to understand the processes and drivers that shape current patterns, set appropriate baselines and predict likely trajectories of change. Indicated by the option ‘general’ on choice cards. c. High level = using region- or site-specific data on the habitat/species of interest to understand the processes and drivers that shape current characteristics, establish appropriate baselines and predict likely trajectories of change. Indicated by the option ‘specific’ on choice cards.

IV. Stakeholder preferences: The uplands provide a wide range of economic, social and environmental benefits, but it is difficult to place a market value on many of these ecosystem services and public goods. As a result, stakeholder involvement is increasingly being used to ensure that policies and management strategies recognise this range of benefits and represent value for money to taxpayers. Stakeholders may range from land owners and managers to residents, visitors and the general public. Preferences across this broad range will inevitably vary and different groups or issues may be tackled in different ways, depending on whether an acceptable strategy is being sought or is being implemented. For example, policy-makers may want to know what farmers preferences are in order to influence their actions and achieve management goals (e.g. through agri-environment schemes), or information on public preferences could be used to increase awareness of conservation issues in visitor centres. These represent a top-down approach. Alternatively, knowledge of preferences can be used to shape how management is designed (bottom–up approach). For instance, information on values held by the general public may be used to ensure that the desired amenities are provided (e.g. paths); willingness-to-pay may be used to generate payment schemes (e.g. car-parking charges to fund national parks or nature reserves), or farmers’ knowledge may be used to shape effective management methods and ensure that desired conservation goals are met. This experiment includes three possible levels of information on stakeholder preferences, and incorporates views expressed by land owners/managers, residents and the general public: a. Low level = management or policies are already decided and stakeholder preferences have no input or influence on what these are or how they are implemented. Indicated by the option ‘none’ on the choice cards. b. Moderate level = management or policies are already decided but knowledge of stakeholder preferences is used to design effective communication strategies for management/policy. Indicated by the option ‘top-down’ on the choice cards. c. High level = management/policy approaches are undecided and preferences are used to shape these goals or methods, i.e. establish what preferences are and use these to decide how policy/management is designed and/or implemented. Indicated by the option ‘bottom-up’ on the choice cards.

3 Choice experiment 1 V. Time cost: Altering current approaches inevitably incurs some costs. Since you are being asked to value various sources of evidence which do not have a market value and implementation costs for the different sources outlined above may vary widely depending on the particular context, you are asked to consider the time management costs involved in making choices about which evidence to use in decision-making. This cost refers to how much working time would be allocated within your organisation, not at a personal level, to explore any additional sources of information. This could involve gaining a basic understanding of additional sources, keeping abreast of developments in a wider range of fields, attending meetings to obtain or discuss additional evidence with relevant experts, or involvement in projects generating these additional forms of evidence – i.e. much as you may now have to accommodate meetings on new policies, establish working partnerships, assess reports from consultants or manage projects. The three levels for this experiment are: a. Low cost = 1 day/4 months or 1.25% b. Moderate cost = 1 day/month or 5% c. High cost = 1 day/week, or 20%

Case studies: You are asked to consider this evidence in the context of two case studies: the first relates to managing upland woodland regeneration and the second relates to peat- and moorland management. Each of these contexts is outlined before you are asked to make your choices. In terms of timeframe, please consider how the application of these sources may affect policy and management outcomes over the next 40-50 years, until 2050-2060, i.e. within the lifespan of many current policy-makers, researchers and managers.

4 Choice experiment 1 Case study 1: upland woodland values and habitat continuity Many upland woods show indications of ancient character and support semi-natural communities or species of national and international conservation value. However, their viability and ability to regenerate are threatened by population fragmentation, grazing pressures and climate change. The habitat forming the basis for this case study is a SSSI-designated woodland, dominated by mature trees and showing limited regeneration: saplings are stunted by grazing of deer and/or sheep, or regeneration is limited by dense ground cover, the invasion of bracken or, in some areas, rhododendron or beech. The only exceptions are more inaccessible steep slopes, rocky outcrops or within exclosures, the oldest of which are becoming difficult to access owing to dense regeneration of pioneer taxa like birch, rowan or ash, or dense understorey growth. In some areas where regeneration is occurring, the woods may be gradually shifting beyond designated boundaries. As a result, grazing levels, the effectiveness of fencing or other intervention methods are of concern in ensuring regeneration, reducing fragmentation and maintaining floristic and faunal values. Examples of this habitat include Atlantic oak/birchwoods and Scots pine woodland.

Using this information, you will now be asked to indicate your most and least preferred levels of evidence from each source outline above, in each case selecting from three alternative combinations presented as a ‘choice card’. Your responses will be treated anonymously in all analyses.

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 1 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 2 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 3 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

5 Choice experiment 1 NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 4 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 5 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 6 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 7 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 8 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

6 Choice experiment 1 NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 9 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 10 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 11 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 12 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 13 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

7 Choice experiment 1 NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred option

Choice card 14 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 15 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 16 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 17 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 18 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

8 Choice experiment 1 Case study 2: Peat- and moorland function and ecosystem services UK peat- and heathlands span a broad hydrological and climatic range, so this case study applies a broad definition encompassing drier, more southerly moors and oceanic wet bog and heaths, all of which are largely unenclosed and of international ecological significance. The extent and severity of grazing, burning, erosion and atmospheric pollution are concerns for policy and management, whether for conservation, the production of food, game or the provision of ecosystem services such as water supplies. Many policy, management and conservation objectives revolve around the leisure, biodiversity and, increasingly, carbon assets of moorland ecosystems and the extent to which uncertainties associated with subsidies, food production, energy provision and climate change will affect ecology and livelihoods. This reflects the significance of moors as a cultural landscape and their increasing importance as a provider of varied ecosystem services.

Once again, please make a series of choices regarding your most and least preferred combination of sources for decision-making.

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 1 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 2 Source Alternative 1 Alternative Alternative 3 2 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 3 Source Alternative Alternative 2 Alternative 3 1 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

9 Choice experiment 1 NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 4 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 5 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 6 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 7 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 8 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

10 Choice experiment 1 NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 9 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 10 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 11 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 12 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 13 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

11 Choice experiment 1 NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 14 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 15 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 16 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 17 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 18 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

12 Choice experiment 2

Choice experiment 2: specific information for each case study In the previous section, you were given rather general information on each of the four sources. You will now be provided with information that is specific to each of the case studies before being asked to make choices based on how important you feel it is to include this sort of information in order to ensure a sound evidence base or achieve sustainable management.

Case study 1: upland woodland values and habitat continuity I. Ecological monitoring: Common Standards Monitoring methods are applied to deal with concerns over woodland regeneration and fragmentation, especially monitoring levels of grazing and assessing appropriate deer management strategies to improve regeneration and maintain or improve habitat quality. Options on the choice cards are: a. Low frequency = every 12 years b. Moderate frequency = every 6 yrs c. High frequency = every 3 years

II. Ecological research: The presence of saplings indicates that many of these upland woods have the potential to regenerate, but this is suppressed by grazing, ground cover and lack of light, so mechanisms that create gaps and allow light to reach saplings and enhance growth rates may be required before this potential will be realised (Scott et al. 2000, Palmer & Truscott 2003, Palmer et al. 2004). Grazing exclusion alone shows limited success and even complete removal of ungulates is unlikely to result in widespread regeneration due to slow sapling growth under a mature canopy. Recognition of these factors has resulted in a shift from minimal intervention to managed disturbance in Abernethy pinewood to promote regeneration and expansion, and maintain mosaics suited to black grouse and capercaillie (Amphlett 2003, Midgley 2007). The reintroduction of disturbance mechanisms like coppicing or pollarding could promote continued viability in Atlantic oakwoods by improving light penetration and age/size-class structure (Palmer et al. 2004). Since forest regeneration can only be achieved at densities considered too low for reliable stalking, managing deer density to secure regeneration will incur considerable costs for both sporting and conservation management (Smart et al. 2008). These will require a reduction in stalking income and enclosure for extended periods due to the slow growth rate of some hardwood species: estimates of the time required for pine regeneration to grow above deer browsing height range from 20 to >35 years (Bullock et al. 1998, Amphlett 2003, Palmer & Truscott 2003, Palmer et al. 2005). In addition to these practical issues, there are also broader factors to be considered. Pine lies at the southern limits of boreal forest in the Scottish Highlands, while oak reaches its northern limits there, suggesting that both are likely to be affected by climate change. Based on UKCIP02 climate projections, increased summer temperatures are likely to allow pine to expand, while increased winter temperatures may lead to pinewood loss (Figure 1). There is some uncertainty over the likely impact of climate change on oak. Under low and high emissions scenarios for the 2050s, it is predicted that areas suitable for Atlantic oakwoods will contract, especially in the far west (Broadmeadow & Ray 2005, Hall & Stone 2005, cf. Brewer et al. 2005). However, warmer winters (with fewer frosts) or summer drought may allow oak to become established in pinewoods, with implications for pine regeneration (Crawford 2001, 2008, Ray 2008). The longevity of trees like oak and pine means that adaptation will lag behind climate change. For instance, the redistribution of adapted pine genotypes could take as much as 13 generations for long-term adaptation to predicted climate change (Rehfeldt et al. 2002). Habitat fragmentation associated with climate change will also threaten the viability of bird populations (Huntley et al. 2008). Choice experiment 2

Figure 1: Comparison of possible contrasting changes in distribution of Pinus sylvestris with varying climate conditions as compared with the temperature regime from 1961- 1990. (a) Winter 4C colder, summer 4C warmer, (b) winter 4C warmer, summer 4C colder. Note the retreat from western Europe with the imposition of warmer winters. The colour key relates to the probability of occurrence of pine (from Crawford 2008).

Options on the choice cards are: a. Low level = no additional ecological information is sought. b. Moderate level = core ecological approaches. c. High level = diverse disciplinary approaches.

III. Long-term data: Woodlands were widespread in the uplands, forming the pre-moorland landscape and reaching their maximum extent around 5000 years ago (Figure 2), although dates for major woodland contractions vary from as early as 8800 years ago in the Western Isles, to 4400 years ago in Highland Scotland, and around 2500 years ago in southern Scotland, northern England and the Pennines, for example (Tipping 1994, Bennett et al. 1997, Huntley et al. 1997, Dark 2000, Simmons 2003). Consequently, thousands of years have passed since many upland areas supported more extensive woodland networks and this affects the viability of expansion and restoration objectives Climate change, human disturbance and soil development (especially peat formation) were the main drivers of past woodland loss. To predict how these factors affect the viability of key conservation objectives, such as the development of self-sustaining woodland networks, it is essential to have data which spans more than a single generation of trees (Willis 1993, Amphlett 2003, Hall & Stone 2005). For instance, the predicted increase in seasonal extremes of temperature and rainfall (IPCC 2007, UKCIP02) may allow trees to colonise mire surfaces,

14 Choice experiment 2

as has occurred in the past, although none of these past colonisation phases lasted for more than one or two tree generations owing to subsequent climatic change (Bridge et al. 1990, Gear & Huntley 1991, Tipping et al. 2008). This may require compromise between woodland and peatland management objectives: should openness be an over-riding objective in peatland management or should tree growth be seen as a transitory stage which is part of wider ecosystem dynamics (Chambers 1997, 2001, Wilkinson 2001, Legg et al. 2003)? In the past, drier conditions have also allowed oak to gain ground at the expense of pine, so a conservation or management preference for pine may require the removal of competing species (Lageard et al. 1999, Crawford 2001, Davies 2003, Davies & Smith 2003, Tipping et al. 2006). By contrast, increased rainfall and exposure could cause stress and mortality: such conditions contributed to major woodland contractions in the past, especially in pine and this knowledge can be used to assess whether conservation expenditure will produce the desired results over timescales required for tree regeneration (Gear & Huntley 1991, Clark 2003, Tipping et al. 2006, 2008, Tipping 2008).

Figure 2. Reconstructed distribution of woodland across the British Isles 5000 years ago (from Bennett 1989).

Focussing now on current semi-natural woods, many are fragmented and have regenerated in their present locations since major prehistoric range contractions, thus showing long-term continuity at a catchment scale. However, at a stand-scale, many areas have reverted from woods to openings during successive generations of natural and managed regeneration (O’Sullivan 1973, Kerslake 1982, Smout et al. 2005, Shaw & Tipping 2006). This shows the need for flexibility within management targets and the need to monitor and plan beyond artificial boundaries created by site-based designations, including compromises that may have to be made when valued open communities are invaded by or encroach into woods. Human activity may have contributed to woodland

15 Choice experiment 2

losses, but it has also ensured the survival and shaped the current composition of many valued upland woods. Consequently, some distinctive and internationally important assemblages have no long history. For instance, some Atlantic woodland assemblages formed as a result of changes in land-use and woodland management between 100-200 years ago (Birks 1993, Sansum 2005). Consequently, the mature trees in these woods developed under radically different disturbance regimes to current conditions, and apparently natural features, like a predominance of oak or pine, are a recent phenomenon resulting from neglect following centuries of management (O’Sullivan 1977, Birks 1993, 1996, Davies & Smith 2003, Sansum 2005, Shaw & Tipping 2006). From a short-term perspective, a lack of management may appear the norm, but limited disturbance and the retention of mono-dominant stands may in fact be contributing to poor regeneration, as is evident in analyses of recruitment and mortality in pinewoods (Edwards & Mason 2006). It will take many decades and more flexible conservation aims if near-natural woods are desired. Alternatively, long-term data show that management need not be incompatible with woodland diversity or continuity (Sansum 2005). Options on the choice cards are: a. Low level = no information is sought. b. Moderate level = general information is used, e.g. national-scale changes in woodland abundance. c. High level = specific data are used, e.g. Atlantic oakwoods.

IV. Stakeholder preferences: In terms of landscape values and preferences for change, some residents and general public expressed a willingness-to-pay (WTP) for current conditions, but more often both locals and visitors were WTP to protect and/or moderately increase tree cover, especially broadleaved, native and ancient semi-natural woodlands which were more closely associated with higher recreational and biodiversity value (Willis & Garrod 1993, Bullock & Kay 1997, Gourlay & Slee 1998, Hanley et al. 1998, 2007, 2009, Macmillan & Duff 1998, Lee 2001, Price et al. 2002, Willis et al. 2003). Overall, landscape diversity and heterogeneity were more highly valued than a dominance of forested or abandoned land, which residents associated with negative livelihood prospects (Bullock & Kay 1997, Soliva et al. 2008). Many upland areas have a distinctive landscape character but public perceptions of their ‘specialness’ do not automatically mean that a landscape should be kept as it is. For instance, greater awareness that woodland cover has changed or has been perceived differently over time reduces residents’ and visitors’ preference for keeping the landscape as it is now and increases their willingness to accept future landscape change (Hanley et al. 2009). Residents’ knowledge of their area can inform policy and management strategies and provide a more strategic approach to achieving conservation and socio-economic objectives. Residents, particularly farmers, observed that approaches advocated by agri- environmental schemes do not always provide the intended environmental benefits and fail to appreciate the extent to which management underpins the values for which SSSIs are designated (Johnston & Soulsby 2006). This knowledge can help redress the shortage of data to assess the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes or conservation policy (Carey et al. 2003, Kleijn & Sutherland 2003, Stewart et al. 2005). Options on the choice cards are: a. Low level = no input or influence. b. Moderate level = top-down approach. c. High level = bottom-up approach.

16 Choice experiment 2

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 1 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 2 Source Alternative 1 Alternative Alternative 3 2 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 3 Source Alternative Alternative 2 Alternative 3 1 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 4 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 5 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

17 Choice experiment 2

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 6 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 7 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 8 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 9 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 10 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

18 Choice experiment 2

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 11 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 12 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 13 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 14 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 15 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

19 Choice experiment 2

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 16 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 17 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 18 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

20 Choice experiment 2

Case study 2: Peat- and moorland function and ecosystem services I. Current ecological monitoring: These reflect current concerns over management impacts on hydrology, water quality, C storage, biodiversity and ecosystem services, thus requiring grazing management and routine monitoring to meet existing targets, especially relating to burning, monitoring and management of grass and bracken invasion. This is in addition to restoration initiatives such as drain blocking, stabilisation and re-vegetation of bare peat. Options on the choice cards are: a. Low frequency = every 12 years b. Moderate frequency = every 6 yrs c. High frequency = every 3 years

II. Research data: Peatlands store huge quantities of carbon (C), with implications for management and climate change. Management has a key role in mediating C stocks since vegetation shifts have a strong impact on C sequestration and are largely controlled by management (Belyea & Malmer 2004, Worrall et al. 2007). There has been a significant increased in the extent of burning in some parts of the English uplands since the 1970s and, while the median repeat time of 20 years is in line with conservation recommendations (Yallop et al. 2006), experimental evidence suggests that rotational burning every 10 years can lead to reduced C accumulation rates on blanket peat (Garnett et al. 2000). Even though the large extent of rotationally burned heather may be unique to UK and Ireland (Hobbs & Gimingham 1987, Thompson et al. 1995, Holden et al. 2007b), the evidence- base remains insufficient to generate robust burning recommendations (Stewart et al. 2005, Yallop et al. 2006). This has serious implications for the sustainability of current practices, particularly as recommended heathland grazing densities may also be set too high to maintain this habitat (Pakeman & Nolan 2009). Climate change will further compound management impacts on peatlands. C loss is likely to be greater under a combination of warmer and drier conditions, with potentially marked impacts arising from summer droughts and severe fires (Moore 2002). Peatlands located on the southern limits of UK blanket bog distribution are likely to be particularly vulnerable as extensive degradation renders them less resilient to drought (Worrall et al. 2006b). Wetter conditions will not necessarily have the opposite impact, since increased precipitation in oceanic regions is predicted to inhibit peat formation and C sequestration, while enhancing emission of methane (CH4), which is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (CO2) (Belyea & Malmer 2004). Efforts to ‘optimise’ land-use and management cannot achieve or balance all aims (e.g. biodiversity, C storage, greenhouse gas budgets, ecosystem services): particular functions or values may need to be prioritised. For example, where current management efforts focus on drain and grip blocking to raise water-tables and restore hydrological integrity and peat growth, it is risky to over-emphasise C sequestration as a primary peatland function since waterlogging actually enhances the release of CH4 (Worrall & Evans, unpubl.). Options on the choice cards are: a. Low level = no additional ecological information is sought. b. Moderate level = core ecological approaches. c. High level = diverse disciplinary approaches.

III. Long-term data: Because the carbon cycle has a long equilibrium time, current peatlands may be responding to past perturbations, while the consequences of actions taken now will persist for centuries (Scholes 1999, cited in Dawson & Smith 2006). A retrospective view demonstrates that accumulated climatic and management impacts strongly affect current moorlands. For instance, the loss of heather and spread of grasses recorded over the last c.50-100 years (e.g. Anderson & Yalden 1981, Thompson et al. 1995, Tudor & Mackey

21 Choice experiment 2

1995) represents a continuation of trends which began in the late 18th-19th centuries largely due to intensified grazing combined with burning, air pollution, drainage and climate change (e.g. Stevenson & Thompson 1993, Mackay & Tallis 1996, Chambers et al. 1999, 2007, Tipping 2000, Yeloff et al. 2006, Dodgshon & Olsson 2006, Davies & Dixon 2007, Hughes et al. 2007). Current communities may thus provide an inappropriate baseline for sustainable management or conservation. In addition, not all current heather dominance has a long history: grasses were part of the dynamic heather mosaic on many current grass moors before this balance was disrupted by erosion, drainage, pollution and Sphagnum loss; such knowledge can temper and broaden restoration goals (Chambers et al. 1999, 2007). The same applies to burning, which has increased in some moorland catchments over the last c.100-250 years (Rhodes & Stevenson 1997), not just over the course of the late 20th century (e.g. Yallop et al. 2006). Based on past responses, even modest climate change is likely to cause significant drying in Sphagnum carpets on raised mires over the next 100 years (Charman 1997, Mauquoy & Yeloff 2008). Extreme weather events are likely to be particularly damaging as extreme deluges, droughts, exposure and prolonged snow-lie caused peat and soil erosion from northern Scotland to the southern Pennines between c.1100 and 1850 (Stevenson et al. 1990, Ballantyne 1991, Rhodes & Stevenson 1997, Curry 2000, Higgitt et al. 2001, Ballantyne & Morrocco 2006, Morrocco et al. 2007, Mills & Warburton unpublished, cited in Holden et al. 2007a). Many such factors are predicted to increase in the future, including the incidence of wildfires, intense downpours, more severe droughts and lowered water-tables (Mackay & Tallis 1996, Charman 1997, Mackay 1997, Tallis 1998, Chiverrell 2006, Worrall et al. 2006b, Yeloff et al. 2006, Malby et al. 2007). Remedial management (drain blocking, tree felling) may reverse a small component of mire drying, but efforts to raise water-tables may not be effective against long-term climate change, especially summer droughts (Charman et al. 2004, Hendon & Charman 2004, Worrell et al. 2006b, IPCC 2007). Increased wetness will not necessarily favour peat expansion or C storage as wetter/colder conditions in the past have reduced C accumulation by reducing plant growth or by increasing CH4 emissions (Mauquoy et al. 2002, 2004). Furthermore, peat acidification and climate change (especially increased wetness) may increase the release of heavy metals sequestered by peat through centuries of atmospheric pollution, so delaying or even counteracting recovery from pollution (Yang et al. 2001, Rose et al. 2004, Fowler & Battarbee 2005, Kernan et al. 2005, Rothwell et al. 2005, 2007b, Dawson & Smith 2006, Holden et al. 2007b). This may already be evident in ecological monitoring (e.g. Ormerod & Durance 2009). Such knowledge can improve predictions and interpretation of monitoring data to detect amplified pollution risks and climatic influences. Options on the choice cards are: a. Low level = no information is sought. b. Moderate level = general information is used. c. High level = specific data are used.

IV. Stakeholder preferences: Residents and visitors most frequently expressed a WTP for the conservation of open heather moors and semi-natural broadleaved woodland, with lower rankings for wild flowers and hay meadows (Willis & Garrod 1993, Bullock et al. 1998, White & Lovett 1999, Hanley et al.1998, 2007). In general, the protection of drystone walls and stone barns was ranked less highly than other landscape features, although this differed between regions (Gourlay & Slee 1998, Hanley et al. 2007). Increased provision of paths is more popular with visitors (Gourlay & Slee 1998). The value placed on biodiversity and naturalness is hard to measure, although many visitors and residents felt that there was ‘wild land’ in Scotland’s mountains, associated with remoteness, solitude and a lack of roads and plantations (Habron 1998, Willis et al. 2003, Christie et al. 2006).

22 Choice experiment 2

Locals and visitors prefer the current landscape and ‘business as usual’ management, or higher agri-environmental priorities where upland farming is maintained to achieve environmental and conservation objectives (Willis & Garrod 1993, Hanley et al. 2007, Soliva et al. 2008). However, residents, particularly farmers, observed that approaches advocated by agri-environmental schemes do not always provide the intended environmental benefits (Johnston & Soulsby 2006). For example, some destocking has led to extensive bracken growth rather than heather communities and competition studies show that warmer climates give bracken a competitive advantage, so the current approach of removing grazing is not certain to provide public goods desired when climate change is factored in (Werkman & Callaghan 2002, Burton et al. 2005). Locals do not support land management wholly by or for conservation and a strong policy shift towards management for conservation could threaten the provision of environmental benefits and public goods, and risk the attrition of social capital, cultural heritage, local knowledge and genetic diversity (e.g. local breeds) because many landowners are concerned about the loss of social values associated with a shift away from productivism (Price et al. 2002, Burton 2004, Soliva et al. 2008). Offering greater financial incentives to adopt more active environmental management may be a cost-effective approach where non-market benefits of wildlife conservation outweigh the costs of existing conservation schemes involving farmers (e.g. Macmillan et al. 2004, Hynes & Hanley 2009). Abandonment is not supported by residents or public: land managers regard it as a loss of cultural heritage, while the public are unwilling to pay higher taxes for this outcome (Burton 2004, Hanley et al. 2007, Solvia et al. 2008). Options on the choice cards are: a. Low level = no input or influence. b. Moderate level = top-down approach. c. High level = bottom-up approach.

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 1 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 2 Source Alternative 1 Alternative Alternative 3 2 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

23 Choice experiment 2

Choice card 3 Source Alternative Alternative 2 Alternative 3 1 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 4 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 5 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 6 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 7 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

24 Choice experiment 2

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 8 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 9 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 10 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 11 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 12 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

25 Choice experiment 2

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 13 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

Choice card 14 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

Choice card 15 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 16 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Ecological research Core None Diverse Long-term research None General Specific Stakeholder preferences Bottom-up Top-down None Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months Choices:

Choice card 17 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 6 yrs Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Ecological research Diverse Core None Long-term research Specific None General Stakeholder preferences None Bottom-up Top-down Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month Choices:

26 Choice experiment 2

NB Make TWO CHOICES on each card: your most [1] & least [X] preferred options

Choice card 18 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring Every 3 yrs Every 12 yrs Every 6 yrs Ecological research None Diverse Core Long-term research General Specific None Stakeholder preferences Top-down None Bottom-up Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week Choices:

27 Feedback

Feedback form A few final questions – to indicate your area of expertise and help evaluate how clear and informative this experiment is. Your expertise/area of interest: † Moorland or peatlands † Woodland † Neither: …………………………………………………………………………… Are you a: † Policy-maker † Ecologist – governmental agency † Ecologist – NGO † Researcher: discipline?…………………………………………………………… What is your previous experience of long-term sources?…………………………………… ……………………………...………………………………………………………………… …………………………….………………………………………………………………… Approximately how long did it take you to complete the choice experiment?...... ………….. Clarity of information: † Too complex † Rather simple † Rather complex † Too simple † Clear Comments:…………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………...…………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… How do you think the information presented in this document is best disseminated? † Email – i.e. as you have seen it † Workshop – with a presentation giving an example of long-term data applied to management and opportunities to ask questions and discuss the topic further. Any other comments to improve the clarity and usefulness of the workshop:…………….. …………………………………………………………………………………..…………… ………………………………………………………………………………….…………… If you are interested in being involved or kept updated on future developments on the use of long-term records, please fill in your contact details:…………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………... Thank you, Althea Using long-term evidence to inform upland research, management & policy- making: references

Amphlett, A. (2003) Contexts, developing ideas and emerging issues in the conservation management of the RSPB Abernethy Forest Reserve, Botanical Journal of Scotland 55, 135-148. Anderson, P. & Yalden, D.W. (1981) Increased Sheep Numbers and the Loss of Heather Moorland in the Peak District, England, Biological Conservation 20, 195- 213. Ballantyne, C.K. (1991) Holocene geomorphic activity in the Scottish Highlands, Scottish Geographical Magazine 107, 84-98. Ballantyne, C.K. & Morrocco, S.M. (2006) Scottish landform example 38: The windblown sands of An Teallach, Scottish Geographical Journal 122, 149-159. Belyea, L.R. & Malmer, N. (2004) Carbon sequestration in peatland: patterns and mechanisms of response to climate change, Global Change Biology 10, 1043-1052. Bennett, K.D. (1989) A provisional map of forest types for the British Isles 5000 years ago, Journal of Quaternary Science 4, 141-144. Bennett, K.D., Bunting, M.J. & Fossitt, J.A. (1997) Long-term vegetation change in the Western and Northern Isles, Scotland, Botanical Journal of Scotland 49, 127- 140. Birks, H.J.B. (1993) Quaternary palaeoecology and vegetation science - current contributions and possible future developments, Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 79, 153-177. Birks, H.J.B. (1996) Contributions of Quaternary palaeoecology to nature conservation, Journal of Vegetation Science 7, 89-98. Bragg, O.M. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) The sensitivity of peat-covered upland landscapes, Catena 42, 345-360. Brewer, S., Hely-Alleaume, C., Cheddadi, R., de Beaulieu, J.L., Laurent, J.M. & Le Cuziat, J. (2005) Postglacial history of Atlantic oakwoods: Context, dynamics and controlling factors, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 41-57. Bridge, M.C., Haggart, B.A. & Lowe, J.J. (1990) The history and palaeoclimatic significance of subfossil remains of Pinus sylvestris in blanket peats from Scotland, Journal of Ecology 78, 77-99. Broadmeadow, M. & Ray, D. (2005) Climate change and British woodland, Information Note, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh. Bullock, C.H. & Kay, J. (1997) Preservation and Change in the Upland Landscape: The Public Benefits of Grazing Management, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 40, 315-334. Bullock, C.H., Elston, D.A. & Chalmers, N.A. (1998) An application of economic choice experiments to a traditional land use - deer hunting and landscape change in the Scottish Highlands, Journal of Environmental Management 52, 335-351. Burton, R.J.F. (2004) Seeing through the ‘good farmer’s’ eyes: towards developing an understanding of the social symbolic value of ‘productivist’ behaviour, Sociologia Ruralis 44, 195-215. Burton, R., Mansfield, L., Schwarz, G., Brown, K. & Convery, I. (2005) Social capital in hill farming. Report for the Upland Centre, International Centre for the Uplands, Cumbria. Carey, P.D., Short, C., Morris, C., Hunt, J., Priscott, A., Davis, M., Finch, C., Curry, N., Little, W., Winter, M., Parkin, A. & Firbank, L.G. (2003) The multi-disciplinary evaluation of a national agri-environment scheme, Journal of Environmental Management, 69, 1, 71-91. Chambers, F.M. (1997) Bogs as treeless wastes: the myth and the implications for conservation, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Oxford, 168-175. Chambers, F.M. (2001) When are trees natural on bogs? in Management of water and trees on raised bogs, S. Whild, R. Meade & J. Daniels, eds., English Nature Research Reports 407, English Nature, Peterborough, 21-25. Chambers, F.M., Mauquoy, D. & Todd, P.A. (1999) Recent rise to dominance of Molinia caerulea in environmentally sensitive areas: new perspectives from palaeoecological data, Journal of Applied Ecology 36, 719-733. Chambers, F.M., Mauquoy, D., Gent, A., Pearson, F., Daniell, J.R.G. & Jones, P.S. (2007) Palaeoecology of degraded blanket mire in South Wales: data to inform conservation management, Biological Conservation 137, 197-209. Charman, D.J. (1997) Peatland palaeoecology and conservation, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Oxford, 65-73. Charman, D.J., Brown, A.D., Hendon, D. & Karofeld, E. (2004) Testing the relationship between Holocene peatland palaeoclimate reconstructions and instrumental data at two European sites, Quaternary Science Reviews 23, 137-143. Chiverrell, R. (2006) Past and future perspectives upon landscape instability in Cumbria, northwest England, Regional Environmental Change 6, 101-114. Christie, M., Hanley, N., Warren, J., Murphy, K., Wright, R., & Hyde, T. (2006) Valuing the diversity of biodiversity, Ecological Economics 58, 304-317. Clark, S.H.E. (2003) Insect faunas associated with the fossil remains of Pinus sylvestris L. in blanket peat from northeast Scotland, Scottish Geographical Journal 119, 39-52. Crawford, R.M.M. (2001) Plant community responses to Scotland's changing environment, Botanical Journal of Scotland 53, 77-105. Crawford, R.M.M. (2008) Plants at the Margin: Ecological Limits and Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Curry, A.M. (2000) Holocene reworking of drift-mantled hillslopes in Glen Docherty, northwest Highlands, Scotland, The Holocene 10, 509-518. Dark, P. (2000) The environment of Britain in the first millennium AD, Duckworth, London. Davies, A. (2003) Torran Beithe: Holocene history of a blanket peat landscape, in The Quaternary of Glen Affric and Kintail, Tipping, R.M., ed., Quaternary Research Association, London, 41-48. Davies, A. (2008, updated 2009) Review of the historical environmental changes in the UK uplands relevant to management and policy. Project output from RELU interdisciplinary fellowship, www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/documents/ upland_history_08.pdf. Davies, A.L. & Dixon, P. (2007) Reading the pastoral landscape: palynological and historical evidence for the impacts of long-term grazing on Wether Hill, Cheviot foothills, Northumberland, Landscape History 30, 35-45. Davies, A.L. & Smith, M.A. (2003) More questions than answers? High resolution pollen records as a tool for conservation management at Ledmore and Migdale Woods, Sutherland, unpublished conference presentation available from www.woodland-trust.org.uk/publications/publicationsmore/ conferencepaperpollen.pdf. Dawson, J.J.C. & Smith, P. (2006) Review of carbon loss from soil and its fate in the environment, final report for Defra project SP08010, downloaded from http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/Project_Data/DocumentLibrary/SP08010/SP08010 _4200_FRP.doc Dearing, J.A., Battarbee, R.W., Dikau, R., Larocque, I. & Oldfield, F. (2006) Human- environment interactions: learning from the past, Regional Environmental Change 6, 1-16. Dodgshon, R.A. & Olsson, G.A. (2006) Heather moorland in the Scottish Highlands: the history of a cultural landscape, 1600-1880, Journal of Historical Geography 32, 21-37. Edwards, C. & Mason, W.L. (2006) Stand structure and dynamics of four native Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) woodlands in northern Scotland, Forestry 79, 261-277. Ellis, C.J. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) Climatic control of peat erosion in a North Wales blanket mire, New Phytologist 152, 313-324. Fowler, D & Battarbee, R. (2005) Climate change and pollution in the mountains: the nature of change, in Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, D.B.A., Thompson, M.F. Price & C.A. Galbraith, eds., The Stationery Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 71-88. Garnett, M.H., Ineson, P. & Stevenson, A.C. (2000) Effects of burning and grazing on carbon sequestration in a Pennine blanket bog, UK, The Holocene 10, 729-736. Gear, A.J. & Huntley, B. (1991) Rapid changes in the range limits of Scots pine 4000 years ago, Science 251, 544-547. Gillson, L. & Willis, K.J. (2004) ‘As Earth’s testimonies tell’: wilderness conservation in a changing world, Ecology Letters 7, 990-998. Gourlay, D. & Slee, B. (1998) Public preferences for landscape features: A case study of two Scottish environmentally sensitive areas, Journal of Rural Studies 14, 249- 263. Habron, D. (1998) Visual perception of wild land in Scotland, Landscape and Urban Planning 42, 45-56. Hall, J. & Stone, D. (2005) Overall biodiversity and the spatial patterns of Atlantic oakwoods, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 115-118. Hanley, N., Macmillan, D., Wright, R.E., Bullock, C., Simpson, I., Parsisson, D. & Crabtree, B. (1998) Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland, Journal of Agricultural Economics 49, 1, 1-15. Hanley, N., Colombo, S., Mason, P. & Johns, H. (2007) The reform of support mechanisms for upland farming: paying for public goods in the severely disadvantaged areas of England. Journal of Agricultural Economics 58, 433-453. Hanley, N., Ready, R., Colombo, S., Watson, F., Stewart, M. & Bergmann, E. A. (2009) The impacts of knowledge of the past on preferences for future landscape change, Journal of Environmental Management 90, 1404-1412. Hendon, D. & Charman, D.J. (2004) High-resolution peatland water-table changes for the past 200 years: the influence of climate and implications for management, The Holocene 14, 125-134. Higgitt, D.L., Warburton, J. & Evans, M.L. (2001) Sediment transfer in upland environments, in Geomorphological Processes and Landscape Change: Britain in the last 1000 years, D.L. Higgitt & E.M. Lee, eds., Blackwell, Oxford, 190-214. Hobbs, R.J. & Gimingham, C.H. (1987) Vegetation, fire and herbivore interactions in heathland, Advances in Ecological Research 16, 87-173. Holden, J., Chapman, P., Evans, M., Hubacek, K., Kay, P. & Warburton, J. (2007a) Vulnerability of organic soils in England and Wales, final technical report to DEFRA and Countryside Council for Wales, DEFRA Project SP0532, CCW contract FC 73-03-275, downloaded from http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/Project_Data/DocumentLibrary/SP0532/SP0532_5 213_TRP.pdf Holden, J., Shotbolt, L., Bonn, A., Burt, T.P., Chapman, P.J., Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E.D.G., Hubacek, K., Irvine, B., Kirkby, M.J., Reed, M.S., Prell, C., Stagl, S., Stringer, L.C., Turner, A. & Worrall, F. (2007b) Environmental change in moorland landscapes, Earth-Science Reviews 82, 75-100. Hughes, P.D.M., Lomas-Clarke, S.H., Schulz, J. & Jones, P. (2007) The declining quality of late-Holocene ombrotrophic communities and the loss of Sphagnum austinii (Sull. ex Aust.) on raised bogs in Wales, The Holocene 17, 613-625. Huntley, B. & Baxter, R. (2002) Climate change and wildlife conservation in the British uplands, in The British Uplands: Dynamics of Change, T.P. Burt, D.B.A. Thompson & J. Warburton, eds., JNCC Report No. 319, 41-47. Huntley, B., Daniell, R.G. and Allen, J.R.M. (1997) Scottish vegetation history: the Highlands, Botanical Journal of Scotland 49, 163-175. Huntley, B., Collingham, Y. C., Willis, S. G. & Green, R. E. (2008) Potential Impacts of Climatic Change on European Breeding Birds, PLoS ONE, 3, e1439. Hynes, S. & Hanley, N. (2009) The Crex crex lament: Estimating landowners’ willingness to pay for corncrake conservation on Irish farmland, Biological Conservation 142, 180-188. IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller, eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, downloaded from http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm Johnston, E. & Soulsby, C. (2006) The role of science in environmental policy: an examination of the local context, Land Use Policy 23, 161-169. Kernan, M., Rose, N.L., Camarero, L., Piña, B. & Grimalt, J. (2005) Contemporary and historical pollutant status of Scottish mountain lochs, in D.B.A. Thompson, M.F. Price, & Galbraith, C.A. (eds.) Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, The Stationary Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 89-98. Kerslake, P.D. (1982) Vegetational History of Wooded Islands in Scottish Lochs, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cambridge. Kleijn, D. & Sutherland, W.J. (2003) How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? Journal of Applied Ecology 40, 947-969. Lageard, J.G.A., Chambers, F.M. & Thomas, P.A. (1999) Climatic significance of the marginalization of Scotls pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) c.2500 BC at White Moss, south Cheshire, UK, The Holocene 9, 321-331. Lee, T.R. (2001) Perceptions, Attitudes and Preferences in Forests and Woodlands, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, Technical Paper 18. Legg, C., McHaffie, H., Amphlett, A. & Worrell, R. (2003) in Restoring Natura Forest Habitats, Caledonian Partnership, Highland Birchwoods, Munlochy, 12-18. Macdonald, A.J. (2003) Assessing the quality of plant communities in the uplands. Botanical Journal of Scotland 55, 111-123. Mackay, A.W. (1997) Peat erosion: some implications for conservation and management of blanket mires and heather moorland in the UK, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Wallingford, 82-87. Mackay, A.W. & Tallis, J.H. (1996) Summit-type blanket mire erosion in the forest of Bowland, Lancashire, UK: Predisposing factors and implications for conservation, Biological Conservation 76, 31-44. Macmillan, D., Hanley, N. & Daw, M. (2004) Costs and benefits of wild goose conservation in Scotland, Biological Conservation 119, 475-485. MacMillan, D. C. & Duff, E. I. (1998) Estimating the non-market costs and benefits of native woodland restoration using the contingent valuation method, Forestry 71, 247-259. Malby, A.R., Whyatt, J.A., Timmis, R.J., Wilby, R.L. & Orr, H.G. (2007) Long-term variations in orographic rainfall: analysis and implications for upland catchments, Hydrological Sciences Journal-Journal des Sciences Hydrologiques 52, 276-291. Mauquoy, D., Engelkes, T., Groot, M.H.M., Markesteijn, F., Oudejans, M.G., van der Plicht, J. & van Geel, B. (2002) High-resolution records of late-Holocene climate change and carbon accumulation in two north-west European ombrotrophic peat bogs, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 186, 275-310. Mauquoy, D., van Geel, B., Blaauw, M., Speranza, A. & van der Plicht, J. (2004) Changes in solar activity and Holocene climatic shifts derived from 14C wiggle- match dated peat deposits, The Holocene 14, 45-52. Mauquoy, D. & Yeloff, D. (2008) Raised peat bog development and possible responses to environmental changes during the mid- to late-Holocene. Can the palaeoecological record be used to predict the nature and response of raised peat bogs to future climate change? Biodiversity and Conservation 17, 2139-2151. Midgley, A.C. (2007) The social negotiation of nature conservation policy: conserving pinewoods in the Scottish Highlands, Biodiversity and Conservation 16, 3317-3332. Moore, P.D. (2002) The future of cool temperate bogs, Environmental Conservation 29, 3-20. Morrocco, S.M., Ballantyne, C.K., Spencer, J.Q.G. & Robinson, R.A.J. (2007) Age and significance of aeolian sediment reworking on high plateaux in the Scottish Highlands, The Holocene 17, 349-360. O'Sullivan, P.E. (1973) Pollen analysis of Mor humus layers from a native Scots pine ecosystem, interpreted with surface samples, Oikos 24, 259-272. O'Sullivan, P.E. (1977) Vegetation history and the native pinewoods, in Native Pinewoods of Scotland, R.G.H. Bunce & J.N.R. Jeffers, eds., ITE, Cambridge, 60- 69. Ormerod, S.J. & Durance, I. (2009) Restoration and recovery from acidification in upland Welsh streams over 25 years, Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 164-174. Pakeman, R.J. & Nolan, A.J. (2009) Setting sustainable grazing levels for heather moorland: a multi-site analysis, Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 363-368. Palmer, S.C.F., Mitchell, R.J., Truscott, A.M. & Welch, D. (2004) Regeneration failure in Atlantic oakwoods: the roles of ungulate grazing and invertebrates, Forest Ecology and Management 192, 251-265. Palmer, S., Truscott, A.M., Mitchell, R. & Welch, D. (2005) Regeneration in Atlantic oakwoods: has deer management had a beneficial effect? Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 167-178. Palmer, S.C.F. & Truscott, A.-M. (2003) Browsing by deer on naturally regenerating Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and its effects on sapling growth, Forest Ecology and Management 182, 31-47. Parr, T.W., Sier, A.R.J., Battarbee, R.W., Mackay, A. & Burgess, J. (2003) Detecting environmental change: science and society - perspectives on long-term research and monitoring in the 21st century, Science of the Total Environment 310, 1-8. Price, M.F., Dixon, B.J., Warren, C.R. & Macpherson, A.R. (2002) Scotland’s Mountains: key issues for their future management, Scottish Natural Heritage, Battleby. Pullin, A.S. & Knight, T.M. (2009) Doing more good than harm - Building an evidence-base for conservation and environmental management, Biological Conservation 142, 931-934. Ray, D. (2008) Impacts of climate change on forests and forestry in Scotland, Forestry Commission Scotland, Roslin. Rehfeldt, G.E., Tchebakova, N.M., Parfenova, Y.I., Wykoff, W.R., Kuzmina, N.A., & Milyutin, L.I. (2002) Intraspecific responses to climate in Pinus sylvestris, Global Change Biology 8, 912-929. Rhodes, N. & Stevenson, T. (1997) Palaeoenvironmental evidence for the importance of fire as a cause of erosion of British and Irish blanket peats, in Blanket Mire Degradation: causes, consequences and challenges, J.H. Tallis, R. Meade & P.D. Hulme, eds., Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen, 64-78. Rose, N., Monteith, D., Kettle, H., Thompson, R., Yang, H. & Muir, D. (2004) A consideration of potential confounding factors limiting chemical and biological recovery at Lochnagar, a remote mountain loch in Scotland, Journal of Limnology 63, 63-76. Rothwell, J.J., Robinson, S.G., Evans, M.G., Yang, J. & Allott, T.E.H. (2005) Heavy metal release by peat erosion in the Peak District, southern Pennines, UK, Hydrological Processes 19, 2973-2989. Rothwell, J.J., Evans, M.G., Liddaman, L.C. & Allott, T.E.H. (2007) The role of wildfire and gully erosion in particulate Pb export from contaminated peatland catchments in the southern Pennines, U.K, Geomorphology 88, 276-284. Sansum, P. (2005) Argyll oakwoods: use and ecological change, 1000 to 2000 AD – a palynological-historical investigation, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 83-97. Scott, D., Welch, D., Thurlow, M. & Elston, D.A. (2000) Regeneration of Pinus sylvestris in a natural pinewood in NE Scotland following reduction in grazing by Cervus elaphus, Forest Ecology and Management 130, 199-211. Shaw, H. & Tipping, R. (2006) Recent pine woodland dynamics in east Glen Affric, northern Scotland, from highly resolved palaeoecological analyses, Forestry 79, 331-340. Simmons, I.G. (2003) The Moorlands of England and Wales: an environmental history 8000 BC-AD 2000. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Smart, J.C.R., White, P.C.L., & Termansen, M. (2008) Modelling conflicting objectives in the management of a mobile ecological resource: Red deer in the Scottish Highlands, Ecological Economics 64, 881-892. Smout, T.C., MacDonald, A.R. & Watson, F. (2005) A history of the native woodlands of Scotland, 1500-1920, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Soliva, R., Ronningen, K., Bella, I., Bezak, P., Cooper, T., Flo, B.E., Marty, P. & Potter, C. (2008) Envisioning upland futures: Stakeholder responses to scenarios for Europe's mountain landscapes, Journal of Rural Studies 24, 56-71. Stevenson, A.C. & Thompson, D.B.A. (1993) Long-term changes in the extent of heather moorland in upland Britain and Ireland: palaeoecological evidence for the importance of grazing, The Holocene 3, 70-76. Stevenson, A.C., Jones, V.J. & Battarbee, R.W. (1990) The cause of peat erosion - a paleolimnological approach, New Phytologist 114, 727-735. Stewart, G.B., Coles, C.F. & Pullin, A.S. (2005) Applying evidence-based practice in conservation management: Lessons from the first systematic review and dissemination projects, Biological Conservation 126, 270-278. Sutherland, W.J., Pullin, A.S., Dolman, P.M. & Knight, T.M. (2004) The need for evidence-based conservation, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19, 305-308. Sutherland, W.J., Armstrong-Brown, S., Armsworth, P.R., Brereton, T., Brickland, J., Campbell, C.D., Chamberlain, D.E., Cooke, A.I., Dulvy, N.K., Dusic, N.R., Fitton, M., Freckleton, R.P., Godfray, H.C.J., Grout, N., Harvey, H.J., Hedley, C., Hopkins, J.J., Kift, N.B., Kirby, J., Kunin, W.E., Macdonald, D.W., Marker, B., Naura, M., Neale, A.R., Oliver, T., Osborn, D., Pullin, A.S., Shardlow, M.E.A., Showler, D.A., Smith, P.L., Smithers, R.J., Solandt, J.L., Spencer, J., Spray, C.J., Thomas, C.D., Thompson, J., Webb, S.E., Yalden, D.W. & Watkinson, A.R. (2006) The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK, Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 617-627. Swetnam, T.W., Allen, C.D. & Betancourt, J.L. (1999) Applied historical ecology: using the past to manage for the future, Ecological Applications 9, 1189-1206. Tallis, J.H. (1998) Growth and degradation of British and Irish blanket mires, Environmental Reviews 6, 81-122. Thompson D.B.A., MacDonald A.J., Marsden J.H. & Galbraith C.A. (1995) Upland heather moorland in Great Britain: a review of international importance, vegetation change and some objectives for nature conservation, Biological Conservation 71, 163-178. Tipping, R. (1994) The form and fate of Scotland's woodlands, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 124, 1-54. Tipping, R. (2000) Palaeoecological approaches to historical problems: a comparison of sheep-grazing intensities in the Cheviot hills in the medieval and later periods, in Townships to Farmsteads: Rural Settlement Studies in Scotland, England and Wales, J. Atkinson, I. Banks & G. MacGregor, eds., British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 293, 130-143. Tipping, R. (2008) Blanket peat in the Scottish Highlands: timing, cause, spread and the myth of environmental determinism, Biodiversity and Conservation 17, 2097- 2113. Tipping, R., Davies, A. & Tisdall, E. (2006) Long-term woodland dynamics in West Glen Affric, northern Scotland, Forestry 79, 351-359. Tipping, R., Ashmore, P., Davies, A. L., Haggart, A., Moir, A., Newton, A., Sands, R., Skinner, T. & Tisdall E. (2008) Prehistoric Pinus woodland dynamics in an upland landscape in northern Scotland: the roles of climate change and human impact, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 17, 251-267. Tudor, G. & Mackey, E.C. (1995) Upland land cover change in post-war Scotland, in Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, D.B.A. Thompson, A.J. Hester & M.B. Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 28-42. Werkman, B. & Callaghan, T. (2002): Responses of bracken and heather to increased temperature and nitrogen addition, alone and in competition, Basic Applied Ecology 3, 267–276. White, P. C. L. & Lovett, J. C. (1999) Public preferences and willingness-to-pay for nature conservation in the North York Moors National Park, UK, Journal of Environmental Management 55, 1-13. Wilkinson, D.M. (2001) An open place? A contribution to the discussion on trees on British mires, in Management of water and trees on raised bogs, S. Whild, R. Meade, & J. Daniels, eds., English Nature Research Reports 407, English Nature, Peterborough, 19-20. Willis, K., Garrod, G., Scarpa, R., Powe, N., Lovett, A., Bateman, I.J., Hanley, N. and Macmillan, D.C. (2003) The social and environmental benefits of forests in Great Britain, Phase 2. Report to the Forestry Commission. Centre for Research in Environmental Appraisal and Management, University of Newcastle. Willis, K.G. & Garrod, G.D. (1993) Valuing Landscape: a Contingent Valuation Approach, Journal of Environmental Management 37, 1-22. Willis, K.J. (1993) How old is ancient woodland? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 8, 427-428. Willis, K.J. & Birks, H.J.B. (2006) What is natural? The need for a long-term perspective in biodiversity conservation, Science 314, 1261-1265. Willis, K.J., Gillson, L., Brncic, T.M. & Figueroa-Rangel, B.L. (2005) Providing baselines for biodiversity measurement, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20, 107- 108. Worrall, F., Burt, T.P. & Adamson, J.K. (2006) Trends in drought frequency - The fate of DOC export from British peatlands, Climatic Change 76, 339-359. Worrall, F., Armstrong, A. & Adamson, J.K. (2007) The effects of burning and sheep- grazing on water table depth and soil water quality in a upland peat, Journal of Hydrology 339, 1-14. Yallop, A.R., Thacker, J.I., Thomas, G., Stephens, M., Clutterbuck, B., Brewer, T. & Sannier, C.A.D. (2006) The extent and intensity of management burning in the English uplands, Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 1138-1148. Yang, H., Rose, N.L., Boyle, J.F. & Battarbee, R.W. (2001) Storage and distribution of trace metals and spheroidal carbonaceous particles (SCPs) from atmospheric deposition in the catchment peats of Lochnagar, Scotland, Environmental Pollution 115, 231-238. Yeloff, D.E., Labadz, J.C. & Hunt, C.O. (2006) Causes of degradation and erosion of a blanket mire in the southern Pennines, UK, Mires and Peat 1, 1-18.

The upland evidence-base: are we using the best information for making decisions in a changing environment?

Are we really making the most effective use of the different sources of evidence available to understand how upland ecosystems function and how they, and as a consequence we, are likely to have to adapt to changes brought about by climatic and management shifts?

Recent reviews have criticised the quality of the evidence upon which current conservation practice is based, concluding that ‘tradition’, anecdote and ad hoc monitoring, rather than scientific evidence, often shape decision-making; this is due to a shortage of strategies for evaluating the effectiveness of current practice and ensuring the accessibility of scientific evidence [1-5]1. This hinders advances in the scientific data which underpin decision-making, with a danger that ineffective and damaging practices will continue to be employed, thus failing to achieve ecological objectives and wasting limited economic resources. It also has potentially severe consequences in the context of climatic and economic uncertainty, particularly in sensitive upland ecosystems which we rely on for a wide range of ecosystem services [6-7]. Consequently, there is a real and pressing need to create more adaptive and anticipatory science-practice-policy frameworks.

Adaptation requires a secure evidence-base, flexibility and foresight [8-10]: in particular, the flexibility to ‘horizon-scan’ and consider sources of evidence which have the potential to contribute to adaptive management, but which currently lie outside established frameworks. To assess the possible benefits of incorporating additional, relevant sources of evidence, this exercise will: 1. Introduce long-term environmental, ecological and management information as an additional tool for decision-making in research, management and policy, taking the uplands as a focus. 2. Provide a first quantitative assessment of how long-term data are regarded relative to more familiar sources in a way that overcomes barriers to knowledge exchange which currently limit their accessibility, and so improve future communication. This will be done by using case studies to present long-term evidence on an equal footing with other sources which are established or increasing contributors to the upland evidence-base.

How does it work and what is your role? This experiment focuses on the relative merits of four different sources of evidence relating to how upland ecosystems function and respond to change, and how research, policy and management decisions can improve resilience: (1) ecological monitoring, (2) ecological research, (3) long-term research, and (4) collaboration with stakeholders.

You will be provided with information from each of these four sources and then asked to select how these insights might be combined to create a sound evidence-base for building research knowledge, informing policy, or improving ‘best practice’, depending on your perspective and expertise. This will be done using a ‘choice experiment’ format: this method is used to value attributes which are unfamiliar or do not have an easily defined market value, like ecosystem services. You will be asked to indicate your most and least preferred choice from a series of options after reading the information provided to inform your choice.

1 References and further copies of this experiment or a Woodland Case Study version can be downloaded from: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/index.html.

Case study on peat- and moorland function & ecosystem services

Case study: Consider how the information presented below might influence research, policy or management in the following case study: Many of the largely unenclosed peat- and moorlands in the UK have internationally-recognised ecological and conservation significance. They are also very sensitive to changes in climate, pollution and management, particularly burning and grazing. Such factors have contributed to the historic loss of heather moorlands and spread of coarse grasses, like Molinia and Nardus, and have caused severe erosion in some areas [7]. Significantly, there is continuing uncertainty over what constitutes ‘best practice’ in many management criteria, with concerns over the longer-term efficacy and sustainability of conservation and management decisions [3, 11-12]. This is reflected, for instance, in the transition from policies advocating peatland drainage and afforestation to improve productivity, to substantial expenditure aimed at drain-blocking and restoring hydrological integrity. Management complexities also extend far beyond moors, as is evident from carbon (C) management and water quality debates. British peatlands store nearly 30 times more C than the amount contained in all vegetation – both forest and non-forest – in Britain, and most of this is concentrated in the uplands [13-14]. This C store is sensitive to and may exacerbate climate change should peatlands become a source rather than a sink, while atmospheric pollutants may be contributing to vegetation degradation [15]. The release of carbon from eroding and desiccated peats is already causing substantial water treatment costs. These issues reflect the significance of moors as a cultural landscape and their importance as a provider of varied ecosystem services. There is an acknowledged need for research, policy and management approaches that combine an understanding of social and natural processes in order to deal with uncertainties for ecology and livelihoods associated with agricultural subsidies, food production, energy provision and climate change [7].

I. Ecological monitoring: This is the first line of evidence used to assess progress towards and fulfilment of management objectives, and provides long-term networks for monitoring trends and understanding the impacts and possible causes of environmental change. The strength of such programmes lies in the use of consistent protocols and centralised collation of data, with longer datasets revealing trends and relationships not detectable over shorter time-frames, e.g. due to biological lags, biogeochemical cycles) and masked by inter-annual variability [16-18]. Monitoring frequency depends on the objectives, e.g. 3-9 yr intervals for Environmental Change Network (ECN) vegetation surveys, 6-9 yr intervals between Countryside Surveys (CS), 6 yr intervals for site condition monitoring (SCM), and annually for deer management agreements. Both site condition monitoring and large-scale monitoring networks reveal major changes in upland environments and moorland vegetation, with strong management implications. The first common standards monitoring report indicates that upland heathlands are in poor condition, with 48% categorised as unfavourable on the basis of SSSI features, rising to 57% based on Natura 2000 criteria [19]. Over-grazing, followed by burning, are the most common causes of unfavourable condition in most upland habitats. For bogs, Common Standards Monitoring and Countryside Survey results indicate that unfavourable hydrological conditions, a lack of conservation management or reduced management and disturbance are responsible for habitat deterioration. In addition, there have been major reductions in upland species richness, particularly an increase in competitive species at the expense of stress-tolerant and/or ruderal species, and an increase in the grass:forb ratio in dwarf-shrub heath and bog over the period 1998-2007, indicating reduced disturbance [20]. Tackling the spread and persistence of generalist species and changes in pH and nutrient availability are major management issues. Increased nutrient availability, through nitrogen (N) deposition, is thought to threaten infertile upland habitats, although recent monitoring results suggest that species loss in acid grass- and heathland may be driven more by acidification than eutrophication [21-22]. Mitigation of N deposition should thus be targeted to habitat type. The graminoid:forb ratio appears to be the best indicator of N deposition impacts and could be relatively easy to incorporate into site condition monitoring programmes [23]. Compared with consistent trends towards rising temperatures (particularly at upland sites), rainfall and soil pH, there are few common trends in plant attributes, suggesting that much semi-natural vegetation is resistant to change and slow to respond [18], with implications for the sensitivity of vegetation-based monitoring systems. Using 6 yrs as an approximate average vegetation survey interval for comparison, consider how the following monitoring frequencies might affect research needs, management or policy decisions: a. Every 12 years b. Every 6 yrs c. Every 3 years

2

II. Ecological research: Peatlands store approximately a third of global terrestrial carbon (C) stocks. Management has a key role in mediating C stores since vegetation shifts strongly influence C sequestration and are largely controlled by management [24-25]. However, what constitutes ‘good practice’ in management is often unclear. This has serious implications for the sustainability of current practices. For instance, the large extent of rotationally burned heather may be unique to the UK and Ireland [7, 26-27], but the evidence-base remains insufficient to generate robust burning recommendations [4, 28-29]. Recent work suggests that recommended heathland grazing densities may also be set too high [30]. Moors provide a wide range of ecosystem services, so minimising uncertainty is particularly critical for meeting these multiple objectives. For instance, experimental evidence suggests that rotational burning every 10 years can reduce C accumulation rates on blanket peat [31], even though this is in line with conservation recommendations. As a result, efforts to optimise land-use and management cannot achieve all aims (e.g. biodiversity, C storage, greenhouse gas budgets, ecosystem services). Modelling suggests that current management paradigms may not achieve their aim of restoring historically degraded moorland over the coming century when climate change is factored in [32]. C loss is likely to be greater under warmer and drier conditions, particularly with increased likelihood of summer droughts and severe fires [33]. More southerly UK blanket peats are especially vulnerable as extensive degradation renders them less resilient to drought and current management regimes, particularly heather burning, may be further intensifying peat decomposition and C loss [34-35]. Drier and stormier conditions may also increase water treatment costs in order to remove organic carbon and industrially-derived heavy metals which are released from peat through erosion and desiccation [34, 36]. Warmer temperatures may exacerbate heather loss, grass spread and peat degradation when combined with grazing stress and the impacts of N deposition [15, 32, 37]. However, wetter conditions will not necessarily have the opposite impact, as increased precipitation in oceanic regions is predicted to cause the expansion of hollows, so inhibiting peat formation and C sequestration, while enhancing emission of methane (CH4), which is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (CO2) [24]. In mediating these impacts, management is likely to have more immediate impacts on less degraded areas and particular functions or values will need to be prioritised. Consider how the following sources of ecological information might influence these ecosystems, and research, policy and management relating to them: a. None: no additional ecological information is sought; present knowledge is adequate for decision- making. b. Monitoring programmes, experiments, modelling and additional techniques are essential to provide more detailed (e.g. taxonomic groups, gene flow, carbon chemistry) or broader (e.g. catchment-scale) information to complement ecological monitoring.

III. Long-term data: Because many ecosystem processes operate over long periods, each generation of policy-makers, researchers and managers sees only part of the process and the origins of many current trends may pre-date ecological records. By working on ecosystem rather than human timescales, longer-term data allow an evidence-based assessment of naturalness, vulnerability, resilience, the role of disturbance regimes and status of rare, endangered or invasive species [38-42]. In combination with ecological data, this can help separate natural from cultural drivers of variability, define effective indicators, baselines and early warning signs [43-46]. Longer-term datasets demonstrate that accumulated climatic and management impacts strongly affect current moorland composition and dynamics. For instance, the loss of heather and spread of grasses recorded over the last c.50-100 years [27, 47-48] represents a continuation of trends which began in the late 18th-19th centuries. These have been driven by intensified grazing combined with burning, air pollution, drainage and climate change [49-57]. Similarly, burning has increased in some moorland catchments over the last c.100-250 years, not just over the course of the late 20th century [28, 58]. Longer term insights can thus help broaden restoration goals and indicate where recent trends and current communities may provide inappropriate baselines. As our experience of climate impacts is limited, past responses can aid anticipation of and planning for potential future threats. For example, even modest climate change is likely to cause significant drying in Sphagnum carpets on raised mires over the next 100 years [59-60]. Remedial management (drain blocking, tree felling) may reverse a small component of mire drying, but efforts to raise water-tables may not be effective against long-term climate change, especially summer droughts [34, 61-62]. The predicted increase in seasonal extremes of temperature and rainfall may also allow trees to colonise mire surfaces. This occurred in the past, but these colonisation phases lasted for one or two tree generations (c.400 yrs) at most, owing to subsequent climatic change [63- 65]. Tree growth could thus be considered a transitory and biodiverse stage within natural upland dynamics. Bog woods can have high conservation value, rather than requiring eradication in the mistaken belief that bogs ‘should’ be treeless [66-69]. Climate change, especially increased wetness 3

and storminess, may increase the release of heavy metals sequestered by peat through centuries of atmospheric pollution, so delaying or even counteracting recovery from pollution [36, 70-72]. This may already be evident in ecological monitoring [73], indicating where long-term information can improve interpretation of causes behind monitoring trends to understand amplified pollution risks caused by climate change. Consider how the following levels of long-term data (>50 years) might influence upland management and policy decisions, and research agendas: a. None: no long-term data is sought; present knowledge is adequate for decision-making. b. Syntheses of data on the habitat/species of interest are appropriate for understanding processes and drivers that shape current patterns, recognising trajectories of change and setting appropriate baselines. c. Region- or site-specific data on the habitat/species of interest is appropriate to understand the processes and drivers that shape current characteristics, recognise trajectories of change and establish appropriate baselines.

IV. Stakeholder preferences: Involving stakeholders can help ensure that policies and management strategies recognise the range of ecosystem goods and services provided by the uplands and represent value for money to taxpayers. This method therefore has the potential to provide a more integrated approach to conservation effectiveness and cost efficiency. For example, residents and visitors frequently express willingness-to-pay (WTP) for the conservation of open heather moors and semi-natural broadleaved woodland, while increased provision of paths is popular with visitors [74- 79]. The value placed on ‘naturalness’ is hard to measure, but many visitors and residents associate ‘wild land’ with remoteness, solitude and a lack of roads and plantations [80-82]. A general increase in awareness of environmental issues does not always extend to particular habitats (e.g. peatlands, Natura sites), indicating that public awareness campaigns, particularly aimed at locals and frequent visitors, could increase support for conservation initiatives [83-84]. Knowledge of stakeholder landscape values and environmental awareness could thus ensure that public ecosystem values are maintained and increase support for existing conservation objectives. As the main mechanism for delivering ecosystem services and environmental benefits across much of the UK uplands, the support of land-owners and -managers is critical for achieving current objectives. Locals and visitors prefer current landscapes and management, or higher agri- environmental priorities where upland farming is maintained to achieve environmental and conservation objectives [74, 79, 85]. Offering greater financial incentives to adopt more active environmental management may be cost-effective where the non-market benefits (e.g. recreation, broader agri-environment benefits) of wildlife conservation outweigh the costs of existing conservation schemes involving farmers [86-87]. However, a strong policy shift towards management for conservation could threaten the provision of environmental benefits and public goods, and risk the attrition of cultural heritage, local knowledge and genetic diversity (e.g. local breeds) due to local resistance towards land management wholly for conservation [85, 88-89]. Collaboration using residents’ knowledge of their area can inform policy and management strategies and provide a strategic approach to achieving conservation and socio-economic objectives. Residents, particularly farmers, have observed that approaches advocated by agri-environmental schemes do not always provide the intended environmental benefits, e.g. some destocking has led to extensive bracken growth rather than the recovery of heather communities, and competition studies show that warmer climates give bracken a competitive advantage, so the current approach of removing grazing is not certain to provide public goods desired when climate change is factored in [90-91]. Local knowledge can thus help redress the shortage of data needed to assess the effectiveness of agri-environment and conservation policies [1, 4, 93]. Consider how the following levels of information on stakeholder preferences and knowledge might contribute to the upland evidence-base, policy and management: a. None: research agendas, management or policies are already decided and stakeholder preferences are unnecessary for determining their content or implementation. b. Guidance: research, policy or management needs are pre-determined, but stakeholder knowledge/ preferences are used to effectively implement these strategies or design acquisition strategies for desired research data. c. Collaboration: research agendas, management or policy approaches are determined through stakeholder engagement to shape and implement policy, practice and research agendas.

V. Time cost: Altering established approaches inevitably incurs costs. Consider the time management costs involved in incorporating different sources of data to strengthen the evidence-base underpinning research agendas, policy and management decisions. This could involve gaining a basic

4

understanding of additional sources, keeping abreast of developments in a wider range of fields, attending meetings to obtain or discuss additional evidence with relevant experts, or involvement in projects generating these additional forms of evidence, i.e. much as you may now have to accommodate meetings on new policies, establish working partnerships, assess reports from consultants or manage projects. This cost relates to how much working time would be allocated within your organisation, not at a personal level: a. 1 day/4 months (1.25%) b. 1 day/month (5%) c. 1 day/week (20%)

Summary of peatland and moorland goals: To establish an evidence-base which allows critical evaluation of ’best practice’ in grazing and burning management in order to support moorland function, biodiversity and upland livelihoods, whilst also recognising the wider ecosystem services provided by moors, including water and renewable energy provision, carbon storage, and recreation.

Making your choices: • Based on the information you have just read, which of the 3 alternatives presented on each choice card below will help strengthen the evidence-base for building research knowledge, informing policy, or improve ‘best practice’ in practical conservation terms, depending on your perspective and expertise. • Which combination do you consider to be least effective? • Consider all of the attributes offered when making your choices: the experiment is designed to examine all possible combinations of information, so some options may seem ‘odd’. • Consider how this evidence would affect the habitat dynamics over the next 40-50 years, i.e. within the lifespan of many current policy-makers, researchers and managers.

Choice card 1 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & based data collection & Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary broader disciplinary contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, None: present Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/week 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

5

Choice card 2 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 6 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on Syntheses of data on None: present Long-term research variability, processes & variability, processes & knowledge is adequate drivers of change drivers of change Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement implementation implementation knowledge is adequate Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/week 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 3 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 6 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, None: present Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/week 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 4 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 3 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change None: present Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement knowledge is adequate implementation knowledge is adequate Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/month 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

6

Choice card 5 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 12 yrs None: present None: present None: present Ecological research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/week 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 6 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on None: present None: present Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate drivers of change Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/month 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 7 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 12 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on Syntheses of data on None: present Long-term research variability, processes & variability, processes & knowledge is adequate drivers of change drivers of change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/month 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

7

Choice card 8 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific data on variability, None: present data on variability, Long-term research processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 9 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & based data collection & Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary broader disciplinary contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on None: present data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/month 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 10 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 12 yrs None: present None: present None: present Ecological research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/4 months 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

8

Choice card 11 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change None: present None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 12 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) None: present None: present None: present Long-term research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 13 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 12 yrs 3 yrs None: present None: present None: present Ecological research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on Syntheses of data on data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & variability, processes & processes & drivers of drivers of change drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

9

Choice card 14 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific data on variability, None: present data on variability, Long-term research processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/4 months 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 15 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, None: present Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate drivers of change change Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement implementation implementation knowledge is adequate Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 16 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on None: present data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option 10

Choice card 17 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on None: present None: present Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate drivers of change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option Choice card 18 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 3 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & based data collection & Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary broader disciplinary contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on None: present None: present Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate drivers of change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/4 months 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

And finally, a few questions to indicate your background/perspective and level of knowledge of the fields used in this experiment:

1. Are you a: † Policy-maker † Ecologist – governmental agency † Ecologist – NGO † Researcher - discipline: † Practitioner

2. Please rate your level of expertise/experience in each of the fields as defined in this experiment, using a scale of 1 (no knowledge or experience) to 10 (my field of expertise): Ecological monitoring:

11

Ecological research: Long-term research: Stakeholder involvement:

Name and contact details (optional) – note that your responses will be treated in confidence and presented anonymously in all analyses and publications.

Name:

Address/contact:

Thank you for your time – please let me know if you would like to be contacted further about this work or hear about the results. Any further comments would be appreciated. Please send completed forms to Dr Althea Davies at [email protected] or School of Biological & Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland UK.

12

The upland evidence-base: are we using the best information for making decisions in a changing environment?

References: peatland case study1

1. Kleijn, D. & Sutherland, W.J. (2003) How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? Journal of Applied Ecology 40, 947-969. 2. Pullin, A.S., Knight, T.M., Stone, D.A. & Charman, K. (2004) Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Biological Conservation 119, 245-252. 3. Sutherland, W.J., Pullin, A.S., Dolman, P.M. & Knight, T.M. (2004) The need for evidence-based conservation, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19, 305-308. 4. Stewart, G.B., Coles, C.F. & Pullin, A.S. (2005) Applying evidence-based practice in conservation management: Lessons from the first systematic review and dissemination projects, Biological Conservation 126, 270-278. 5. Gaston, K.J., Charman, K., Jackson, S.F., Armsworth, P.R., Bonn, A., Briers, R.A., Callaghan, C.S.Q., Catchpole, R., Hopkins, J., Kunin, W.E., Latham, J., Opdam, P., Stoneman, R., Stroud, D.A. & Tratt, R. (2006) The ecological effectiveness of protected areas: The United Kingdom, Biological Conservation 132, 76-87. 6. Hulme, P.E. (2005) Adapting to climate change: is there scope for ecological management in the face of a global threat? Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 784. 7. Holden, J., Shotbolt, L., Bonn, A., Burt, T.P., Chapman, P.J., Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E.D.G., Hubacek, K., Irvine, B., Kirkby, M.J., Reed, M.S., Prell, C., Stagl, S., Stringer, L.C., Turner, A. & Worrall, F. (2007b) Environmental change in moorland landscapes, Earth-Science Reviews 82, 75-100. 8. Sutherland, W.J., Bailey, M.J., Bainbridge, I.P., Brereton, T., Dick, J.T.A., Drewitt, J., Dulvy, N.K., Dusic, N.R., Freckleton, R.P., Gaston, K.J., Gilder, P.M., Green, R.E., Heathwaite, A.L., Johnson, S.M., Macdonald, D.W., Mitchell, R., Osborn, D., Owen, R.P., Pretty, J., Prior, S.V., Prosser, H., Pullin, A.S., Rose, P., Stott, A., Tew, T., Thomas, C.D., Thompson, D.B.A., Vickery, J.A., Walker, M., Walmsley, C., Warrington, S., Watkinson, A.R., Williams, R.J., Woodroffe, R. & Woodroof, H.J. (2008) Future novel threats and opportunities facing UK biodiversity identified by horizon scanning, Journal of Applied Ecology 45, 821-833. 9. Pullin, A.S. & Knight, T.M. (2009) Doing more good than harm - Building an evidence-base for conservation and environmental management, Biological Conservation 142, 931-934. 10. Sutherland, W.J. & Woodroof, H.J. (2009) The need for environmental horizon scanning, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24, 523-527. 11. Sutherland, W.J. (2006) Predicting the ecological consequences of environmental change: a review of the methods, Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 599-616. 12. Heller, N.E. & Zavaleta, E.S. (2009) Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: A review of 22 years of recommendations, Biological Conservation 142, 14-32. 13. Cannell, M.G., Dewar, R.C. & Pyatt, D.G. (1993) Conifer plantations on drained peatlands in Britain: a net gain or loss of carbon? Forestry 66, 353-369. 14. Milne, R. & Brown, T.A. (1997) Carbon in the vegetation and soils of Great Britain, Journal of Environmental Management 49, 413-433. 15. Britton, A.J., Pearce, I.S.K., & Jones, B. (2005) Impacts of grazing on montane heath vegetation in Wales and implications for the restoration of montane areas, Biological Conservation 125, 515- 524. 16. Macdonald, A.J. (2003) Assessing the quality of plant communities in the uplands. Botanical Journal of Scotland 55, 111-123. 17. Firbank, L.G., Barr, C.J., Bunce, R.G.H., Furse, M.T., Haines-Young, R., Hornung, M., Howard, D.C., Sheail, J., Sier, A., & Smart, S.M. (2003) Assessing stock and change in land cover and biodiversity in GB: an introduction to Countryside Survey 2000, Journal of Environmental Management 67, 207-218. 18. Morecroft, M.D., Bealey, C.E., Beaumont, D.A., Benham, S., Brooks, D.R., Burt, T.P., Critchley, C.N.R., Dick, J., Littlewood, N.A., Monteith, D.T., Scott, W.A., Smith, R.I., Walmsley, C. & Watson, H. (2009) The UK Environmental Change Network: Emerging trends in the composition of plant and animal communities and the physical environment, Biological Conservation 142, 2814-2832.

1 Copies of this experiment and a Woodland Case Study version can be downloaded from: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/index.html 19. Williams, J.M., ed. (2006) Common Standards Monitoring for Designated Sites: First Six Year Report, JNCC, Peterborough. 20. Countryside Survey (2007c) UK results from 2007, chapter 7: Mountain, moor and heath, CEH/NERC, pp. 68-84. 21. Smart, S.M., Bunce, R.G.H., Marrs, R., Leduc, M., Firbank, L.G., Maskell, L.C., Scott, W.A., Thompson, K. & Walker, K.J. (2005) Large-scale changes in the abundance of common higher plant species across Britain between 1978, 1990 and 1998 as a consequence of human activity: tests of hypothesised changes in trait representation, Biological Conservation124, 355-371. 22. Maskell, L.C., Smart, S.M., Bullock, J.M., Thompson, K. & Stevens, C.J. (in press), Nitrogen deposition causes widespread loss of species richness in British habitats, Global Change Biology. 23. Stevens, C.J., Maskell, L.C., Smart, S.M., Caporn, S.J. M., Dise, N.B. & Gowing, D.J.G. (2009) Identifying indicators of atmospheric nitrogen deposition impacts in acid grasslands, Biological Conservation 142, 2069-2075. 24. Belyea, L.R. & Malmer, N. (2004) Carbon sequestration in peatland: patterns and mechanisms of response to climate change, Global Change Biology 10, 1043-1052. 25. Worrall, F., Armstrong, A. & Adamson, J.K. (2007) The effects of burning and sheep-grazing on water table depth and soil water quality in a upland peat, Journal of Hydrology 339, 1-14. 26. Hobbs, R.J. & Gimingham, C.H. (1987) Vegetation, fire and herbivore interactions in heathland, Advances in Ecological Research 16, 87-173. 27. Thompson D.B.A., MacDonald A.J., Marsden J.H. & Galbraith C.A. (1995) Upland heather moorland in Great Britain: a review of international importance, vegetation change and some objectives for nature conservation, Biological Conservation 71, 163-178. 28. Yallop, A.R., Thacker, J.I., Thomas, G., Stephens, M., Clutterbuck, B., Brewer, T. & Sannier, C.A.D. (2006) The extent and intensity of management burning in the English uplands, Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 1138-1148. 29. Newton, A.C., Stewart, G.B., Myers, G., Diaz, A., Lake, S., Bullock, J.M., & Pullin, A.S. (2009) Impacts of grazing on lowland heathland in north-west Europe, Biological Conservation 142, 935- 947. 30. Pakeman, R.J. & Nolan, A.J. (2009) Setting sustainable grazing levels for heather moorland: a multi-site analysis, Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 363-368. 31. Garnett, M.H., Ineson, P. & Stevenson, A.C. (2000) Effects of burning and grazing on carbon sequestration in a Pennine blanket bog, UK, The Holocene 10, 729-736. 32. Chapman, D.S., Termansen, M., Quinn, C.H., Jin, N., Bonn, A., Cornell, S.J., Fraser, E.D.G., Hubacek, K., Kunin, W.E., & Reed, M.S. (2009) Modelling the coupled dynamics of moorland management and upland vegetation, Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 278-288. 33. Moore, P.D. (2002) The future of cool temperate bogs, Environmental Conservation 29, 3-20. 34. Worrall, F., Burt, T.P. & Adamson, J.K. (2006) Trends in drought frequency - The fate of DOC export from British peatlands, Climatic Change 76, 339-359. 35. Yallop, A.R. & Clutterbuck, B. (2009) Land management as a factor controlling dissolved organic carbon release from upland peat soils 1: Spatial variation in DOC productivity, Science of the Total Environment 407, 3803-3813. 36. Rothwell, J.J., Robinson, S.G., Evans, M.G., Yang, J. & Allott, T.E.H. (2005) Heavy metal release by peat erosion in the Peak District, southern Pennines, UK, Hydrological Processes 19, 2973- 2989. 37. Britton, A.J., Beale, C.M., Towers, W. & Hewison, R.L. (2009) Biodiversity gains and losses: Evidence for homogenisation of Scottish alpine vegetation, Biological Conservation 142, 1728- 1739. 38. Birks, H.J.B. (1996) Contributions of Quaternary palaeoecology to nature conservation, Journal of Vegetation Science 7, 89-98. 39. Bragg, O.M. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) The sensitivity of peat-covered upland landscapes, Catena 42, 345-360. 40. Ellis, C.J. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) Climatic control of peat erosion in a North Wales blanket mire, New Phytologist 152, 313-324. 41. Gillson, L. & Willis, K.J. (2004) ‘As Earth’s testimonies tell’: wilderness conservation in a changing world, Ecology Letters 7, 990-998. 42. Dearing, J.A., Battarbee, R.W., Dikau, R., Larocque, I. & Oldfield, F. (2006) Human-environment interactions: learning from the past, Regional Environmental Change 6, 1-16. 43. Swetnam, T.W., Allen, C.D. & Betancourt, J.L. (1999) Applied historical ecology: using the past to manage for the future, Ecological Applications 9, 1189-1206. 44. Parr, T.W., Sier, A.R.J., Battarbee, R.W., Mackay, A. & Burgess, J. (2003) Detecting environmental change: science and society - perspectives on long-term research and monitoring in the 21st century, Science of the Total Environment 310, 1-8. 45. Willis, K.J., Gillson, L., Brncic, T.M. & Figueroa-Rangel, B.L. (2005) Providing baselines for biodiversity measurement, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20, 107-108. 46. Willis, K.J. & Birks, H.J.B. (2006) What is natural? The need for a long-term perspective in biodiversity conservation, Science 314, 1261-1265. 47. Anderson, P. & Yalden, D.W. (1981) Increased Sheep Numbers and the Loss of Heather Moorland in the Peak District, England, Biological Conservation 20, 195-213. 48. Tudor, G. & Mackey, E.C. (1995) Upland land cover change in post-war Scotland, in Heaths and Moorland: cultural landscapes, D.B.A. Thompson, A.J. Hester & M.B. Usher, eds., HMSO, Edinburgh, 28-42. 49. Stevenson, A.C. & Thompson, D.B.A. (1993) Long-term changes in the extent of heather moorland in upland Britain and Ireland: palaeoecological evidence for the importance of grazing, The Holocene 3, 70-76. 50. Mackay, A.W. & Tallis, J.H. (1996) Summit-type blanket mire erosion in the forest of Bowland, Lancashire, UK: Predisposing factors and implications for conservation, Biological Conservation 76, 31-44. 51. Chambers, F.M., Mauquoy, D. & Todd, P.A. (1999) Recent rise to dominance of Molinia caerulea in environmentally sensitive areas: new perspectives from palaeoecological data, Journal of Applied Ecology 36, 719-733. 52. Chambers, F.M., Mauquoy, D., Gent, A., Pearson, F., Daniell, J.R.G. & Jones, P.S. (2007) Palaeoecology of degraded blanket mire in South Wales: data to inform conservation management, Biological Conservation 137, 197-209. 53. Tipping, R. (2000) Palaeoecological approaches to historical problems: a comparison of sheep- grazing intensities in the Cheviot hills in the medieval and later periods, in Townships to Farmsteads: Rural Settlement Studies in Scotland, England and Wales, J. Atkinson, I. Banks & G. MacGregor, eds., British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 293, 130-143. 54. Yeloff, D.E., Labadz, J.C. & Hunt, C.O. (2006) Causes of degradation and erosion of a blanket mire in the southern Pennines, UK, Mires and Peat 1, 1-18. 55. Dodgshon, R.A. & Olsson, G.A. (2006) Heather moorland in the Scottish Highlands: the history of a cultural landscape, 1600-1880, Journal of Historical Geography 32, 21-37. 56. Davies, A.L. & Dixon, P. (2007) Reading the pastoral landscape: palynological and historical evidence for the impacts of long-term grazing on Wether Hill, Cheviot foothills, Northumberland, Landscape History 30, 35-45. 57. Hughes, P.D.M., Lomas-Clarke, S.H., Schulz, J. & Jones, P. (2007) The declining quality of late- Holocene ombrotrophic communities and the loss of Sphagnum austinii (Sull. ex Aust.) on raised bogs in Wales, The Holocene 17, 613-625. 58. Rhodes, N. & Stevenson, T. (1997) Palaeoenvironmental evidence for the importance of fire as a cause of erosion of British and Irish blanket peats, in Blanket Mire Degradation: causes, consequences and challenges, J.H. Tallis, R. Meade & P.D. Hulme, eds., Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen, 64-78. 59. Charman, D.J. (1997) Peatland palaeoecology and conservation, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Oxford, 65-73. 60. Mauquoy, D. & Yeloff, D. (2008) Raised peat bog development and possible responses to environmental changes during the mid- to late-Holocene. Can the palaeoecological record be used to predict the nature and response of raised peat bogs to future climate change? Biodiversity and Conservation 17, 2139-2151. 61. Charman, D.J., Brown, A.D., Hendon, D. & Karofeld, E. (2004) Testing the relationship between Holocene peatland palaeoclimate reconstructions and instrumental data at two European sites, Quaternary Science Reviews 23, 137-143. 62. Hendon, D. & Charman, D.J. (2004) High-resolution peatland water-table changes for the past 200 years: the influence of climate and implications for management, The Holocene 14, 125-134. 63. Bridge, M.C., Haggart, B.A. & Lowe, J.J. (1990) The history and palaeoclimatic significance of subfossil remains of Pinus sylvestris in blanket peats from Scotland, Journal of Ecology 78, 77-99. 64. Gear, A.J. & Huntley, B. (1991) Rapid changes in the range limits of Scots pine 4000 years ago, Science 251, 544-547. 65. Tipping, R., Ashmore, P., Davies, A.L., Haggart, A., Moir, A., Newton, A., Sands, R., Skinner, T. & Tisdall E. (2008) Prehistoric Pinus woodland dynamics in an upland landscape in northern Scotland: the roles of climate change and human impact, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 17, 251-267. 66. Chambers, F.M. (1997) Bogs as treeless wastes: the myth and the implications for conservation, in Conserving Peatlands, L. Parkyn, R.E. Stoneman & H.A.P. Ingram, eds., CAB International, Oxford, 168-175. 67. Chambers, F.M. (2001) When are trees natural on bogs? in Management of water and trees on raised bogs, S. Whild, R. Meade & J. Daniels, eds., English Nature Research Reports 407, English Nature, Peterborough, 21-25. 68. Wilkinson, D.M. (2001) An open place? A contribution to the discussion on trees on British mires, in Management of water and trees on raised bogs, S. Whild, R. Meade, & J. Daniels, eds., English Nature Research Reports 407, English Nature, Peterborough, 19-20. 69. Legg, C., McHaffie, H., Amphlett, A. & Worrell, R. (2003) The status of wooded bogs at Abernethy, Strathspey, in Restoring Natura Forest Habitats, Caledonian Partnership, Highland Birchwoods, Munlochy, 12-18. 70. Yang, H., Rose, N.L., Boyle, J.F. & Battarbee, R.W. (2001) Storage and distribution of trace metals and spheroidal carbonaceous particles (SCPs) from atmospheric deposition in the catchment peats of Lochnagar, Scotland, Environmental Pollution 115, 231-238. 71. Rose, N., Monteith, D., Kettle, H., Thompson, R., Yang, H. & Muir, D. (2004) A consideration of potential confounding factors limiting chemical and biological recovery at Lochnagar, a remote mountain loch in Scotland, Journal of Limnology 63, 63-76. 72. Kernan, M., Rose, N.L., Camarero, L., Piña, B. & Grimalt, J. (2005) Contemporary and historical pollutant status of Scottish mountain lochs, in D.B.A. Thompson, M.F. Price, & Galbraith, C.A. (eds.) Mountains of Northern Europe: conservation, management, people and nature, The Stationary Office Scotland, Edinburgh, 89-98. 73. Ormerod, S.J. & Durance, I. (2009) Restoration and recovery from acidification in upland Welsh streams over 25 years, Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 164-174. 74. Willis, K.G. & Garrod, G.D. (1993) Valuing Landscape: a Contingent Valuation Approach, Journal of Environmental Management 37, 1-22. 75. Bullock, C.H., Elston, D.A. & Chalmers, N.A. (1998) An application of economic choice experiments to a traditional land use - deer hunting and landscape change in the Scottish Highlands, Journal of Environmental Management 52, 335-351. 76. Gourlay, D. & Slee, B. (1998) Public preferences for landscape features: A case study of two Scottish environmentally sensitive areas, Journal of Rural Studies 14, 249-263. 77. White, P. C. L. & Lovett, J. C. (1999) Public preferences and willingness-to-pay for nature conservation in the North York Moors National Park, UK, Journal of Environmental Management 55, 1-13. 78. Hanley, N., Macmillan, D., Wright, R.E., Bullock, C., Simpson, I., Parsisson, D. & Crabtree, B. (1998) Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland, Journal of Agricultural Economics 49, 1, 1-15. 79. Hanley, N., Colombo, S., Mason, P. & Johns, H. (2007) The reform of support mechanisms for upland farming: paying for public goods in the severely disadvantaged areas of England. Journal of Agricultural Economics 58, 433-453. 80. Habron, D. (1998) Visual perception of wild land in Scotland, Landscape and Urban Planning 42, 45-56. 81. Willis, K., Garrod, G., Scarpa, R., Powe, N., Lovett, A., Bateman, I.J., Hanley, N. and Macmillan, D.C. (2003) The social and environmental benefits of forests in Great Britain, Phase 2. Report to the Forestry Commission. Centre for Research in Environmental Appraisal and Management, University of Newcastle. 82. Christie, M., Hanley, N., Warren, J., Murphy, K., Wright, R., & Hyde, T. (2006) Valuing the diversity of biodiversity, Ecological Economics 58, 304-317. 83. Environmental Group (2004) An Economic Assessment of the Costs and Benefits of Natura 2000 Sites in Scotland, Scottish Executive Research Report 2004/05. 84. MacPherson, C. and Macleod, D. (2006) Attitudes towards and awareness of local people and communities to the peatlands of Caithness and Sutherland, LIFE Peatlands Project report. 85. Soliva, R., Ronningen, K., Bella, I., Bezak, P., Cooper, T., Flo, B.E., Marty, P. & Potter, C. (2008) Envisioning upland futures: Stakeholder responses to scenarios for Europe's mountain landscapes, Journal of Rural Studies 24, 56-71. 86. MacMillan, D., Hanley, N. & Daw, M. (2004) Costs and benefits of wild goose conservation in Scotland, Biological Conservation 119, 475-485. 87. Hynes, S. & Hanley, N. (2009) The Crex crex lament: Estimating landowners’ willingness to pay for corncrake conservation on Irish farmland, Biological Conservation 142, 180-188. 88. Price, M.F., Dixon, B.J., Warren, C.R. & Macpherson, A.R. (2002) Scotland’s Mountains: key issues for their future management, Scottish Natural Heritage, Battleby. 89. Burton, R.J.F. (2004) Seeing through the ‘good farmer’s’ eyes: towards developing an understanding of the social symbolic value of ‘productivist’ behaviour, Sociologia Ruralis 44, 195- 215. 90. Johnston, E. & Soulsby, C. (2006) The role of science in environmental policy: an examination of the local context, Land Use Policy 23, 161-169. 91. Werkman, B. & Callaghan, T. (2002): Responses of bracken and heather to increased temperature and nitrogen addition, alone and in competition, Basic Applied Ecology 3, 267–276. 92. Burton, R., Mansfield, L., Schwarz, G., Brown, K. & Convery, I. (2005) Social capital in hill farming. Report for the Upland Centre, International Centre for the Uplands, Cumbria. 93. Carey, P.D., Short, C., Morris, C., Hunt, J., Priscott, A., Davis, M., Finch, C., Curry, N., Little, W., Winter, M., Parkin, A. & Firbank, L.G. (2003) The multi-disciplinary evaluation of a national agri- environment scheme, Journal of Environmental Management 69, 1, 71-91.

The upland evidence-base: are we using the best information for making decisions in a changing environment?

Are we really making the most effective use of the different sources of evidence available to understand how upland ecosystems function and how they, and as a consequence we, are likely to have to adapt to changes brought about by climatic and management shifts?

Recent reviews have criticised the quality of the evidence upon which current conservation practice is based, concluding that ‘tradition’, anecdote and ad hoc monitoring, rather than scientific evidence, often shape decision-making; this is due to a shortage of strategies for evaluating the effectiveness of current practice and ensuring the accessibility of scientific evidence [1-5]1. This hinders advances in the scientific data which underpin decision-making, with a danger that ineffective and damaging practices will continue to be employed, thus failing to achieve ecological objectives and wasting limited economic resources. It also has potentially severe consequences in the context of climatic and economic uncertainty, particularly in sensitive upland ecosystems which we rely on for a wide range of ecosystem services [6-7]. Consequently, there is a real and pressing need to create more adaptive and anticipatory science-practice-policy frameworks.

Adaptation requires a secure evidence-base, flexibility and foresight [8-10]: in particular, the flexibility to ‘horizon-scan’ and consider sources of evidence which have the potential to contribute to adaptive management, but which currently lie outside established frameworks. To assess the possible benefits of incorporating additional relevant sources of evidence, this exercise will: 1. Introduce long-term environmental, ecological and management information as an additional tool for decision-making in research, management and policy, taking the uplands as a focus. 2. Provide a first quantitative assessment of how long-term data are regarded relative to more familiar sources in a way that overcomes barriers to knowledge exchange which currently limit their accessibility, and so improve future communication. This will be done by using case studies to present long-term evidence on an equal footing with other sources which are established or increasing contributors to the upland evidence-base.

How does it work and what is your role? This experiment focuses on the relative merits of four different sources of evidence relating to how upland ecosystems function and respond to change, and how research, policy and management decisions can improve resilience: (1) ecological monitoring, (2) ecological research, (3) long-term research, and (4) collaboration with stakeholders.

You will be provided with information from each of these four sources and then asked to select how these insights might be combined to create a sound evidence-base for building research knowledge, informing policy, or improving ‘best practice’, depending on your perspective and expertise. This will be done using a ‘choice experiment’ format: this method is used to value attributes which are unfamiliar or do not have an easily defined market value, like ecosystem services. You will be asked to indicate your most and least preferred choice from a series of options after reading the information provided to inform your choice.

1 References and further copies of this experiment or a Peatland Case Study version can be downloaded from: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/index.html. 1

Case study on upland woodland regeneration and habitat continuity

Case study: Consider how the information presented below might influence research, policy or management in the following case study: Many upland woods show indications of ancient character (i.e. continuity of woodland since 1600 in England, 1750 in Scotland) and support semi-natural communities or species of national and international conservation value. However, their viability and ability to regenerate are threatened by population fragmentation, grazing pressures and climate change. There is also uncertainty as to what models of woodland dynamics are appropriate [11], given the evidence for ancient woodland management (e.g. the work of Oliver Rackham [12]), and debates over naturalistic grazing sparked by Frans Vera’s model, which stresses the role of herbivores in maintaining long-term woodland regeneration [13-14]. Putting this into context, many SSSI-designated woods are dominated by mature trees and show limited regeneration: saplings are stunted by grazing or regeneration is limited by dense ground cover, invasion by bracken and, in some areas, rhododendron or beech. The only exceptions are more inaccessible steep slopes, rocky outcrops or within fenced exclosures, the oldest of which are becoming difficult to access owing to dense regeneration of pioneer taxa like birch, rowan or ash, or dense understorey growth. In areas where regeneration is occurring, woodland composition may be altering from the present valued characteristics and some woods are shifting beyond designated boundaries, at times encroaching onto other valued habitats. As a result, management dilemmas include setting appropriate grazing levels, assessing the effectiveness of fencing, and establishing the role of disturbance, succession processes and the need for intervention to ensure regeneration, reduce fragmentation and maintain floristic and faunal values. Examples include Atlantic oak/birchwoods and Scots pine woodland.

I. Ecological monitoring: This is the first line of evidence used to assess progress towards and fulfilment of management objectives, and also provides long-term networks for monitoring trends and understanding the impacts and possible causes of environmental change. The strength of such programmes lies in the use of consistent protocols and centralised data collation, with longer datasets revealing trends and relationships not detectable over shorter time-frames, e.g. due to biological lags, biogeochemical cycles, or masked by inter-annual variability [15-17]. Monitoring frequency depends on the objectives, e.g. 3-9 yr intervals for Environmental Change Network (ECN) vegetation surveys, 6-9 yr intervals between Countryside Surveys (CS), 6 yr intervals for site condition monitoring (SCM) and annually for deer management agreements. Both site condition monitoring and large-scale monitoring networks reveal significant trends with strong management implications. The first common standards monitoring report indicates a far higher proportion of woods in unfavourable-declining condition in upland Scotland than in England [18]. In addition, the Countryside Surveys reveal continued loss of old woods and little reversal of fragmentation despite a UK-level increase in total woodland area, with significant decreases in woodland patch size in the uplands of England and Wales between 1984 and 1998 [19]. Upland woods in Scotland and Wales have experienced a decrease in species richness and increase in more competitive species, with a significant increase in species associated with less fertile, more acidic conditions in Scotland [20-21]. These trends are consistent with repeat surveys which show a decline in species richness, particularly of woodland specialists and open ground taxa, and reduction in pH [22-23]. Drivers include extensive deer browsing in Scotland, which may be an inherent threat due to the largely unenclosed nature of the landscape [18]. On a UK scale, other contributory factors may include a decline in management and little evidence of a reduction in grazing over the period 1971- 2001, particularly the high grazing pressures associated with species typical of the western uplands [22- 23]. Using 6 yrs as an approximate average vegetation survey interval for comparison, consider how the following monitoring frequencies might affect decisions regarding research needs, and appropriate management or policy responses: a. Every 12 years b. Every 6 yrs c. Every 3 years

II. Ecological research: There is continuing uncertainty over the most appropriate models and methods required to achieve aims established under the Natura habitats directive [11]. The presence of saplings in many upland woods indicates potential for regeneration, but this is often suppressed by grazing, ground cover and lack of light, so mechanisms that create gaps and allow light to reach saplings and enhance growth rates may be required before this potential will be realised [24-26]. Grazing exclusion alone shows limited success and even complete removal of ungulates is unlikely to result in widespread regeneration due to slow sapling growth under a mature canopy. Furthermore, managing deer density to secure regeneration will incur considerable costs for sporting and conservation management over extended periods, since pine regeneration may take 20 to >35 years to grow above deer browsing 2

height [25, 27-30]. The reintroduction of disturbance mechanisms like coppicing or pollarding could promote viability in Atlantic oakwoods by improving light penetration and age/size-class structure [26]. Many woodland ecologists now recognise cultural imprints on ancient woods, including pollarding and wood pastures [31], but few incorporate them into management. In Abernethy pinewood, for example, managed disturbance is being used to promote regeneration and maintain mosaics suited to black grouse and capercaillie in recognition of management influence on current conservation values [28, 32].

Figure 1: Possible changes in distribution of Pinus sylvestris with varying climate conditions as compared with 1961-1990 temperature regimes. (a) Winter 4C colder, summer 4C warmer, (b) winter 4C warmer, summer 4C colder. Note the retreat from western Europe with the imposition of warmer winters. The colour key relates to the probability of occurrence of pine (from Crawford 2008 [37]).

Broader factors also influence population viability. In the Scottish Highlands pine lies at the southern limits of boreal forest, while oak reaches its northern limit, suggesting that both are likely to be affected by climate change. Increased summer temperatures are predicted to allow pine to expand, while increased winter temperatures may lead to pinewood loss (Figure 1). Areas suitable for Atlantic oakwoods are predicted to contract, especially in the far west [33-34, cf.35], although summer drought or warmer winters (with fewer frosts) may allow oak to become established in pinewoods, with implications for management strategies required to favour pine regeneration [36-38]. Consequently, the feasibility of grazing exclusion and natural regeneration to fulfil conservation targets is questionable, particularly when slow response times are taken into account. Consider how the following sources of ecological information might influence research, policy and management relating to these woodland ecosystems: a. None: no additional ecological information is sought; present knowledge is adequate for decision- making. b. Ecological experiments, modelling and additional techniques are essential to provide more detailed (e.g. taxonomic groups, gene flow, carbon chemistry) or broader (e.g. catchment-scale) information to complement ecological monitoring.

III. Long-term data: Because many ecosystem processes operate over long periods, each generation of policy-makers, researchers and managers sees only part of the process and the origins of many current trends may pre-date ecological records. By working on ecosystem rather than human timescales,

3 longer-term data allow an evidence-based assessment of naturalness, vulnerability, resilience, the role of disturbance regimes and status of rare, endangered or invasive species [39-43]. In combination with ecological data, this can help separate natural from cultural drivers of variability, define effective indicators, baselines and early warning signs [44-47]. All are relevant to woodland status and management. At a national level, woodland cover was once widespread in the uplands, forming the pre- moorland landscape. Woods reached their maximum extent around 5000 years ago (Figure 2), although major woodland contractions began as early as 8800 years ago in the Western Isles, through to around 2500 years ago in southern Scotland, northern England and the Pennines [48-52]. Thousands of years have thus passed since the uplands supported extensive woodland, with implications for the feasibility of expansion and restoration objectives under current conservation legislation aimed at increasing connectivity. Climate change, human disturbance and soil development (especially peat expansion) have been the main drivers of woodland dynamics and contraction. Responses to past climate change can contribute to woodland monitoring and management since knowledge of climate change responses is limited by the longevity of woodland populations and absence of monitoring data covering periods of significant climate change. For instance, drier conditions have in the past allowed oak to gain ground at the expense of pine [45, cf. 46, 53-55], so a conservation or management preference for pine may require the removal of competing species. By contrast, pine populations may be particularly vulnerable to increased rainfall and exposure, which caused stress and contributed to major past woodland contraction [55-59]. Such knowledge of population resilience to climate change can shape more sensitive monitoring systems. It can also be used to assess whether conservation expenditure will actually produce the desired results over the timescales required for population regeneration, and establish what levels of intervention may be called for to maintain present values, including practices like assisted migration.

Figure 2. Reconstructed distribution of woodland across the British Isles 5000 years ago (from Bennett 1989 [67]).

The current composition and structure of semi-natural woodland composition and structure may reflect past environmental dynamics and management legacies more strongly than present conditions due to the slow rate at which long-lived populations adapt to change. This can lead to misconceptions in management that overlook successional dynamics or fail to provide the conditions required for regeneration. For instance, many fragmented woods have regenerated around their present locations since major range contractions during prehistory, thus showing long-term continuity at a catchment scale. However, at a stand-scale, many areas have reverted from woods to openings during successive generations of natural and managed regeneration [60-62]. This indicates the importance of incorporating succession and spatial mobility into management and legislation. Furthermore, although 4

many semi-natural woods are managed on a limited intervention basis, much current composition and age structure reflects centuries of management, followed by 100-200 years of relative neglect. Consequently, mature trees developed under radically different disturbance regimes to present conditions, to the extent that limited disturbance and the retention of mono-dominant stands may be contributing to poor regeneration [39, cf.22, 62-66]. It will take many decades and more flexible conservation objectives if near-natural woods are desired. Alternatively, long-term datasets show that management often contributed to woodland diversity and continuity, and so need not be incompatible with conservation objectives; this lends support to ecological studies advocating disturbance as a means of ensuring regeneration [26, 28, 65]. Based on this information, consider how the following levels of long-term data (>50 years) might influence upland management and policy decisions, and research agendas: a. None: no long-term data are sought; present knowledge is adequate for decision-making. b. Syntheses of data on the habitat/species of interest are appropriate for understanding processes and drivers that shape current patterns, recognising trajectories of change and setting appropriate baselines. c. Region- or site-specific data on the habitat/species of interest is appropriate to understand the processes and drivers that shape current characteristics, recognise trajectories of change and establish appropriate baselines.

IV. Stakeholder preferences: Involving stakeholders can help ensure that policies and management strategies recognise the range of ecosystem goods and services provided by the uplands and represent value for money to taxpayers. This method therefore has the potential to provide a more integrated approach to conservation effectiveness and cost efficiency. For example, although the general public and some residents show willingness-to-pay (WTP) to maintain current conditions, more often there is support to protect and/or moderately increase tree cover, especially broadleaved, native and ancient semi-natural woodlands which are associated with higher recreational and biodiversity value [68-77]. Knowledge of stakeholder landscape values could therefore increase support for some existing woodland conservation objectives. Although many upland areas have a distinctive landscape character, public perceptions of their ‘specialness’ do not automatically mean that a landscape should be kept as it is. For instance, greater awareness that woodland cover has changed or has been perceived differently over time reduces residents’ and visitors’ preference for keeping the landscape as it is now [73]. Knowledge of past change can thus increase willingness to accept change – a potentially useful finding at a time when change may be required to adapt to or mitigate the impacts of climate change. Collaboration using residents’ knowledge of their area can inform policy and management strategies and provide a strategic approach to achieving conservation and socio-economic objectives. For example, incorporating local knowledge of red deer habitat use can improve the predictive ability of ecological models and contribute to adaptive management, including woodland conservation, across ownership boundaries [78]. Consider how the following levels of information on stakeholder preferences and knowledge might contribute to upland research, policy and management: a. None: research agendas, management or policies are pre-determined and stakeholder preferences are unnecessary for determining their content or implementation. b. Guidance: research, policy or management needs are pre-determined, but stakeholder knowledge/ preferences are used to effectively implement these strategies or design acquisition strategies for desired research data. c. Collaboration: research agendas, management or policy approaches are determined through stakeholder engagement to shape and implement policy, practice and research agendas.

V. Time cost: Altering established approaches inevitably incurs costs. Consider the time management costs involved in incorporating different sources of data to strengthen the evidence-base underpinning research agendas, policy and management decisions. This could involve gaining a basic understanding of additional sources, keeping abreast of developments in a wider range of fields, attending meetings to obtain or discuss additional evidence with relevant experts, or involvement in projects generating these additional forms of evidence, i.e. much as you may now have to accommodate meetings on new policies, establish working partnerships, assess reports from consultants or manage projects. This cost relates to how much working time would be allocated within your organisation, not at a personal level: a. 1 day/4 months (1.25%) b. 1 day/month (5%) c. 1 day/week (20%)

5

Summary of woodland management goals: To establish appropriate models and methods on upland woodland dynamics and succession that will increase regeneration, improve population viability and connectivity (reduce fragmentation) over the timescales required for woodland dynamics, and ensure floristic and faunal diversity.

Making your choices: • Based on the information you have just read, which of the 3 alternatives presented on each choice card below will help strengthen the evidence-base for building research knowledge, informing policy, or improve ‘best practice’ in practical conservation terms, depending on your perspective and expertise. • Which combination do you consider to be least effective? • Consider all of the attributes offered when making your choices: the experiment is designed to examine all possible combinations of information, so some options may seem ‘odd’. • Consider how this evidence would affect the habitat dynamics over the next 40-50 years, i.e. within the lifespan of many current policy-makers, researchers and managers.

Choice card 1 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & based data collection & Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary broader disciplinary contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, None: present Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/week 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 2 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 6 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on Syntheses of data on None: present Long-term research variability, processes & variability, processes & knowledge is adequate drivers of change drivers of change Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement implementation implementation knowledge is adequate Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/week 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

6

Choice card 3 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 6 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, None: present Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/week 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 4 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 3 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change None: present Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement knowledge is adequate implementation knowledge is adequate Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/month 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 5 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 12 yrs None: present None: present None: present Ecological research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/week 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

7

Choice card 6 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on None: present None: present Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate drivers of change Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/month 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 7 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 12 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on Syntheses of data on None: present Long-term research variability, processes & variability, processes & knowledge is adequate drivers of change drivers of change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/month 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 8 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific data on variability, None: present data on variability, Long-term research processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

8

Choice card 9 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & based data collection & Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary broader disciplinary contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on None: present data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/month 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 10 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 12 yrs None: present None: present None: present Ecological research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/4 months 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 11 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of processes & drivers of drivers of change change change None: present None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

9

Choice card 12 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) None: present None: present None: present Long-term research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Collaboration: contribute Collaboration: contribute None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 13 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 12 yrs 3 yrs None: present None: present None: present Ecological research knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on Syntheses of data on data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & variability, processes & processes & drivers of drivers of change drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 14 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Region- or site-specific data on variability, None: present data on variability, Long-term research processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation knowledge is adequate implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/4 months 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

10

Choice card 15 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 6 yrs 12 yrs 12 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on data on variability, None: present Long-term research variability, processes & processes & drivers of knowledge is adequate drivers of change change Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to None: present Stakeholder involvement implementation implementation knowledge is adequate Time commitment 1 day/week 1 day/4 months 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 16 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 6 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- based data collection & None: present None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) Region- or site-specific Syntheses of data on None: present data on variability, Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate processes & drivers of drivers of change change Collaboration: contribute None: present Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and knowledge is adequate implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/month 1 day/week MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

Choice card 17 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 12 yrs 3 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & None: present Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary knowledge is adequate contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on None: present None: present Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate drivers of change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/month 1 day/week 1 day/4 months MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

11

Choice card 18 Source Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ecological monitoring 3 yrs 3 yrs 6 yrs Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- Necessary: ecology- based data collection & based data collection & based data collection & Ecological research broader disciplinary broader disciplinary broader disciplinary contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. contributions (e.g. chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) chemistry, genetics) Syntheses of data on None: present None: present Long-term research variability, processes & knowledge is adequate knowledge is adequate drivers of change Collaboration: contribute Guidance: contribute to Guidance: contribute to Stakeholder involvement to objectives and implementation implementation implementation Time commitment 1 day/4 months 1 day/4 months 1 day/month MOST preferred option LEAST preferred option

And finally, a few questions to indicate your background/perspective and level of knowledge of the fields used in this experiment:

1. Are you a: † Policy-maker † Ecologist – governmental agency † Ecologist – NGO † Researcher - discipline: † Practitioner

2. Please rate your level of expertise/experience in each of the fields as defined in this experiment, using a scale of 1 (no knowledge or experience) to 10 (my field of expertise): Ecological monitoring: Ecological research: Long-term research: Stakeholder involvement:

Name and contact details (optional) – note that your responses will be treated in confidence and presented anonymously in all analyses and publications.

Name:

Address/contact:

Thank you for your time – please let me know if you would like to be contacted further about this work or hear about the results. Any further comments would be appreciated. Please send completed forms to Dr Althea Davies at [email protected] or School of Biological & Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland UK.

12

The upland evidence-base: are we using the best information for making decisions in a changing environment?

References: woodland case study1

1. Kleijn, D. & Sutherland, W.J. (2003) How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? Journal of Applied Ecology 40, 947-969. 2. Pullin, A.S., Knight, T.M., Stone, D.A. & Charman, K. (2004) Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Biological Conservation 119, 245-252. 3. Sutherland, W.J., Pullin, A.S., Dolman, P.M. & Knight, T.M. (2004) The need for evidence-based conservation, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19, 305-308. 4. Stewart, G.B., Coles, C.F. & Pullin, A.S. (2005) Applying evidence-based practice in conservation management: Lessons from the first systematic review and dissemination projects, Biological Conservation 126, 270-278. 5. Gaston, K.J., Charman, K., Jackson, S.F., Armsworth, P.R., Bonn, A., Briers, R.A., Callaghan, C.S.Q., Catchpole, R., Hopkins, J., Kunin, W.E., Latham, J., Opdam, P., Stoneman, R., Stroud, D.A. & Tratt, R. (2006) The ecological effectiveness of protected areas: The United Kingdom, Biological Conservation 132, 76-87. 6. Hulme, P.E. (2005) Adapting to climate change: is there scope for ecological management in the face of a global threat? Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 784. 7. Holden, J., Shotbolt, L., Bonn, A., Burt, T.P., Chapman, P.J., Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E.D.G., Hubacek, K., Irvine, B., Kirkby, M.J., Reed, M.S., Prell, C., Stagl, S., Stringer, L.C., Turner, A. & Worrall, F. (2007b) Environmental change in moorland landscapes, Earth-Science Reviews 82, 75-100. 8. Sutherland, W.J., Bailey, M.J., Bainbridge, I.P., Brereton, T., Dick, J.T.A., Drewitt, J., Dulvy, N.K., Dusic, N.R., Freckleton, R.P., Gaston, K.J., Gilder, P.M., Green, R.E., Heathwaite, A.L., Johnson, S.M., Macdonald, D.W., Mitchell, R., Osborn, D., Owen, R.P., Pretty, J., Prior, S.V., Prosser, H., Pullin, A.S., Rose, P., Stott, A., Tew, T., Thomas, C.D., Thompson, D.B.A., Vickery, J.A., Walker, M., Walmsley, C., Warrington, S., Watkinson, A.R., Williams, R.J., Woodroffe, R. & Woodroof, H.J. (2008) Future novel threats and opportunities facing UK biodiversity identified by horizon scanning, Journal of Applied Ecology 45, 821-833. 9. Pullin, A.S. & Knight, T.M. (2009) Doing more good than harm - Building an evidence-base for conservation and environmental management, Biological Conservation 142, 931-934. 10. Sutherland, W.J. & Woodroof, H.J. (2009) The need for environmental horizon scanning, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24, 523-527. 11. Quelch, P.R. (2005) Structure and utilisation of the early oakwoods, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 99-105. 12. Rackham, O. (1980) Ancient Woodland: its history, vegetation and uses in England, Edward Arnold, London. 13. Vera, F.W.M. (2000) Grazing Ecology and Forest History, CAB International, Oxford. 14. Hodder, K.H., Bullock, J.M., Buckland, P.C. & Kirby, K.J. (2005) Large herbivores in the wildwood and modern naturalistic grazing systems, English Nature Research Report 648. 15. Macdonald, A.J. (2003) Assessing the quality of plant communities in the uplands. Botanical Journal of Scotland 55, 111-123. 16. Firbank, L.G., Barr, C.J., Bunce, R.G.H., Furse, M.T., Haines-Young, R., Hornung, M., Howard, D.C., Sheail, J., Sier, A., & Smart, S.M. (2003) Assessing stock and change in land cover and biodiversity in GB: an introduction to Countryside Survey 2000, Journal of Environmental Management 67, 207-218. 17. Morecroft, M.D., Bealey, C.E., Beaumont, D.A., Benham, S., Brooks, D.R., Burt, T.P., Critchley, C.N.R., Dick, J., Littlewood, N.A., Monteith, D.T., Scott, W.A., Smith, R.I., Walmsley, C. & Watson, H. (2009) The UK Environmental Change Network: Emerging trends in the composition of plant and animal communities and the physical environment, Biological Conservation 142, 2814-2832. 18. Williams, J.M., ed. (2006) Common Standards Monitoring for Designated Sites: First Six Year Report, JNCC, Peterborough.

1 Copies of this experiment and a Peatland Case Study version can be downloaded from: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/index.html 19. Petit, S., Howard, D.C. & Stuart, R.C. (2004) A national perspective on recent changes in the spatial characteristics of woodland in the British landscape, Landscape and Urban Planning 69, 127-135. 20. Countryside Survey (2007a) Scotland results from 2007, chapter 6: Woodlands: broadleaved, mixed and yew woodlands; and coniferous woodland, CEH/NERC, pp. 50-59. 21. Countryside Survey (2007b) Wales results from 2007, chapter 5: Woodlands: broadleaved, mixed and yew woodlands and coniferous woodland, CEH/NERC, pp. 40-48. 22. Kirby, K.J., Smart, S.M., Black, H.I.J., Bunce, R.G.H., Comey, P.M. & Smithers, R.J. (2005) Long term ecological change in British woodland (1971-2001), English Nature Research Reports, 653. 23. Hopkins, J.J. & Kirby, K.J. (2007) Ecological change in British broadleaved woodland since 1947, Ibis 149, 29-40. 24. Scott, D., Welch, D., Thurlow, M. & Elston, D.A. (2000) Regeneration of Pinus sylvestris in a natural pinewood in NE Scotland following reduction in grazing by Cervus elaphus, Forest Ecology and Management 130, 199-211. 25. Palmer, S.C.F. & Truscott, A.M. (2003) Browsing by deer on naturally regenerating Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and its effects on sapling growth, Forest Ecology and Management 182, 31- 47. 26. Palmer, S.C.F., Mitchell, R.J., Truscott, A.M. & Welch, D. (2004) Regeneration failure in Atlantic oakwoods: the roles of ungulate grazing and invertebrates, Forest Ecology and Management 192, 251-265. 27. Bullock, C.H., Elston, D.A. & Chalmers, N.A. (1998) An application of economic choice experiments to a traditional land use - deer hunting and landscape change in the Scottish Highlands, Journal of Environmental Management 52, 335-351. 28. Amphlett, A. (2003) Contexts, developing ideas and emerging issues in the conservation management of the RSPB Abernethy Forest Reserve, Botanical Journal of Scotland 55, 135-148. 29. Palmer, S., Truscott, A.M., Mitchell, R. & Welch, D. (2005) Regeneration in Atlantic oakwoods: has deer management had a beneficial effect? Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 167-178. 30. Smart, J.C.R., White, P.C.L., & Termansen, M. (2008) Modelling conflicting objectives in the management of a mobile ecological resource: Red deer in the Scottish Highlands, Ecological Economics 64, 881-892. 31. Holl, K. & Smith, M. (2007) Scottish upland forests: History lessons for the future, Forest Ecology and Management 249, 45-53. 32. Midgley, A.C. (2007) The social negotiation of nature conservation policy: conserving pinewoods in the Scottish Highlands, Biodiversity and Conservation 16, 3317-3332. 33. Broadmeadow, M. & Ray, D. (2005) Climate change and British woodland, Information Note, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh. 34. Hall, J. & Stone, D. (2005) Overall biodiversity and the spatial patterns of Atlantic oakwoods, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 115-118. 35. Brewer, S., Hely-Alleaume, C., Cheddadi, R., de Beaulieu, J.L., Laurent, J.M. & Le Cuziat, J. (2005) Postglacial history of Atlantic oakwoods: Context, dynamics and controlling factors, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 41-57. 36. Crawford, R.M.M. (2001) Plant community responses to Scotland's changing environment, Botanical Journal of Scotland 53, 77-105. 37. Crawford, R.M.M. (2008) Plants at the Margin: Ecological Limits and Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 38. Ray, D. (2008) Impacts of climate change on forests and forestry in Scotland, Forestry Commission Scotland, Roslin. 39. Birks, H.J.B. (1996) Contributions of Quaternary palaeoecology to nature conservation, Journal of Vegetation Science 7, 89-98. 40. Bragg, O.M. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) The sensitivity of peat-covered upland landscapes, Catena 42, 345-360. 41. Ellis, C.J. & Tallis, J.H. (2001) Climatic control of peat erosion in a North Wales blanket mire, New Phytologist 152, 313-324. 42. Gillson, L. & Willis, K.J. (2004) ‘As Earth’s testimonies tell’: wilderness conservation in a changing world, Ecology Letters 7, 990-998. 43. Dearing, J.A., Battarbee, R.W., Dikau, R., Larocque, I. & Oldfield, F. (2006) Human-environment interactions: learning from the past, Regional Environmental Change 6, 1-16. 44. Swetnam, T.W., Allen, C.D. & Betancourt, J.L. (1999) Applied historical ecology: using the past to manage for the future, Ecological Applications 9, 1189-1206. 45. Parr, T.W., Sier, A.R.J., Battarbee, R.W., Mackay, A. & Burgess, J. (2003) Detecting environmental change: science and society - perspectives on long-term research and monitoring in the 21st century, Science of the Total Environment 310, 1-8. 46. Willis, K.J., Gillson, L., Brncic, T.M. & Figueroa-Rangel, B.L. (2005) Providing baselines for biodiversity measurement, Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20, 107-108. 47. Willis, K.J. & Birks, H.J.B. (2006) What is natural? The need for a long-term perspective in biodiversity conservation, Science 314, 1261-1265. 48. Tipping, R. (1994) The form and fate of Scotland's woodlands, Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 124, 1-54. 49. Bennett, K.D., Bunting, M.J. & Fossitt, J.A. (1997) Long-term vegetation change in the Western and Northern Isles, Scotland, Botanical Journal of Scotland 49, 127-140. 50. Huntley, B., Daniell, R.G. and Allen, J.R.M. (1997) Scottish vegetation history: the Highlands, Botanical Journal of Scotland 49, 163-175. 51. Dark, P. (2000) The environment of Britain in the first millennium AD, Duckworth, London. 52. Simmons, I.G. (2003) The Moorlands of England and Wales: an environmental history 8000 BC- AD 2000. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. 53. Lageard, J.G.A., Chambers, F.M. & Thomas, P.A. (1999) Climatic significance of the marginalization of Scotls pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) c.2500 BC at White Moss, south Cheshire, UK, The Holocene 9, 321-331. 54. Davies, A. (2003) Torran Beithe: Holocene history of a blanket peat landscape, in The Quaternary of Glen Affric and Kintail, Tipping, R.M., ed., Quaternary Research Association, London, 41-48. 55. Tipping, R., Davies, A. & Tisdall, E. (2006) Long-term woodland dynamics in West Glen Affric, northern Scotland, Forestry 79, 351-359. 56. Gear, A.J. & Huntley, B. (1991) Rapid changes in the range limits of Scots pine 4000 years ago, Science 251, 544-547. 57. Clark, S.H.E. (2003) Insect faunas associated with the fossil remains of Pinus sylvestris L. in blanket peat from northeast Scotland, Scottish Geographical Journal 119, 39-52. 58. Tipping, R., Ashmore, P., Davies, A.L., Haggart, A., Moir, A., Newton, A., Sands, R., Skinner, T. & Tisdall E. (2008) Prehistoric Pinus woodland dynamics in an upland landscape in northern Scotland: the roles of climate change and human impact, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 17, 251-267. 59. Tipping, R. (2008) Blanket peat in the Scottish Highlands: timing, cause, spread and the myth of environmental determinism, Biodiversity and Conservation 17, 2097-2113. 60. O'Sullivan, P.E. (1973) Pollen analysis of Mor humus layers from a native Scots pine ecosystem, interpreted with surface samples, Oikos 24, 259-272. 61. Smout, T.C., MacDonald, A.R. & Watson, F. (2005) A history of the native woodlands of Scotland, 1500-1920, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. 62. Shaw, H. & Tipping, R. (2006) Recent pine woodland dynamics in east Glen Affric, northern Scotland, from highly resolved palaeoecological analyses, Forestry 79, 331-340. 63. O'Sullivan, P.E. (1977) Vegetation history and the native pinewoods, in Native Pinewoods of Scotland, R.G.H. Bunce & J.N.R. Jeffers, eds., ITE, Cambridge, 60-69. 64. Birks, H.J.B. (1993) Quaternary palaeoecology and vegetation science - current contributions and possible future developments, Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 79, 153-177. 65. Sansum, P. (2005) Argyll oakwoods: use and ecological change, 1000 to 2000 AD – a palynological-historical investigation, Botanical Journal of Scotland 57, 83-97. 66. Edwards, C. & Mason, W.L. (2006) Stand structure and dynamics of four native Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) woodlands in northern Scotland, Forestry 79, 261-277. 67. Bennett, K.D. (1989) A provisional map of forest types for the British Isles 5000 years ago, Journal of Quaternary Science 4, 141-144. 68. Willis, K.G. & Garrod, G.D. (1993) Valuing Landscape: a Contingent Valuation Approach, Journal of Environmental Management 37, 1-22. 69. Bullock, C.H. & Kay, J. (1997) Preservation and Change in the Upland Landscape: The Public Benefits of Grazing Management, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 40, 315- 334. 70. Gourlay, D. & Slee, B. (1998) Public preferences for landscape features: A case study of two Scottish environmentally sensitive areas, Journal of Rural Studies 14, 249-263. 71. Hanley, N., Macmillan, D., Wright, R.E., Bullock, C., Simpson, I., Parsisson, D. & Crabtree, B. (1998) Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland, Journal of Agricultural Economics 49, 1, 1-15. 72. Hanley, N., Colombo, S., Mason, P. & Johns, H. (2007) The reform of support mechanisms for upland farming: paying for public goods in the severely disadvantaged areas of England. Journal of Agricultural Economics 58, 433-453. 73. Hanley, N., Ready, R., Colombo, S., Watson, F., Stewart, M. & Bergmann, E. A. (2009) The impacts of knowledge of the past on preferences for future landscape change, Journal of Environmental Management 90, 1404-1412. 74. MacMillan, D.C. & Duff, E.I. (1998) Estimating the non-market costs and benefits of native woodland restoration using the contingent valuation method, Forestry 71, 247-259. 75. Lee, T.R. (2001) Perceptions, Attitudes and Preferences in Forests and Woodlands, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, Technical Paper 18. 76. Price, M.F., Dixon, B.J., Warren, C.R. & Macpherson, A.R. (2002) Scotland’s Mountains: key issues for their future management, Scottish Natural Heritage, Battleby. 77. Willis, K., Garrod, G., Scarpa, R., Powe, N., Lovett, A., Bateman, I.J., Hanley, N. and Macmillan, D.C. (2003) The social and environmental benefits of forests in Great Britain, Phase 2. Report to the Forestry Commission. Centre for Research in Environmental Appraisal and Management, University of Newcastle. 78. Irvine, R.J., Fiorini, S., McLeod, J., Turner, A., Van der Wal, R., Armstrong, H., Yearley, S. & White, P.C.L. (2009) Can managers inform models? Integrating local knowledge into models of red deer habitat use, Journal of Applied Ecology 46, 344-352. To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

RELU RESEARCH REPORT

Background The uplands are under pressure from changes in agriculture and climate, the growth of conservation, tourism and renewable energy production. Striking a balance between the various demands and values, and maintaining ecosystem function requires a secure understanding of how upland environments respond to change. Much of the evidence- base used in decision-making has a strong present-future focus, even though concepts such as sustainability and resilience imply a substantial time dimension. Many ecological processes and responses also occur over decades and centuries, making it difficult to differentiate trends, interactions and responses from short-term (e.g. seasonal or annual) variability when using sub-decadal records (e.g. Morecroft et al. 2009). It is therefore only with the benefit of hindsight that some changes become evident. Managers and decision- makers thus need to deal with legacies and lagged responses from the past, present pressures and future threats. In the context of changes in climate, economics and policy, rapid decision-making is required and we do not have the luxury of time to learn and adapt as processes unfold. Ensuring resilience requires insights on longer timescales than current planning tools can provide. This project explored how longer-term ecologies, using techniques applied in environmental archaeology, can contribute to decision-making in upland management in the UK. In itself, this is not a novel objective: many eminent palaeoecologists have discussed the ways in which long-term datasets (>50 years) could benefit conservation and management (e.g. Foster et al. 1990, Birks 1993, Dearing et al. 2006, Willis et al. 2007). This has been achieved with some success in Denmark and Sweden, through many years of interaction between forestry managers, policy-makers and palaeoecologists (Bradshaw et al. 2005, Lindbladh et al. 2008). In the UK, some palaeoecologists have also established good working relationships with conservation managers on an individual basis (e.g. Chambers et al. 1999, 2007). However, long-term methods are only a routine and established part of management structures in the Water Framework Directive, which specifically includes hindcasting methods, like palaeolimnology, to establish appropriate reference conditions and assess progress in improving freshwater quality (Bennion & Battarbee 2007). Papers advocating wider application of long-term methods are primarily cited by palaeoecologists, rather than ecologists, and rarely play much part in ecological or management debates. For instance, analysis of the 100 questions of conservation importance identified by Sutherland et al. (2006) found that answering 54 of those questions required at least some consideration of processes acting over multiple years or of conditions in the past as well as the present, but such techniques and issues are conspicuous by their absence in horizon-scanning and recent critical reviews of the conservation evidence-base (Davies & Bunting 2010). Within this RELU fellowship, social science methods provided the methodological and theoretical framework for investigating the value of long-term ecology and land-use in current and future management planning issues. This approach aimed to address the gap in knowledge exchange and dissemination which contributes to the limited application of long-term evidence in the UK. It also allowed long-term environmental research perspectives to engage more with the social and economic dimensions of environmental change (Parr et al. 2003). The work was conducted in the Peak District (England) and Sutherland (NW Scotland), both landscapes with high conservation values and dependant on hill farming, but with contrasting stresses and opportunities due to the relative proximity/remoteness of conurbations. Differing climatic regimes and pollution

13 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

loads also affect the sensitivity and threats facing human and other biological communities. The research programme consisted of four interconnected projects: Project 1: Review of the historical environmental changes in the UK uplands relevant to management and policy – to increase accessibility of long-term evidence and provide context from which to develop local case studies (Projects 2-3) and valuation assessment of long-term datasets (Project 4). Project 2: Tracking the moorland fringe in the Peak District - examining changes in the diversity and stability of heather/grass ecosystems to contribute a longer-term perspective into thresholds and resilience to inform moorland monitoring and management baselines. Project 3: The changing value of Atlantic moors in NW Sutherland – comparing interlinked dynamics of moors and land-use across a range of contrasting moorland contexts, from former farms to remote ‘semi-natural’ heath. Project 4: Adaptive learning: evaluating the past as a means of informing future management – applying social science and socio-economic techniques to understand how long-term narratives can contribute to the upland evidence-base, incorporating evidence from Projects 1-3.

Objectives The aims of the project reflect the two integrated strands on which the research is based: environmental history and social science tools for communication and knowledge exchange. 1. To establish environmental history (the relationships between people and their landscape) as a tool to inform and support decision-making for the conservation of the rural environment, and for enhancing knowledge of natural and cultural heritage in the uplands. Environmental history effectively provides a series of long-term ‘natural experiments’ in which the drivers and ecological and human consequences of change are known - in contrast with the uncertainties involved in modelling change from short-term baselines. Good progress was made towards this aim through the project case studies and choice experiments (see Results and Knowledge transfer). The range of conferences and meetings attended during the project helped raise awareness, while development of several small projects gave opportunities for training and extending the project rationale and case studies, including wider collaboration (see Capacity-building). Establishing unfamiliar sources within existing decision-making frameworks is, however, not achievable by a single researcher over the duration of one grant and broader level initiatives discussed below are essential in progress towards this goal. As regards terminology, in theory, environmental history is an interdisciplinary field of research which incorporates ecological, environmental, social and economic aspects of ecosystem services and values. However, in practice, the definition of this field is either unclear to the wider community or is strongly associated with history and changes in the perception of the environment (e.g. Sorlin & Warde 2007). The terms ‘long-term ecology’ or ‘long-term ecological research’ (LTER) is preferred as it is increasingly used by palaeoecologists and is less ambiguous, even though the role of society is not preeminent. A key finding from the discussions held during the case studies in this project is that stakeholder engagement is most successful when long-term ecologies and land-use histories start from places and events that stakeholders can identify with. Social

14 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

and economic values are thus an essential part of this engagement process when using palaeoecology/long-term ecology methods (cf. Parr et al. 2003). This requires changes in emphasis when structuring long-term discussions and data presentations in order to incorporate socio-economic and cultural values and reference points that are relevant to wider disciplinary and non-academic stakeholder groups. 2. To establish a communication framework between stakeholders and academic researchers in environmental history by combining long-term approaches with econometric methods for valuing environmental resources. Communication and dissemination barriers between LTER and other ecological knowledge are significant obstacles to greater interaction (see Background). Project 1 (Review) provides a more accessible, single-source reference to the current state of knowledge on the potential contribution of long-term sources to upland management. In retrospect, gearing the review towards publication would have increased dissemination and longevity. This would have required additional time and, in the view of the PI, have been best achieved through a team rather than an individual in consultation with wider stakeholders to draw out the most pertinent theoretical and applied implications. Social science methods of engagement were applied to develop case studies in habitats of international and national significance which are tailored to local needs, in recognition of the need to translate broad-level recommendations into locally adapted options (e.g. Anderson et al. 2009, Heller & Zavaleta 2009) (Projects 2-3). Progress towards this aim was most evident at a local level, where stakeholders have a deeper interest and understanding of their landscapes. Semi-structured interviews provided an effective means of designing site selection strategies that reflected the habitats and sites of concern, and was an accessible method of assessing local stakeholder responses to long- term results (see Knowledge transfer and Outputs). Infrastructural obstacles occur at higher levels due to existing demands and targets which agencies are obliged to meet. Both local-level and policy-level initiatives are thus required, in addition to continued engagement with the ecological community, to increase awareness and disseminate case study applications. Econometric methods were used to assess the value placed on long-term datasets by wider communities as it is difficult to put monetary values on knowledge, ecological legacies or heritage (Project 4). This was implemented using choice experiments (CEs) to assess the value of long-term evidence to (1) residents living around the Peak District, and (2) to a broad ecological (researcher, practitioner, policy-maker) community on a national level. As Project 2 was still in the early stages, CE1 was more valuable as a training opportunity and a contribution to the RELU Sustainable hill farming CE than a strong contribution to the literature. The proposed CE in Sutherland (Project 3) was replaced with further interviews to develop the quantitative social science experience of the PI. The methods, but not the aims of CE2 were altered (see Methods). Work is underway to complete analyses of both CEs (see Results). For collaborations and networking initiatives undertaken to increase the impact of this objective beyond the fellowship, see Interdisciplinarity.

Methods Project 1 was a survey of literature and review of existing long-term data relevant to upland management. Long-term evidence and contextual information on current management objectives and habitat issues were derived from peer-reviewed publications, agency and NGO documents, including unpublished reports to governmental and other bodies where these were available.

15 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

Social science and long-term ecological methods were combined in Projects 2 and 3. Study sites were selected through semi-structured interviews with stakeholders, using data from Project 1 to provide the broader context and starting point for these discussions. Semi-structured interviews are a useful tool for overcoming communication barriers between research and stakeholder knowledge and understanding perceptions of landscape change and conservation values held by different groups (e.g. Owens 2005, Midgley 2007, Fischer & Keith 2009). In Project 3 (Sutherland), stakeholders included local residents, land managers (e.g. North Assynt Crofters Trust, Assynt Foundation), partnerships, conservation agency and NGO staff (Scottish Natural Heritage, John Muir Trust). In Project 2 (Peak District), interviews were conducted primarily with ecologists working within partnerships (Moors for the Future, Peak District National Parks Authority), conservation agency and NGO staff (Natural England, National Trust, United Utilities) to narrow the search for study sites and to avoid the risk of stakeholder fatigue in an area where there are many land-owners and tenants, as well as many researchers conducting work. Interviews were structured around landscape values and perceptions of landscape change, and then focussed on habitats identified as valued or at risk, objectives, priorities and means of conservation and restoration management. This enabled habitats and potential study sites to be selected where long-term ecologies could contribute to current understandings of sensitivity and resilience on longer, ecosystem timeframes. Local stakeholder responses to the long-term data were also assessed after the dissemination of reports on long-term ecological dynamics. Once sites had been selected through stakeholder consultation, data for Projects 2-3 were generated using high resolution palaeoecology. These describe changes over time on a local scale, including vegetation, land-use, fire regimes and plant diversity (Bradshaw 1988, Davies & Tipping 2004). A network of sites was analysed in each study area to distinguish local variability and regional trends (Bradshaw & Lindbladh 2005).  At each site, a core was extracted from a small peat deposit using a modified golf- hole corer to provide a 50 cm deep x 10 cm diameter sample (Dr. A. Tyler, unpubl.). Cores were sealed in plastic wrap in the field and stored at 4°C in the laboratory to minimise biological activity.  Standard laboratory and analytical techniques were applied to sediment description (Aaby & Berglund 1986) and pollen identification (Moore et al. 1991, Bennett 1994).  Selected fungal spores were recorded as an additional proxy for changes in grazing, burning and hydrology (Blackford et al. 2006, van Geel & Aptroot 2006, Yeloff et al. 2007).  Microscopi provide a record of fire history.  Pollen results were analysed using rarefaction to provide a proxy for long-term changes in plant diversity, and using ordination techniques to enable inter-site comparisons (Birks & Line 1992).  Analysis of changes in hydrological conditions and carbon accumulation rates was undertaken through pollen preservation analysis, bulk density and carbon/nitrogen quantification. These were undertaken with assistance from post-graduate environmental science students (see Capacity-building).  Patterns and drivers of environmental change were examined at 20-25 year intervals (i.e. a timescale of human generations), using secure chronologies derived from a combination of radiocarbon dating and spheroidal carbonaceous particles (SCPs: soot particles derived from fossil fuel combustion since c.1850). SCP dating was supported in the Peak District by lead-210 (210Pb) dating, which also works over the

16 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

period 1850-present. This technique was applied to better calibrate the soot particle data as this area is influenced by three regional patterns of atmospheric pollution, each with slightly different timings. SCP and 210Pb dates provide more precise age estimates than 14C for the period since AD 1850 (Oldfield et al., 1995; Rose and Appleby 2005). 210Pb ages were calculated using the Constant Rate of Supply (CRS) model (Oldfield and Appleby, 1984). SCP concentrations were calculated using a modified version of the method of Rose (1994) by Dr. R. McCulloch (unpubl.). All dates are rounded to the nearest 10 years and quoted in calendar years AD.  Where available, results were compared with local knowledge of management change and historical sources (agricultural reports, agricultural census data) and archaeology to understand drivers of change and relate ecological trends to changing perceptions and policies. Feedback from managers and tenants provided more information on recent management history (see Results). To provide an additional, semi-quantitative, perspective to the semi-structured interviews undertaken in Projects 2-3, Project 4 incorporated choice experiments. This method is used to value attributes which are unfamiliar or do not have an easily defined market value, like ecosystem services (e.g. Hanley et al. 1998). CE1 (residents living around the Peak District) was designed in SPSS using standard orthogonal design methods, focussing on preferences for management. A list of preliminary questions was given to solicit information on existing understanding of changes in environment and land-use. This was followed by the presentation of information on the dynamic nature of the landscape and ways that this could inform current management. Participants then completed the CE which focussed on preferences for the type and level of management on eroding moorland and in valley bottom farmland, including labour and access implications (see Results). The aims of CE2 were (a) to introduce long-term environmental, ecological and management information as an additional tool for decision-making in research, management and policy, taking the uplands as a focus; and (b) to provide a first quantitative assessment of how long-term data are regarded relative to more familiar sources in a way that overcomes barriers to knowledge exchange which currently limit their accessibility, and so improve future communication. The experiment focused on the relative merits of four different sources of evidence relating to how upland ecosystems function and respond to change, and how research, policy and management decisions can improve resilience: ecological monitoring, ecological research, long-term research, and collaboration with stakeholders. Evidence presented was derived from Project 1. Advice and recommendations were also sought from the fellowship mentors, RELU Sustainable Uplands and Sustainable Hill Farming project teams. The design was applied to two upland case studies: peat/moorland and woodland. An initial pilot CE was designed in collaboration with Dr. Sergio Colombo and Prof. Nick Hanley using SPExpt Software (Street & Burgess 2007) to produce choice cards incorporating four selected attributes, each with three levels, using time as a cost variable. Participants completed the choice cards after a brief outline of each attribute, and then again after being given more detailed information to assess whether the level of information affected their choices. Coefficient values from a conditional logit model of the pilot CE using Limdep were used by Dr. Colombo to derive a mixed design combining MNL and MMNL panel designs. This ensured that the design was efficient with a relatively small sample size. Based on pilot results, only one set of evidence was presented in the full CE. Originally, CE2 was to be carried out via workshops, but this was altered to an online survey in response to the change in economic conditions and resulting time pressures it has placed on those within the target audience, many of whom are no longer able to attend meetings

17 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

that are not directly related to their work. Responses were solicited by attending meetings, targeting individuals and networks of ecologists spanning academia, governmental agencies, NGOs, practitioners and consultants (see Results; 1 copy is enclosed1).

Interdisciplinarity As indicated by in Objectives, combining environmental history knowledge with social science tools for communication were integral aspects of the project design. Working on local scales with stakeholder communities, through environmental history case studies, informed the research design and site selection. Broader networking opportunities through numerous meetings and local feedback on the case studies continue to shape the dissemination and publication strategies. For wider cross-disciplinary networking activities to fulfil the objectives of the project, see Knowledge transfer.

Results Project 1 set the context for the case studies (Projects 2-3). It provided a valuable opportunity for the PI to become familiar with conservation and management priorities. It is structured to provide a searchable and more accessible source of information on the long-term data available for the UK uplands. It summarises the important contributions that LTER can make to management and policy decisions, and some of the obstacles to meeting this objective. The main review is structured around five themes: 1. Moorland management & dynamics: farming in fluctuation 2. Degraded lands & thresholds of stability 3. Upland diversity: the legacy & role of management 4. Resilience & restoration management 5. Climatic & economic change: rural risk & resilience Key findings and gaps in existing knowledge were identified in each section. Full references are provided to allow readers to pursue information in areas of interest2. Project 2: Initially, a single altitudinal transect was proposed to track the movement of the moorland fringe through time. However, the broader applicability of results from a single transect may be limited, so four sites were selected from contrasting altitudes and moorland communities. Four sites were selected on the basis of literature evidence, semi- structured interviews and fieldwork (Table 1). Two additional sites are being analysed for an MSc dissertation (see Capacity-building). The records show strikingly similar extremes of change in moorland ecology, especially in the last c.150 years (Table 1). These follow UK-wide historical trends, with grass invasion of heather moors evident across the Peak District and elsewhere in the UK. This has implications for how realistic baselines are set. Baselines established on mid-late 20th century norms may underestimate the amount of change. There is no single driver of change. In this study, moderate levels of grazing are beneficial for maintaining heather, while extreme fires are more closely associated with grass expansion, echoing 20th century experience of the damaging effects of wildfire. Desiccation (driven by climate and drainage) and pollution stresses also inferred from this study add to a growing body of evidence for long-term sensitivities that continue to influence current moorland management and condition.

1 The CE is available via: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/questionnaire/index.html. 2 To download the review: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/documents/Upland_environmental_history_and_ma nagement_review_Davies_2008_updatedJul09.pdf. One copy is enclosed with this report.

18 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

On a more positive note, unprecedented extremes of vegetation change do not necessarily indicate that moors have crossed an irreversible threshold as three sites show some recovery in heaths in the last c.40-60 years. However, they remain vulnerable and hydrological changes on eroded and grass-dominated moors, like Withens Moor, may have been too severe to shift the competition balance back strongly in favour of heaths. Restoration work would thus be more cost effective and ecologically feasible on less heavily degraded moors.

Table 1. Site contexts and major ecological changes in the four Peak District study sites. Withens Moor: Grassmoor on deep blanket peat 1. Heather dominant c.1430-1860 2. Grass dominant c.1870-2008 Barbrook: Mixed heather/grass moor on mineral soil 1. Mixed grass/heather c.650-1480 2. Heather dominant c.1750-1880 3. Grass dominant c.1900-1985 4. Mixed grass/heather c.1975-2008 Emlin Dike: Heather moor near the moorland edge, managed for grouse 1. Heather dominant c.1590-1880 2. Grass dominant c.1885-1950 3. Mixed grass/heather c.1955-2008 Cranberry Bed: Valley-bottom flushed mire 1. Heather dominant c.1770-1880 2. Mixed grass/heather c.1880-1900 3. Heather dominant c.1900-1960 4. Grass dominant c.1960-1990 5. Mixed grass/heather c.1975-2008

Project 3: Three sites were selected through stakeholder consultation: two lie at the moor/woodland ecotone and the third is located within the distinctive limestone/acid moorland mosaic. A fourth (birchwood) site was analysed for an MSc dissertation (see Capacity-building). The balance between peat and trees, and between heather and grasses is driven by disturbance. In the last 500 years, this has increasingly been determined by stocking regimes, not natural factors. Current restoration efforts are taking place within the most widespread period of regeneration in the last c.500 years. Birch populations in this study and previous work in the area show a pulse of growth since c.1900. This may be in response to a release from grazing suppression. Although it is increasing the extent of woodland cover, birch regeneration is not considered favourable under the EU Habitats Directive, since it contributes to the tendency for non- designated communities to take over from target species or habitats. Legislative definitions are, however, based on idealised rather than actual woodland composition. Less emphasis should be placed on oak, which has remained a secondary component of birch-dominated woods. Birch has survived climatic adversity and anthropogenic disturbance, and is currently spreading, so management strategies which support birch may enhance woodland resilience, particularly in combination with managed disturbance. Periodic disturbance is needed to ensure that the pulse of growth continues beyond the current generation of trees. Woodland restoration would benefit from wider application of controlled grazing experiments, following the model established in Scots pinewoods, to balance short-term ‘damage’ to ‘favourable condition’ with support for long-term ecosystem processes.

19 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

In contrast with the strong grass/heath transformations in the Peak District study, the record from the limestone/acid moor in Sutherland shows long-term cyclicity in heather/grass dynamics over the last 500 years. Similar to Peak District results, though, these transitions have become increasingly marked, perhaps indicating increased pressures or greater sensitivity. As with woodland dynamics, this was largely driven by fluctuations in grazing and in burning. Heather growth coincides with moderate disturbance, echoing the findings in the Peak District. During the course of this project, the site has been declassified as a National Natural Reserve owing to conflicts of interest between the government agency and the land-owner, with increased emphasis on sustainable deer management. More work is needed to understand the broader significance of these local grass-heather dynamics, particularly in view of the shift in management priorities.

There is growing interest in the carbon storage function of peatlands, but surprisingly little is known about the effects of anthropogenic activities on longer-term peatland carbon balance (Garnett et al. 2000). Carbon accumulation rates and associated changes in peat structure were analysed at six sites in the Peak District and two in Sutherland. Potential interactions between vegetation composition and productivity, management, hydrology and carbon sequestration are complex. Results are currently being studied. Preliminary inferences show that strong changes in vegetation result in marked changes in carbon accumulation, as anticipated from previous work. Low C accumulation rates from c.1570-1850 at the two Sutherland sites may be comparable with data suggesting reduced productivity during the ‘Little Ice Age’ (Mauquoy et al. 2002), but more sites and longer records are required to test this. Results will be compared with similar work being undertaken on degraded bogs in the Peak District by Dr Martin Evans (Univ. Manchester).

Many of the changes recorded in Projects 2 and 3 lie beyond the scope of conventional ecological datasets. Ecosystem resilience and sustainable management therefore depend on having reference points that are apt to the ecosystem rather than convenient to human timeframes. Post-dissemination interviews and conversations in both project areas established that starting long-term perspectives from places and events that stakeholders recognise may be a more successful, practical way of weaving LTER into existing local and regional frameworks than the top-down approach applied in many published papers on the value of LTER approaches, many of which are intended to engage on a theoretical level.

Project 4: As indicated in Objectives, to coordinate this work with the RELU Sustainable Hill Farming project, the CE in the Peak District was carried out before Project 2, so CE1 provided the context within which to evaluate the results and inform communication approaches. In the context of the Sustainable Hill Farming project, the results showed that providing more information, including historically informed management options, does alter participants’ preferences, but that this is transient rather than lasting influence (D. Tinch, pers. comm.).

CE2 provided a novel way of evaluating the value of LTER knowledge, relative to familiar and established sources used in upland decision-making. The data provide a useful counterpart to papers by palaeoecologists illustrating the value of long-term evidence for conservation. Results from the pilot study (5 participants) and on-going analyses of the online survey indicate that ecologists do value long-term evidence when it

20 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

is presented on a comparable footing with familiar decision-making tools. Peatland and woodland case studies produced similar results. Pilot results show that short-term monitoring on the current 6 year common standards monitoring interval is strongly preferred to longer (12 year) intervals. Long-term data are valued, with site- or region- specific evidence preferable to general syntheses. Preferences for stakeholder collaboration were largely non-significant, with some support for bottom-up rather than top-down methods. Altering established approaches inevitably incurs costs. When asked to consider potential time management costs when incorporating different sources of data, the results were largely non-significant, with a weak preference against 1 day/week, while 1 day/month was in some cases preferred over 1 day/quarter. This provided a challenging exercise, but a useful semi-quantitative comparison with semi-structured interviews and responses. It has also exposed some inflexibility in current management structures, particularly in translating LTER evidence into practice: targets and objectives set by existing policy-driven frameworks limit the potential for incorporating new sources of evidence for many agency staff without further impetus. Both higher level engagement and local communication are thus critical to promote changes in established frameworks from top-down and bottom-up perspectives.

Capacity-Building and Training Many of the training events undertaken during the grant were to improve the interdisciplinary skills of the PI, particularly in the area of stakeholder engagement. The following events were attended by the PI during the Fellowship: Jul 2007 Introduction to STATA course, Stirling Feb 2008 Dialogue Matters: 3-day training course on good practice in stakeholder participation, Kent Mar 2008 Effective research interview practice, Stirling Jun 2008 RELU managing and sharing research data, Edinburgh Nov 2008 Science in the Media, Voice of Young Science, Edinburgh May 2009 NERC, BES and ERFF Knowledge transfer, learning and development workshop: Science – Policy Interactions, Reading May 2009 Ministerial shadowing, Prof. Maggie Gill & ecological advisors, Scottish Government, Glasgow & Edinburgh The delay in the start date for the project meant that it was not possible to attend in- house training events with members of the RELU Sustainable Uplands project, as proposed in the original project training programme. In retrospect, contacting other RELU projects to ask whether it would have been possible to act as an observer at participatory events would have provided a good bridge between the training course and stakeholder meetings held during this project.

The fellowship also provided an opportunity to develop small research projects. These provided student training opportunities to increase research capacity amongst future graduates, counteracting the lack of awareness of LTER amongst many environmental and conservation management students. The projects also provided opportunities to increase the amount of data within the case studies and develop collaborations beyond the geographical and stakeholder remit of the fellowship: (1) Long-term birchwood ecology by Glenleraig, Sutherland. Undertaken by Richard Hill, MSc Environmental Management 2009, Univ. Stirling. (2) Bridging the past and present to secure the future of the Caledonian forest, Scotland: incorporating historical vegetation reconstruction into ecological restoration framework. Undertaken by Ana Prohaska, MSc Biodiversity, Conservation and

21 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

Management 2009, Univ. Oxford; in collaboration with Prof. Kathy Willis & Dr. Cynthia Froyd. (3) Testing the native status of pine at Ford Moss, N England, in collaboration with Russell Anderson (Forest Research) and Paul Muto (Natural England). Being undertaken by Rebecca Barclay, MSc Environmental Management 2010, Univ. Stirling. (4) Long-term perspectives on woodland restoration at Comer Estate, Loch Lomond, in cooperation with Andrew Dixon (Comer Estate). Being undertaken by Ross Preston, MSc Environmental Management 2010, Univ. Stirling. (5) Historical carbon sequestration patterns on two contrasting grass moors in the Peak District Being undertaken by Michel Pelka, MSc Environmental Management 2010, Univ. Stirling. (6) The transition from woodland to moorland in Highland Scotland and implications for future regeneration in Scots pinewood regeneration. Undertaken by Dr. Jenny Watson, PDRA, Univ. Stirling – funded with a small grant from the host department. (7) The role of vegetation dynamics in carbon sequestration in Sutherland: plant macrofossil analyses. Undertaken by Dr. Dmitri Mauquoy, Univ. Aberdeen. (8) The funding intended to employ assistants during workshops was combined with underspent field assistant monies to employ and train two post-graduate environmental science students to assist with carbon accumulation and dating analyses. Both students are continuing to develop and apply their skills in environmental geography (see 4. Staffing). (9) Training and second supervision for 2 MSc and 5 BSc students using pollen analytical methods to study bumblebee foraging preferences – increasing the use pollen to span a broader disciplinary remit in ecology and conservation.

The following teaching was undertaken during the project to increase awareness of timescales and interdisciplinarity in environmental sciences and geography: 2007 Tutorial for MSc Environmental Management and lecture on MRes Environmental History; assist with BSc Environmental Policy and Management habitat restoration practical 2009 Lecture on MRes Environmental History 2010 Coordinate and deliver/part-deliver two modules for BSc Environmental Geography/ Environmental Geography & Education/Biology; lecture on BSc Restoration Ecology module; assist with BSc Environmental Policy and Management Habitat restoration practical

With funding from this RELU grant, a successful conference was held in the final year of the project. The meeting was structured around timescales in ecology, ranging from ‘re- visiting’ studies (looking back over the last c.50 years of ecological recording) to centennial and millennial studies in order to reflect the wide variety of spatial and temporal scales over which environmental processes and ecological responses occur. It brought together researchers, consultants and policy-advisors to discuss effective communication of long-term records. The meeting included representatives from Scottish Government, Scottish Natural Heritage, Deer Commission Scotland, National Trust for Scotland, RSPB, English Heritage, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, and 19 UK and international universities. Conferences and meetings attended to disseminate the results are listed in Knowledge transfer.

22 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

Outputs and Data In addition to the publications and review produced under Project 1, as entered on ESRC Society Today, and the case study reports (available online3, with a single copy of each is enclosed), the project has produced the following publications, stakeholder reports and articles to communicate the rationale and results with non-academic audiences: Publications Davies, A.L. (2010) Late Holocene vegetation and land-use diversity in NW Sutherland: a fine resolution palaeoecological perspective, in The Quaternary of the far NW Scottish Highlands Field Guide, Lucas, S. & Bradwell, T. (eds.), Quaternary Research Association, London, 87-100. Newsletters Davies, A. (Aug 2010) Taking the long view: the value of hindsight in moorland ecology and management. Heather Trust Annual Report, 33-35. Davies, A. (Feb 2010) Article review: Carrión, J.S. & Fernández, S. (2009) The survival of the ‘natural potential vegetation’ concept (or the power of tradition), Journal of Biogeography 36, 2202-2203. Bridging the Gap newsletter 7, 10. Davies, A. (Aug 2009) Further comment on Vera’s ‘wood pasture’ hypothesis – Péter Szabó (2009) Open woodland in Europe in the Mesolithic and in the Middle Ages: can there be a connection? Forest Ecology and Management 257, 2327-2330. Article review, Bridging the Gap newsletter 5, 9. Davies A. & Quelch, P. (Jan 2009) The past in the present: constructing history in woodland management: a discussion. Bridging the Gap newsletter 3, 12-14. Davies, A. (Sept 2008) Looking back to look forward. Peatlands Partnership Newsletter, issue 2, The Peatlands Partnership, www.caithness.org/peatlands_partnership/Newsletter%20Issue%202.pdf (1 copy enclosed) Davies, A., Bunting, J. & Whitehouse, N. (Aug 2008) Bridging the Gap: crossing the palaeoecology-ecology divide, Association for Environmental Archaeology Newsletter 101. Davies, A. (May 2008) The past in the present: constructing history in woodland management. Article review, Bridging the Gap newsletter 1, 2. Davies, A. (Dec 2007) Lessons from the past for the future of the uplands. Looking to the Hills, Newsletter of the Uplands Lead Co-ordination Network, Issue 15, 24-27. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/pdf/ulcn_newsletter15v1.pdf (1 copy enclosed)

Data management: In accordance with the initial Communication and Data Management strategy for the project, collected data were stored on a password-protected networked drive at the University of Stirling and were regularly transferred to USB and external hard-drive, both stored off-site. Archiving has been agreed and collation of datasets into appropriate format with explanatory information is in the final stages of completion.

3 Project 2: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/documents/PeakDistrictlong- termecologyreport_Jan2010.pdf Project 3: http://www.sbes.stir.ac.uk/people/davies/documents/NWSutherlandLong- termecologyreport_Mar2009_000.pdf

23 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

Knowledge Transfer, User Engagement and Impacts To ensure wide user engagement, the project rationale and results were presented at conferences and meetings which included researchers (academic and policy research providers), governmental agencies, NGOs, land managers and residents: Feb 2008 Research seminar, University of Aberdeen. Presentation: Lessons from long-term ecology - the value of hindsight Mar 2008 Bridging the Gap workshop, University of Hull. Presentation: Palaeoecology and conservation: working towards better practice? Mar 2008 Research seminar, University College Dublin. Presentation: Historical palynology in Highland Scotland - history lessons for archaeology? Mar 2008 FIRES workshop: the role of managed fire in ecosystem services of UK moorlands & heathlands, University of Edinburgh. Presentation: Where do we set the baselines? A long-term perspective on fire management of moorlands Apr 2008 Stories of Assynt: working together to interpret Assynt, Inchnadamph field centre (local community initiative). Presentation: A sense of place: stories of Assynt from a palaeoenvironmental perspective May 2008 Moor for the Future Research day, Bakewell, Peak District. Presentation: On the brink? How looking to the past can help the future of the Peak District Nov 2008 Moor for the Future Research conference, Castleton, Peak District (no presentation). Apr 2009 FIREMAN workshop: EU-BIODIVERSA project on fire management to maintain biodiversity and mitigate economic loss, Cumbria. Presentation: Links to practice: long-term perspectives on burning & biodiversity in UK moorland management Jul 2009 Foresight Land Use Futures and RELU Workshop on Land Valuation and Decision Making, London. Presentation: Foundations for the future: learning from the past Sept 2009 AHRC Contested Common Land Symposium, Environmental Governance, Law & Sustainable Land Management, c.1600-2006, University of Newcastle. Presentation: In retrospect: using long-term ecology to set current management issues in context Oct 2009 British Ecological Society Forest Research group meeting, University of Cambridge. Presentation (with Dr. Jane Bunting): Palaeoecological contributions to woodland pattern & process Nov 2009 Upland Management and Biodiversity- Knowledge Exchange Workshop, Scottish Natural Heritage Perth. Poster promoting choice experiment: Integrating human and ecosystem timescales in upland research, management and policy: is there a role for long-term datasets? (Project 4) Dec 2009 14th Meeting of the UK Biodiversity Research Advisory Group, Edinburgh. Poster promoting choice experiment: Integrating human and ecosystem timescales in upland research, management and policy: is there a role for long-term datasets? (Project 4) Jan 2010 Long-term ecology in habitat management, University of Stirling (RELU fellowship conference). Presentation: Life beyond pollen diagrams: alternative methods of communicating long-term findings Jan 2010 Scottish Alliance for Geoscience, Environment & Society (SAGES) meeting on Palaeo-ecological, climatological and archaeological reconstruction of the Scottish Highlands for the last ~8000 years, Stirling. Presentation: Life beyond pollen diagrams: communicating long-term ecology Feb 2010 SAGES Flow Country Peatlands Workshop, Dundee (no presentation)

24 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

Mar 2010 Association for Environmental Archaeology spring conference on the Environmental Archaeology of the North, University of Aberdeen. Presentation: Community and conservation in UK peatlands: using environmental archaeology to set current debates into a long-term context in Sutherland and the Peak District

Application of research results beyond the project include: consultation during the construction of a fire report by Sutherland stakeholders to SNH on the detrimental effects of fire, and consultation, leading to co-authorship, and use of the Project 1 review in an article on the state of the uplands (Reed et al. 2009). Connections made during the project have also led a project with the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology: an initial assessment has been completed and funding is currently being sought to carry out full analysis to contribute to the RELU Loweswater catchment management project, with the aim of producing a joint ecology /palaeolimnology /palaeoecology /history paper. Involvement of the PI was also sought in a community-led Landscape Partnership application in the Project 3 study area (Nov 2009).

These are modest beginnings. Embedding longer-term methods within established decision-making and evidence-base frameworks is not a short-term goal. It requires increased cross-disciplinary awareness of methods and data that are unfamiliar to many stakeholders, and changes in established decision-making frameworks and communication networks to incorporate additional sources of evidence. This project provides impetus and opportunity, but effecting wider change requires time and continued effort beyond the present project. The parallel development of the Bridging the Gap (BtG) network is thus an essential forum to effect longer-term and broader-scale changes in established practice. It is facilitating contact and, through regular newsletters4, stimulating debate between palaeoecologists, ecologists and conservationists. BtG was established by Drs Jane Bunting (Univ. Hull) and Nicki Whitehouse (Queen’s University Belfast) and close contact has been maintained between this project and network activities. The RELU fellowship conference incorporated the second meeting of the BtG network. The Mires Research and Forest Ecology Groups within the British Ecological Society provide established opportunities for networking and discussions spanning multiple temporal and spatial scales (see Capacity-building & training).

Future Research Priorities The project revealed infrastructural resistance within existing decision-making frameworks to the incorporation of additional evidence, despite evidence from the CE that the knowledge it could provide is valued. To extend horizon-scanning exercises and evidence-base surveys beyond ecological comfort zones, infrastructural change would be best achieved through collaborative research applications, to develop and strengthen links from multiple disciplines and perspectives.

Throughout the fellowship, opportunities to broaden the application of long-term ecological & environmental evidence to management and conservation have been pursued through research grants and projects. These include: involvement as a co- applicant in a NERC KE grant application (Mar 2009) and PI on an application for RELU call IV (Oct 2009), both unsuccessful.

4 http://www2.hull.ac.uk/science/geography/research/environmental_change/mjb3.aspx

25 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Full Research Report ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

References Anderson et al. (2006) TREE 21, 696-704; Bennett (1994) Annotated catalogue of pollen and pteridophyte spore types of the British Isles. Dept. Plant Sci., Univ. Cambridge; Bennion & Battarbee (2007) J. Paleolim. 38, 285-295; Birks (1993) Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 79, 153-177; Blackford et al. (2006) Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 141, 189-201; Bradshaw (1988) in Huntley & Webb (eds.) Vegetation History. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 725-751; Bradshaw & Lindbladh (2005) Ecol. 86, 1679-1686; Bradshaw et al. (2005) Ecography 28, 1-8; Chambers et al. (1999) J. Appl. Ecol. 36, 719-733; Chambers et al. (2007) Biol. Cons. 137, 197-209; Davies & Bunting (2010) Open Ecol. J. 3, 54-67; Davies & Tipping (2004) The Holocene 14, 233-245; Dearing et al. (2006) Regional Environmental Change 6, 1-16; Fischer & Keith (2009) J. Rur. Stud. 26, 185-193; Foster et al. (1990) TREE 5, 119–122; Heller & Zavaleta (2009) Biol. Conserv. 142, 14-32; Lindbladh et al. (2008) J. Biogeog. 35, 682-697; Mauquoy et al. (2002) Paleogeog. Palaeoclim, Palaeoecol. 186, 275-310; Midgley (2007) Biodiv. Conserv. 16, 3317-3332; Morecroft et al. (2009) Biol. Conserv. 142, 2814-2832; Moore et al. (1991) Pollen Analysis (2nd edition.). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific; Oldfield et al. (1995) The Holocene 5, 141-148; Oldfield & Appleby (1984) in Haworth & Lund (eds.), Lake Sediments and Environmental History. Univ. Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 93-124; Owens (2005) Trans. Instit. Brit. Geog. 30, 287-292; Parr et al. (2003) Sci. Tot. Environ. 310, 1-8; Reed et al. (2009) Futures 41, 619-630; Rose (1994). J. Paleolim. 11, 201-204; Rose & Appleby (2005) J. Paleolim. 34, 349-361; Street & Burgess (2007) The Construction of Optimal Stated Choice Experiments: Theory and Methods, Wiley; Sorlin & Warde (2007) Environ. Hist. 12, 107-130; Sutherland et al. (2006) J. Appl. Ecol. 43, 617-627; Willis et al. (2007) Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London B362, 175-186; van Geel & Aptroot (2006) Nova Hedwigia 82, 313-329; Yeloff et al. (2007) Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 146, 102-145.

26 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Non-Technical Summary (Research summary) ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

ACTIVITIES AND ACHIEVEMENTS QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Non-Technical Summary

Aims & objectives: The uplands supply a wide range of ecosystem services and are home to many high conservation-value species and habitats. Striking a balance between these various demands and providing rural communities with sustainable livelihoods requires a secure understanding of how these ecosystems function and respond to change. Most decisions are based on short-term information (mostly <10 yrs), even though many ecological processes play out over longer timescales. This can make it difficult to disentangle trends and interactions from seasonal and annual variability. As a result, managers and policy-makers are dealing with immediate issues and legacies of the past, while planning for future change, yet overwhelmingly rely on short-term insights. Ensuring resilience thus requires insights on longer timescales than current planning tools can provide. In the context of changes in climate, economics and policy, rapid decision-making is needed and we do not have the luxury of time to learn and adapt as processes unfold. The main objective of the project was to explore how longer-term (>decadal) evidence can be incorporated into decision-making the UK uplands to ensure that we use the benefits of hindsight. This was done by combining environmental archaeology/history techniques for understanding past environmental and land-use changes, with social science methods of engagement and evaluation to bring these longer narratives into planning frameworks. The broader aim is to ensure that short-term monitoring systems and goals will support the longer-term processes that underpin ecosystem function and values.

Main research results: On a broad level, the project revealed that although the ecological community does value long-term evidence, there is infrastructural resistance to incorporating additional sources of knowledge into the evidence-base due to pressures to meet existing targets. This indicates the need for engagement both at policy-level and with local stakeholders to introduce and embed long-term concepts into the governance arena and decision-making frameworks, as well as developing and testing strategies that can be applied to specific situations to increase local resilience. On local scales, the case study results show that, despite spanning nearly c.100 years, ecological survey records for Peak District moors are not representative of the range of habitat variability, and may produce baselines that underestimate the extent of change and sensitivity of the UK’s drier peatlands. In Sutherland, combined long-term and short-term insights indicate that current legislative and stakeholder emphasis on oak in habitat definitions for Atlantic woods are too narrow to ensure sustainability, and that managed livestock disturbance may also be a more feasible means of ensuring regeneration than relying on natural processes. Many of the changes recorded in both case studies lie beyond the scope of conventional ecological datasets. This indicates the value of reference points that are apt to the ecosystem rather than convenient to human timeframes.

Significant academic achievements: On a personal level, involvement in the RELU network through this fellowship has allowed me to improve communication and interdisciplinary research skills within and beyond academia. The work and contacts formed during the project helped build local partnerships to create small projects which also build new researcher skills and develop applied examples to illustrate how long-term insights help inform and perhaps challenge management decisions.

7 To cite this output: Davies, Althea (2010). Foundations for the future: learning from the past: Non-Technical Summary (Research summary) ESRC End of Award Report, RES-229-27-0003. Swindon: ESRC

Dissemination activities focussed on the ecology community and on building relations with local stakeholders, the latter particularly in the northern study area. These involved presentations and newsletter contributions to reach academic, agency and local partnership levels, and discussions at policy-advisor through to local conservation officer levels within conservation agencies. This was invaluable in ensuring that the long-term research evidence is targeted at current policy and management concerns. Building good local relations has provided opportunities for further engagement to strengthen local adaptive capacity.

Policy & practice impacts: As intimated above, policy and practice impacts are relatively limited as bringing unfamiliar sources into established decision-making frameworks requires continued interaction to introduce the concepts and also ensure that long-term ecologists are sufficiently familiar with the needs of potential users. These goals are being actively pursued through networks like Bridging the Gap, an informal group of ecologists, conservation managers and palaeoecologists interested in exploring the ways in which long term perspectives can help understand present ecosystems and ecosystem processes and predict future responses to environmental and management change. Through this network, experience gained during this fellowship and by other long-term ecologists who have also established good local partnerships is helping to forge common agendas and increase awareness to effect longer-term change.

8