DOCSLIB.ORG

Gical Survey 1994

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gical Survey 1994 Alpert Dale, Hope Woodlands, Derbyshire Archaeological Survey 1994 W J. Bevan: Survey Archaeologist g ~A~l~)~~3 Caring for a living landscape ALPORT DALE, HOPE WOODLANDS, DERBYSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1994 by BILL BEVAN .. ,. ' . CONTENTS Page How to Use this Report ii Introduction 1 Part 1 Archaeological Features on Alport Dale 2 Part 2 Field Boundaries on Alport Dale 3 Part 3 Alport Dale: Changes in Land Use Through Time 4 Part 4 Alport Dale: Location of Archaeological Features 9 Part 5 Alport Dale: Catalogue of Archaeological Features 10 Part 6 Alport Dale: Assessment of Relative Feature Importance 19 Part 7 Safeguarding the archaeological heritage - what you can do 20 Part 8 Glossary of Archaeological Terms Used 22 Part 9 Bibliography 24 Appendices A Alport Dale: Description of Survey Archive 25 B Feature Recording - Survey Specifications 26 Acknowledgements 27 ILLUSTRATIONS Opposite Page Fig. 1 Location of Alport Dale 1 Fig. 2 Boundary of survey area & locations covered by figs. 8 to 1 o 3 Fig. 3 Boundary changes 1627 to 1808 4 Fig. 4 Boundary changes 1808 to 1850 4 Fig. 5 Boundary changes 1850 to 1880 4 Fig. 6 Communication routes 6 Fig. 7 Landscape Characterisation Zones 7 Fig. 8 Archaeological features (south) 10 Fig. 9 Archaeological features (central) 10 Fig. 10 Archaeological features (north) 10 ~. !. HOW TO USE THIS REPORT The following archaeological report is a result of a field survey of the farm or land undertaken by a Peak National Park survey archaeologist. It is divided into nine major parts to allow easy access to different aspects of the information. Part 1 is a summary of the types and the date of archaeological features identified. Use this section for an overview of the archaeological features within the survey area. Part 2 is a description of the farm field boundaries. Use this section for an overview of the existing field system. Part 3 discusses changes in land use over time, based on the features identified on the ground and from basic documentary work. Use this section for an outline of the development through time of the survey area as an archaeological landscape and for assessing the archaeological character of different parts of the area surveyed. Part 4 is the maps, showing all the archaeological features recognised by the survey. Use this section to find out the locations of features within the survey area. Part 5 is the catalogue, listing all the archaeological features discovered by the survey. Use this section for detailed description and an interpretation of each feature. Part 6 is an assessment of relative importance. Use this section as a guide to the importance of individual archaeological features in the survey area. Part 7 is an outline guide to managing archaeological features. Use this section for general suggestions on how archaeology can be ·managed in the landscape without undue interference with usual land management practice. Part 8 is a glossary. Use this section for definffions of archaeological terms used in the report. Part 9 is a bibliography of published and archive documents consulted in the writing of this -t· report. Use this section if more background or detailed information on the types of feature found within the survey area is required. In addition, in the Appendices there is a description of all the archive material produced in conjunction with the survey and where it is kept, and a note of how the survey information was recorded. ii ALPORT DALE, HOPE WOODLANDS, DERBYSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1994 BILL BEVAN The archaeological swvey of this area was carried out in September 1994, for the Upper Derwent Officer Working Group as part of Upper Derwent Su!Vey Project (see figs. 1 & 2). Su!Vey comprised systematic search of the farm, and discoveries were sketch-plotted on an OS 1:2500 base (the Board's Phase 1 su!Vey standard). Time did not allow extensive archive research to be undertaken, thus this report should not be taken as a history of the farm, but one that largely concentrates on the extant archaeology. The interpretations of the archaeology given in this report are provisional. They are based on the knowledge available at the time of writing. Additions and some alterations may be made to these interpretations when su1Vey work for the whole of the Upper Derwent Su!Vey Project area and more in-depth documentary research is completed. Any such changes will be provided after completion of the whole project. 1 PROJECT KEY Offe!{ ~/l.No;!.Jr 50!1.IJq: A W'~T !7AJ...e ... Tll£i S//RWY llRGA 8PEA1 ILLUSTRATION NO. 1 NATION MAI< NATIONAi- PARK TITLE \ fJX;A llON OF &xJN!?NlY Caring for a Living Lam AtJ>oRr mu ) NAIN fJ.OA175 FIELDWORK DATE SGPT 1qql/- Peak Park Joint Planning Aldern House, Baslow Ro DRAWING DATE V'AN t'l'f5 Bakewell, Derbyshire, DE· DRAFTSPERSON "'1:J8 Tel. 0629814321Fax.06298· REF - f Stockport • Sheffield • Macclesfield• Hanington Matlock• Wars low Leek • .. Ashbourne PART1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FEATURES ON ALPORT DALE One of the main archaeological features inspected in 1994 had been recorded previously in the Features and Monuments Record (SMR) (see feature 35). The 1994 survey recorded a further 7 nationally or regionally important features, comprising a trackway (feature 5), two sledways (features 52 & 53), two groups of buildings, Woodlands Valley Water Conduit (see feature 3) and Ashop Weir (see feature 10). A further 57 locally important archaeological features and 2 groups of standing buildings were recorded, only two of which had been previously entered in the SMR (feature 19; 62). Rowlee Bridge isthe only listed buildings within the survey area, but is not the responsibility of Severn Trent Water (see feature 60). A number of the sites catalogued are not owned by Severn Trent Water, though they lie within the survey area (see features 60, 61, 62, 63). Features of National and Regional Importance A number of important archaeological features exist on the farm that are of a variety of dates. No pre-medieval features occur on the farm, though post-medieval agricultural activity may have destroyed surface evidence for earlier structures on the lower ground. Of the important archaeological features on the farm, the earliest are probably the three routeways (features 5, 52, 53) and the Alport Dale hamlet (Alport Farm and Alport Castles Farm) (see features 6, 57). The routes are either medieval or very early post-medieval, pre­ dating 1627 (Senior, 1627). The routeways are complemented by much of the enclosure, some of which is abandoned though much is still in use, which also pre-dates 1627 (ibid.). There is also an llbandoned field system which was constructed in the post-medieval period (see feature 35). The buildings of the hamlet consist of mainly 19th century rebuilding with surviving earlier elements. Settlement is recorded at this location from as early as 1627 and may date to the medieval period (Senior, 1627). The other two important features are the 20th century Ashop Weir and Woodlands Valley Water Conduit (see features 3, 10). Though very recent structures, their importance is due to their integral part in the Howden, Derwent and Ladybower reservoirs scheme. This huge construction project transformed the landscape of the area. Features of Local Importance The majority of archaeological features of local importance within the surveyed area are of post-medieval date, though some may be as early as medieval. Some are redundant structures related to past farming, including old boundaries (features 7, 16, 18, 20, 24, 32, 33, 37, 40, 41, 45, 46), buildings (features 26, 31, 34, 39, 42, 64, 65, 66, 67), clearance cairns (see feature 43) stock folds (see features 51, 55) and one area of ridge and furrow (see feature 22). There are quarries (features 38, 49, 54), which are agriculture-related, providing wall-building stone. There are post-medieval tracks which link settlements and fields, provide fixed access points within fields, or, in the case of the Sheffield to Manchester turnpike form through-routes (features 1, 2, 4, 21, 25, 27, 30, 36, 47, 63). The remainder of the features are bridges (see features 60, 61 ), footpath signs (see feature 19), miscellaneous features related to Ashop Weir (see features 8, 9, 13, 14), platforms (see features 28, 29, 58), a water sluice (see feature 12), and a rain gauge (see feature 56). 2 PROJECT . KEY UPP€fl. 1?6R.N6Nr SUl<IEI · 80UN17AR.1 OF S(}RVcY ARs'A At...fOR:< (7;4L£3 - Fl'iUM NUl-fdcfi. OF AR.C/-IN:iOUXY ILWSTRATION NO. J. Fl'i. q 1-a::AT/ON Pt-Al.J 8fA~I~~~ 1!:1~//llR.Y if SiJR.1)£'/ AR.EA 6UIW7iN4 Caring (or a Uving Landscape ANO wxxru>NS G::JVO:R.€1? 8Y - F''iUM'5 s ro 10 Peak Park Joint Planning Board, FIELDWORK DATE 5'?( l?llf- ~ fl.LV6fi- Aldern House, Baslow Road, DRAWING DATE J'AJJ /"1'15 Bakewell, Derbyshire, DE45 1AE Tel. 01629 816200 DRAFTSPERSON W;J6 Fax. 01629 81_63JO REF. I fl~. 10 ow METRES (,._pf'R.OX) :, : . • ~ " PART2 FIELD BOUNDARIES ON ALPORT DALE While field boundaries are very much part of the archaeology of an area, they are not easily listed in a catalogue because of their number and nature. Individually they may superficially seem of limited archaeological value, but put together they are of crucial importance in defining the character of the archaeological landscape. Those field boundaries comprising the currently used field system, at the date of the survey, are not included in the catalogue of features given below (Part 5). Due to this, and the archaeological importance of field boundaries in the landscape, this field system is desc.ribed here.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: River Noe and River Ashop Low Flow Distribution Assessment
    Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: River Noe and River Ashop Low Flow Distribution Assessment Official Sensitive (Sensitive information redacted) 13 February 2020 Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: River Noe and River Ashop Low Flow Distribution Assessment Prepared for: Severn Trent Water Ltd 2 St John’s Street Coventry CV1 2LZ Report reference: 64116AB R36rev1, February 2020 OFFICIAL SENSITIVE Report status: Final rev1 CONFIDENTIAL New Zealand House, 160-162 Abbey Foregate, Registered Office: Shrewsbury, Shropshire Stantec UK Ltd SY2 6FD Buckingham Court Kingsmead Business Park Telephone: +44 (0)1743 276 100 Frederick Place, London Road Facsimile: +44 (01743 248 600 High Wycombe HP11 1JU Registered in England No. 1188070 Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: River Noe and River Ashop Low Flow Page i Distribution Assessment Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: River Noe and River Ashop Low Flow Distribution Assessment OFFICIAL SENSITIVE This document is classified by Severn Trent Water Ltd (STWL) as Official Sensitive and the information contained within is sensitive. Distribution of this document must be restricted and managed within organisations given access to it. If in doubt, please seek STWL’s permission before this document is shared with third parties. This report has been prepared by Stantec UK Ltd (Stantec) in its professional capacity as environmental specialists, with reasonable skill, care and diligence within the agreed scope and terms of contract and taking account of the manpower and resources devoted to it by agreement with its client and is provided by Stantec solely for the internal use of its client. The advice and opinions in this report should be read and relied on only in the context of the report as a whole, taking account of the terms of reference agreed with the client.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Nature in the Peak District What We Know About the Key Habitats and Species of the Peak District
    Nature Peak District State of Nature in the Peak District What we know about the key habitats and species of the Peak District Penny Anderson 2016 On behalf of the Local Nature Partnership Contents 1.1 The background .............................................................................................................................. 4 1.2 The need for a State of Nature Report in the Peak District ............................................................ 6 1.3 Data used ........................................................................................................................................ 6 1.4 The knowledge gaps ....................................................................................................................... 7 1.5 Background to nature in the Peak District....................................................................................... 8 1.6 Habitats in the Peak District .......................................................................................................... 12 1.7 Outline of the report ...................................................................................................................... 12 2 Moorlands .............................................................................................................................................. 14 2.1 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Nature and value ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Common Sandpipers Also Dive to Escape Danger: in England
    52 Wader Study Group Bulletin wastinging a day-oldchick beside the GlentressWater, Scot- a shortdistance underwater (water depthranging from 2 to tish Borders,the soleparent guarding the chick was giving 30 cm), and emergedunscathed. alarmcalls and performing the broken-wingdistraction dis- play on the oppositeshore, about 6 m away.Suddenly a male Minton, C. 2001. Waders diving and swimming underwateras a means SparrowhawkAccipiter nisus appearedand stoopedat the of escape.Wader Study Group Bull. 96: 86. adultsandpiper, which promptly dived into the stream,swam Common Sandpipers also dive to escape danger: in England D.W. YALDEN School of BiologicalSciences, 3.238 StopfordBuilding, VictoriaUniversity of Manchester, M13 9PT, UK, e-maih d. w.yalden @man. ac. uk The note by Clive Minton (Minton 2001) recordingdiving On 12 July 1997, also on the River Ashop, a recently to escapepredation or captureby OystercatchersHaema- fledgedbird was retrappedin a mistnetset acrossthe fiver. topus ostralegus and a Black-winged Stilt Himantopus On releaseit flew only about20 m beforeflopping into the himantopusprompts me to report five similar recordsfor water and swimmingto hide amongthe rootsof a bankside CommonSandpiper Actitis hypoleucos. aldertree. At 39 g, andwith bill andwing lengthsof 22 mm On 2 April 1992, on our River Ashopstudy site in Derby- and 105mm respectively,it appearedto be only 21 daysold, shire, England (Yalden 1986), I heard a pair of Common but hadbeen finged at about5 daysold on 13 June1997, and Sandpipersin courtship,trilling on
    [Show full text]
  • River Ashop & River Noe Silt Issues
    www.WaterProjectsOnline.com Water Treatment & Supply River Ashop & River Noe Silt Issues improving the transfer of raw water to Bamford WTW in the Peak District by Tony Heaney BSc CEng MICE evern Trent Water treats 150Ml/d of raw water at Bamford WTW to provide potable water to large parts of the East Midlands. Raw water is also used to power turbines at Ladybower dam. Water for this plant is drawn from Sthree reservoirs - Ladybower, Derwent and Howden - supplied directly by the River Derwent catchment in the upper Derwent Valley. Water cascades into Derwent and Ladybower reservoirs from Howden. The water supply is of major strategic importance, and subsequent to a detailed review, the need for significant maintenance investment on the assets was identified. This project involved maintenance of the weirs and aqueducts to extend their life and to improve the transfer of raw water. River Noe extraction weir completion - Courtesy of NMCNomenca The reservoirs its natural course along the valley. As a result the level difference The Derwent and Howden Reservoirs were built in the early 20th between the aqueduct and the river increases downstream with century. To provide an additional source of water, flows from the the aqueduct supported at the top of a steep slope up to 20m high. River Ashop, above Ladybower, are diverted into the Derwent Reservoir via an aqueduct from a weir higher up the Ashop valley. Over time the river has eroded the bottom of the slope causing problems of stability and threatening the integrity of the structure. Ladybower Reservoir was constructed during the Second World War.
    [Show full text]
  • Shire Hill Quarry, Glossop, Derbys
    ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE: SHIRE HILL QUARRY, GLOSSOP, DERBYS. NGR: SK 0540 9445 MPA: Peak District National Park Authority Planning Ref.: HPK1197168 PCAS Job No.: 808 PCAS Site Code: SHGD11 Report prepared for Mineral Surveying Services Limited On behalf of Marchington Stone Ltd., By, K.D. Francis (BA MIfA) August-September 2011 Pre-Construct Archaeological Services Ltd 47, Manor Road Saxilby Lincoln LN1 2HX Tel. 01522 703800 Fax. 01522 703656 Pre-Construct Archaeological Services Ltd Contents List of Figures...........................................................................................................................2 List of Plates.............................................................................................................................3 Non-Technical Summary ..........................................................................................................5 1.0 Introduction....................................................................................................................6 2.0 Planning Background and Proposals .............................................................................6 3.0 Methodology ..................................................................................................................7 4.0 The Site .........................................................................................................................8 4.1 Site Location ..................................................................................................... 8 4.2
    [Show full text]
  • Adaptive Management Plan – Rivers Ashop and Noe
    Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: Adaptive Management Plan – Rivers Ashop and Noe Official Sensitive (Sensitive information redacted) February 2020 Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: Adaptive Management Plan – Rivers Ashop and Noe Prepared for: Severn Trent Water Ltd 2 St John’s Street Coventry CV1 2LZ Report reference: 64116AB R47, February 2020 OFFICIAL SENSITIVE Report status: Final CONFIDENTIAL New Zealand House, 160-162 Abbey Foregate, Registered Office: Shrewsbury, Shropshire Stantec UK Ltd SY2 6FD Buckingham Court Kingsmead Business Park Telephone: +44 (0)1743 276 100 Frederick Place, London Road Facsimile: +44 (01743 248 600 High Wycombe HP11 1JU Registered in England No. 1188070 Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: Adaptive Management Plan – Rivers Ashop and Noe Page i Severn Trent Water AMP6 Low Flows Programme: Adaptive Management Plan – Rivers Ashop and Noe OFFICIAL SENSITIVE This document is classified by Severn Trent Water Ltd (STWL) as Official Sensitive and the information contained within is sensitive. Distribution of this document must be restricted and managed within organisations given access to it. If in doubt, please seek STWL’s permission before this document is shared with third parties. This report has been prepared by Stantec UK Ltd (Stantec) in its professional capacity as environmental specialists, with reasonable skill, care and diligence within the agreed scope and terms of contract and taking account of the manpower and resources devoted to it by agreement with its client and is provided by Stantec solely for the internal use of its client. The advice and opinions in this report should be read and relied on only in the context of the report as a whole, taking account of the terms of reference agreed with the client.
    [Show full text]
  • Advisory Visit River Noe, Derbyshire July 2018
    Advisory Visit River Noe, Derbyshire July 2018 1.0 Introduction This report is the output of a site visit undertaken by Tim Jacklin of the Wild Trout Trust to the River Noe, Edale, Derbyshire on 10th July, 2018. Comments in this report are based on observations on the day of the site visit and discussions with the landowner. Normal convention is applied throughout the report with respect to bank identification, i.e. the banks are designated left hand bank (LHB) or right hand bank (RHB) whilst looking downstream. 2.0 Catchment / Fishery Overview The River Noe is located in north Derbyshire, within the Peak District National Park, close to Ladybower Reservoir. It rises in the Vale of Edale near Kinder Scout and flows south-east to join the River Derwent a short distance downstream of Ladybower Reservoir dam. Angling on much of the river is controlled by Peak Forest Angling Club (PFAC) and the Wild Trout Trust have carried out previous advisory and practical visits to other sections of the river on behalf of the club. This visit was at the request of the adjacent landowner who has recently acquired a property alongside this section of river; this section of river forms part of Beat 11 of PFAC’s fishery. The River Noe is an upland river, running off the shales and sandstones of the Dark Peak. It has good water quality and generally good in-stream habitat, which support healthy stocks of wild brown trout and, in the lower reaches, grayling. This is reflected in the environmental monitoring data collected by the Environment Agency (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Derbyshire Derwent Catchment Partnership Leaflet
    k u . g r o . t s u r t e f i l d l i w e r i h s y b r e d . w w w k u . g r o . t s u r t e f i l d l i w e r i h s y b r e d . w w w k u . g r o . t s u r t e f i l d l i w e r i h s y b r e d . w w w 8 8 1 1 8 8 3 7 7 1 0 k u . o c . t w e r i h s y b r e d @ s e i r i u q n e r e p p i D . a e r a g n i d n u o r r u s d n a e t i S e g a t i r e H . t n e m n o r i v n e d l r o W s l l i M y e l l a V t n e w r e D e h t n o t c a p m i l a m i n i m e v a h e h t n i y l r a l u c i t r a p , s i h t e t a g i t i k m u . o y e h t t a h t e r u s n e o t s a e r a n a b r u d n a e g a n a m o t s y a w d n c a .
    [Show full text]
  • Rivers Alport and Ashop Monitoring Report
    The Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop Monitoring Report Funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; administered by the Environment Agency; managed by the National Trust; and prepared by the Moors for the Future Partnership on behalf of the National Trust. Prepared by: Moors for the Future Partnership The Moorland Centre, Edale, Hope Valley, Derbyshire, S33 7ZA, UK T: 01629 816 581 M: 07972 734077 E: [email protected] W: www.moorsforthefuture.org.uk Suggested citation: Crouch, T., Walker, J.S. and Morley, K. (2015) Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop Monitoring Report. Moors for the Future Partnership, Edale. 2 | P a g e Contents 1. Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 10 2. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11 2.1. Water Framework Directive .................................................................................... 12 3. Site description and summary of work ............................................................................ 14 3.1. Package 1 – the Edge, Kinder Plateau ...................................................................... 14 3.2. Package 2 – the wider Alport and Ashop catchments ............................................. 14 3.3. Package 3 – Seal Edge, Kinder Plateau .................................................................... 14 4. Summary
    [Show full text]
  • Derbyshire County
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 To Holmfirth 351 Holme Greenfield DERBYSHIRE A Public Transport Map A Pennine Way 351 Trans Pennine Trail Mossley Trans Pennine Trail Woodhead M1 to Leeds Crowden Langsett Tameside Reservoir Hospital 236 Torside Underbank Ashton- 237 Pennine Reservoir Reservoir under- Stalybridge Bridleway 236 Lyne 237 l a Torside n a C Trans Pennine To Manchester 236 t Trail 351 s 237 e Guide r 237 Tintwistle o SOUTH YORKSHIRE Bridge F Bleaklow R k i a v e Broomhead e P r 237 Reservoir 236 D 237 Hollingworth o Flowery K n Hyde Padfield P A R Field Pennine A L North Hadfield Way O N B Newton Mottram A T I B 236 351 N 341 Godley Old T More Hall Hyde 341 Glossop I C Reservoir Hyde 341 Dinting T R Trans Pennine Central 341 341 394 I S Trail 341 341 D 341 K Upper Derwent 341 341 Hattersley 341 Gamesley A (Kings Tree) Glossop 236 P E 341 236,237 237 To GREATER Broadbottom 341 Manchester w ro 394 Simmondley MANCHESTER e th Charlesworth 61,341 E r Derwent Sheffield & South Woodley e 351,394 Sheffield v 394 orkshire Navigation Bredbury i Reservoir Y R 43,44,50,50A,53 Chisworth R 65,80,218,252 Romiley i Northern M18 to Doncaster 61 ve r Middlewood 271,272,273 General 394 Lo Hospital xl 274,275,X17,X30 ey Meadowhall Derwent Dams Lane Ends Grouse Inn m Goyt ra r rt e e iv p R u Marple 394 Derwent S To Stockport Marple Fairholmes S u Kinder p Riv e Bridge er r A H1 ,H2 t s r 358 Marple 61 ho L a Offerton p ad m yb Rosehill ow SOUTH 273 e Shalesmoor Marple Kinder r C Ulley C To Little Hayfield Reservoir H1 R e Country Stockport Goyt s 275 Trans R
    [Show full text]
  • Derwent Valley (Ashop and Noe) up Front Permitting (UFP) - Summary
    Derwent Valley (Ashop and Noe) Up Front Permitting (UFP) - Summary To vary licence number 3/28/38/18 Derwent Valley The UFP proposal for the NEP is to change the compensation requirements from the River Ashop, River Noe and Jaggers Clough. The changes are within Schedule A Section 9 Further Conditions and in Additional Information at the end of the licence document. The proposals are: River Ashop To increase the compensation release from 5 Ml/d to 8.5 Ml/d as a mean monthly minimum. With the daily mean flow no less than 5.5 M/d River Noe/Jaggers Clough To vary the allocation of the current 20 Ml/d (10 Ml/d Noe plus 10 Ml/d J Clough) in two stages 1. Increase the Noe to 12 Ml/d and reduce J Clough to 8 Ml/d 2. Increase the Noe to 14 Ml/d and reduce J Clough to 6 Ml/d Variations will be needed to Sections 9.3, 9.4. and 9.5 as well as to the Additional Information section regarding low upstream flows The details of the proposals are in the two recent Stantec/APEM reports • Low Flow Distribution Assessment • Adaptive Management Plan In addition • A new time limit will be agreed • A Section 20 Agreement will be required to manage the Adaptive Management plan to include details of monitoring, reporting and assessing • An emergency condition may be considered whereby water from the Ashop Diversion can be transferred to support Jaggers Clough. • It is recommended that Schedules C and D which refer to the HEP conditions (Schedule B) are removed and put in a separate MoU.
    [Show full text]
  • Rivers Alport & Ashop
    Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport & Ashop Catchment Restoration Fund for England Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop • Tia Crouch, Science Project Manager, Moors for the Future • Richard Vink, Project Officer, National Trust The project is based around the restoration of bare and eroding peat, which is a prominent feature on moorland in the High Peak. Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop Eroding peat is the primary driver of diffuse pollution; the Rivers Ashop and Alport failing to meet the requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive. Rivers Ashop /Alport are within the NT Peak District; provide water for Ladybower Reservoir, Severn Trent Water Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop Importance of clear objectives • Relevance • Baseline data • Challenging • How – cost/capability • SMART • What does success look like? Are these smart objectives? • Reduce POC and its associates into the river Ashop by 50% from current levels by end 2014. • Establish cotton grass (Eriophorum spp.) and other moorland species on all areas of bare peat associated with gully blocks by July 2015 • Presence of Sphagnum colonies on 80% of suitable habitat by July 2015. Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop What monitoring has shown Bare peat stabilisation is successful in reducing the extent of bare peat. Vegetation quadrat BP4.P1.Q2 in April 2013 and July 2014 Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop Bare peat stabilisation together with gully blocking is successful in reducing sediment loss. • 16g of POC trapped in TIMS units located in control gullies (unblocked and un-vegetated) • 0.2g of POC trapped in TIMS units located in blocked and re-vegetated gullies • This represents a 99% reduction in POC loss Peatland Restoration Project: Rivers Alport and Ashop Gully blocking is successful in raising sediment and water levels in gully systems.
    [Show full text]