Authors: Lisa Norton1, John Rockliffe2, Helen Bennion3, Angus Winchester4 and Nick Haycock5 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Title: Authors: Lisa Norton1, John Rockliffe2, Helen Bennion3, Angus Winchester4 and Nick Haycock5


1
Authors Lisa Norton1, John Rockliffe2, Helen
Bennion3, Angus Winchester4 and Nick Haycock5 1
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology Lancaster,
Lancaster Environment Centre, Library Avenue,
Bailrigg, Lancs, LA1 4AP, UK lrn_at_ceh.ac.uk 2
Mitchells Auction Company Ltd, Cockermouth,
Cumbria 3 Dr Helen Bennion, Environmental Change
Research Centre, Department of Geography,
University College London, Pearson Building,
Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
hbennion_at_geog.ucl.ac.uk Department of History,
Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YG, UK
a.winchester_at_lancaster.ac.uk Haycock Associates
Limited, Suite 1, Deer Park Business Centre,
Eckington, Pershore, Worcs, WR10 3DN
nehaycock_at_haycock-associates.co.uk
Background This work forms part of a Rural
Economy and Land Use (RELU) project on Community
Catchment Management at Loweswater. The project
is focused on 1) understanding the relationships
between the community, land and water at
Loweswater and 2) investigating the potential for
the community to work alongside other
stakeholders in the management of the catchment.
The project arises out of and builds on previous
work in the Loweswater catchment and the
commitment shown by farmers in the catchment
towards improving lake water quality.

• Loweswater catchment in brief (2010)
• In the Lake District National Park designated
  as a quiet valley
• Small catchment (8km) and lake (lt1km)
• 8 sheep and cattle farmers (most with land
  outside of catchment)
• 50 permanent residents visitors
• Church and pub just outside of catchment but no
  local school, shop, or health provision

• Landscape agricultural management (2010)
• Attractive mixed landscape
• Fell 48, In-bye 37, Woodland 13 and Buildings
  2
• Small fields with152km of boundary features ,
  over 450 individual trees
• 22 permanent dwellings

Many farmers have diversified into BB etc,
agricultural income ranges from 32-58 of farm
income, of the remainder, most is from the Single
Payment Schemes or agri-environment schemes.
Total farming profit in the year of the survey
was comparable with that for NW farms of this
type, on average 7k. Despite similarities
between enterprises, (largely beef and sheep),
there is high variability between the 8 farmers
in the catchment in terms of farm size, field
size, stocking rate, boundary types and
management, income and labour 6 farmers in the
catchment are over 50 yrs old, 3 of those have
potential inheritors one of whom already farms
elsewhere in the catchment area
Linear features on farms in the catchment
Historical information Marked land use change
1945-1965 Horses Tractors
3-fold nitrate Arable Pastoral
increase 55-72 In the mid nineteenth century
liming and tile draining dramatically changed the
landscape and lake
Date Holdings No. of cows No. of sheep
1614 48 450 3700
1850 24 5500
1941 22 362 4977
2009 8 194 1417
70 of walls are in good condition, 30 show
signs of deterioration
What do we want from the catchment? Ecosystem
services may include water, climate regulation,
air quality, biodiversity, habitat diversity,
cultural identity, recreation, aesthetic
enjoyment, inspirations, heritage etc. Who is
going to provide it? Currently 8 farmers manage
the landscape for very little net income. They
manage in the most cost/resource effective
manner, capital works money from agri-environment
schemes has resulted in repaired walls and some
hedge planting/maintenance. For some farmers
these activities are too labour intensive and not
worth doing. Future management of the catchment
is potentially in the hands of still fewer
farmers who will have more to do in terms of
managing larger numbers of stock. What role
tradition? Back to horses and no fertiliser?
Where will the farmers come from and what quality
of life will they expect?
Research in the catchment reveals that it has
previously been heavily mined as well as farmed
and retains historic land use features including
raised becks and stone and earth banks. Human
influence on the catchment is set against a
background of ongoing geological change
influenced by climate.