# xTbl_Overview_Assessment

Benefiting:
the protection of infield trees (many of which are ancient) and the manageement of bankside trees; the managemennt of hedgerows; the conservation of archaeological sites under arable cultivation; the restoration of parkland/ wood pasture; the retention and management of large water features; the restoration of lowland heathland and the restoration of fen.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection; the management of traditional orchards; the management of permanent grassland with low inputs and the management and restoration of wet grasslands; the retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings; the conservation of archaeological sites under grassland; the conservation and restoration of small ponds; the conservation and restoration of species rich semi-natiral grassland, both wet and dry, and management by hay cutting.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 10,900 ha   73%ELS    27% HLS 
ELS is primarily responsible for the management / conservation of field trees and hedgerows, the management of the agricultural landscape, and for roughly 40% of the archaeological conservation.  What is very noticeable is that 67% of all ES uptake by area in this NCA is for the two options EK2/EK3.  The uptake of HLS on the other hand, primarily covers woodland management; a small part of the agricultural land management; 60% of archaeological conservation; the management and restoration of parkland;  and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats.  In this NCA higher levels of ES uptake would be particularly beneficial for the management of the many small woodlands; the management of traditional orchards;  the conservation and restoration of the remnant species-rich pastures and wet grasslands of this NCA; and the conservation management of the  highly characteristic field ponds.


Benefiting:
Improved grassland managed with low fertiliser inputs; the retention and management of archeological sites under both arable and grassland; the management and restoration of species-rich semi-natural grassland and the creation of reed bed.

Limiting:
woodland management and the protection of infield trees; the conservation management of hedgerows and ditches; and the conservation management of wet grasslands.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 2,198 ha   78%ELS   26% HLS 
ELS uptake primarily relates to the protection of field trees; the management of hedgerows and ditches; and the management of grassland with low fertiliser inputs.  HLS is associated with the management of the archaeological resource (with this being the single strongest focus of HLS in this NCA); and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats.  This NCA would particularly benefit from greater conservation and restoration of the semi-natural wet grazing marshes and associated reed beds that once dominated  this landscape and the conservation management of the characteristic  ditches and dykes.


Benefiting:
woodland manangement and semi-natural woodland regeneration and scrub management; the protection of infield trees (likely to be associated with the major estates of the western downs); management of hedgerows; the restoration of historic buildings; the management of aracheological sites under arable and grassland and the protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk; the management of large water features (again likely to be associated with the large estates); the management and restoration of species-rich semi-natural grassland; the management of rare chalk heath; and the manageement and restoration of reed beds and fen.

Limiting:
the protection of woodland from grazing animals; the management of riverside trees; the planting of important lost hedgerow lengths; the conservation management of ditches on the valley floors; the introduction of wide grass buffer strips around areas of arable cultivation to help  define field pattern; the retention of winter stubbles; the management of permanent pasture with low fertiliser inputs; the management of floodplain grasslands; the maintenance of traditional buildings; the management and restoration of parklands; and the management of small areas of salt marsh and vegetated shingle banks within the Cuckmere Estuary

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 23426ha   48%ELS  52% HLS 
This NCA has a high level of ES uptake.   HLS is the main scheme supporting woodland management; the restoration of agricultural buildings; just under half of the uptake for conservation of the historic environment; the management of parkland; and all options for the management of semi-natural habitats both terrestrial and on the coast.  Conversely ELS is the main scheme supporting the management of field boundaries and field trees; the management of the agricultural landscape; and just over half of the uptake for the conservation of the historic environment. Future priorities for ES uptake will be set out in the South Downs Management Plan.


Benefiting:
semi-natural woodland regeneration; hedgerow management; retention and management of large water bodies; management and restoration of semi-natural grassland; management of coastal heathland; and management of reedbeds and salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland management; the protection of in-field trees; the conservation management of ditches and dykes; the creatiuon of wide buffer strips to help define field boundaries on the coastal plain; the retention of over-wintering stubbles; the management of permanent pasture with low fertiliser inputs; the rentention and restoration of historic buildings; the management of the archaeological resource under grassland; the management and restoration of parkland; the maintenance of small ponds; the management of species-rich grasslands through hay cutting and the conservation of sand dunes.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 1,593 ha   49% ELS  51% HLS
Overall levels of ES uptake are low reflecting the highly urbanised character of the coastal plain. Of the total uptake benefitting landscape.  ELS options largely relate to the protection of field trees and the management of boundary features; and the management of the wider agricultural landscape. HLS uptake largely relates to the conservation management of archeological features; the management of woodlands; and the conservation of semi-natural habitats both on the coast and inland.  This landscape would particularly benefit from the increased management of woodland and trees and the management and stronger definition of boundary features through the use of grass buffer strips on the coastal plain; greater protection of archaeology; and greater management and restoration of the coastal habitats which are suffering from coastal squeeze.


Benefiting:
woodland management; the management of scrub; the management of hedgerows; the conservation of the archaeological resource under arable cultivation; the retention and management of large and small water bodies; the management and restoration of semi-natural grasslands (particularly chalk downland); the conservation of remant heathlands; the management of fen and reed beds; and the management of salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland protection; the protection and management of infield and hedgerow trees; the conservation of traditional orchards; new hedgerow planting; the management of permanent grassland with low fertiliser inputs; management of rough grassland; the retention of historic farm buildings; the conservation of archaeology under grassland; the management of parkland and remnant areas of wood pasture; and hay meadow management.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 4,044 ha   39% ELS 61% HLS 
HLS is the primary scheme for woodland management; aspects of archaeological conservation; the management of parklands; and the management of semi-natural habitats, including those along the coast.  ELS primarily covers the management of hedgerows and trees; the management of the agricultural landscape; and aspects of archaeological conservation. The NCA would benefit from increased uptake of options for hedgerow planting where important lengths have been lost; and the management of parkland and archaeology under grassland.


Benefiting:
the protection of infield trees and management of riverside trees; the conservation management of hedgerows; the use of wide grass buffer strips in the arable landscape to help define field pattern; the conservation of the archaeological resource under both grassland and arable cultivation; the management of small ponds; and the conservation of remaining areas of semi-natural chalk grassland and valley fens and reedbeds.

Limiting:
the management of small woodlands and their protection from grazing;  new hedgerow planting where hedgerows have been lost; the management of ditches in the river valleys; the retention of winter stubbles to diversify the winter landscape; the retention of permanent pasture under low fertilizer inputs (although it is significant that 50% of areas under this option type are under the more rigerous options for very low fertiliser inputs); the conservation of wet grasslands; the retention and restoration of traditional water meadows; the preservation and restoration of traditional farm buildings; and the conservation and restoration of parkland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 12,978 ha   69% ELS  31% HLS 
HLS makes up the majority of the area for woodland  management, parklands, and semi-natural habitats; as well as committing over 1000ha to archaeological conservation.  Conversely ELS is the main scheme for field boundaries; the conservation management of arable cropping and permanent pasture and over half of the area committed to the conservation of archaeology. The NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for hedgerow restoration; the management of parklands and water meadows in the valleys and the conservation management of the wet grasslands and fens of the valley floors.


Benefiting:
the significant areas of restoration and manaagement of wood pasture, semi-natural habitats especially extensive areas of lowland heathland and species-rich grassland restoration, and the  management of salt marsh on the coast.

Limiting:
on areas of woodland and trees (other than wood pasture) with all of the main forest enclosures under the management of the Forestry Commission.  It is equally having more limited impact on field boundaries, field and hedgerow trees,  on areas of semi-improved and wet grassland and on the maintenance and restoration of traditional farm builts.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 25,478ha   6%ELS    94% HLS
The high levels of HLS uptake for the restoration and management of wood pasture and restoration of lowland heathland and species-rich grassland is very noticeable, although greater uptake of HD10 / 11 for the management and restoration of traditional water meadows would be beneficial in the Avon valley.   There is much greater reliance on ELS options on the enclosed lands that surround the Open Forest and very significantly lower levels of uptake.


Benefiting:
the managment of hedgerows; the retention of permanent grassland through low fertilizer inputs; conservation of the archaeological resource under arable cropping and under grass; and the management of fen vegetation.

Limiting:
the management and protection of woodland; the protection of field trees and the coppicing of bankside trees; the planting of hedgerows; the creation of wide buffer strips to help define the field pattern; introduction of winter stubbles to increase diversity of the winter landscape; the conservation management of wet grasslands; the conservation and restoration of traditional water meadows; the protection and restoration of traditional farm buildings; the retention and management of parklands and associated water bodies; and the management/ restoration/ creation of calcareous grasslands.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 22,095 ha   75%ELS    25% HLS
ELS is  the dominant scheme. HLS is the primary scheme for the management of woodlands and of semi-natiural habitats while ELS is the primary scheme for the management of the agricultural landscape and the management of the archaeological resource, as well as the  conservation management of hedgerows.  The NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels  of ES uptake for the restoration of hedgerows; the conservation and restoration of wet grasslands, water meadows and parklands; and for significantly increased areas of the calcareous grassland  resource to be brought under ES, recognising the international importance of Salisbury Plain.


Benefiting:
the extensive areas of lowland heathland that are being managed and restored, areas of lowland fen marsh that are being managed appropriately and along the coast the areas of sand dune and saltmarsh that have been brought under appropriate management.  ES is also supporting active woodland management and the management of scrub. Archaeological sites are also being well managed under both grassland and arable

Limiting:
the conservation management of field boundaries, the protection and renewal of hedgerow trees, the retention of mixed / pastoral character, the  management and restoration of wet grassland and traditional water meadows and the restoration of farm buildings.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 9,466 ha   22%ELS    78% HLS
HLS is the main influence on the landscape with the high levels of HLS uptake for the restoration and management of lowland heathland and woodland management, as well as the management of coastal sand dunes and salt marshes around the fringes of Poole Harbour.  Notable opportunities are being missed to manage and restore the wet grasslands of the valley floors (HK9-14) and to manage and restore historic water meadows (HD10 / 11). Generally there is  greater reliance on ELS options on the enclosed lands that surround the open heathland and coastal habitats and here greater levels of uptake would help maintain  and enhance the pastoral landscape character.


Benefiting:
the management of woodland and hedgerows; the retention of a mixed/ pastoral character through reduced fertiliser inputs to permanent pasture; the management of parkland; and esspecially the management of significant areas of the highly characteristic calcareous grassland and remnant areas of lowland heath and acid grassland.

Limiting:
the protection of woodland from grazing animals; the conservation of field trees (in the Corfe Vale); the planting of new hedgerows lengths  and the management and restoration of stone walls; the conservation management of rough grassland; the protection and restoration of traditioanl agricultural buildings; and the management of the archaeological resource under arable cultivation and grassland.  While the NCA has an internationally important coastline management needs fall largely outside the scope of ES.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 3,497 ha  47%ELS    53% HLS
HLS is the primary scheme for woodland management; the conservation of semi-natural habitats and the management of parkland; as well as the restoration of the characteristic  stone walls; while ELS is the primary scheme for the management of hedgerows; the conservation of permanent pasture through reduced fertilizer inputs; and the management of archaeology under arable cultivation and grassland.  The NCA would particularly benefit from increased uptake of stone wall options and for the management of archaeology under arable cultivation and grassland.


Comments:
According to Genesis there is NO uptake of ES on the Isle of Portland


Benefiting:
woodland management; the management of traditional orchards; the management of hedgerows; retention of the pastoral character  through options for permanent pasture; the conservation of the archaeological resource under grassland and the conservation of Scheduled Monuments; the conservation of parkland; the conservation and managmeent of the semi-natural limestone grasslands and potentially remnant neutral grassland meadows; and the management of lowland heathland.

Limiting:
the protection of woodland from grazing animals; the protection of field trees; the conservation management of the ditches of the valley floor and the highly characterstic limestone walls of higher ground; the conservation management  of rough grassland; the retention  and restoration of traditional farm buildings;  and the conservation of archaeology under arable cultivation.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 5,394 ha  51%ELS    49% HLS
Overall ELS has the higher level of uptake .  HLS is the primary scheme in the management of woodlands, walls, and semi-natural habitats and important aspects of archaeology while ELS is the primary scheme in the management of the wider agricultural landscape (especially the management of hedgerows and of low input grasslands) and the conservation of the wider archaeological resource.  Greater management of limestone walls under ES could be beneficial along with the conservation management of rough grassland.


Benefiting:
management of permanent pasture; the management of the highly characteristic parklands and estates; and the management of moorland.

Limiting:
woodland management; the conservation management of individual trees (especially the beech lines); the management of earth banks which are an important boundary feature; the management of hedgerows; the management of locally characteristic traditional orchards; the management of rough grassland; the conservation of traditional farm buildings; the archaeological resource under grassland and on moorland; and the conservation of species-rich grassland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 1,640 ha  36%ELS  24%UELS  40% HLS
This is an NCA with low levels of ES uptake.  While there has been a significant level of uptake for moorland and parkland (both key characteristics of the landscape) there have been surprisingly low levels of uptake for some of the other highly distinctive characteristics of this landscape, most notably the ancient woodlands; conservation of the outgrown beech lines and supporting earth banks; management of the distinctive archaeological resource on moorland and elsewhere and management of semi-natural grassland and remnant traditonal orchards.  It is possible that the beech lines / hedgebanks and other key characteriatics are covered by some form of special project.


Benefiting:
the management and restoration of traditional orchards; encouragement of woodland regeneration on valley sides; the retention of field pattern defined by characteristic hedges and hedgebanks; retention of the pastoral character of the enclosed landscape and the continued management of hay meadows; the retention of historic farm buildings and increased visibility of arachaological sites on moorland; and the management and restoration of moorland, banket bog and the sand dunes at Braunton Burrows.

Limiting:
woodland management; the management of characteristic riverside trees in the valleys and the stone walls of the Outakes; the management and restoration of wet and species-rich grasslands; the management of rough pasture; and the management of parklands and archaeology under grassland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 63,600 ha   41%ELS  33%UELS  26% HLS
This very high level of uptake in part reflects the co-location of moorland options. HLS uptake is the dominant scheme for archaeology and semi-natural habitat restoration while ELS has  the higher levels of uptake for woodlands and trees, field boundary options and agricultural grasslands; while UELS contributes significanlty to the management of upland habitats and moorland.  While there are already very high levels of uptake it would be good if there was increased uptake for the conservation of stone walls; the conservation of archaeology under grassland and arable and the management and restoration of parkland.


Benefiting:
the protection of field trees and the management and restoration of traditional orchards and wood pasture; the management of hedgerows and earthbanks;  the management and restoration of lowland heathland and semi-natural grasslands and hay meadows; the retention of the predominantly pastoral character of the area; and the protection of archaeological sites under grassland and removal of archaeological sites from cultivation.

Limiting:
the management of woodland and hedgerow and bankside  trees; the management of ditches (common in the river valleys); the management and restoration of wet grasslands; the management of salt marsh in the Axe Estuary; and the maintenance of traditional farm buildings

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 8,170 ha   76%ELS   24% HLS
The predominate uptake throughout is through ELS with the exception of the uptake of HLS options for lowland heathland and species-rich semi-natural grassland and hay meadows.  The relatively limited uptake figures compared to the still traditional character of the landscape may be because many of the once small dairy farms of the area have now passed into amenity uses which are no longer registered agricultural holdings (as in the similar landscape of the High Weald in the South East of England).  The NCA would benefit from greater uptake of ES for small ponds, the conservation management of wet grasslands and the bringing on of a new population of hedgerow trees.


Benefiting:
the conservation of traditional orchards; management  of hedges and hedgebanks and creation of new hedgerow lengths; the management of permanent grassland with  low fertiliser inputs; the conservation of traditional farm buildings; the removal of archaeological sites from cultivation and the management of archaeological sites under grassland; the management of parkland; and the conservation of semi-natural grassland,, lowland heathland, upland moorland on the fringes of Dartmoor and saltmarsh along the estuaries and sand dunes along the coast.

Limiting:
woodland and tree management; and the management of wet grassland and hay meadows.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  14,660 ha   70%ELS  10%UELS   20% HLS  
HLS makes a greater contribution to the management of woodlands and trees; the conservation of archaeological sites and the conservation of semi-natural and coastal habitats.  Conversely ELS is primarily responsible for the conservation of field boundaries; the management of permanent and wet grasslands; and the conservation of historic buildings. UELS underpins the moorland options. It would be beneficial  if ES could do more for wet grasslands and hay meadows and woodland management.


Benefiting:
woodland regeneration and scrub management; the conservation of field trees and the management of traditional orchards; conservation of hedgerows and Cornish hedges; the management of archaeological sites under grassland and their removal from cultivation;  the conservation of semi-natural grasslands; the management of coastal and inland heathlands; the management of reedbeds; and the management of small areas of salt marsh and  sand dune along the coast.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection; the conservation management of improved grasslands, rough grassland and wet grassland; the conservation and restoration of traditional buildings and of archaeology under arable; and the management of parkland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  20,496 ha   77%ELS    23% HLS  
ELS is the dominant influence: primarily relating to permanent grassland management and the management of boundaries.  Nevertheless, HLS is the dominant scheme for woodland management; management of archaeology (792ha) and the management of semi-natural habitats including those of the coast.   There would be great benefit if there was higher uptake of parkland options and those for the conservation management of rough and wet grassland, as well as a greater emphasis on EK3 in the management of permanent pasture.  Greater coverage of archaeological sites under cultivation would also be beneficial.


Benefiting:
woodland management; conservation management of the Cornish hedgebanks; rentention of the pastoral character of the enclosed landscape; and the management and restoration of moorland.

Limiting:
the protection of woodland from grazing animals; hedgerow management; the management of wet grasslands; the maintenance of traditional farm buildings; the protection of the archaeological resource; the management of species-rich grasslands and the management of valley fens.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  20,496 ha   60%ELS  32%UELS   8% HLS  
 HLS options dominate for woodland management and aspects of semi-natural habitat conservation wheras ELS uptake dominates for all other aspects.  In particular, of the moorland options, UELS options together cover some 6,500ha. Notably abscent are significant levels of ES uptake for archeologocial options in this important ritual landscape, although these may be covered separately by HAP and OES special projects  (capital items under HLS).


Benefiting:
the management of hedgerows and stone-faced hedgebanks (Cornish hedges) and the conservation of the semi-natural habitats of this NCA; including the heathlands of the clifftops and plateau and species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
The management of woodlands and stone walls; the appropriate management of the pastoral landscape; and the conservation of the traditional built enviroment and of the internationally important archaeological resource.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  2,677ha   45%ELS  55% HLS  
 ELS options focus on the management of boundary features and the conservation management of permanent pasture and rough grassland while HLS uptake relates to woodland management and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats where ES is having a significant effect.  The lack of options for the conservation of the internationallyimportant archaeology of this NCA is noticeable. This could be because the area is covered by a Special Project(s)(OES) or Historical and Archaeological Features Protection (HAP), both capitaal items.  These have not been covered by this analysis as the Genesis database does not reveal the details of these options.


Benefiting:
woodland management; the management of hedgerows and hedgebanks; the management of the archaeological resource on both arable and grassland; and the conservation and restoration of species- rich semi-natural grassland and lowland heathland.

Limiting:
fencing woodlands that may be exposed to grazing animals; the management of the agricultural landscape in terms of the retention of pasture and the management of wet grasslands; and the retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 2,666 ha   45%ELS   55% HLS
HLS options form the main uptake for woodland management; the conservation of archaeology; and the conservation of semi-natural habitats while ELS option uptake dominates in the management of boundary features; conservation measures in the agricultural landscape and the maintenance of traditional farm buildings.  Notably the largest area under a single option type is for the conservation of lowland heathland covering 830 hectares. The NCA would benefit from increased uptake of options for very low fertiliser input on permanent pasture to help conserve the pastoral landscape.


# xTbl_Overview_Assessment1

Benefiting:
semi-natural woodland regeneration; protection of in-field trees; extension of traditional orchards; management and restoration of hedgerows; and retention and management of pastures, retention of historic farm buildings, archaeology on grassland, parkland, wetland habitats, traditional cattle grazing and salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection; creation of new or replacement hedgerows; management and restoration of the area's distinctive stone walls; restoration of historic farm buildings;  and management of species-rich grassland, hay meadow and moorland.

Comments:
ELS is the main driver in relation to in-field trees, hedgerows, pastures, historic buildings, archaeology on grassland, and moorland.  HLS is influential in relation to parkland and wood pasture, species-rich grassland and wetlands.  The limited impact of ES overall on woodlands and stone walls is of some concern.


Benefiting:
scrub regeneration; management or restoration of traditional orchards and hedgerows; retention of historic farm buildings and archaeology on grass; and management of parkland and wood pasture, species-rich grassland, wetlands and salt marsh.

Limiting:
broadleaved woodland management and protection; management and restoration of characteristic stone walls; retention of pastures, rough pastures and traditional mixed grazing.

Comments:
ELS is the main driver in relation to hedgerows, mixed stocking, historic farm buildings, and archaeology on grass.  HLS is more influential in relation to scrub, orchards, parkland and species-rich grassland, wetland, and coastal salt marsh habitats.  Increased uptake of measures for stone walls and rough pasture would be helpful.


Benefiting:
protection of infield trees; management of hedgerows, archaeology on grass and water features; and management of species-rich grassland, lowland hay meadows and wetlands.

Limiting:
woodland protection and management; stone walls; agricultural land use generally; historic farm buildings; archaeology on arable and removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and parkland.

Comments:
ELS is most influential in relation to in-field trees, hedgerows and archaeology on grassland, while HLS has benefited ponds, species-rich grasslands, hay meadows and wetlands.  Greater uptake of options for woodlands, stone walls and parkland would be especially beneficial to this landscape.


Benefiting:
renewal of hedgerow trees; creation of new hedgerow lengths; retention and management of water features, lowland species-rich grassland and hay meadows (probably mainly in valleys), fen and reedbed and moorland.

Limiting:
protection of in-field trees, management of hedgerows, retention of historic farm buildings, archaeology and parkland.  It is having almost no impact on the management of woodlands, stone walls or agricultural land use elements.

Comments:
This is an area where the agricultural landscape is heavily influenced by industrial and urban land uses.  Emphasis need to be on conservation of surviving agricultual landscape features and restoration/creation of new ones.  At present ES is generally having limited impact on this landscape due to very low uptake of most options.  The exceptions are ELS  hedgerow tree establishment and hedgerow planting; and the HLS options for semi-natural habitats, which show good uptake of appropriate options.  Greater attention to conservation and renewal of landscape structure (woodland and tree cover, field boundaries and historic farm buildings especially) would be helpful.


Benefiting:
some limited semi-natural woodland regeneration; management and restoration of hedgerows; retention of historic farm buildings; removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and management of water features and lowland heathland.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection; in-field and hedgerow trees, which are important features in some areas; ditches and dykes; retention of pastures; archaeology on grass; parklands; and grassland and wetland habitats.

Comments:
In this intensively farmed landscape, ES uptake is not always very high.  ELS is influencing hedgerows, agricultural grasslands and historic farm buildings, while HLS is contributing in a modest way to woodland regeneration and management of archaeology, water features and semi-natural habitats.  Greater uptake of measures for in-field and hedgerow trees, ditches and dykes, semi-natural grasslands and wetlands would be beneficial.


Benefiting:
protection of in-field trees; management and restoration of hedgerows and orchards; retention and restoration of historic farm buildings; removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and retention and maangement of water features, ponds and wetland habitats.

Limiting:
woodlands, hedgerow tree renewal, agricultural land use, archaeology on arable and grass, parkland, species-rich grassland and lowland heath.  Fencing along water courses also seems to have a negative impact locally.

Comments:
Many of the traditional, often ancient features within this landscape appear to be benefiting from ES in this intensively farmed landscape.  ELS is contributing in terms of protection of in-field trees, hedgerows and historic farm buildings but is also giving rise to negative impacts from fencing along watercourses.  HLS is the main driver in relation to orchards, historic building restoration, removal of archaeology from cultivation, and wetlands.  A greater focus on hedgerow tree renewal and parkland would further benefit the landscape.


Benefiting:
management of hedgerows, creation of rough pasture, water features, fen and reedbed.

Limiting:
woodland management, retention of historic farm buildings, salt marsh and sand dunes; and little or no impact on ditches and dykes, restoration of historic farm buildings, and archaeology on grass.

Comments:
In this small, linear, mainly coastal NCA there is very limited stock of many landscape elements and results are therefore hard to interpret.  ELS makes a positive contribution to the retention and management of hedgerows; while HLS contributes to creation of rough coastal grassland; management of water features and especially to restoration of fen and reedbed.  Improved uptake of options for salt marsh and sand dunes would be beneficial as these are key landscape elements.


Benefiting:
woodland management; the management of hedgerows; the conservation of archaeological features both on grass and under arable; the conservation of remaining areas of parkland; the conservation and restoration of water features, both large and small; and the management of characteristic reedbeds.

Limiting:
the management of remnant traditional orchards, the conservation management of ditches and dykes; the use of wide buffer strips to help define field pattern in areas under arable cultivation; the retention and management of a pastoral character and the management and restoration of wet grasslands;  the management of historic farm buildings; the management and restoration of semi-natural grasslands; the management and restoration of salt marsh and the creation of new coastal habitats.

Comments:
By area uptake is predominantly under ELS with the exception of coastal options and the management of semi-natural features which fall to HLS.  Uptake overall is low especially in some of the options that would most benefit the key characteristics of this landscape.  Overall significantly higher levels of uptake would be  very beneficial in options for  managemen of remnant orchards; the management of wet grasslands; the management of remaining areas of species rich grasslands; and the management and restioration of salt marsh.


Benefiting:
protection of in-field trees; management of hedgerows; retention of pastoral character; removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and management of species-rich grasslands and hay meadows.

Limiting:
woodlands, riparian trees, buffer strips (reinforcement of field patterns in arable), historic buildings, archaeology on arable and grass, and parkland.  It seems to be having little or no impact on renewal of hedgerow trees and stone walls, or on the diversity of the arable landscape.

Comments:
This intensively farmed landscape is benefiting from ES in some important ways but not in others.  ELS is contributing to in-field tree protection, hedgerow management and pastoral character; while HLS is the main influence on removal of archaeology from cultivation and on species-rich grassland and hay meadows.  Greater uptake of options for woodland, hedgerow tree renewal, the arable landscape (buffer strips and overwintering stubbles) and parkland would be especially helpful.


Benefiting:
management and restoration of hedgerows; retention of pastoral character; removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and management of species-rich grassland and hay meadows.

Limiting:
woodlands, in-field trees, hedgerow trees, creation of hedgerows, arable field patterns, diversity of the arable landscape, farm buildings, archaeology on arable and grass, and parkland.

Comments:
This mixed farming landscape is benefiting from ES to some extent.  ELS is contributing to hedgerow management and pastoral character; while HLS is the main influence on removal of archaeology from cultivation and on species-rich grassland and hay meadows.  Greater uptake of options for woodland, in-field and hedgerow trees, archaeology on grassland and parkland would be beneficial.


Benefiting:
the remnant areas of neutral semi-natural riverside grasslands and hay meadows and fen marsh that are under ES option.  It is also benefiting Scheduled Monuments at Risk that have been taken out of cultivation and the lengths of hedgerow that have been brought under appropriate management under ES - the relatively high proportion of hedgerow lengths under ES in part reflects the reduction in the overall hedgerow population over the last 50 years.

Limiting:
the trees of the NCA with relatively few hedgerow, field and bankside trees under appropriate management - this is a significant missed opportunity with the loss of so many trees to Dutch Elm disease.  Equally, levels of uptake would need to be higher to ensure the retention of a mixed landscape with permanent pasture and wet grasslands, parklands brought under management and to ensure the conservation of the archaeological resource (identified through SHINE) under arable cropping.  In addition, the significant lengths of riverside fencing may be detracting from the landscape as rivers are removed from view while fallow plots also have the potential to detract from the landscape.

Comments:
Overall ELS is the main influence on the landscape, although HLS makes a contribution in relation to  species-rich grassland and fen.


Benefiting:
the significant areas of restoration and manaagement of wood pasture, semi-natural habitats especially extensive areas of lowland heathland and species-rich grassland restoration, and the  management of salt marsh on the coast.

Limiting:
on areas of woodland and trees (other than wood pasture) with all of the main forest enclosures under the management of the Forestry Commission.  It is equally having more limited impact on field boundaries, field and hedgerow trees,  on areas of semi-improved and wet grassland and on the built environment..

Comments:
The high levels of HLS uptake for the restoration and management of wood pasture and restoration of lowland heathland and species-rich grassland is very noticeable, although greater uptake of HD10 / 11 for the management and restoration of traditional water meadows would be beneficial in the Avon valley.   Conversely there is a greater reliance on ELS options on the enclosed lands that surround the Open Forest and significantly lower levels of uptake.


Benefiting:
the extensive areas of lowland heathland that are being managed and restored, areas of lowland fen marsh that are being managed appropriately and along the coast the areas of sand dune and saltmarsh that have been brought under appropriate management.  ES is also supporting active woodland management and the management of scrub. Archaeological sites are also being well managed

Limiting:
the conservation management of field boundaries, the protection and renewal of hedgerow trees, the retention of mixed / pastoral character, the  management and restoration of wet grassland and traditional water meadows and the restoration of farm buildings.

Comments:
HLS is the main influence on the landscape with the high levels of HLS uptake for the restoration and management of lowland heathland and woodland management,as well as the management of coastal sand dunes and salt marshes around the fringes of Poole Harbour.  Notable opportunities are being missed to manage and restore the wet grasslands of the valley floors (HK9-14) and to manage and restore historic water meadows (HD10 / 11). Generally there is  greater reliance on ELS options on the enclosed lands that surround the open heathland and coastal habitats and here greater levels of uptake would help maintain  and enhance the pastoral landscape character.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Open Forest and significantly lower levels of uptake.


Benefiting:
the management and restoration of traditional orchards; encouragement of woodland regeneration on valley sides; the retention of field pattern defined by characteristic hedges and hedgebanks; retention of the pastoral character of the enclosed landscape and the continued management of hay meadows; the retention of historic farm buildings and increased visibility of arachaological sites on moorland; and the management and restoration of moorland and banket bog.

Limiting:
woodland management; the management of characteristic riverside trees in the valleys and the stone walls of the Outakes; the management and restoration of wet and species-rich grasslands; the management of rough pasture; and the management of parklands and archaeology under grassland.

Comments:
HLS uptake is the dominant scheme for archaeology and semi-natural habitats while ELS has  the higher levels of uptake for woodlands and trees, field boundary options and agricultural grasslands.


Benefiting:
the protection of infield trees and the management and restoration of traditional orchards and wood pasture; the management of hedgerows and earthbanks;  the management and restoration of lowland heathland and semi-natural grasslands and hay meadows; the retention of the predominantly pastoral character of the area; and the protection of archaeological sites under grassland and Scheduled Monuments at risk from cultivation.

Limiting:
the management of woodland and hedgerow and bankside  trees; the management of ditches (common in the river valleys); the management and restoration of wet grasslands; the management of salt marsh in the Axe Estuary; and the maintenance of traditional farm buildings

Comments:
The predominate uptake throughout is through ELS with the exception of the uptake of HLS options for lowland heathland and species-rich semi-natural grassland and hay meadows.  The relatively limited uptake figures compared to the still traditional chracter of the landscape may be because many of the once small dairy farms of the area have now passed into amenity uses which are no longer registered agricultural holdings (as in the similar landscape of the High Weald in the South East of England.


Benefiting:
the conservation of traditional orchards; management  of hedges and hedgebanks and creation of new hedgerow lengths; the management of permanent grassland with  low fertiliser inputs; the conservation of traditional farm buildings; the removal of archaeological sites from cultivation and the management of archaeological sites under grassland; the management of parkland; and the conservation of semi-natural grassland; lowland heathland; upland moorland on the fringes of Dartmoor and saltmarsh along the estuaries.

Limiting:
woodland and tree management; and the management of wet grassland and hay meadows.

Comments:
There is a roughly even split between the influence of ELS and HLS.  HLS makes a greater contribution to the management of woodlands and trees; the conservation of archaeological sites and the conservation of semi-natural and coastal habitats.  Conversely ELS is primarily responsible for the conservation of field boundaries; the management of permanent and wet grasslands; and the cnservation of historic buildings.


Benefiting:
the management of hedgerows and stone-faced hedgebanks (Cornish hedges) and the conservation of the semi-natural habitats of this NCA; including the heathlands of the clifftops and plateau and species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
The management of woodlands and stone walls; the appropriate management of the pastoral landscape; and the conservation of the traditional built enviroment and of archaeology.

Comments:
This NCA is dominated by the uptake of ELS options with the exception of those relating to woodland and semi-natural habitats where HLS is dominant and, in the case of semi-natural habitats, is having a significant effect.  What is noticeable is that as one of the best known historical landscapes in England, receiving international recognition,  levels of ES uptake relating to the historic environment are low.  This may well  be because the area is covered by a Special Project(s)(OES) or Historical and Archaeological Features Protection (HAP), both capitaal items.  These have not been covered by this analysis as the Genesis database does not reveal the details of these options.


# xTbl_Overview_AssessmentLC

Benefiting:
semi-natural woodland regeneration; protection of in-field trees; extension of traditional orchards; management and restoration of hedgerows and the highly characteristic stone walls; and retention and management of pastures including rough pasture, retention of historic farm buildings, archaeology on grassland, parkland, wetland habitats, traditional cattle grazing and salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection; creation of new or replacement hedgerows;  restoration of historic farm buildings;  and management of species-rich grassland, hay meadow and moorland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  20980ha   61%ELS  24%UELS   15%HLS 
ES is having a positive impact overall with ELS as the main driver in relation to in-field trees, hedgerows, stone walls, pastures, historic buildings, archaeology on grassland, and moorland.  HLS is influential in relation to parkland and wood pasture, rough pastrue, species-rich grassland and wetlands.  The limited impact of ES overall on woodlands would benefit from increased uptake.


Benefiting:
scrub regeneration; management or restoration of traditional orchards, hedgerows and the highly characteristic limestone walls; conservation management of rough pasture; retention of historic farm buildings and archaeology on grass; and management of parkland and wood pasture, species-rich grassland, wetlands and salt marsh.

Limiting:
broadleaved woodland management and protection; management and restoration of locally characteristic ditches and dykes; retention of pastures and traditional mixed grazing.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  8960ha   60%ELS  40% HLS 
ELS is the main driver in relation to hedgerows, walls,  mixed stocking, historic farm buildings, and archaeology on grass.  HLS is more influential in relation to scrub, orchards, rough pasture, parkland and species-rich grassland, wetland, and coastal salt marsh habitats.  Increased uptake of measures for ditches would be helpful.


Benefiting:
protection of infield trees; management of hedgerows, archaeology on grass and water features; and management of species-rich grassland, lowland hay meadows and wetlands.

Limiting:
woodland protection and management; stone walls; agricultural land use generally; historic farm buildings; archaeology on arable and removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and parkland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 5571ha   75%ELS  25% HLS
ELS is most influential in relation to in-field trees, hedgerows and archaeology on grassland, while HLS has benefited ponds, species-rich grasslands, hay meadows and wetlands.  Greater uptake of options for woodlands, stone walls, archaeology on arable, and parkland would be especially beneficial to this landscape.


Benefiting:
management of hedgerows, rough pasture, archaeology on grass, wetland habitats and saltmarsh.

Limiting:
in-field trees, ditches,  improved pastures, traditional stock grazing, historic farm building retention and species-rich grasslands - but at very low levels.  It is having no impact at all on characteristic stone walls or historic farm building restoration.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  1532ha   47%ELS  53% HLS
This small NCA includes substantial urban areas.  There is very limited ES uptake and its effect on the landscape is relatively small.  ELS is contributing to the management of hedgerows; and HLS to the management of archaeology on grass, rough pasture, and salt marsh.  Greater uptake of options for ditches, stone walls, pastoral character and mixed stock grazing would be beneficial.


Benefiting:
hedge management; the retention of historic farm buildings; the retention and managerment of archaeology under arable and grassland; and the management of salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection of field trees; the planting of new hedgerow lengths to replace lost sections; the management and restoration of ditches and the use of wide buffer strips in arable to reinforce field pattern; the retention and conservation management of permanent pasture and wet grassland; the restoration of historic farm buildings; the retention and management of parkland and small ponds; and the management and restoration of specied-rich grassland, the remnant raised lowland bogs that defined the landscape before the advent of land drainage, and sand dunes

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 2,837 ha    64%ELS   36% HLS
The ELS uptake focuses on protection of field trees; the management of boundary features and the use of wide buffer strips;  the management of pasture with low inputs; and the conservation of archaeology  and the maintenance of historic farm buildings.  HLS brings the conservation management of woodland and wet grasslands; a contribution to the conservation of archaeological features; and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats - primarily salt marsh. The NCA would benefit from significantly higher levels of uptake that strengthen field boundaries (conservation management of ditches and the use of wide buffer strips in arable) and the restoration of lowland raised bog habitat and characteristic small ponds.


Benefiting:
renewal of hedgerow trees; creation of new hedgerow lengths; retention and management of water features, lowland species-rich grassland and hay meadows (probably mainly in valleys), fen and reedbed and moorland.

Limiting:
protection of in-field trees, management of hedgerows, retention of historic farm buildings, archaeology and parkland.  It is having almost no impact on the management of woodlands, stone walls or agricultural land use elements.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 4,944ha    30%ELS  7%UELS  63%HLS 
This is an area where the agricultural landscape is heavily influenced by industrial and urban land uses.  Emphasis need to be on conservation of surviving agricultual landscape features and restoration/creation of new ones.  At present ES is generally having limited impact on this landscape due to very low uptake of most options.  The exceptions are ELS  hedgerow tree establishment and hedgerow planting; and the HLS options for semi-natural habitats, which show good uptake of appropriate options.  Greater attention to conservation and renewal of landscape structure (woodland and tree cover, field boundaries and historic farm buildings especially) would be helpful.


Benefiting:
some limited semi-natural woodland regeneration; management and restoration of hedgerows; conservation management of wet and rough  pastures; retention of historic farm buildings; removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and management of water features and lowland heathland.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection; in-field and hedgerow trees, which are important features in some areas; ditches and dykes; retention of permanent pastures; archaeology on grass; parklands; and wetland habitats.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 7,723ha    58%ELS  42% HLS 
In this intensively farmed landscape, ES uptake is not always very high.  ELS is influencing hedgerows, agricultural grasslands, historic farm buildings and also fallow plots (which may have a negative landscape impact); while HLS is contributing in a modest way to woodland regeneration and management of archaeology, conservation management of wet  and rough grasslands and water features and semi-natural habitats.  Greater uptake of measures for in-field and hedgerow trees, ditches and dykes, semi-natural grasslands and wetlands would be beneficial.


Benefiting:
management and restoration of hedgerows; use of wide buffer strips in arable to reinforce field pattern; conservation management of wet and rough pastures; maintenance of historic farm buildings; removal of archaeological  features from cultivation; and the conservation of parkland and lowland heathland.

Limiting:
woodland management; protection of field trees and renewal and managemenbt of bankside trees; management of traditional orchards; planting of new hedgerows; management and restoration of ditches; retention of overwintering stubbles and areas of pasture; restoration of historic farm buildings; conservation of archaeology under arable and grassland; and conservation of species-rich grassland, reed beds and hay meadows.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 9,548ha    64%ELS   36% HLS
The ELS uptake focuses on the management of boundary features and the use of wide buffer strips in arable helping to strengthen field pattern;  the retention of winter stubbles and the management of pasture; and makes a contribution to conservation of the archaeological resource and the maintenance of historic farm buildings.  HLS brings the management of woodland, traditional orchards and wet and rough pastures; the conservation of archaeological features; and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats - primarily the management and restoration of species-rich grassland and lowland heathland. The NCA would benefit from greater uptake of options for the management of field and bankside trees; the retention of overwintering stubbles; the protection of the archaeological resource on arable and the conservation management of  species-rich grassland.


Benefiting:
the management of woodland and successional areas; the conservation management of wet and rough grassland; the maintenance of traditional farm buildings; the conservation management of archaeology under grassland; the conservation and restoration of upland and lowland species-rich grassland; the managemet of upland hay meadows; and the conservation and restoration of moorland.

Limiting:
the protection of woodland from grazing animals; the management of hedgerows and stone walls; the management of permanent pasture under low inputs; the restoration of traditional farm buildings; the management of archaeology on moorland and the management and restoration of parkland; the conservation and restoration of lowland heathland and fen and the rewetting of blanket bog.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 11,424ha   44% ELS  11%UELS  45% HLS
The UELS uptake is associated with the management of upland hay meadows and the conservation management of moorland, The ELS uptake is made up of  options for the management of boundary features;  the management of the agricultural landscape (of which the management of permanent pasture  makes up the vast majority of the ELS uptake); and the conservation of the historic environment (200 ha); it also covers the grazing of moorland.    The HLS uptake is focused on woodland management; the management of wet and rough pastures and the management of archaeology; and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats (primarily upland moorland).   Overall ES is helping maintain the structure of the landscape and some of its key elements but the NCA would benefit from greater uptake of options for the protection of woodlands; the restoration of parkland and the management and restoration of fen.


Benefiting:
protection of in-field trees; management and restoration of hedgerows and orchards; conservation management of wet and rough grasslands; retention and restoration of historic farm buildings; removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and retention and management of water features, ponds and wetland habitats.

Limiting:
woodlands, hedgerow tree renewal, agricultural land use, archaeology on arable and grass, parkland, species-rich grassland and lowland heath.  Fencing along water courses also seems to have a negative impact locally.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 19,822ha   57% ELS  43% HLS 
Many of the traditional, often ancient features within this landscape appear to be benefiting from ES in this intensively farmed landscape.  ELS is contributing in terms of protection of in-field trees, hedgerows and historic farm buildings but is also giving rise to negative impacts from fencing along watercourses.  HLS is the main driver in relation to orchards, historic building restoration, removal of archaeology from cultivation, the conservation management of wet and rough grasslands, and wetlands.  A greater focus on hedgerow tree renewal, parkland and restoraton of wetland habitats would further benefit the landscape.


Benefiting:
the protection of field trees and management of hedgerows; and the maintenance of traditional farm buildings.

Limiting:
the management and creation of woodland; the planting of new hedgerow lengths; the  management of permanent pasture with low inputs and the conservation management of small areas of rough grassland; the restoration of traditional farm buildings; the conservation of archaeology under arable cultivation and grassland; the conservation management of small ponds which are characteristic of this NCA; the management of species-rich grassland; the management and restoration of lowland heathland; and the management and restoration of fen, marsh and swamp vegetation on lower ground.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 983ha   72% ELS  28% HLS
The small area of ES uptake reflects the small overall area of this NCA. ES is helping maintain the landscape structure by conserving hedgerows and protecting field trees.    The HLS uptake is focused on woodland management; the conservation management of rough grassland and the limited protection offered to archaeology in this NCA; and the limited management and restoration of semi-natural habitats.  The ELS uptake is made up of  options for the management of boundary features and trees and the management of permanent grassland.  The NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the  conservation and restoration of lowland heathland and the conservation of archaeology.


Benefiting:
the management of woodland and the maintenance of scrub as successional areas; the protection of field trees and coppicing of bankside trees; the management of traditional orchards; the management of hedgerows; the conservation management of permanent pasture, wet  and rough grasslands; the maintenance and restoration of tranditional farm buildings; the conservation of archaeology under arable and grassland; the management and restoration of parkland; the conservatiojn and management of large and small water features; the management and restoration of species-rich grassland; management of grassland by hay cutting; and the conservation management of moorland.

Limiting:
woodland protection and woodland creation; the conservation of stone walls; the management of the archaeologcal resource on moorland; and the management and restoration of lowland heathland (although this may be covered by the moorland uptake); and the management of fen and reedbeds.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 28,140ha  44% ELS  10%UELS  45% HLS
This NCA has a very high level of ES uptake which benefit many aspects of the landscape  The HLS uptake is focused on woodland management  including the management of traditional orchards; the conservation management of wet and rough grasslands; the management of archaeology and parklands (together 1153 ha); and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats (primarily upland moorland).  The ELS uptake is made up of  options for the management of boundary features and trees;  the management of the agricultural landscape (of which the management of permanent pasture makes up the vast majority of the ELS uptake); and the conservation of the historic environment (650 ha).  The UELS uptake is focused on moorland management and upland  haymaking. In this NCA (compared to other NCAs) there are noticeably very high levels of uptake for woodland management; the conservation of field trees (5,563 field trees); the coppicing of bankside trees; and the management of orchards and hedgerows helping conserve important landscape elements.


Benefiting:
the management of scrub as successional areas; the management of hedgerows; the conservation of species-rich grassland and their management by hay cutting; and the restoration of lowland heathland and fen.

Limiting:
the management and creation of woodland; the protection of field trees and coppicing of bankside trees; the planting of new hedgerow lengths; the conservation management of ditches on the valley floors; the management of permanent pasture under low inputs; the maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings; and the management of archaeology under arable cultivation and grassland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 3,236ha  32% ELS  68% HLS
ES has made a strong contribution to the conservation of the open heathlands of Cannock Chase but surrounding farmed landscapes generally have low levels of uptake. HLS uptake is focused on woodland management; the conservation management of wet grasslands;  the limited protection offered to archaeology in this NCA; the conservation of  parklands; and particularly the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats (primarily the restoration of lowland heathland).  ELS uptake is making  a strong contribution to the management of hedgerows and is helping the retention of permanent grassland.  The NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the management  and creation of small woodlands off the Chase, and the  conservation of archaeology under arable and grassland.


Benefiting:
management of hedgerows, management and creation of rough pasture, and conservation of wet grasslands, water features, and reedbed.

Limiting:
woodland management, retention of historic farm buildings, salt marsh and sand dunes; and little or no impact on ditches and dykes and restoration of historic farm buildings.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 1077ha   -% ELS  100% HLS
In this small, linear, mainly coastal NCA there is very limited stock of many landscape elements and results are therefore hard to interpret.  ELS makes a positive contribution to the retention and management of hedgerows; while HLS contributes to the management and creation of rough coastal grassland and the conservation management of wet grasslands; management of water features and locally to conservation of reedbed.  Improved uptake of options for salt marsh and sand dunes would be beneficial as these are key landscape elements.


Benefiting:
semi-natural woodland regeneration; management of riparian trees, hedgerows and ditches and dykes; conservation of wet and rough grasslands; removal of archaeological features from cultivation; and the management of parkland, water features, lowland species-rich grassland and wetland.

Limiting:
woodland management, agricultural land use, historic farm buildings, archaeologyy on arable and grass, and sand dunes.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 10170 ha   27% ELS  73% HLS 
ES is having a relatively positive impact on this landscape.  ELS is primarily benefiting field boundaries; while HLS is assisting with semi-natural woodland regeneration, conservation management of wet and rough grasslands, removal of archaeology from cultivation, and management of parkland and water features.  Improved uptake of overwintering stubbles, measures aimed at retaining a mixed/pastoral character, and particularly the management of fen and reedbeds would be most beneficial to the character of this area.


Benefiting:
woodland management; the management of hedgerows; the conservation of wet and rough passture; the conservation of archaeological features both on grass and under arable; the conservation of remaining areas of parkland; the conservation and restoration of water features, both large and small; and the management of characteristic reedbeds.

Limiting:
the management of remnant traditional orchards, the conservation management of ditches and dykes; the use of wide buffer strips to help define field pattern in areas under arable cultivation; the retention and management of a pastoral character;  the management of historic farm buildings; the management and restoration of semi-natural grasslands, salt marsh and the creation of new coastal habitats.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 8449 ha   31% ELS  69% HLS 
Any ES uptake in this area where farming sits close to areas of major urban expansion will be a good thing. HLS assists in the management of wet and rough grassland and coastal options and the management of semi-natural habitats.  Uptake overall is low especially in some of the options that would most benefit the key characteristics of this landscape.  Overall significantly higher levels of uptake would be  very beneficial for the conservation management of  the highly characteristic ditches and dykes and associated reed beds and the conservation management of salt marshes.


Benefiting:
the management of scrub as successional areas; the management of traditional orchards; the management of hedgerows and the planting of new hedgerow lengths to replace those lost in the past; the management and restoration of wet grasslands; the conservation of Scheduled Monuments; the management and restoration of parkland; and the management and restoration of semi-natural species-rich grassland; lowland heathland and reed beds and fen.

Limiting:
woodland management; the protection of field trees and the coppicing of bankside trees; the conservation management of ditches; the management of permanent pasture with low inputs;  the maintence and restoration of traditional farm buildings;  the conservation  of archaeology under arable cultivation and grassland; and the conservation management of salt marsh and sand dunes.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 4,844ha   32% ELS   68% HLS
In this NCA ES is strongly focused on the consevation of boundary features and semi-natural habitats with ELS providing the main uptake for boundary features and tree protection and HLS for semi-natural habutats, especially the restoration of lowland heathland.  HLS also covers the  conservation management of wet grasslands and traditional orchards; and the management of archaeology and parklands (358 ha).   The NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the  conservation of archaeology under arable and grassland and  the conservation management of coastal habitats, fen and reedbed.


Benefiting:
the management of scrub, protection of in-field trees (2,518), conservation of traditional orchards, management of hedgerows and the planting of new hedgerow lengths, management of ditches in the river valleys, conservation of rough pasture, restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, management of parkland, retention and management of large water features, and management and restoration of species-rich semi-natural grasslands.

Limiting:
the management of woodland and coppicing of bankside trees, retention of over-wintering stubbles, management of permantent pasture and wet grasslands, encouragement of mixed stocking (beneficial for the management of floodplain grazing marsh), maintenance of traditional farm buildings, and conservation of archaeology on arable and grassland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 8,704ha    46% ELS   54% HLS
 In this NCA overall level of uptake relative to the size of the NCA is quite low (with uptake equivalent to just 2.5% of the farmed area).  However, an emphasis on the management of boundary features and trees and targeting of other options means that the influence of ES is felt across the landscape having a POSITIVE landscape effect.  ELS uptake focuses on management of boundary features and trees, the agricultural landscape, and conservation of the historic environment (937 ha).  HLS uptake  focuses on woodland management including management of traditional orchards, management and restoration of wet and rough pasture, the management of archaeology and parklands (546 ha); and management and restoration of semi-natural habitats (primarily lowland species-rich meadows).  In addition, there is sufficient uptake of two option types that  have the potential to adversely affect the landscape if  in the wrong location - a high uptake of wide buffer strips, which in a landscape of small irregular fields may detract from the field pattern, and the uptake of fallow plots which, while very beneficial for certain bird species, may detract from the landscape where they can be viewed on a slope.  

The  NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the  management of small woodlands and shaws; the conservation of archaeology under arable and grassland and  the conservation management of wet grasslands and potentially fen.


Benefiting:
traditional orchards, hedgerows, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk.

Limiting:
woodlands, in-field, hedgerow and bankside trees,  hedgerow renewal, ditches, use of wide buffer strips to help define field boundaries, over-wintering stubbles, permanent pastures (low input) and wet and rough grasslands, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and under cultivation, and conservation of parkland, species-rich grasslands, hay meadows and wetland habitats (fen and reed beds). Fallow plots may be having an adverse effect on the landscape if visible on slopes.

Comments:
In this rolling, open area of intensive arable production ES is having a NEUTRAL effect on the landscape - there are many missed opportunities.  HLS is assisting the management of woodland,  bankside trees and traditonal orchards, the conservation of wet and rough grasslands, archaeology on grasslands and the small areas of parkland management and conservation of semi-natural habitats.  ELS is supporting the protection of trees, management of boundary features, wide buffer strips, low input grasslands and over-wintering stubbles, and conservation of archaeology on arable.  There are many aspects that would benefit from significantly higher levels of uptake including strengthening the field structure through restoration of deteriorating  boundary lengths and use of wide buffer strips, the conservation of permanent pasture and especially wet grasslands and the conservation of parkland, calcareous grasslands and wetland habitats.


Benefiting:
protection of infield trees and conservation of traditional orchards, management and renewal of hedgerows and wet ditches and the use of wide buffer strips to help define field pattern, conservation management of rough grassland, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at Risk, management of mineral workings for nature conservation and the conservation of species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
woodlands and the protection and renewal of hedgerow trees, over-wintering stubbles, permanent low input pasture and wet grasslands, maintenance and restoration of  traditional  farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and under cultivation, and conservation of parkland and wetland habitats. Arable plots may be having an adverse effect on the landscape if visible on sloping  ground.

Comments:
In this large-scale arable landscape ES is having a POSITVE effect on the landscape especially helping retain and excentuate boundary features (hedgerows and ditches) and maintaining the population of infield trees. HLS is helping woodlands and remaining areas of wet and rough grasslands, conservation of archaeology under cultivation and semi-natural habitats, including those of old mineral workings (sand and gravel and clay) .  Conversely ELS is assisting the management of trees, hedges and ditches and wide buffer strips that help define field pattern, over-wintering stubbles and permanent pasture (low input), and with HLS is helping conserve archaeology on grassland.  This NCA would particularly benefit from hedgerow tree regeneration and further restoration of hedgerows, greater focus on the conservation of remaining wet grasslands and wetland habitats, and the conservation of archaeology as well as retention of the remaining areas of permanent pasture.


Benefiting:
the management of hedgerows and permanent grassland, the conservation of archaeological sites on grassland, the conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and the conservation of species-rich grasslands and their management through hay cutting.

Limiting:
the management and protection of woodland, the protection of field trees and the coppicing of bankside trees, the restoration and renewal of hedgerows, use of wide buffer strips in arable to help strengthen field pattern, the retention of winter stubbles to bring diversity to the winter landscape,  maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology under cultivation and of parkland, and the management and restoration of fen and floodplain grazing marsh and of lowland heathland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 7,748ha    66% ELS   34% HLS
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on most landscape themes of these low lying clay vales largely under arable.  ELS uptake is made up of  options for the management of boundary features and trees,  the management of the agricultural landscape, and the conservation of the historic environment (547 ha).  HLS uptake is focused on woodland management,  conservation of wet grasslands,  conservation of archaeology and parklands (together coverng 1104 ha of uptake), and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats (primarily lowland species-rich meadows and their management as hay meadows).  The  NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for woodland management and parkland, regeneration of hedgerow trees, and particularly the conservation management of fen, of which 13,969 ha are identified as BAP Priority Habitat, and the 3007 ha of BAP floodplain grazing marsh.


Benefiting:
management of hedgerows, permanent pasture (low inputs) and rough grassland, over-wintering stubbles, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and conservation of species-rich grassland and heathland.

Limiting:
woodlands, hedgerow and infield trees including the regeneration of hedgerow trees, planting of new hedgerow lengths, over-wintering stubbles, wet grasslands, maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on arable and grassland, and conservation of parkland.

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape of this NCA helping retain hedgerows and pastoral farming within this predomninalty arable landscape.  HLS is assisting the management of woodlands, wet and rough grasslands, archaeology under cultivation, and the management of semi-natural habitats.  Conversely ELS is supporting the protection of infield trees, hedgerows, over-wintering stubbles, permanent pasture (low inputs), and the conservation of archaeology on grassland.  The NCA would particularly benefit from greater uptake of options for the restoration of hedgerows and particularly the protection of trees and the rejuvination of hedgerow trees.  As in NCA 91 the very low uptake for tparkland / wood pasture is surprising given their importance in this NCA - it is possible that this is covered by a combination of special projects, capital items, and the application of a combination of relevant ES options to these areas.


Benefiting:
hedgerow management, permanent pasture (low inputs), wet and rough grassland, retention of traditional farm buildings, protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk, restoration of species- rich grassland and management as traditional hay meadows.

Limiting:
woodlands, hedgerow and field trees and the rejuvination of hedgerow trees, hedgerow renewal / planting of new lengths, restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and arable, conservation of parkland, and conservationm of wetland habitats

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on this landscape with its mosaic of woodland, pasture and arable derived from Medieval hunting forests, especially  helping conserve the strong hedgerow pattern.  HLS is supporting the management of woodlands, rough and wet grasslands, parklands, the conservation of archaeology on arable and the management of semi-natural habitats.  ELS is assisting the conservation of hedgerows, hedgerow and field trees, pasture (low inputs), the retention of traditional agricultural buildings, and the conservation of archaeology on grassland.  In this NCA it is noticeable that field and especially hedgerow trees have low levels of uptake. Many hedgerow trees have been lost to Dutch elm disease and encouragement of a new generation of hedgerow trees would be especially beneficial as would the conservation of remaining ancient pollards.  It is possible that pollards are covered by Capital items, as may be the conservation of parklands and wood pasture, which have surprisingly low levels of uptake relative to their importance in this NCA.


Benefiting:
protection of in-field trees, management of hedgerows, retention of pastoral character, removal of archaeological features from cultivation, and management of species-rich grasslands and hay meadows.

Limiting:
woodlands, riparian trees, buffer strips (reinforcement of field patterns in arable), historic buildings, archaeology on arable and grass, and parkland.  ES seems to be having little or no impact on renewal of hedgerow trees and stone walls, or on the diversity of the arable landscape.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 4,132 ha   72% ELS  28% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape in this intensively farmed landscape.  The landscape is benefiting from ES in some important ways but not in others.  ELS is contributing to in-field tree protection, hedgerow management and pastoral character, while HLS is the main influence on removal of archaeology from cultivation and on species-rich grassland and hay meadows.  Greater uptake of options for woodland, hedgerow tree renewal, the arable landscape (buffer strips and overwintering stubbles) and parkland would be especially helpful.


Benefiting:
woodlands, parklands, hedgerows, permanent and rough grasslands, archaeology on grassland and protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and species-rich grasslands and hay meadows.

Limiting:
protection of woodland and in-field and hedgerow trees and the restoration of hedgerows and regeneration of hedgerow trees, use of wide buffer strips to help define field boundaries, over-wintering stubbles and the conservation of wet grasslands, the retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, and the the conservation of archaeology on arable.

Comments:
In this landscape of broad rolling ridges and secluded valleys with a quiet rural character ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape helping manage its small woodlands and having a strongly positive effect on the management of hedgerows (well retained from a history of hunting) and the conservation of the characterisitic ridge and furrow under grassland.  HLS is helping the management of woodland and parkland,  the conservation of wet and rough grasslands, the removal of archaeology from cultivation, and the conservation of semi-natural habitats.  ELS is primarily assisting the protection of trees,  management of hedgerows and provision of buffer strips, low inputs for permanent pasture, over-wintering stubbles, and with HLS is supporting the conservation of archaeology on grassland.  This landscape would particularly benefit from greater uptake of options for the restoration of hedgerows and especially the regeneration and protection of hedgerow and field trees that form a major component of the area's wooded character, the removal of remaining ridge and furrow from cultivation and the conservation of characteristic field ponds.


Benefiting:
the management of hedgerows and wet grassland, the conservation of archaeology on grassland and Scheduled Monuments at risk, and conserevation of species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
woodland management, protection of woodland and in-field trees, coppicing of bankside trees, a and protection, hedgerow planting, use of wide buffer strips to help define field pattern, over-wintering stubbles, retention of permanent pastures (low inputs), maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology under cultivation and parkland, and conservation of wetland habitats.

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on most landscape themes in these low lying clay vales largely under arable. ELS is supporting the protection of trees, management of hedgrows, buffer strips, over-wintering stubbles, low input pastures,and the majority of archaeology on grassland and arable. HLS is supporting woodland management, bankside trees, wet grasslands, and the conservation of parkland and semi-natural habitats. The  NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for woodland and parkland management, regeneration of hedgerow trees, use of wide buffer strips and  the conservation of fen.


Benefiting:
management and restoration of hedgerows, retention of pastoral character and wet grasslands, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and management of species-rich grassland and hay meadows.

Limiting:
woodlands, in-field trees, hedgerow trees, creation of hedgerows, arable field patterns, diversity of the arable landscape, farm buildings, archaeology on arable and grass, and parkland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 12,307ha   81% ELS  19% HLS 
This mixed farming landscape is benefiting from ES to some extent (identiifed as a POSITIVE effect).  ELS is contributing to hedgerow management and pastoral character; while HLS is the main influence on the management and restoration of wet grasslands, removal of archaeology from cultivation and on species-rich grassland and hay meadows.  Greater uptake of options for woodland, in-field and hedgerow trees, archaeology on grassland and parkland would be beneficial.


Benefiting:
woodland and orchards, hedgerows, wet and rough grassland, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and conservation of species-rich grassland and wetland habitats.

Limiting:
woodland and tree protection, regeneration of hedgerow trees and coppicing of bankside trees, hedgerow restoration / planting, low input grasslands, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and arable, and conservation of parkland and traditional hay meadows

Comments:
In this intensive mixed agricultural landscape that retains a heathy character with extensive woodland within the influence of the West Midlands conurbation, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape.  It is particularly helping retain the woodland and  hedgerow structure.  In this NCA HLS is supporting woodlands, orchards and bankside trees, wet and rough grasslands, archaeology on arable (removing from cultivation) and semi-natural habitats; while ELS is supporting hedgeows and trees, low input grasslands and the management of archaeology on grassland.  This landscape would benefit from significantly greater uptake for the restoration of hedgerows and regeneration of hedgerow trees, as well as significantly greater  support for removing characteristic ridge and furrow from cultivation.


Benefiting:
the maintenance of scrub, protection of infield trees, management of traditional orchards and wet grassland, hedgerow management, management of large water features (likely to be associated with the major parklands of the NCA), management and restoration of species-rich grasslands, restoration of lowland heathland, and the management and restoration of fens.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection, coppicing of bankside trees, planting of new hedgerow lengths to replace important lengths that have been removed, management of permanent pasture with low inputs, conservation of  rough grasslands, maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeological sites under arable and grassland, management of parkland (a very strong feature of this landscape), and management of small field ponds that are also characteristic.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 7,596ha   76% ELS   24% HLS
 ES is having a positive effect on this small-scale well-treed landscape but may not be addressing one of its key characteristics - parkland. ELS uptake is made up of  options for management of boundary features and trees (with Arden having a very large number of field trees (2,384) under option), management of the agricultural landscape, and conservation of the historic environment (347 ha).  HLS uptake is focused on woodland management  including the management of traditional orchards (where again there is a high level of uptake compared to other NCAs),  management of archaeology and parklands, and management and restoration of wet and rough pastures and semi-natural habitats (primarily lowland species-rich meadows and their management as hay meadows).  The  NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the  conservation of archaeology under agriculture, conservation management of small woodlands; and the conservation management of parkland.


Benefiting:
management of scrub as successional areas and of bankside trees, management and restoration of traditional orchards, management of hedgerows, maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings, management of wet and rough pasture, conservation of archaeological sites on arable and grassland, rewetting of small areas of blanket bog, and the introduction of mixed grazing on moorland.

Limiting:
the management and protection of woodland, protection of field trees, planting of new hedgerow lengths, management of permanent pasture (low inputs), conservation, management of archaeology on moorland. management and restoration of parkland, conservation of species-rich grasslands, hay meadows, lowland heathland, and upland moorland and management of fen.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 9,877ha   48% ELS 10%UELS  42% HLS 
In this border area of upland hills and narrow valleys with transition from valley bottom intensive mixed farming to upland moorland, ES is having a STRONGLY POSITIVE effect on the landscape.   ELS uptake is helping conserve boundary features and trees ,management of the agricultural landscape.  It is also helping conserve archaeological sites, while 1330ha (15% of all uptake) is for mixed grazing on moorland.  HLS uptake is focused on woodland management, a range of agricultural options including management and restoration of wet and rough grassland, management of archaeological sites (77% of total archaeological options), and management and restoration of semi-natural habitats. This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the management of semi-natural habitats (other than moorland) and parkland.


Benefiting:
bankside trees and orchards, hedgerows, retention of permanent pasture through low inputs, retention of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and Scheduled Monuments at risk, and the conservationof species-rich grasslands, upland hay meadows and moorland.

Limiting:
woodlands and in-field and hedgerow trees, hedgerow restoration/ planting, rough grassland and mixed stocking of pastures, restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology under arable cultivation, conservation of parkland and re-wetting of blanket bog.

Comments:
In this border landscape with a transition from the wide fertile Golden Valley in the east to a steep-sided moorland ridge in the west, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape, bringing benefit to all landscape themes and especially moorland habitats. It is also helping conserve traditional farm buildings.  HLS is primarily assisting woodlands, orchards, parklands and bankside trees, rough grasslands, and semi-natural upland habitats.  ELS is supporting  hedgerows and field and hedgerow trees, low input pasture, retention of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and upland moorland rough grazing. UELS is supporting characteristic upland hay meadows and cattle grazing on upland moorland / grassland.  This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for woodland management a protection, the renwal of hedgerows and hedgerow trees and the re-wetting of the large areas of blanket bog.


 Conservation.  ELS is assisting hedgerows and trees, low input grasslands and the retention of traditional farm buildings, while  ELS and HLS together are helping conserve the archaeological resource.   The main areas where ES could offer further support are in the management of woodlands, restoration of hedgerows and renewal of hedgerow trees (retaining the landscape structure) and potentially the further restoration of wet grassland along with conservation of permanent pasture in the river valleys.


Benefiting:
field trees and traditional orchards, coppicing of bankside trees, hedgerows, retention of permanent pasture, the retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of  archaeology on grassland and conservation of Scheduled Monuments, as well as the conservation of species-rich grasslands.

Limiting:
woodlands, parkland, hedgerow trees, restoration of hedgerows, wet and rough grasslands, conservation of archaeology on grassland, and conservation of hay meadows.

Comments:
ES is assessed as having a STRONGLY POSITIVE effect on the landscape, unusually, bringing benefit to all landscape themes and notably having a strongly positive effect on traditional farm buildings.  Particularly beneficial is the support for traditional orchards (highly characteristic of the area)  and the significant restoration of the remnant areas of species-rich grassland. Options for pasture are also playing an important role in preserving permanent grassland on floodplains. HLS is primarily assisting woodlands, orchards, parklands and bankside trees, wet and rough grasslands, traditional farm building restoration and semi-natural habitat conservation.  ELS is assisting hedgerows and trees, low input grasslands and the retention of traditional farm buildings, while  ELS and HLS together are helping conserve the archaeological resource.   The main areas where ES could offer further support are in the management of woodlands, restoration of hedgerows and renewal of hedgerow trees (retaining the landscape structure) and potentially the further restoration of wet grassland along with conservation of permanent pasture in the river valleys.


Benefiting:
woodland management and the protection of infield trees, coppicing of bankside trees and the conservation of traditional orchards,hedgerow management, low input and rough pastures, the retention of traditional farm buildings, conservation of  archaeology on grassland, and the conservation of species-rich grassland and hay meadows.

Limiting:
protection of woodland and hedgerow trees and the  renewal of hedgerow trees, restoration of hedgerows (new planting), wet grasslands, restoration of traditional farm buildings, and the conservation of parkland.

Comments:
ES is assessed as having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape, unusually, bringing benefit to all landscape themes and especially benefitting the  conservation of woodlands, trees and traditional orchards (which have significant levels of uptake) and restoration of the small remaining areas of species-rich grassland. Options for permanent pasture are helping prevent reversion to arable. Here HLS is assisting woodland management, bankside trees and orchards, conservation management of rough grasslands and the conservation of species-rich grasslands.  ELS is focused on tree and hedgerow conservation,  low input pasture and mixed grazing, the retention of traditional buildings and, with HLS, is conserving archaeology on grassland.  The main areas where ES could offer further support is in the restoration of hedgerows and renewal of hedgerow trees (retaining the landscape structure) and potentially the restoration of small areas of wet grassland - these are identified in the landscape descriptions but are not identified as a BAP Priority Habitat in this NCA.  Grater attention to parklands would also be good.


Benefiting:
bankside trees and traditional orchards, hedgerow management, low input and rough pasture, conservation of archaeology on grass, and species -rich grasslands and hay meadows.

Limiting:
woodlands and in-field and hedgerow trees, planting of hedgerows, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings and parkland.

Comments:
ES is assessed as having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape bringing benefit to nearly all landscape themes and especially benefitting the  conservation of traditional orchards and restoration of the small remaining areas of semi-natural habitat.  Here HLS is assisting traditional orchards and the coppicing of waterside trees, rough grasslands,  restoration of traditional buildings, and the conservation of archaeology on grassland and semi-natural habitats.  ELS focuses on the protection of field trees and the management of hedgerows and low input grasslands.  The NCA would benefit from options that reinforce field pattern - the restoration of hedgerows and regeneration of hedgerow trees, as well as greater attention on parklands.


Benefiting:
bankside trees, traditional orchards, management of hedgerows, permanent grassland with low inputs, management of archaeology on grassland, management and restoration of parkland, and management and restoration of species-rioh grassland.

Limiting:
small woodlands, management of scrub as successional areas, protection of in-field trees and renewal of hedgerow trees, conservation of rough grassland, mixed grazing on permanent pasture, maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings, management of archaeology on arable, and conservation of lowland heathland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 2,347ha   41% ELS   59% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape of this narrow ridge of rounded
hills, with hill forts, benefitting nearly all landscape themes. ELS uptake is assisiting the management of boundary features and trees, management of the agricultural landscape, with small areas (28 ha) for the conservation of archaeology.  HLS uptake is focused on woodland management  including the management of traditional orchards, management of archaeology and parklands, and management and restoration of semi-natural habitats (primarily lowland species-rich meadows).  The  NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake relating to field trees, conservation of archaeology under cultivation, the conservation management of rough grassland and the management and restoration of lowland heathland on the hill tops.


Benefiting:
scrub as successional areas, traditional orchards, hedgerow management, archaeology on grassland, protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and the conservation and restoration of species-rich grassland and its management by hay cutting.

Limiting:
the management and protection of woodland,  protection of trees and coppicing of bankside trees,  permanent pasture with low inputs,  wet and rough grasslands, mainitenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings, archaeology under cultivation, parkland, and  management and restoration of fen and reedbeds in river valleys.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 3,048ha   65% ELS   35% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE effect overall on the landscape of this border area of rolling hills and lower reaches of the Wye, helping conserve the landscape structure.   ELS uptake is helping boundary features and trees, management of the agricultural landscape, while also assisting conservation of archaeological sites.  HLS uptake is focused on woodland management, wet and rough grasslands,  the management of archaeological sites (72% of total archaeological options), and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats. This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the management of small woodlands and parkland, the renwal of hedgerow trees and greater emphasis on the restoration of semi-natural habitats.


Benefiting:
traditional orchards and parkland / wood pasture, species-rich grassland, heathland and salt marsh (on the banks of the Severn).

Limiting:
woodland management and protection, field trees,  hedgerows and stone walls, low input, wet and rough grasslands, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, archaeology on grassland and under cultivation,  and management of hay meadows.

Comments:
The pattern of uptake in this NCA may be strongly influenced by the management of much of the core of the area (the statutory Forest) by the Forestry Commission and the presence of many small holdings which may not be registered agricultural holdings.  Notable are the low levels of uptake, in this predominantly small-scale pastoral landscape, for boundary features,  permanent pasture and the historic environment.  Here HLS is playing the primary role in the management of orchards, parkland / wood pasture and semi-natural habitats, as well as the conservation management of wet and rough grassland.  ELS is primarily contributing to the management of trees, boundary features, low input grasslands and archaeology on grassland.  Here it would be particularly  valuable to have increased uptake of options for the management of hedgerows and field boundaries and better coverage of  archaeological heritage.


Benefiting:
field and bankside trees and traditional orchards, hedgerows, restoration of traditional farm buildings, archaeology on grassland and protection of Scheduled Monuments, large and small water bodies, species-rich grassland and hay meadows, and estuarine salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland and the protection and regeneration of hedgerow trees,  planting of new hedgerows,  wet ditches (rhines), low input, wet and rough pasture, retention of traditional farm buildings,    archaeology on arable, parklands, and the creation of new coastal habitats.  The NCA has high uptake of fallow plots in arable - these may have an adverse effect on the landscape if visible on a slope.

Comments:
Despite a long tradition of intensive agricultural management (the NCA includes the Vale of Evesham) ES is assessed as having a STRONGLY POSITIVE effect on the landscape.  This especially reflects that ES is conserving those features identified as central to the character of the NCA not least field and waterside trees and traditional orchards.  Here HLS  is helping to manage woodlands, riverside trees and traditional orchards and parkland, as well as  characteristic wet and rough grasslands, large and small water features and semi-natural habitats, along with archaeology under cultivation and the restoration of traditional farm buidings.  ELS on the other hand, is helping maintain the hedgerow network and population of field trees as well as low input grasslands and archaeology on grassland.  This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for wet grasslands and wetland habitats that reinforce the riverine character of this NCA, as well as restoration of hedgerows, especially those affected by Dutch elm disease.


Benefiting:
management of scrub, protection of in-field trees and coppicing of bankside trees, conservation of traditional orchards, management and planting / restoration of  hedgerows, management of the  highly characteristic limestone walls and also ditches, use of wide buffer strips to help define field boundaries, retention of permanent pasture (with low inputs), protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and conservation of species-rich grassland and hay cutting.

Limiting:
woodlands, overwintering stubbles, wet and rough grasslands, traditional water meadows,  maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildings,  archaeology under cultivation and on grassland, parkland, and  lowland heathland and wetland habitats.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 35497ha.   65% ELS   35% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE impact on this ihglhy distinctgive  AONB landscape, however, there is a notable split in the landscape themes with those for woodlands and trees, boundaries and semi-natural habitats showing a strongly positive effect and those for agricultural land use,buildings and the historic environment showing a neutral effect.  ELS uptake focuses on boundary features and trees (which includes a very high level of uptake for field trees (7619 trees), winter stubbles, permanent pasture (low inputs), and conservation of archaeology, while  HLS uptake focuses on woodlands, wet and rough grasslands, conservation of archaeology (59% of total archaeological uptake); and semi-natural habitats. This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the conservation management of permanent and wet pastures, parkland and archaeological features under agricultural management.


Benefiting:
hedgerows (which have suffered significant reduction in length in the past), rough grasslands, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, small  ponds, and neutral species-rich  riverside grasslands.

Limiting:
woodlands, parklands and orchards as well as, field, hedgerow and bankside trees (this is a significant missed opportunity with the loss of so many trees to Dutch Elm disease), hedgerow planting, ditches and wide  buffer strips that help define field pattern, over-wintering stubbles, permanent pasture (low inputs) and wet grasslands,  mixed stocking (that may benefit management of wet grasslands), traditional farm buildings, archaeology on arable and grassland, and conservation of hay meadows and wetland habitats. In addition,  significant lengths of riverside fencing and arable plots, if in the wrong location, could detract from the landscape.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 20,728ha.   66%ELS 34% HLS
In this large NCA which has been affected by gravel extraction and the effects of Dutch elm disease, significant opportunites have been missed to enhance the landscape, with ES having a NEUTRAL effect on the landscape overall. Here ELS is the main influence on the landscape, although HLS is responsible for the management and restoration of wet and rough pasture and  species-rich grassland, as well as woodlands.  The NCA would benefit from higher levels of uptake across all aspects and especially in the encouragement of hedgerow trees, restoration of hedgerows and the use of wide buffer strips in arable to strenghten field pattern.  Equally, levels of uptake need to be higher to ensure the retention of a mixed landscape with permanent pasture and wet grasslands and associated wetland habitats and parklands, as well as the conservation of  archaeology on grassland and arable.


Benefiting:
hedgerows and species-rich grassland, as well as very small areas of fen and heath.

Limiting:
woodlands, parklands, hedgerows and field and hedgerow trees and the use of wide buffer strips to help define field pattern.  It is also having more limited impact on improved and rough grasslands, traditional farm buildings and the conservation of archaeology on grassland and arable.

Comments:
ES is having a NEUTRAL effect overall on this rural agricultural NCA stretching between Oxford and Swindon.  Uptake of many options is low compared to the size of the NCA, with ES only identified as having a positive effect on the landscape with respect to hedgerows and semi-natural habitats. The influence of HLS is primarily related to woodlands and parklands, rough grasslands and the conservation of semi-natural habitats. ELS is primarily influencing the conservation of field trees and hedgerows, the provision of buffer strips and low input grasslands while ELS and HLS are equally contributing to the conservation of archaeology on agricultural land.  This NCA would particularly benefit from greater uptake of options for the restoration and renewal of hedgerows (many are gappy) and hedgerow trees and the provision of wide grass buffer strips to help strenghten the field pattern, combined with greater uptake of parkland options and those for the conservation of archaeology.


Benefiting:
scrub management, hedgerows, wet and rough pasture,  restoration of traditional farm buildings, protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk,  and species-rich grassland, lowland heathland, and wetlands.

Limiting:
woodlands, infield, hedgerow and bankside trees, traditional orchards, planting of new hedgerow lengths, creation of wide buffer strips to strengthen field pattern, overwintering stubbles,  permanent pastures (with low inputs), wet grasslands, retention of traditional farm buildings,   archaeology on arable and grassland, parkland and wood pasture, and hay cutting.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 10891ha   62%ELS   38% HLS 
ES is having a POSITVE effect overall on this well wooded chalkland landscape (much of which falls within the Chilterns AONB) although uptake is generally below threshold for woodland and trees and the historic environment.  ELS uptake is assisting  the management of boundary features and trees, winter stubbles, low input permanent pastures, and conservation of archaeology.  HLS uptake is focused on woodlands, wet and rough pasture, conservation of archaeology (36% of total archaeological uptake); and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats. This NCA would particularly benefit from support for field and hedgerow trees and orchards, restoration of important hedgerow lengths, use of wide buffer strips, greater protection of archaeology, and management of parklands (if not separately covered under special projects and ES capital items).


Benefiting:
the protection of in-field trees and  conservation of orchards, wet ditches and rough grassland, the retention of small ponds and the conservation of species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
woodland and parkland management, protection and renewal of hedgerow trees and coppicing of bankside trees, management and renewal of hedges, winter stubbles, low input and wet grasslands and water meadows, protection and restoration of traditional farm buildings,  conservation of archaeology on arable and grassland, and hay meadows, heathland, wetland habitats and the small areas of salt marsh on the coastal boundaries of this NCA.

Comments:
ES is having a NEUTRAL effect overall on this NCA.  Uptake of many options is low, perhaps due in part to the NCA's strong urban influences, although much of the NCA remains under agricultural management.  HLS is the primary influence on the management of woodland, bankside trees, orchards and parklands, the management of wet and rough grasslands,  the conservation of archaeology on arable, as well as the conservation of semi-natural habitats and ponds. The primary influence of ELS is on the management of trees and boundary features, over-wintering stubbles and low input grasslands, and archaeology on grassland.  This NCA would particularly benefit from bringing the diverse small farm woodlands under management and the strengthening of hedgerow boundaries and associated hedgerow trees, along with the management of parkland / wood pasture and reinforcement of the semi-natural wetland character of the river valleys.


Benefiting:
wet grassland,  archaeology on grassland and management of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and  species-rich grassland, wetland habitats and sand dunes.

Limiting:
woodlands, trees, traditional orchards (this is a very low level of uptake relative to the strong orcharding tradition of the area), management and restoration of hedgerows and wet ditches, over-wintering stubble, low input permanent pasture, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, archaeology on arable, parklands, meadows and the conservation of heathland and salt marsh.

Comments:
Overall this NCA has relatively low levels of ES uptake, with its strong development pressures and intensive horticultural / arable production but ES is assessed as having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape.  ELS is assisting protection of trees and  management of boundary features, over-wintering stubbles, low input pastures, and the protection of archaeology, while HLS is assisting  woodlands, wet grasslands and  semi-natural habitats including those along the coast.    This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake to support the management of small woodlands, the restoration management of hedgerows and wet drains, the restoration management of wetland habitats, heathland and salt marsh, and the restoration of traditional orchards and parkland, the former being an iconic feature of this landscape, as part of the former 'Garden of England'.


Benefiting:
the management of scrub, rough grassland, species-rich grassland and heathland.

Limiting:
small woodlands,  in-field, hedgerow and bankside trees, hedgerows and ditches, permanent pasture (low inputs),  wet grasslands, conservation of archaeology, parklands and small ponds, the retention of traditional farm buildings, and the conservation of fen.

Comments:
Overall uptake levels are low in this NCA with ES having a NEUTRAL  effect on the landscape, potentially refecting its highly built-up character, although there are significant areas of common land.  Within this limited uptake HLS uptake is assisting the conservation of small woodlands,  rough grassland, parkland and semi-natural habitats.  ELS uptake is primarily influencing the management of trees, boundary features and low input grasslands.  As for the Thames Valley, in this urban edge NCA much of the land has now passed out of agricultural use making the landscape of the  areas of agriculture that remain all the more important.  This NCA would particularly benefit from greater  uptake of options  that encourage the restoration of gappy hedgerows and conservation and reinstatement of hedgerow trees including ancient pollards, the conservation of wet grasslands and small ponds and restoration of parkland and wood pasture, if not already covered by other special projects.


Benefiting:
management of successional areas, rough grassland, and species-rich grassland and heathland.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodland,orchards,field, hedgerow and bankside trees, parkland,  hedgerows and ditches, permanent pasture (low input) and wet grasslands, retention and restoration of historic farm buildings, protection of archaeology on agricultural land and  conservation of traditional hay meadows and wetland habitats.

Comments:
ES is having a NEUTRAL effect  with low levels of uptake in this urban edge landscape bisected by the M25 and with much past gravel extraction and waste tips.  Much of the land has now passed out of agricultural use making the landscape of the  areas of agriculture that remain all the more important.  Here ELS is primarily assisting field trees, boundary features, conservation of permanent pasture, and conservation of archaeology on farmland. HLS is the main influence on the management of woodland and coppicing of bankside trees, wet and rough grasslands, parkland and  semi-natural habitats.  This NCA would particularly benefit from greater  uptake of options  that encourage the management of small woodlands, restoration of hedgerows, reinstatement of hedgerow trees and restoration of traditional orchards (once a strong characteristic of this area),  wet grasslands and other wetland habitats, with hay cutting as appropriate,  and the restoration of parkland and wood pasture, if not already covered by other special projects.


Benefiting:
management of scrub, hedgerows and planting of new hedgerow lengths (important where remaining hedgerows have become very gappy), ditches,  wet and rough pasture, restoration of historic farm buildings,  archaeology under cultivation and on grassland, and conservation of  chalk grassland and wetland habitats.

Limiting:
small woodlands, infield, hedgerow and bankside trees, wide buffer strips helping define arable boundaries, overwintering stubbles, permanent pasture with low inputs, retention of historic farm buildings, and  conservation  of parkland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 17,155ha   66%ELS   34% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape across all landscape themes other than woodlands and trees in this large-scale chalkland landscape, renown for its race horse training  and dominated by arable production, largely falling within the North Wessex Downs AONB. ELS uptake is made up of four main groups of options: those for boundary features,  winter stubbles, low input permanent pasture, and conservation of archaeology.  HLS uptake is focused on woodland management, wet and rough pastures, conservation of archaeology (25% of total archaeological uptake),  and the management and restoration of semi-natural habitats. This NCA would particularly benefit from higher uptake for the conservation of riverside and hedgerow trees in river valleys and the use of wide buffer strips to help define arable field boundaries in this very large scale landscape, encouragement of low input grasslands on scarp slopes, as well as the management of parklands if not covered by other special projects.


Benefiting:
hedgerows and ditches (in river valleys), restoration of traditonal farm buildings,  archaeology on grassland, protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and the restoration of species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
woodlands, infield, hedgerow and bankside trees, planting of hedgerow lengths, stone walls,  low input and wet grasslands, retention of traditional farm buildings, archaeology under cultivation, and the conservation management of parkland and  wetland habitats.

Comments:
ES is having a NEUTRAL effect on this strongly rural low lying varied landscape, with generally low levels of uptake throughout but especially evident for woodlands and trees, agricultural land uses and traditional farm buildings.  Here  ELS is the main influence on field trees, permanent pastures (low inputs), rush pastures, and the conservation of archaeology. By comparison, HLS is the main influence on small woodland and bankside trees, parkland and semi-natural habitats.    The landscape of this NCA would particularly benefit from restoration of prominent hedgerow lengths, regeneration of hedgerow trees, maintenance of field walls and conservation management of wet grasslands and parklands assuming that these are not already covered by Special Projects, as well as the protection of any remaining areas of ridge and furrow under arable cultivation.


Benefiting:
in-field trees and orchards, hedgerows,  conservation management of wet grassland and archaeology on grassland, and the conservation of species-rich grassland

Limiting:
small  woodlands, protection and renewal of hedgerow trees, stone walls which are locally characteristic on the limestone,  management of rough and low input pasture, retention of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on arable and of parkland / wood pasture, and the conservation of hay meadows and wetland habitats.

Comments:
In this highly varied area of ridges and valleys under the urban influence of Bristol, ES is having a POSITIVE effect  across all landscape themes other than that for traditional agricultural buildings.  ELS is assisting the conservation of tree and boundary features,  low input grasslands and the conservation of archaeology, while HLS is aiding the management of woodland and traditional orchards, wet and rough grassland, parkland, and the conservation management of semi-natural habitats.    The NCA would particularly benefit from increased uptake of options for small woodlands, stone walls, hedgerow tree re-establishment where characteristic of vale landscapes, and the conservation management of rough grassland and parkland  - the latter characteristic of the south and west where the woodlands and mature and exotic trees bring a distinctive local character.


Benefiting:
management of scrub, infield trees and traditional orchards, hedgerows and the planting of new hedgerows (a very high level  compared to many other NCAs), wet and rough pasture, protection of the archaeological resource under cultivation, and management and restoration of semi-natural species rich grasslands, heathland, fen and and salt marsh.

Limiting:
small woodlands, bankside trees, the ditches of the valley floors, wide buffer strips in arable to help accentuate the field pattern of larger fields, over-wintering stubbles, permanent pasture (low inputs), retention and restoration of historic farm buildings, management of archaeological sites on  grassland and of parkland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 12,751 ha.  54%ELS    46% HLS 
On these chalk downs that trace the southern edge of London and commuter towns to west and east and make up parts of both the Surrey Hills and Kent Downs AONBs, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape, with ES particularly benefitting field patterns and boundaries and the conservation of semi-natural habitats, especially characteristic chalk grassland. Here HLS is the primary scheme for the conservation of woodland and orchards, wet and rough grasslands,  for two-thirds of the uptake relating to archaeological conservation, parkland, and the conservation of semi-natural habitats.  ELS is the scheme primarily covering the protection of field trees, management of boundary features and the farmed landscape,  conservation of certain aspects of the archaeological resource. This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for  the management of small farm woods, the use of wide buffer strips to help define larger arable field boundaries, conservation of archaeology on grassland, and the management of  parklands, if not covered by other special projects.


Benefiting:
scrub,  in-field and bankside trees, orchards, wet ditches within river valleys combined with wet and rough grasslands - a highly valued feature of the river valleys,  restoration of traditional farm buildings,  parkland / wood pasture, and archaeology on arable, the conservation of water features and species-rich grassland,  and the large-scale restoration of lowland heathland.

Limiting:
the management and protection of small woodlands,  hedgerow trees, conservation of the highly characteristic hedgerow pattern, permanent pasture with low inputs, the management of archaeology on grassland and the conservation of Scheduled Monuments at Risk, the conservation management of fen and swamp vegetation in  the river valleys and on heathlands, and the management of coastal salt marshes (identified by Land Cover Map) and sand dunes.

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape of this well wooded and heavily populated Greensand ridge with extensive areas of remaining heathlands that falls partly within the South Downs National Park and Surrey Hills and Kent Downs AONBs.  It is notable though that ES is not having a discernible effect on the conservation of the characteristic small-scale field pattern. Here HLS makes the major contribution to the management of woodlands, orchards and coppicing of bankside trees, wet and rough grasslands, parklands and large and small water features, and the management of semi-natural habitats including the very significant restoration of lowland heathland.  ELS makes the primary contribution to the protection of woodlands and trees, management of boundary features, permanent pasture with low inputs, and the conservation of archaeology.  This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the management of small woodlands, hedgerows and conservation and renewal of hedgerow trees, as well as the conservation of archaeology on grassland and of wetland habitats.


Benefiting:
protection of infield trees (many of which are ancient) and management of bankside trees,  hedgerows, wet and rough pasture,  conservation of archaeology under arable cultivation,  restoration of parkland/ wood pasture, retention and management of large water features, and  restoration of lowland heathland and fen.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection, renewal of hedgerow trees, management of traditional orchards, permanent pasture  with low inputs, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeological sites on grassland, small ponds,  and conservation of species-rich grassland  and its management by hay cutting.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 12,541 ha  60%ELS    40% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on this low-lying, rural, well-wooded,  pastoral landscape.  It is  having an especially positive effect on conserving its pastoral character and its archaeology and parklands / wood pasture.  Here ELS is primarily responsible for the management / conservation of field trees and hedgerows, management of the agricultural landscape, and roughly 40% of the archaeological conservation.  The uptake of HLS on the other hand, primarily covers management of woodland, rough and wet pasture, 60% of archaeological conservation, and management and restoration of parkland and semi-natural habitats.  In this NCA higher levels of ES uptake would be particularly beneficial for management of the many small woodlands and remaining orchards, regeneration of hedgerow trees, conservation and restoration of remnant species-rich pastures and management by hay cutting, and conservation of the highly characteristic field ponds.


Benefiting:
infield trees and bankside trees, wet ditches in the river valley floodplains,  wet and rough grasslands (including semi-improved grasslands), conservation of archaeology on grassland, and conservation restoration of semi-natural habitats including species-rich grasslands, heathlands and the wetland habitats of the river floodplains.

Limiting:
small woodlands, protection and regeneration of hedgerows and hedgerow trees, traditional orchards, permanent pasture with low inputs, hay cutting and mixed stocking, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on arable, and conservation of characteristic parkland and wood pasture and small field ponds.

Comments:
In this distinctive Medieval landscape of small irregular fields, shaws and interlinking small woodlands falling within the High Weald AONB, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape.  This especially relates to the conservation and  restoration of species-rich grasslands and heathlands (including the large expanse of Ashdown Forest) although it is notable that ES is having a limited effect on conserving the highly characteristic dense hedgerow pattern. HLS is the primary influence on the management of woodlands and orchards and the coppicing of bankside trees, the management of wet and rough grasslands, and the conservation parklands / wood pasture, ponds, hay meadows and semi-natural habitats. Conversely ELS is the primary influence on the protection of woodland and trees, management of boundary features, low input pasture and archaeology on grassland.  The NCA would particularly benefit from increased uptake of options for the management of small woodlands, hedgerows, regeneration of hedgerow trees, hay meadows and parklands /woodpasture- in the latter case these may already be covered by separate Management Plans with uptake of a suite of options rather than the specific parkland options.


Benefiting:
woodland protection, conservation of traditional orchards, hedgerows, low input, wet and rough pastures, archaeology on grassland, water bodies and species-rich grassland, and the conservation management of salt marsh and sand dunes.

Limiting:
woodland management and the protection of in-field trees, conservation management of dykes and water filled ditches, use of wide buffer strips helping reinforce field pattern in this largely open arable landscape, winter stubbles, mixed stocking, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology under cultivation, and conservation of heathland and wetland habitats (reed beds and fen).

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on this open drained coastal landscape largely under arable cropping.  In particular ES is helping retain remaining areas of permanent pasture and especially wet and rough pastures and  important coastal sand dunes.  HLS is primarily supporting the management of woodlands and orchards, wet and rough pastures, water features,  and the conservation of  terrestrial and coastal semi-natural habitats.  ELS is helping the protection of woodland and trees, management of boundary features, overwintering stubbles and low input pastures and support for mixed stocking.  The management of archaeology on grassland and the creation of wide buffer strips is shared between ELS and HLS, with ELS having roughly two-thirds of the uptake in both cases.  This NCA would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the conservation management of ditches and rhynes and reed bed and fens, as well as the use of wide buffer strips to help define field boundaries.


Benefiting:
low input permanent pasture, highly characteristic wet grasslands and mixed stocking,  and conservation of the very small areas of species-rich semi-natural grassland and the creation of reed bed.

Limiting:
woodland management, protection of trees, management of hedgerows and ditches, rough grassland, and the retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, potentially including 'lookers' huts.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 3,351 ha   48%ELS   52% HLS 
ES is assessed as having a NEUTRAL effect  on this open, drained, coastal pastoral landscape.  This partly reflects that some of the landscape themes are less relevant to this small NCA which, for example, has a very small archaeological resource.  Importantly ES is addessing the most important aspect of this landscape - conservng the areas of coastal grazing marsh.  Here ELS is primarily helping  field trees, and conservation management of hedgerows, ditches and low input pastures, while HLS is most strongly associated with the management and restoration of the highly characteristic wet grazing marshes and other semi-natural habitats.   This NCA would particularly benefit from greater uptake for the conservation management of wet ditches and reed beds, helping excentuate the area's  strong wetland associations.


Benefiting:
small woodland and scrub management, protection of infield trees (particularly associated with the major estates of the western downs), management of hedgerows, wet grasslands of the valleys and rough pasture of steeper slopes, restoration of historic buildings, conservation of archaeology on farmland, of large water features (again likely to be associated with the large estates), and the major restoration of chalk grasslands and rare of rare chalk heath.

Limiting:
woodland protection, coppicing of riverside trees, planting of new hedgerow lengths,  conservation management of wet ditches on valley floors,  wide grass buffer strips on arable  to help define field pattern, over-wintering stubbles, permanent low input pasture, retention of  traditional buildings, restoration of parkland, and the conservation of wetland habitats and the small areas of salt marsh and vegetated shingle banks within the Cuckmere Estuary.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 28,375ha   54%ELS  46% HLS 
In this chalk downland landscape, forming part of the South Downs National Park, high levels of ES uptake are having a STRONGLY POSITIVE effect on the landscape. especially in respect of Semi-natural Habitats, the Historic Environment, and the conservation of wet and rough grasslands.  Here HLS is  supporting woodland management, wet and rough pasture, restoration of agricultural buildings,  just under half of the uptake for conservation of archaeology, parkland, and all options for  semi-natural habitats, both terrestrial and on the coast.  Conversely ELS is the main scheme supporting the management of field boundaries and field trees, arable options, and just over half of the uptake for the conservation of archaeology. Future priorities for ES uptake will be set out in the South Downs Management Plan.


Benefiting:
hedgerows, wet grasslands, large water bodies (gravel pits that form the largest areas of freshwater in the area), and small areas of semi-natural grassland, coastal heathland, and  reedbeds and salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland management, protection of in-field trees, conservation management of wet ditches, use of wide buffer strips to help define field boundaries, over-wintering stubbles,  permanent pasture with low inputs, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, management of archaeology on grassland and parkland, conservation of characteristic small ponds, hay cutting of grasslands and the conservation of fen and sand dunes for which the small area of uptake does not reflect their importance to to the area, for example, sand dunes at the mouth of Chichester Harbour and Littlehampton.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 2262ha   34% ELS  66% HLS
Overall levels of ES uptake are low reflecting the highly urbanised character of the coastal plain, although ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape, which includes the Chichester Harbour AONB.  ELS options largely relate to the protection of field trees, management of boundary features, and management of the wider agricultural landscape. Conversely HLS largely supports conservation of archeology, management of woodlands on higher ground, conservation of wet grasslands, and the conservation of semi-natural habitats both on the coast and inland.  This landscape would particularly benefit from conservation management of wet ditches, use of wide buffer strips to give stronger definition to field boundaries, and greater management and restoration of coastal habitats and especially sand dunes, which are suffering from coastal squeeze.


Benefiting:
management of woodland, hedgerows, wet and rough pasture, conservation of  archaeology under arable cultivation, retention and management of large and small water bodies, and the conservation of semi-natural habitats (particularly chalk grassland) and the management of salt marsh.

Limiting:
woodland protection, infield and hedgerow trees, traditional orchards, new hedgerow planting,   management of low input permanent pasture,  retention of traditional farm buildings,  conservation of archaeology on grassland, parklands and remnant areas of wood pasture, and hay meadow management.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 4,435 ha   33% ELS 67% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on this highly varied AONB island landscape bringing particular benefit to field boundaries and semi-natural habitats.  HLS is the primary scheme for woodland, orchards,  and wet and rough grassland management, aspects of archaeological conservation, parklands, and semi-natural habitats, including those along the coast.  ELS primarily covers the management of hedgerows and trees, the agricultural landscape, and aspects of archaeological conservation. The NCA would benefit from increased uptake of options for regeneration of hedgerow trees where they are characteristic, hedgerow planting where important lengths have been lost, and the management of parkland and wood pasture, if not already covered by special projects, as well as conservation of the small areas of salt marsh suffering from coastal squeeze.


Benefiting:
scrub and wet grassland, management of water bodies (likely to be gravel workings) and small ponds, restoration of species-rich grassland and heathland restoration and the  restoration and management of wetland habitats.

Limiting:
management of woodland and protection and replacement of field and hedgerow trees (both esential characteristics of this landscape), coppicing of bankside trees, management of hedgerows and wet ditches, permanent pasture with low inputs,  traditional water meadow, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, parkland and conservation of salt marsh on the lower reaches of the main rivers entering Southampton Water.

Comments:
This is a well wooded and treed landscape similar to the enclosed lands of the New Forest and  crossed by the lush lower valleys of the Test, Itchen and Meon,  ES is assessed as having a NEUTRAL effect on the landscape potentially reflecting the strong urban pressures within the area, crossed by the M27 and M3 and affected by the outward expansion of Southampton,  Eastleigh and Havant. 
Here HLS makes up the majority of the uptake  for woodland, parkland / wood pasture  and scrub management, wet grasslands and water meadows and the conservation management of semi-natural habitats and water features including small ponds.  ELS makes up the majority of uptake for trees and boundary features, and permanent pasture with low inputs.  This NCA would particularly benefit from increased uptake for the conservation management of hedgerows (that define the small-scale character of this landscape) and drainage ditches, the protection and regeneration of hedgerow trees, and further uptake of options for traditional water meadows (expanding on the significnant uptake that has already been achieved), and conservation of salt marsh at the mouth of the river estuaries and suffering from coastal squeeze.


Benefiting:
scrub mangement (likely to be for the control of scrub on heathland and in valley wetlands),  management of ditches / dykes in river valleys, conservation of archaeology on arable, conservation of water features, and conservation and restoration of species-rich grassland and especially heathland.

Limiting:
woodland management, in-field and hedgerow trees, regeneration of hedgerow trees, coppicing of bankside trees, hedgerow management, permant low input, wet and rough pastures, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and parkland / wood pasture, and the conservation of fen and other wetland habitats.

Comments:
Overall ES is having a NEUTRAL effect on this distinct area of unenclosed heathland and coniferous forestry.  Uptake of many options is low potentially reflecting the strong urban influences of Newbury, Bracknell, Camberley, Aldershot, Ascot, Farnborough and Woking, linked by major transport routes (the M3, M4, M25, and A34). Nevertheless, ES is having a strongly positive effect on the NCA's heathland character.  Here HLS makes up the majority of the uptake  for woodland  and scrub management, bankside trees, wet and rough grasslands and the conservation  of semi-natural habitats (especially heathland), and water features and parklands.  ELS covers the protection of trees, management of boundary features and permanent pastures, including rush pastures and the conservation of archaeology on arable - the conservation of archaeology on grassland is roughly split between ELS and HLS.  In this NCA there would be significant gains for the landscape if greater emphasis were placed on the uptake of options for hedgerow management and renovation, the conservation and regeneration of hedgerow and field trees, and especially the protection of ancient pollards,  There would also be benefit in greater emphasis on the management of wet grassland, fens and other wetland habitats in the river valleys.


Benefiting:
infield and riverside trees, management of hedgerows, use of wide grass buffer strips in arable  to help define field pattern, conservation of wet and rough grasslands, archaeology on grassland and arable, and conservation of small ponds and remaining areas of semi-natural chalk grassland.

Limiting:
protection and management of small woodlands, hedgerow planting, management of ditches in the river valleys, over-wintering stubbles, retention of low input permanent pasture (significant that 50% of area under this option type is under the more rigerous options for very low inputs),   retention and restoration of traditional water meadows and conservation of valley fens and reed beds, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, and conservation of parkland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 13,281 ha   68% ELS  32% HLS 
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape of this large-scale rolling chalk downland dominated by arable cropping, with strongly positive effects for Field Boundaries, the Historic Environment and Semi-natural Habitats.  Significant parts of this NCA fall within the South Downs National Park and North Wessex Downs AONB.  Here HLS makes up the majority of uptake  for woodland  management, parklands, wet grasslands  and semi-natural habitats,  as well as committing over 1000ha to archaeological conservation.  Conversely ELS is the main scheme for field boundaries, conservation management of arable cropping and permanent pasture and over half of the area committed to the conservation of archaeology.  This NCA would particularly  benefit from higher levels of uptake for hedgerow restoration of important lengths (many are very gappy), management of parklands and conservation management of the water meadows, wet grasslands and fens of the valley floors.


Benefiting:
the significant areas of restoration and management of wood pasture, semi-natural habitats especially extensive areas of lowland heathland and species-rich grassland restoration, and the  management of salt marsh on the coast.  Also the coppicing of bankside trees and the conservation management of wet pasture.

Limiting:
areas of woodland and trees (other than wood pasture) with all of the main forest enclosures under the management of the Forestry Commission.  ES is equally having more limited impact on field boundaries, field and hedgerow trees,  on areas of improved permanent and rough pasture and on the maintenance and restoration of traditional farm buildingsm the management of archaeology under grassland, and the management of wetland habitats.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 26,679ha   6%ELS    94% HLS
In this NCA, which largely falls within the New Forest National Park, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape. The high levels of HLS uptake for the restoration and management of wood pasture and restoration of lowland heathland and species-rich grassland is very noticeable, as are the very significant areas managed as wet grasslands  (for breeding waders) although greater uptake of HD10 / 11 for the management and restoration of traditional water meadows would be beneficial in the Avon valley.   There is much greater reliance, however, on ELS options on the enclosed lands that surround the Open Forest and significantly lower levels of uptake.  Improved uptake in these areas would be beneficial to help conserve and strengthen the pattern of small woodlands and hedged enclosures with many hedge and field trees that provide context to the Open Forest.


Benefiting:
managment of hedgerows, retention of permanent and rough pasture,  conservation of the archaeological resource under arable cropping and on grass, and the management of reed beds.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodland, protection of field trees and coppicing of bankside trees, planting of hedgerows, creation of wide buffer strips to help define field pattern, winter stubbles, conservation  of wet grasslands, conservation and restoration of traditional water meadows in the Avon Valley, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of parklands and associated water bodies, and the management/ restoration/ creation of calcareous grasslands.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 23,268 ha   72%ELS    28% HLS
In this very large-scale, open, downland landscape, falling partly within the Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs AONB,  ES is having a POSITIVE effect  on the landscape overall and a very positive effect on the historic environment (including the Stonehenge and Avebury WHS).  However, with the largest area of internationally important semi-natural chalk grassland in Western Europe, it is noticeable that levels of uptake for this habitat are low (relative to its total area).   In this NCA ELS is the dominant scheme overall, assisting the management of the agricultural landscape and the management of the archaeological resource, as well as the  conservation management of hedgerows. Conversely, HLS is the primary scheme for the management of woodlands and of rough and wet grasslands and semi-natural habitats.  

 The real opportunity in this NCA is for very significantly greater levels of uptake for the conservation of species-rich grassland, combined with the use of wide buffer strips to strengthen field boundaries across arable areas and potentially greater areas of over-wintering stubbles. There would also be significant merit in conserving and strengthening the character of the distinct river valleys especially through greater uptake of wet grassland  and wetland options and greater support for the conservation of traditional water meadows.


Benefiting:
protection of infield trees, management of traditional orchards, hedgerows, rough pasture, archaeology on grassland,  large and small water features, and conservation of species-rich grasslands and hay meadows.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodlands, protection and renewal of hedgerow trees and coppicing of bankside trees, management of ditches,  low input and wet pastures, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on arable, and management of parkland.

Comments:
In this rich, pastoral, remote and intensely rural area, that falls partly within the Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs AONB, ES is assessed as having a POSITIVE effect  across nearly all landscape themes, and a strongly positive effect on Semi-natural Habitats. Here  ELS is the main influence on the protection of woodlands and hedgerow and field trees, boundary features, rush pastures and permanent pasture with low inputs, while HLS is the primary influence on the management of woodland, rough grasslands, and semi-natural habitats.    The conservation  of archaeology on grassland is roughly split between ELS and HLS.  Particular aspects that would benefit the landscape are higher levels of uptake for renewal of hedgerow trees (mainly oak)and management of small woodlands combined with greater uptake for wet grassland options to stengthen the character of the river valleys and for parklands if not covered by other special projects.


Benefiting:
protection of in-field trees, management of scrub, traditional orchards, hedgerows, low input pastures, archaeology on grassland and arable and the protection of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and conservation of species-rich grassland and restoration of lowland heathland (along the NCA boundary with the Dorset Heaths), as well as management of wetland habitats.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodland,  the protection and renewal of hedgerow trees, planting of hedgerow lengths,  use of buffer strips to help define field pattern, overwintering stubbles, wet grasslands and conservation of traditional water meadows, retention and restoration of traditional farm building, conservation of parkland and management of traditional hay meadows.

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape overall and a strongly positive effect on Field Patterns, the Historic Environment and Semi-natural Habitats of this large scale rolling chalkland landscape with inimitate hidden valleys and a strong estateland feel.  The majority of the NCA falls within the Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs  AONB and a smaller part in the Dorset  AONB. Here HLS is the main influence on the landscape  with regard to the management of woodland, scrub, orchards and parkland and wood pasture, wet and rough grasslands, and  the maintenance and restoration of semi-natural habitats.  ELS is the main influence on protection of trees,  management of hedgerows and use of wide buffer strips, low input grasslands, and the conservation management of archaeology on grassland and arable.  In this NCA the landscape would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for restoration of important hedgerow lengths and wide buffer strips in arable, combined with greater uptake of wet grassland and water meadow options in the river valleys to strengthen their distinct character, and greater uptake of parkland options, although these may be covered by other Special Projects.


Benefiting:
the extensive areas of lowland heathland that are being managed and restored, areas of floodplain and rough pasture and  lowland fen marsh that are being managed appropriately and along the coast the areas of sand dune and saltmarsh that have been brought under appropriate management.  ES is also supporting active woodland management and the management of scrub, as well as the conservation of archaeology on grassland.

Limiting:
the conservation management of field boundaries, protection and renewal of hedgerow trees, retention of mixed / pastoral character, management and restoration of traditional water meadows, and the retention and restoration of farm buildings.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 10,714 ha  19%ELS    81% HLS

In this strongly heathland landscape with a heathland core surrounded by transitional farmland, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape overall and a strongly positive effect on the restoration of heathland and coastal habitats but it is noticeable that levels of uptake are less influential on the landscape of the surrounding agricultural areas.  In this NCA HLS is the main influence on the landscape with the high levels of HLS uptake for the restoration and management of lowland heathland and species-rich grasslands, as well as the management of woodland, conservation of wet and rough grasslands, and coastal sand dunes and salt marshes around the fringes of Poole Harbour.  ELS provides the main support for trees and boundary features, permanent pastures, and conservation of archaeology on grassland.  Notable opportunities for greater uptake relate to the  management and restoration of historic water meadows (HD10 / 11) in the river valleys along with greater support for hedgrow management and restoration and regeneration of hedgerow trees to help maintain  and enhance the small-scale nature of the surrounding farmland.


Benefiting:
woodlands and hedgerows, retention of a mixed/ pastoral character supported by permanent pastures with low inputs and rough pasture, as well as management of parklands  and significant areas of the highly characteristic calcareous grassland and remnant areas of lowland heath and acid grassland.

Limiting:
protection of woodlands, conservation of field trees (in the Corfe Vale), planting of new hedgerows, management of stone walls, retention and restoration of traditioanl agricultural buildings, and archaeology under arable cultivation and on grassland.  While the NCA has an internationally important coastline management needs fall largely outside the scope of ES.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 3,752 ha  41%ELS    59% HLS
In this exceptionally diverse AONB landscape, strongly influenced by the mix of underlying geology and with a dramatic coast of international geological importance, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape, especially with regard to conservation of calcareous grasslands. HLS is the primary scheme for woodland management, conservation of semi-natural habitats, rough grasslands and parklands, as well as the restoration of the characteristic  stone walls; while ELS is the primary scheme for the management of hedgerows and walls, conservation of permanent pasture through low inputs,  and management of archaeology  on arable and grassland.  The NCA would particularly benefit from increased uptake of  options for the management and restoration of stone walls and the protection and regeneration of hedgerow trees, as well as conservation of reedbeds and other wetland habitats along seepage lines.


Comments:
According to Genesis there is NO uptake of ES on the Isle of Portland


Benefiting:
management and protection of woodland and scrub, management of hedgerows and rough pasture, maintenance and restoration of species-rich grassland and management of reedbeds.

Limiting:
protoction of in-field and hedgerow trees, conservation of characteristic stone walls, management of low input permanent and wet grasslands, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings,  conservation of archaeology on grassland, and management of coastal salt marsh.

Comments:
in this rural mixed agricultural landscape that overlies a broad ridge and valley landscape backing Chesil Beach and the Jurassic Coast, ES is having a positive effect on this landscape, and a strongly positive effect on Semi-natural habitats. This NCA lies partly within the Dorset AONB.  Here 
HLS is the primary driver for the management of woodland and scrub, wet and rough pasture, and the conservation of semi-natural habitats.  ELS is assisting the hedgerow trees, stone walls,  and management of low input grasslands.  The low archaeological uptake is evenly distributed between ELS and HLS. The NCA would particularly benefit from increased support for the restoration of hedgerows, conservation of stone walls, restoration of wet grasslands within the river valleys and conservation of salt marsh.


Benefiting:
management of woodlands and orchards, hedgerows, permanent pasture with low inputs,   species-rich grasslands, traditional hay cutting, and very small areas for restoration of lowland heathland.

Limiting:
in-field, hedgerow and bankside trees, management of rough pasture, the retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland,  and the conservation of wetland habitats.

Comments:
ES is having a positive effect on this small-scale pastoral landscape of interlinking small woodlands, copses and hedgerows set within a bowl-shaped clay vale surrounded by ridges and headlands of Upper Greensand.  Lying entirely within the Dorset AONB,  ES is particularly benefitting semi-natural habitats and is helping maintain the network of woodlands and hedgerows and underlying pastoral character.
HLS is the primary driver for the management of woodland and orchards and coppicing of bankside trees, management of rough grassland and conservation of semi-natural habitats.  ELS is the primary driver for  the protection of trees, management of hedgerows and low input pastures, and  conservation of archaeology on  grassland.  This NCA would particularly benefit from greater uptake of options for the restoration of hedgerows to ensure their longevity and the protection and regeneration of hedgerow and field trees, the decline of which would lead to a radical change in the character of the landscape.


Benefiting:
management of woodland (where uptake is particularly high), in-field trees and traditional orchards, hedgerows, parkland which is highly characteristic of the area, species-rich meadows and calcareous grasslands.

Limiting:
establishment of hedgerow trees and coppicing of bankside trees, maintenance of dry stone walls and repair of hedge earth banks, permanent pasture with low inputs,  wet and rough grasslands,  retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and  arable, traditional hay meadows, and conservation fens.

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on this rural mixed agricultural landscape of broad ridges separating sheltered clay vales.  It is particularly noticeable that ES is having a strongly positive effect on the  management of small woodlands, trees and orchards that provide an important framework to this landscape. HLS is the primary driver for the management of  woodlands, orchards and bankside trees, management of rough grassland, parkland, and conservation of semi-natural habitats; while  ELS is the primary driver for the protection of in-field trees and the management of boundary features,  low input pastures, rush pasture, and conservation of archaeology on grassland and arable.  This NCA would particularly benefit from greater uptake of options for the establishment of hedgerow trees, maintenance and restoration of stone walls, and restoration of wet gasslands within the river valleys.


Benefiting:
woodland management, management of traditional orchards, hedgerows and highly characteristic limestone walls of higher ground, retention of pastoral character  through options for permanent pasture and rough grassland, conservation of archaeology on grassland and conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, parklands, and conservation of semi-natural limestone grasslands,   potentially remnant neutral grassland meadows, and restoration of lowland heathland.

Limiting:
protection of woodland and in-field trees, management of ditches on the valley floors, retention  and restoration of traditional farm buildings,  and conservation of archaeology under arable cultivation.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 6,855 ha  57%ELS    43% HLS
ES is having a POSITIVE effect overall on the landscape of this distinctive chain of prominent limestone hills with rare karsk features, part of which falls within the Mendips AONB. Notably ES is having a strongly positive effect on Field Patterns, the Historic Environment and Semi-natural Habitats.  Here HLS primarily influences woodland management, rough grasslands and semi-natural habitats and important aspects of archaeology, while ELS is the primary influence on management of the wider agricultural landscape (especially the management of hedgerows, walls and of low input grasslands) and the conservation of the wider archaeological resource.  Greater uptake for the conservation of hedgerow and field trees could be beneficial.


Benefiting:
woodland management, coppicing of bankside trees and management of traditional orchards, management of hedgerows, wet and rough grasslands (the area of wet grasslands under option is significant (nearly 4,000ha) but small compared to the total area of BAP floodplain grazing marsh of over 43,000ha), management of archaeology on grassland and conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk, and management of species-rich grassland,  hay meadows and salt marsh.

Limiting:
protection of in-field and hedgerow trees and the renewal of hedgerow trees, conservation management of the characteristic rhynes, low input permanent pasture, retention and restoration of historic buildings, conservation  of archaeology on arable, and the conservation of wetland habitats and sand dunes.

Comments:
In this unique area of rivers and wetlands, artificially drained, irrigated and modified to allow productive farming ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape across nearly all themes
HLS  is the primary driver for the management of woodland and orchards, wet and rough grasslands,  conservation of archaeology on arable, and management of semi-natural habitats and hay meadows.  ELS is the primary driver for the management of trees and boundary features, low input pastures and archaeology on grassland.  Although this NCA has high levels of uptake of options for wet grasslands it would benefit from significantly higher levels (recognising the very large area covered by this BAP Priority Habitat - in excess of 40,000ha), along with increased conservation management of the rhynes and the extensive wetland habitats (fens, reedbeds and lowland raised bog).


Benefiting:
management of woodland and parkland, hedgerows and ditches, protection of Scheduled Monuments, and management of species-rich grasslands and hay meadows.

Limiting:
protection of woodlands and hedgerow and field trees and establishment of hedgerow trees,  management of traditional orchards, low input and wet permanent pasture, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, protection of archaeology on arable and grassland, and  conservation of lowland raised bog.

Comments:
On these small-scale mixed farming hills that once had very significant orchard areas, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape overall and on most landscape themes. HLS is the primary driver for the management of woodland and orchards,  wet grasslands (in the river valleys) and the management of parkland and semi-natural habitats and hay meadows.  ELS is the primary driver for the protection of field and hedgerow trees, the management of field boundaries, low inputs to permanent pasture, and  management of archaeology on grassland and arable.  Here the landscape  would particularly benefit from higher levels of uptake for the protection and establishment of hedgerow trees, management of traditional orchards, and the retention of permanent pasture.


Benefiting:
management of permanent pasture, highly characteristic parklands and estates, and conservation of moorland.

Limiting:
woodland management, conservation management of individual trees (especially the beech lines),  management / restoration of earth banks which are an important boundary feature,  management of hedgerows,  locally characteristic traditional orchards,  rough grassland, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings,  conservation of archaeology on  grassland and  moorland, and conservation of species-rich grassland.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 1,583 ha  40%ELS  15%UELS  45% HLS
In this distinctive AONB landscape of open moorland hills and small-scale farmland divided by distinctive outgrown beech hedges, ES is having a NEUTRAL effect on the landscape.  This is reflected in low levels of ES uptake.  Here HLS is primarily supporting the managemet of parkland, moorland and other semi-natural habitats while ELS assists low input pastures and management of boundary features and trees.  However, while there has been significant uptake  of moorland and parkland options (both key characteristics of the landscape) there have been surprisingly low levels of uptake for some of the other highly distinctive characteristics of this landscape, most notably the ancient woodlands, conservation of the outgrown beech lines and supporting earth banks,  management of the distinctive archaeological resource on moorland and elsewhere and management of semi-natural grassland and remnant traditonal orchards.  It may be that the beech lines / hedgebanks and other key characteristics are covered by some form of special project.


Benefiting:
management of traditional orchards and scrub,  retention of field pattern defined by characteristic hedges and hedgebanks, retention of the pastoral character of the enclosed landscape and the continued management of hay meadows and rough pasture,  retention and restoration of historic farm buildings, increased visibility of archaeological sites on moorland, and the management and restoration of moorland, species-rich grasslands and the sand dunes at Braunton Burrows.

Limiting:
woodland protection and management,protection of field trees, management of characteristic riverside trees in the valleys,  stone walls, wet pasture, management of parklands and archaeology on arable and grassland, and the re-wetting of blanket bog.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 53,006ha   50%ELS  17%UELS  33% HLS
in this National Park landscape ES is having a STRONGLY POSITIVE effect  on the landscape. The  very high levels of overall uptake in part reflect the co-location of moorland options. HLS uptake is the dominant scheme for archaeology, the management of rough and wet pastures and semi-natural habitat restoration; while ELS has  the higher levels of uptake for trees, field boundary options and the conservation management of improved grasslands; while UELS contributes significantly to the management of upland habitats and moorland.  While there are already high levels of uptake it would be good if there was increased uptake for the management of small woodlands and protection of field trees, conservation of stone walls and archaeology on grassland and arable, management of parkland (if not covered under Special Projects), and the re-wetting of blanket bog.


Benefiting:
management of hedgerows, conservation of Scheduled Monuments at risk,  and management and restoration of species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
management of woodland, protection of infield and hedgerow trees, establishement of hedgerow trees, coppicing of bankside trees and management of traditional orchards, management of low input, wet and rough pastures, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings,  conservation of archaeology on arable and grassland, management of parkland, hay meadows  and  management of wetland habitats.

Comments:
Overall this rural vale has a low level of ES uptake reflecting a similar pattern to that in the adjacent Quantock Hills, resulting in ES having a NEUTRAL effect on the landscape.  HLS is the primary driver for the management of woodland, orchards and parkland, the conservation  management of wet and rough grasslands and management of archaeology on arable and grassland, and the management of species-rich grasslands.  ELS is the primary driver for management of hedgerows and trees and low input permanent pasture.  Overall this NCA would benefit from considerably greater levels of ES uptake across all landscape themes and especially for the protection and regeneration of characteristic hedgerow trees, conservation of traditional orchards, retention of pastures and especially wet pastures in the river valleys, and management of parklands and hay meadows.


Benefiting:
protection of field trees and management of traditional orchards and parkland /wood pasture,  management of hedgerows and earthbanks,  management and restoration of lowland heathland and semi-natural grasslands and hay meadows, low input pastures, conservation of archaeology on grassland and conservation of Scheduled Monuments at Risk.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodland, hedgerow and bankside  trees, management of ditches (common in the river valleys), wet and rough grasslands, small ponds, archaeology on arable, salt marsh in the Axe Estuary, and retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 8,358 ha   71%ELS   29% HLS
The predominant uptake throughout is through ELS, although HLS is the main influence on the management of lowland heathland and species-rich semi-natural grassland, hay meadows, wet and rough grasslands and small woodlands, orchards and parkland.  The relatively limited uptake figures compared to the still traditional character of the landscape may reflect that many of the once small dairy farms of the area have now passed into amenity uses which are no longer registered agricultural holdings (as in the similar landscape of the High Weald in the South East of England).  Nevertheless, ES is having a POSITIVE landscape effect across most landscape themes.  Overall, the landscape would particularly benefit from greater uptake of ES for the management of small woodlands, regenration of hedgerow trees and management of bankside trees - helping conserve the small-scale landscape framework,  and the conservation management of wet and rough grasslands, and small ponds.


Benefiting:
management of scrub, protection of infield trees, management of traditional orchards,  hedges, ditches of the floodplains and the highly characteristic Devon hedgebanks,  conservation of archaeology on grassland and protection of Scheduled Monuments, conservation of species-rich grasslands and significant restoration of lowland heathlands, and management of small areas of  saltmarsh and sand dunes along the coast.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodland, protection and establishment of hedgerow trees and the coppicing of riverside trees, management of low input, wet and rough pastures, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, conservation of archaeology under cultivation, and management of parkland and traditional hay meadows

Comments:
In this hilly, small-scale landscape, with steep valleys and winding sunken lanes and red soils, opening out to floodplains and saltmarshes at the coast, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape, with strongly positive effects on Field Boundaries and Semi-natural Habitats. 
HLS supports the management of woodlands, scrub and orchards, management of wet and rough pastures, removal of archaeology from cultivation, management of parkland,  and the conservation of hay meadows and semi-natural and coastal habitats.  Conversely ELS is primarily responsible for the conservation of trees and field boundaries, management of permanent and rush pastures, and conservation of archaeology on grassland. Adding to the existing levels of ES uptake, it  would be beneficial if ES could do more for the conservation  of permanent, wet and rough pastures,  hay meadows and the management of small woodlands and regeneration of hedgerow trees, helping maintain the pastoral character and strong landscape framework.


Benefiting:
management of scrub, protection of infield trees and management of traditional orchards,  management of hedgerows and characteristic hedge banks, management of rush pasture (Culm grassland), retention and restoration of historic buildings, conservation of archaeology on grassland and protection of Scheduled Monuments from damage, conservation of species-rich grassland that may also include areas of Culm grassland,  mixed grazing on moorland and lowland hay meadows.

Limiting:
woodland management and protection, protection and renewal of hedgerow trees, low input and rough pastures, conservation of archaeology on arable, management of parkland, conservation  of lowland heathland, management of upland hay meadows, as well as the management of coastal salt marshes and sand dunes.

Comments:
In this deeply rural marginal landscape ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape across all landscape themes other than the coast, and a strongly positive effect on Field Boundaries and Semi-natural Habitats. HLS is assisting the management of woodland, scrub and orchards, rough grasslands,  historic farm building restoration, conservation of archaeology under cultivation,  parkland and semi-natural habitats.  ELS is assisting management of boundary features, low input and rush pasture, and conservation of archaeology on grassland.  Looking forward this NCA would particularly benefit from greater uptake of options for woodland and parkland management and the regeneration of hedgerow trees, combined with those options that assist with the habitat mosaics associated with Culm grassland, recognising its very strong associations with this area, as well as support for coastal salt marsh, sand dunes and coastal heaths.


Benefiting:
management of woodland, scrub and traditional orchards, management of hedgerows and earthbanks, rough and low input pastures / mixed stocking, conservation of archaeology on moorland, parklands,  conservation of species-rich grassland and hay meadows, and the  conservation of moorland.

Limiting:
protection of woodland and in-field trees,  regeneration of hedgerow trees, conservation of highly characteristic stone walls and  wet grasslands, retention and restoration of traditional buildings,  conservation of archaeology on grassland, and the rewetting  of blanket bog.

Comments:
ES is having a POSITIVE effect on this National Park landscape, especially its pastoral character  and the conservation of semi-natural habitats. HLS is making the primary contribution towards the management of woodlands, orchards and parkland,  and semi-natural habitats.  UELS is the primary driver for the conservation of boundaries (with ELS), the management of rough grasslands, maintaining the visibility of archaeology on moorland, the continuation of upland hay cutting and support for cattle grazing on moorland, while ELS plays the primary role in the conservation of field trees and boundaries (with UELS),  management of low input and rush pasture, mixed stocking and the conservation of archaeology on grassland.  In the future the landscape would particularly benefit from greater uptake of options for the establishment of hedgerow trees and management of characteristic stone walls.  It would also benefit from greater uptake of options for the conservation  of archaeology on grassland and re-wetting of blanket bog.


Benefiting:
traditional orchards and parkland,  hedges and hedgebanks and creation of new hedgerow lengths, management of permanent, wet and rough pasture, restoration of  traditional farm buildings,  conservation of archaeology on arable and grassland and semi-natural grasslands, lowland heathland, and moorland cattle grazing (on the fringes of Dartmoor), combined with  conservation of small areas of saltmarsh along the estuaries and sand dunes along the coast.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodland, in-field and riverside trees, hay meadows, retention of traditional farm buildings, management of wetlands, and restoration of moorland on the Dartmoor fringes.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  16,856 ha   63%ELS  6%UELS   31% HLS  
In this AONB landscape of rounded hills and intimate valleys and a spectacular coast and ria harbours, ES is having a STRONGLY POSITIVE  effect on the landscape, especially in respect of four of the landscape themes. HLS is assisting the management of woodlands, orchards and parklands,  the management of wet and rough pastures,  conservation of archaeology, restoration of traditional buildings and conservation of semi-natural and coastal habitats.  Conversely ELS is primarily responsible for field boundaries, permanent and rush pastures, and retention of historic buildings. UELS underpins the moorland options.  The main additional areas where ES could benefit the landscape is in the management of woodlands and field trees and in support for hay meadows.


Benefiting:
scrub management, field trees, traditional orchards, hedgerows and especially highly characteristic Cornish hedge, archaeology on grassland, conservation of Schuduled Monuments at risk,  semi-natural grasslands, coastal and inland heathlands, reedbeds, and the  areas of salt marsh and  sand dune along the coast.

Limiting:
management and protection of woodland, protection and regeneration of hedgerow trees, low input, wet and rough pasture, traditional agricultural  buildings, archaeology on  arable, parkland, and lowland hay meadows.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 17,506 ha   71%ELS    29% HLS  
Across this large NCA that covers the majority of Cornwall and includes areas of the Cornwall AONB, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape overall , and  a strongly positive effect on Field Boundaries and Semi-natural Habitats including those of the Coast.  ELS is the dominant influence: primarily relating to permanent grassland management and the management of trees and boundaries.  Nevertheless, HLS is assisting woodlands, rough and wet grasslands, archaeology  and the management of semi-natural habitats including those of the coast.  In this NCA the landscape would benefit from greater management of small woodlands, protection and especially regeneration of hedgerow trees, encouragement of hay meadows, greater conservation management and restoration of rough and wet grasslands, and the conservation of parklands if not already covered by other special projects.


Benefiting:
woodlands, Cornish 'hedges'; retention of the pastoral character of the enclosed landscape, management of rough pasture and the management and restoration of moorland and species-rich grasslands.

Limiting:
protection of woodland from grazing animals, hedgerows, wet grasslands, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings, protection of all aspects of the archaeological resource, and the re-wetting of blanket bog.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  17,654ha   69%ELS  21%UELS   10% HLS  
ES is having a POSITIVE effect  on the landscape of this remote, exposed upland moorland block most of which lies within the Cornwall AONB.  ES is having a strongly positive effect on the pastoral character of the enclosed landscape and also on the open moorland.  HLS options dominate for woodland management and aspects of semi-natural habitat conservation and management of rough pasture, with UELS contributing to moorland management; whereas ELS uptake dominates for all other aspects.  Notably abscent are significant levels of ES uptake for archaeological options in this important ritual landscape, although these may be covered separately by HAP and OES special projects  (capital items under HLS).  The NCA would also benefit from increased uptake of the supplement for the rewetting of blanket bog and hay cutting of semi-natural enclosed grasslands.


Benefiting:
small woodlands, hedgerows, stone walls and earth banks and  characteristic Cornish hedges,  parkland that is characteristic of the southern ria coastal areas, species-rich grassland, lowland heath - the most characteristic semi-natural habitat of this NCA, including coastal heath.

Limiting:
willow carr in valley bottoms, pasture with low inputs, wet grassland and rush pasture, rough grasslands, retention and restoration of historic buildings, and archaeology on grasslands.

Comments:
In this unique landscape of china clay extraction and surrouding small-scale agriculture, with heathland tops, ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape, with a strongly positive effect on Fileld Patterns.  ELS options focus on the maintenance of field boundaries, low input pasture and  rush pastures; while HLS focuses on small woodlands, wet and rough grassland, parkland and semi-natural habitats, especially lowland heathland.  This NCA would benefit from higher levels of uptake for permanent, wet and rough grasslands and archaeology on grassland.


Benefiting:
hedgerows and banks / Cornish hedges, wet grasslands and heathland if being carefully targeted on areas of BAP Priority  Habitat.

Limiting:
woodland, willow scrub in river valleys, low input and rough permanent pasture, retention of historic farm buildings, archaeology on grassland and arable, parkland, species-rich grasslands and  heathland.

Comments:
Overall uptake of ES is low in this small NCA which has had a long history of mining.  There is little uptake of HLS, especially evident in the limited uptake for semi-natural habitats, and uptake of ELS is also limited.  The NCA would especially benefit from increased uptake of options for archaeology (recognisingthat the area lies within the on grassland and the management of heathland and species-rich grasslands.


Benefiting:
hedgerows, walls and stone-faced hedgebanks (Cornish hedges),  rough grassland and semi-natural habitats, including the heathlands of the clifftops and plateau and species-rich grassland.

Limiting:
woodlands, appropriate management of the pastoral landscape, conservation of the traditional built enviroment and of the internationally important archaeological resource.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape =  2,877ha   42%ELS  58% HLS  
On this rugged granite plateau that forms the western toe of England,  ES is having a POSITIVE effect  on the landscape, especially in respect of Field Boundaries and Semi-natural Habitats - plateau and cliff-top heathlands and species-rich grasslands.  ELS options focus on boundary features and permanent pastures, while HLS uptake relates to woodlands (very little uptake),  rough grasslands and semi-natural habitats where ES is having a significant effect.  The lack of options for the conservation of the internationallyimportant archaeology of this NCA is noticeable. This could be because the area is covered by a Special Project(s)(OES) or Historical and Archaeological Features Protection (HAP), both capital items.  These have not been covered by this analysis as the Genesis database does not reveal the details of these options.  If archaeology is not covered, this is a very noticeable omission.


Benefiting:
management of woodlands, hedgerows and hedgebanks Cornish 'hedges', rough pasture, archaeological resource on both arable and grassland, and species- rich grassland and lowland heathland.

Limiting:
fencing woodlands, retention of pasture, retention and restoration of traditional farm buildings,   management and restoration of fen and reedbed habitats in the river valleys and sand dunes on the coast.

Comments:
Total area of ES uptake of benefit to landscape = 2,666 ha   45%ELS   55% HLS

On this most southerly point of England formed of a heathlnd plateau with incised valleys and dramatic coastline, ES is having a STRONGLY POSITIVE effect on the landscape, especially Woodlands, Field Boundaroes, the Historic Environment and Semi-natural Habitats.  HLS options form the main uptake for woodlands, conservation of archaeology and semi-natural habitats and rough grassland; while ELS  uptake dominates boundary features, conservation measures in the agricultural landscape and the maintenance of traditional farm buildings.  Notably the largest area under a single option type is for the conservation of lowland heathland covering 830 hectares. The NCA would benefit from increased uptake of options for very low input ermanent pasture to help conserve the pastoral landscape and greater uptake of options for the conservation of fen habitats in the river valleys and sand dunes on the coast.


Benefiting:
retention of a pastoral character,  rough pasture, retention of historic farm buildings and management of species-rich grassland and lowland heathland.

Limiting:
stone walls (although there has been significant uptake for repair under capital items), and  management of archaeological features on grassland.

Comments:
On this small island in the Bristol channel ES is having a POSITIVE effect on the landscape and especially the management of pastures, traditional buildings, and semi-natural habitats. Lundy is managed entirely under HLS only agreement(s) and options.  There  could be benefit in bringing more wall lengths under option and providing significantly greater support for protecting the important archaeological resource - it is possible that this is covered under a special project.


# xx_Tbl_Assessment_before_spellcheck

Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  1653ha fens, 894ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority of uptake for reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These may be having an adverse effect on the landscape if on a slope


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These are likely to be associated with restored gravel workings adjacent to the River Ouse, and water bodies in the Marston Vale resulting from clay extraction ie more associated with nature conservation objectives


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1028ha lowland meadows, 112ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Just over 50% of uptake for restoration of species-rich grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 4,187 ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
28% of uptake is for more beneficial EK3 pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These options particularly important because of presence of ridge and furrow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
38% of uptake is for the more beneficial options for removal of archaeology from cultivation (ED2/HD7).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 230 ha lowland meadows, 104 ha calcareous grassland, 62 ha limestone pavement. Level of uptake addresses the area of these habitats but may also include areas of floodplain grazing marsh (see F6 below).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
38% of uptake is for more beneficial options for removal of archaeology from cultivation (ED2/HD7).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 74 ha lowland heathland.  Some uptake for this habitat would be  beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake may well largely relate to the   conservation management of wet gravel pits


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 3,007ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh, suggesting uptake is not meeting the threshold. Over 90% of uptake is for wet grassland management and restoration (HK9-14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority of uptake relates to  management of parkland (HC12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
20% of  uptake is for the more beneficial options for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3, HB11/12). Plus 40 km of capital items for  hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
19% of this uptake for the more beneficial Enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high  environmental quality (EB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat:  43ha fen. As indicated under Agriculture may be a case for greater support of wetland habitats


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 382 ha lowland calcareous grassland, 253 ha lowland meadows;


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Most uptake is on grassland.  Greater uptake on arable land (C1) would be good.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 347ha  floodplain grazing marsh. Low uptake suggests that characteristic wet valley grasslands are not being well-targeted.  More uptake of HK9-14 would help.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
23% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 29ha Lowland calcareous grassland, 20ha lowland meadows.  Half of total uptake is for the restoration/creation of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Compared to other NCAs this is a high percentage uptake


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats:  62ha lowland heathland, 58ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 445ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh mainly found in the valley of the River Welland in the south and east of the NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high percentage level of uptake compared to other NCAs. Uptake fairly evenly split between maintenance and restoration / creation of parkland / wood pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Given the very great importance of hedgerow trees in the landscape much higher levels of uptake required


Greatest_benefit_comments:
51%  of uptake for the more beneficial very low input options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
majority of uptake is for non-invasive cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Potentially associated with scrub management  on the heathlands of the NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 209ha lowland meadows. Majority of uptake for the management of existing species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
None of the uptake is for the protection of ancient pollards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 715ha lowland dry acid grassland, 174ha lowland heathland. Majority of uptake for the restoration of heathland from conifer plantation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 137 ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh derived from acidic waters rising from the Greensand aquifers


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a very low level of uptake compared to the importance of parkland and wood pasture in this NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
13% of uptake for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
36% of uptake is for the more beneficial pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 14ha lowland calcareous grasslands, 11ha lowland meadows. Majority of uptake for the restoration and creation of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Only two trees under HC2 (protection of ancient trees)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 199 ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  With careful targeting the total area of uptake may be benefitting areas of BAP habitat


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very small level of uptake relative to the total area and importance of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high level of uptake compared to many of the other lowland NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
50% of uptake under the more beneficial options for pasture management with very low inputs (E/HK3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Area of fen and reed bed not certain.  Majority of uptake relates to management /restoration of fen (HQ6/7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
31% of uptake under the more beneficial (ED2/HD7) that take archaeological sites out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
May be negative in the landscape if plots are on sloping ground and therefore visible


Greatest_benefit_comments:
31% of uptake under the more beneficial (ED2/HD7) that take archaeological sites


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Water features likely to be associated with parklands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 315 ha lowland meadows, 31ha lowland calcareous grassland. 50% of uptake for restoration /  creation of species-rich grassland (HK7/8)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1,465 ha of floodplain grazing marsh. LCM may be over-estimating the areas of wet grassland. Almost all uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (HK9 - 14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
44 Registered Parks and Gardens covering 3,004 ha.  Main emphasis of uptake on maintenance of parkland (HC12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This may be being applied to areas of floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 51 ha lowland acid grassland, 5 ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high number of agreements for a single NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Where there is a relatively small-scale and irregular field pattern wide buffer strips can detract from the field pattern.  In larger rectilinear fields their presence will help define field pattern


Greatest_benefit_comments:
15% of uptake under the more beneficial options of (EB3, HB11/12) enhanced hedgerow management.  Plus 21 km under capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
3% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority of uptake for options for reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Likely to be associated with the management of chalk grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Again the stock id greater than that indicated by LCM


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 1276ha lowland calcareous grassland, 338ha lowland meadows. As indicated by the BAP habitats, the stock is greater than that identified by LCM, as a result the threshold is not met.  Uptake roughly split between the maintenance and restoration / creation of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 390ha coastal and grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is largely for the creation of new orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 151ha lowland meadows, 95ha lowland calcareous grassland.  69% of uptake for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 14ha lowland heathland.  All uptake for the restoration of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
hedgerow renewal would be beneficial where hedgerows have become gappy


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 251 ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Nearly all uptake is for the maintenance of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
11% of uptake relates to the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
23% of uptake is for the more beneficial management of pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  615ha lowland meadows, 246ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Majority of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 903ha reedbeds.  Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial,


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Main uptake is for the creation of traditional  orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
11% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  87ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 563ha of Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. This suggests that the level of uptake is having an evident beneficial effect


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All uptake is for the restoration of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at all - surprising as there is a significant resource here.  BAP Priority habitat: 5512ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Disappointing level of uptake.  BAP Priority habitat: 22015ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 13344ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake level poor considering size of resource.  BAP Priority habitat: 64685ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at all.  BAP Priority habitat: 99ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake not bad as hedgerow trees characteristic only of lower ground


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Quite high uptake given that trees are localised within valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake given that this is a small NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake mainly on grassland not arable land.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
But much greater uptake of HC5 and HC6 for ancient trees would be helpful


Greatest_benefit_comments:
A very high level of uptake compared to other NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very good uptake but probably scope for greater uptake on arable land (C5 and C6)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Nearly all on grassland.  Greater uptake of C1 and C5 for trees/ ancient trees on arable land would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of C5 and C6 for ancient trees would be helpful in this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake on arable land (C1) very limited.  Also, no uptake of C5 and C6 for ancient trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake, including some trees on arable land (C1) and ancient trees (C5), but still below threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake although many of these trees are key landscape features


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake given relatively small NCA size


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively low uptake given importance of field trees to landscape character


Greatest_benefit_comments:
By far the highest level of agreements in the country


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Fair uptake considering limited area of moorland in this NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Surprisingly low uptake of K5 options, more would be good to reinforce pastoral character


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1747ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More than a third of uptake is for restoration of moorland (L10).  BAP Priority habitat: 9707ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 615ha upland heathland.  Unusually low uptake of moorland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More than half of uptake is for restoration of moorland (L10).  BAP Priority habitat: 1419ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 228ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a very high level of hedgerow uptake. 8% of uptake for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
23% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
32% of uptake is for the more beneficial removal of archaeology from cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 37ha lowland dry acid grassland, 15ha lowland meadows. With careful targeting area of uptake could be benefiting the BAP habitats. 65 ha of uptake is for the restoration/creation of species-rich grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 32ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Area of BAP Habitat suggests that if targeted this uptake may be benefitting areas of remaining BAP Habitat.  Uptake entirely relates to wet grasslands rather than rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
6% of uptake for more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat:  21ha reed bed.  Greater uptake of these options would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of D5 would be beneficial as archaeology on grass is a very important characteristic of this area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 394ha lowland meadow, 247 ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 69 ha lowland acidic grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 925ha floodplain grazing marsh. With careful targeting the area of uptake may be benefiting this BAP habitat. Over 90% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grassland (HK9-14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
22% of uptake is for the more beneficial management with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 99ha reedbeds, 65ha fens. 34ha of uptake is for reed beds and 21 ha for fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater part of uptake is for taking archaeological features out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake more likely to be associated with areas of gravel workings


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 459ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  If carefully targeted uptake may be assisting the areas of floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant uptake justifies strongly positive assessment for this theme. 16% of uptake is for the moor beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
21% of uptake under more beneficial options for very low inputs (EK3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats5:  82ha fen, , 45ha reed bed.  Nearly all uptake relates to the management /restoration of fen (HQ6/7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake for protection of the archaeological resource


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 401ha lowland meadows.  68% of total uptake for restoration / creation of species-rich grassland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 44ha acidic grassland, 10ha lowland heathland.  All uptake for  restoration of lowland heathland (HO2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat; 592ha floodplain grazing marsh.  If carefully targeted uptake may be benefiting areas of BAP habitat.  Over 90% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grassland (HK9 - 14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The primary focus of uptake is on restoration of parkland (HC13)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
12% of uptake is more beneficial (EB3, HB11/12) for enhanced hedgerow management .  Plus  35 km of capital items for  hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
30% of uptake under more beneficial  EK3/UL3 for very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 311 ha upland heathland. 38% of uptake is for the restoration of moorland HL10


Greatest_benefit_comments:
41% of uptake under more beneficial  ED2/HD7 taking archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 42 ha lowland meadows, 123ha upland calcareous grassland.  76% of uptake for restoration /  creation of species-rich grassland (HK7/8)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat:   7 ha fen. Uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Important as significant lengths of hedgerow have been lost in the past


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 44ha lowland acidic grassland and 17ha lowland heathland. Uptake may be covered under moorland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats:166 ha floodplain grazing marsh, 81ha rush pasture.  Careful targeting of uptake could be benefitting areas of BAP habitat. Vast majority of current uptake is for wet grassland management and creation (HK9, 11, 12, 13)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake dominated by HC12 for parkland management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
31%  of uptake for more beneficial EB3, HB11/12 , UB14. Plus 94km under capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
10% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
45% of uptake is for the restoration of moorland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial, with cultivation on the floodplains which are likely to be areas of former human activity


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 19ha lowland meadows. With careful targeting uptake may be benefitting areas of BAP Priority Habitat.  The majority of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1158ha blanket bog. Missed opportunity that there is no uptake for moorland re-wetting


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 449ha lowland heathland.  Reflecting the BAP habitats greater uptake would be beneficial but may be covered under moorland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high level of uptake compared to other NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
15% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12) - e.g. as should be applied to the ancient hedgerows of the road verges


Greatest_benefit_comments:
High uptake valuable in conserving areas of permanent pasture - will be particularly valuable if located on the floodplains


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial, especially in the river valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high number of protected trees compared to many NCAs.  Valuable in an area where hedgerow trees have been lost


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 74ha lowland meadows. 264ha of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 211ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  If carefully targeted these may be benefitting the areas of BAP habitat.  Greater uptake would be valuable especially where this reinstates traditional wet meadows.  Approx. 110ha of uptake is for the restoration/creation of wet grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial.  Majority of current uptake for the maintenance of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high percentage of uptake compared to other NCAs. 91ha of uptake is for the maintenance of traditional orchards and 139ha for their restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Particularly beneficial that hedgerows have been brought under ES management, encouraging them to grow thicker and higher


Greatest_benefit_comments:
15% of uptake is for the more beneficial vey low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 23ha lowland meadows. 255ha of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some areas of uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake split between restoration and maintenance of grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a very high percentage uptake compared to most NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
10% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management and hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high percentage of uptake relative to many NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
18% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input pasture options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 64ha lowland meadows.  Majority of uptake is for species-rich grassland restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly higher levels of uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a very significant % area of uptake compared to other NCAs and a highly characteristic feature of this NCA.  Roughly 70% of uptake is for the maintenance of traditional orchards and 30% for their restoration.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
20% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
18% of  uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 29ha lowland meadow.  77% of uptake  for restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of these options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 38ha lowland heathland.  Uptake for lowland heathland  would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 777ha floodplain grazing marsh, 527 lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 888ha lowland raised bog. Uptake distributed across lowland raised bog, reedbed and fen


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 765ha fens.  Appears to be significant resource, so selected even though this is an 'upland' area.  Threshold not met


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 786ha floodplain grazing marsh, 268ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 338ha floodplain grazing marsh, 139ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 2965ha reedbeds.  Little uptake, may need better targeting


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 3688ha floodplain grazing marsh, 197ha fens, 160ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 96ha fens, 96ha reedbeds.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 103ha fens.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake very low given size of stock and key landscape role.  Priority habitats: 414ha fens, 182ha floodplain grazing marsh, 38ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 610ha floodplain grazing marsh, 482ha fens, 246ha reedbed. More Q5 and Q8 (habitat creation) would be helpful


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 10ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 388 ha lowland raised bog.  More uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP priority habitats: 103ha fens, 82ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 348ha fens, 99ha floodplain grazing marsh.  No uptake despite evidence of stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 258ha fen, 164ha reedbed. Uptake mainly of fen and reedbed options - appropriate


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 3103ha lowland raised bog, 2032ha reed beds, 512ha fen. Rated neutral on this basis.  Uptake covers fen (mainly) reedbeds and lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 483ha reedbeds, 213ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake.  BAP Priority habitat: 349ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Fen appears rare although mentioned as a key characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 5789ha fens, 1249ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 674ha fen, 294ha  reedbeds.  Higher uptake of relevant options desirable


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 69ha flood plain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 126ha lowland raised bog, 32ha reedbeds.  Rated as positive on this basis.  Significant uptake for restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Apparently no BAP priority habitat of fen as such


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 90ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh, 33ha reedbeds.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant uptake for restoration of lowland raised bog (Q10).  BAP Priority habitat: 341ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 717ha lowland raised bog.  Uptake primarily relates to fen (HQ6 - 8).  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 70ha  floodplain grazing marsh.  Current uptake is for restoration of fen (HQ7) and management / restoration of lowland raised bog (HQ9/10)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake mainly restoration of fen.  BAP Priority habitat: 43ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 619ha fen, 453ha  floodplain grazing marsh, 134ha reedbed.   Greater uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mainly restoration of fen (Q7).  BAP Priority habitat: 28ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 44ha fen, 8ha reedbed.  Most uptake for restoration of fen (HQ7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 44ha fens, 43ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 189ha fens, 135ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at all.  BAP Priority habitats: 161ha reedbeds, 121ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 163ha fens, 104ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Most uptake is for maintenance only.  BAP Priority habitats: 1835ha reedbeds; 1411ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake would be good - most trees are actually in hedgerows not in-field


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is minimal and needs to be increased


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Potential for uptake to protect existing avenue plantings


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake (of C24 and C25) would be good, especially given intensively farmed character of much of area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 2,085ha of coastal floodplain grazing marsh.
Good that there are significant areas of uptake for wet grasslands (managed and restored for breeding and over-wintering waders).  All uptake for options HK9 - 14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly 54% of all uptake relates to more beneficial EK3


Greatest_benefit_comments:
60% of uptake relates to options removing archaeology from cultivation (eg ED2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 655ha of calcareous grassland, 215ha of lowland meadows. 57% of uptake for the restoration and creation of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats:  149ha reedbeds, 87ha fens.  Uptake, 71% for fens (HQ7/8/9) and  29%  for reedbeds (HQ3/4)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
34% of uptake under more beneficial Enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and Management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality  (HB11/HB12). Under the remainder (EB1/2) reduced flail cutting will also help.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 13ha coastal sand dunes.  ES uptake may be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 121 lowland acidic grassland, 65ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
In areas of parliamentary enclosure many  hedgerows extremely gappy and replanting  required


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 578 ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  The majority of the uptake is for the management  and restoration of wet grasslands with small areas of rush pasture management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
46% of the uptake is for the more beneficial management of pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This uptake may be associated with the management of hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 354ha lowland meadows, 29ha lowland calcareous grassland. 80% of uptake is for the  restoration or creation of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
23ha of uptake is for the restoration of fen and 27ha for the maintenance of reed beds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly greater uptake required.  Of the total uptake 23% is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12),  Greater uptake required reflecting the great importance of hedgerows in this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Likely to be associated with the management of scrub on heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  86ha lowland dry acid grassland.  All uptake is for the restoration of heathland (HO2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some 110km for earthbank management  (EB12/13) and some 130km for stone faced hedgebank management (EB4/EB5).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake primarily woodland management (HC7) with some woodland restoration (HC8).  This is a very high level of uptake compared to other NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Under HK16 for rough grassland management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Need dependent on current state of buildings


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very beneficial for the landscape that ALL option uptake relates to capital items for stone wall restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
11% of uptake under EB3/ HB11 for enhanced hedgerow management. Plus 16%      of uptake under capital items for t hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
31% of uptake under the more beneficial  EB3 /EL3 pasture management with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 40ha lowland meadows and 10ha calcareous grassland  84%  of uptake for restoration of species rich grassland (HK7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 562 ha fens, 350ha reed beds. Significantly greater uptake required


Greatest_benefit_comments:
32% of uptake for the more beneficial ED2  take archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 53ha lowland dry acidic grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
74% of uptake is for the creation of wet grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
8% of uptake is for the more beneficial EB3 & HB11/12 enhanced hedgerow management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
13% of uptake for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 111ha lowland meadows, 43ha lowland calcareous grassland. Uptake roughly split between maintenance and restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is for the maintenance of salt marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 80ha lowland dry acid grassland.  All uptake is for the restoration of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 123 ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Possible that much of this uptake relates to maintenance and restoration of wood pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These are an important characteristic of the NCA and in this instance the main feature to lie outside the remit of the Forestry Commission


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly 16 km of uptake is for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) or the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (EB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This may be an under-estimation of the contribution of ES to small farm woodlands in that the majority of the woodland resource is made up of the central Forest blocks managed by the Forestry Commission


Greatest_benefit_comments:
27% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input pasture management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
75% of uptake is for  the more beneficial removal from cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a very high level of uptake compared to other NCAs - assumed that it also covers hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  383ha lowland meadows, 146ha lowland calcareous grassland, 8ha acidic grassland.  Over 100ha of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Again this is a very high number compared to other NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
One of the few NCAs to meet this threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Plots likely to be detrimental to the landscape if viewed on a slope


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 13,923ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake is for the maintenance of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a significant area of uptake compared to other NCAs, reflecting the strong orchard tradition of the area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
A high level of agreements for lowland England


Greatest_benefit_comments:
35% of uptake for EK3 pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
23% of uptake relates to the removal of archaeology from cultivation (ED2/HD7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although below target uptake likely to be significant in the river valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 2,984ha calcareous grassland, 654ha  lowland meadow. 67% of uptake for restoration  / creation of species-rich grassland (HK7/8).  Uptake likely to relate to areas of limestone and wet grasslands.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats  50ha reedbed, 26ha  fen.  Uptake relates to fen and reedbed.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
While beneficial for birds, can create an 'Advent Calendar' effect when on slopes


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 93 ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1225 ha of floodplain grazing marsh, 14ha rush pasture and purple moor grass.  Taking these figures of stock, uptake does not meet the threshold. Of the total area of uptake 65% is for the restoration of wet grassland and the remainder for its management (HK9 - 13)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 71% relates to restoration and creation of traditional orchards (HC20/21)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
14% of uptake for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and (HB11/12). Plus 61 km of capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
32% of uptake for the more beneficial very low input pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher uptake of wide grass buffer strips would help reinforce a now diluted field pattern


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial if  greater proportion of ED2 (taking sites out of cultivation) compared to ED3 (reduced depth of cultivation)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1,265ha of lowland meadow, 38ha lowland calcareous grassland. 54% of uptake for restoration/creation of species rich grassland (HK7/8)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 68ha reed beds, 29ha fen. Greater uptake would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Potentially may have an adverse effect if viewed on a slope


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher uptake would be beneficial given past significant loss of hedgerows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 6,467ha  floodplain grazing marsh, 16ha purple moor grass and rush pasture.  80% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (HK9-14) with the remainder for the management of rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
There is a significant parkland resource but no uptake of HC12 / 13 for parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial if  higher levels of uptake of HC18/20/21 for the maintenance/  restoration/ creation of  traditional orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial if there were higher levels of uptake of HC7 - many woodlands are small and may fall under the EWGS threshold of 3ha.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
From a landscape perspective better if these fences are avoided


Greatest_benefit_comments:
37% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Suspected that this uptake includes hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 61ha lowland meadows, 23ha lowland dry acidic grassland, 19ha lowland calcareous grassland. Uptake evenly divided between the maintenance and restoration of species-rich grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Planting and gapping up needed to restore hedgerow lengths


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is for the restoration of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
17% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
39% of uptake for pasture with very low inputs (EK3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
15% of uptake relates to options that take archaeology out of cultivation (ED2/HD7).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1192 ha calcareous grassland, 161ha lowland meadow.  58%     of uptake for  restoration/creation of species-rich grassland (HK7/8).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats :  52ha fen, 16ha  reedbed.  Majority of uptake relates to fen (HQ6/7), remainder to reedbeds (HQ3/4)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Needed where hedgerows have become very gappy


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 51ha lowland acidic grassland, 14ha lowland heathland. Total uptake  for restoration of lowland heathland (HO2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 341ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. The area of BAP habitat suggests that with careful targeting the area  of uptake may be benefitting the  most important areas of wet grassland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
16% of uptake for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and HB11/12.  Plus 40 km of capital items for hedgerow restoration.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although overall uptake is low, 50% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Exceeds the 40km threshold for river valleys but it is hedgerows that are the main boundary features of this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake is for the more beneficial removal of archaeology from cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  377ha lowland meadows. Roughly half of the total uptake is for the restoration / creation of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:   304ha reed beds, 252ha fens.  Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Restoration of hedgerows required where hedgerows becoming gappy, as in the predominantly arable areas and where elm succering is prevalent


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 838ha lowland heathland, 517ha lowland dry acid grassland.  The total BAP area for heathland suggests that the threshold is not being met.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1,677 ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. All uptake is for wet grasslands (rather than rush pastures), mainly the maintenance of wet grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
78% of uptake is for the restoration of parkland - part of this uptake may relate to the restoration of wood pasture which is characteristic of this NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
18% of uptake is for the more beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Unusual across the NCAs as a whole to  see a significant amount of uptake for these options.  Uptake is for the restoration of water meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Ponds are an important characteristic of this landscape but this uptake cannot compensate for the low levels of uptake across all other elements of the historic environment


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  34ha lowland meadows.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake is for reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 33ha lowland meadow, 27 ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Roughly 40% of uptake is for the maintenance of species-rich grassland and 60% for its restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 40ha fens, 14 ha reed beds. If carefully targeted this uptake may be benefiting the areas of BAP priority habitat.  46ha of uptake is for the maintenance of reed bed and 32 ha for the restoration of fen


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although not meeting the threshold, this is a larger area of hay meadow uptake than seen in many NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 472ha of coastal marshes. 142ha of uptake is for the restoration of sand dunes


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  77ha lowland heathland.  Some uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1,307ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh (this figure is may not be accurate). The majority of uptake is for the management of wet grassland rather than management of rush pasture.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
6%  of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake likely to be associated with the management of heathland on commons


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial.  Noted that there is no uptake for  protection of ancient trees (HC5/6) which would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 16ha lowland meadow. 72ha of uptake for the maintenance of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 361ha fens.  Greater uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 22ha lowland heath. Majority (40ha)of uptake for the maintenance of heathland but 20ha for restoration from conifer plantation (HO3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Restoration of hedgerows required where hedgerows have become thin and gappy


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: -  Uptake for management of rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly higher uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
28% of uptake for the more beneficial very low  input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This uptake  is likely to be associated with the management of heathland areas


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Appears that these options are also being used to protect hedgerow trees.  Noted that there is no uptake for  protection of ancient trees (HC5/6) which would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 294ha lowland meadows; 17ha calcareous grassland. 196 ha of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland and the remainder for its maintenance


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 531ha reedbed, 20ha fens.  The majority of the uptake is for the maintenance and restoration of fen


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1133ha lowland dry acid grassland, 68ha lowland heathland. All of the uptake is for the restoration of lowland heathland  (HO2/3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 236ha Coastal flood plain & grazing marsh.  Greater uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority of uptake for the maintenance of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
NCA Profile identifies 3164km of hedgerows. 18% of uptake for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/HB12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
55% of uptake under more beneficial EK3 pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although below target likely to be a significant length of ditch under option within the river valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
5% of uptake under E/HD2 for taking archaeology out of cultivation.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1,334 ha calcareous grassland,108ha lowland meadows. 59% of uptake for restoration of species-rich grassland (HK7).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 14ha reed bed/ fen.  Uptake for  reed beds (HQ3/4) and fens (HQ6 / 7).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Important where hedgerow lengths have become very gappy


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 302ha grazing marsh. This area of BAP  Habitat suggests that with careful targeting current uptake should be positive for the landscape even if the overall threshold is not achieved. Over 90% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (for over-wintering waders) HK10, 12, 14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
30% of uptake for more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and HB11/12, plus  23 km of capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
29% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although not meeting the overall threshold, meets the threshold of 40km in river valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
95% of uptake relates to reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 52734ha blanket bog.  Uptake better than in other NCAs but still small


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1979ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 6260ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 28702ha blanket bog.  Almost no uptake although blanket bog is a key habitat


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 129ha blanket bog.  Rated positive but the actual area involved is very small


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Extremely low uptake.  BAP Priority habitat: 20965ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2,958ha blanket bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake could be improved - very small given intensive arable character


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Could be applied more widely in this landscape, which has a significant arable component


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These options could add interest to this largely arable landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of F6 options could help diversify this mainly arable landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Overwintering stubbles could be applied much more widely


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very little uptake although there could be significant benefit to landscape character


Greatest_benefit_comments:
27% of uptake under the more beneficial options for pasture with very low inputs (EK3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
30% of uptake under more beneficial EK3 for pasture under very low inputs (E(H)K3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
41% of uptake under the more beneficial options for pasture under very low inputs (E(H)K3/E(H)L3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
40% of uptake under the more beneficial option for pasture with very low inputs (EK3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
27% of uptake relates to the more beneficial EK3/EL3 pasture with very low  inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
26% of uptake is for the more beneficial EK3 pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reduction in permanent pasture is an issue in this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake although below threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
65% of uptake under more beneficial EK3 for very low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Notable that 76% of uptake is for the more beneficial pasture with very low inputs (EK3) - one of the  highest percentages across all NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Target to river valleys and coastal grazing marsh.  BAP Priority Habitat: 205ha floodplain grazing marsh.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 65ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake despite the fact that wet grasslands appear to be a key landscape feature, that should be targeted.  BAP Priority habitat: 9460ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 3294ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 254ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis (but not enough to make whole theme positive)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
5379ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. Uptake is primarily for wet grassland management and restoration (HK9-12).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Assessed as positive as wet grassland occurs in part of NCA only (river floodplain) but not enough to make whole theme positive.  BAP Priority habitat: 95 ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 786ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 338ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 3688ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Assessed as neutral on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1368ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Better uptake of these options would be good - wet grassland important to this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
2749ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. Rated neutral on this basis.  Calculations based on LCM may be underestimating the area of wet grasslands. Majority of uptake relates to management and restoration of wet grasslands (HK9-11)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
8,920ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh and 125ha rush pasture. Calculations based on LCM may be under-estimating the extent of wet grassland.  Majority of uptake for management and restoration of wet grasslands (HK9/11)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP priority habitat: 1278ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 552ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP priority habitat: 6,058ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. Nearly all uptake relates to the management and restoration of wet grasslands (HK9-14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 3106ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 813ha coastal floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 172ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 5042ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
2,421 ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated as positive on that basis.  Nearly all uptake is for the management/ restoration of wet grasslands (HK9-14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 167ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Borderline positive if this is used as stock but left as neutral as area is so small


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake.  Area is supposed to have BAP Priority habitat: 349ha floodplain grazing marsh but wet grassland is not mentioned in NCA descriptions, so uncertain if this is correct


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake only for rush pasture not wet grassland management.  BAP Priority Habitat: 269ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Nearly all uptake is for rush pasture management E(H)K4/EL4


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 141ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 469ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Over 90% of uptake is for the restoration and management of wet grasslands (HK9-13).  BAP Priority Habitat: 1,842 ha of floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Woodland creation is a key objective for this landscape, where a new character needs to be created


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Woodland creation identified as potentially beneficial to this former coalfield landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake given this is a mainly arable landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would probably be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
23% of uptake under the more beneficial option (EK3) enhanced hedgerow management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
18% of uptake under the more beneficial options EB3/HB11/12) for enhanced hedgerow management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good uptake overall but more hedgerow restoration (B14) would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
14% of uptake under the more beneficial options for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3, HB11/12) environmental quality (HB11/12).  Plus  157km under capital items for hedgerow restoration.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
12% of uptake relates to the more beneficial EB3, HB112/12 enhanced hedgerow management.  Plus 9km of capital works for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial that 25% of uptake for EB3 enhanced hedgerow management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
20% of uptake relates to more beneficial options for enhanced hedgerow management (E/HB3,HB11/12). Plus 23km covered by capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 73ha Purple Moor Grass and Rush Pasture.  Although the threshold is not met, careful targeting may be benefiting areas of BAP Priority Habitat. Area not sufficient to score positive overall


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 106ha lowland calcareous grassland, 54ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 65ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1246 lowland calcareous grassland, 164 lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 5987ha lowland calcareous grassland, 617ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats:  95ha lowland meadows, 78ha lowland calcareous grassland; 219ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 76ha lowland calcareous grassland, 60ha lowland meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 1073ha lowland calcareous grassland, 194ha lowland meadows, 113ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  301ha lowland meadows;  604ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 904ha lowland calcareous grassland, 222ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2749ha lowland meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 343 ha lowland meadows.  More uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 363ha lowland meadows, 132ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Rate as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 381ha lowland meadows; 91ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 721ha lowland dry acid grassland; 88ha upland calcareous grassland; 733ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 122ha lowland meadows; 308ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 539ha lowland meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 877ha lowland meadow.  Assessed as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 50ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake tiny.  BAP Priority habitat: 233ha lowland meadows; 96ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 39ha lowland meadows, 38ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 286ha lowland meadows, 157ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 170ha lowland meadows; , 60ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good uptake of K7 for restoration.  BAP Priority habitat: 131ha lowland calcareous grassland; 297ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 4086ha lowland meadows, 49ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 85ha lowland meadows, 49ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Assessed as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 226ha lowland meadows, 49ha of calcareous grassland.  Of total uptake 73% for the restoration and creation of species-rich grassland.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 37ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 163ha lowland meadows; 344ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 8272ha lowland dry acid grassland; 377ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 2010ha lowland dry acid grassland; 2843ha lowland calcareous grassland, 2360ha upland calcareous grassland; 1716ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 136 ha upland calcareous grassland; 2,186 ha lowland dry acidic grassland; 58ha lowland meadows.  72% of uptake for restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 133ha lowland dry acid grassland, 125ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 47ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 49ha lowland meadows.  Uptake is mainly for restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 162ha lowland meadows; 1506ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 35ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 32ha lowland meadows; 80ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 315ha lowland meadows, 88ha lowland calcareous grassland; 57 ha lowland acidic grassland.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 103 ha lowland meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant uptake (around 70%) is K7, restoration.  BAP Priority habitat: 51ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Almost 80% of uptake is for restoration.  BAP Priority habitat: 98ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 126ha lowland meadows; 99ha lowland acidic grassland. 72%  of uptake relates to the restoration and creation of species-rich  grassland (HK7/8)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats:  149ha lowland meadow; 75ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 240 ha lowland meadow; 105ha lowland acidic grassland.  69% of uptake for restoration of species-rich grassland (HK7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is mainly for restoration and creation (K7 and K8).  BAP Priority habitat: 40ha lowland meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 125ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not enough to justify positive on theme as a whole. Mainly restoration (K7) and creation (K8)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not enough on its own to justify strongly positive.  BAP Priority habitat: 17ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 25ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Main restoration (K7).  BAP Priority habitats: 121ha lowland meadows, 29ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More than two-thirds of uptake is for restoration or creation (K7 and K8).  BAP Priority habitats: 379ha lowland meadows; 318ha lowland calcareous grassland; 58ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  222ha lowland calcareous grassland, 50ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Considerable restoration and creation (K7 and K8).  BAP Priority habitats: 80ha lowland meadows; 49ha lowland dry acid grassland; 112ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 890ha lowland meadow.  Significantly greater uptake would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 205ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 109ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 866 ha lowland meadow; 189ha lowland acidic grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 860ha lowland meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 193 ha lowland meadows; 2,163 ha lowland dry acidic grassland.  Uptake is for species-rich grassland management and restoration (HK6/7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More than 50% of uptake is for restoration or creation (K7 and K8).  BAP Priority habitats: 378ha lowland meadows, 105ha lowland calcareous grassland, 86ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Almost two-thirds of uptake is for restoration or creation (K& and K8).  BAP Priority habitat:  206ha lowland meadows.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
High uptake of deer fencing may have negative impact but also protects woodlands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Rare example of significant uptake, with potentially negative landscape impact


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively high uptake although below threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively high uptake and close to threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
May detract from the landscape if fence lines are highly visible and views to water obscured


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 273ha upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 23ha  upland calcareous grassland. Likely to be covered under the uptake for F1


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 92ha fen, 23ha reed bed.  Uptake focuses on the maintenance of reed bed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake  mainly relates to fen.  Greater uptake of reed bed options (Q3 and Q4) would be good.  BAP Priority habitat: 396ha fens, 298ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake mainly for fen, including restoration (Q7) but very small area.  BAP Priority habitat: 161ha reedbeds, 131ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 6,277ha reedbeds, 4,116ha fen.  80% of uptake is for fen and 20% for reed bed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 9,957ha reedbeds, 48ha fen. Uptake entirely relates to reedbed (HQ3-5)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1,089ha  reedbeds; 444ha fen.  79% of uptake relates to  maintenance of reed beds (HQ3) and  19% to maintenance of fen (HQ6)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is for fen maintenance and restoration.  BAP Priority habitat: 111ha fens.  LCM stock figure appears to be an overestimate.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Most uptake is for fen.  BAP Priority habitats: 833ha fens, 382ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 5622ha reedbeds, 841ha fens.  Nearly all of uptake is for fens, including restoration and creation.  Greater uptake for reedbed might benefit landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonably high uptake although still below threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not enough on its own to justify positive assessment on theme when other objectives have no uptake at all


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not enough on its own to swing result to positive when other key objectives are not met


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Included in this instance, despite small stock, as NCA is small.  However not enough to outweigh poor performance on parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake given scale and importance of resource


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial.  BAP Priority habitat: 502ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
453 ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Assessed as positive on this basis.  Over 90% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grassland (HK9-14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 53ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 394ha of floodplain grazing marsh.  Assessed as positive on this basis.   Majority of uptake relates to the management and restoration of wet grasslands (HK9 & 11) with small areas under rush pasture management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Bap Priority habitat: 2431 floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 4231ha floodplain grazing marsh.  LCM figure appears to be a significant underestimate.  Assessed as neutral on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 301ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 333ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 499ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 138ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Appears well targeted.  BAP Priority habitat: 272ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
943 ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh, suggesting that LCM figure is an under-estimate of the area of wet grasslands. All uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (for waders) HK9-11 & 13


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Apparently no coastal and floodplain grazing marsh BAP Priority Habitat


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mainly restoration and creation (K11, K12 and K14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
11,563 ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh, suggesting that LCM wet grassland may be a significant under-estimate.  Over 90% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (for waders) HK9-14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
12,729ha of floodplain grazing marsh.  In this case, LCM may be significantly under-estimating the area of wet grasslands.  Nearly all uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (for waders) HK9-14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
3,209 ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  All uptake relates to the management and restoration of wet grassland (HK9 - 14 - for waders)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1292ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1237ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Assessed as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1021ha floodplain grazing marsh.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
May be positive if focused on coast but no information on this


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake but could be better given size and landscape importance


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of capital items would be good as this is an important landscape element


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake given that the NCA is small


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good uptake given that ditches are not characteristic of whole NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good uptake given that ditches occur in only parts of this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive on basis that ditches only occur in valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive on basis that ditches are characteristic of valley floors only


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Rated positive although below threshold as ditches occur only in valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively low level of uptake given importance of ditches and dykes in the landscape.  Main uptake  EB6 / EB7 plus 12km of capital items for ditch restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Associated with low lying areas and grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive on basis that ditches characteristic only of valley floors


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Rated positive as ditches characteristic of valleys only


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 45ha Upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 480ha upland calcareous grassland.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 55ha upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1637ha upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Actual resource appears from mapping to be very limited so objective not selected


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 815ha upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 31ha Upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 888ha upland calcareous grassland, 776ha limestone pavement.  Likely to be covered by options under F1


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 7644ha upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 55ha upland calcareous grassland.  Positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 92ha upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 268ha lowland meadows, 119ha lowland calcareous grassland; 80ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 71ha upland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake should be higher given importance of parkland in this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at all, although parkland is not especially extensive in this NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at although this is a key landscape feature


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at all although parkland is perhaps the key historic landscape feature


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at all although parkland is a key landscape feature


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake although parkland is a key characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Probably restoration of wood pasture - positive although only a small area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very poor uptake indeed - target for improvement


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not identified as a key characteristic but considerable stock.  Low uptake - may need improved targeting


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake for this key landscape element - better targeting needed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mostly maintenance not restoration of parkland ie need more C13


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not really a key characteristic.  However considerable stock with no uptake at all


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake but not a key characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake although not identified as a key characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Includes significant restoration and creation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher levels of uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Considerable uptake although threshold is not met


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake may reflect urban fringe location with many former farm buildings no longer in farming use


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Extremely low uptake in an area that appears to have relatively large stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very poor uptake, possibly due to proximity to large urban areas


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant uptake of D1 under both ELS and HLS


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively low uptake given importance to landscape character


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Little uptake, but landscape is very sparsely settled


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Surprising no uptake as other measures seem strongly targeted


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very limited uptake, especially given substantial stock of historic buildings


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Still greater uptake of capital item HTB would probably be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly higher levels of uptake required


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of the relevant options required


Greatest_benefit_comments:
47% of uptake relates to the more beneficial ED2 /HD7 for removal of  archaeology  from cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Untapped potential to regenerate coastal scrub and degraded river courses


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive but uptake is still very small and could be increased


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 533ha of floodplain grazing marsh. 34ha Purple moor grass & rush pasture. Over 80% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (for overwintering waders) HK10/12.  Uptake identified as positive as BAP Priority Habitat extent likely to be the more accurate measure of stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very important features of Test and Itchen Valleys - higher uptake desirable


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Dominated by EB1/EB2.  More uptake of EB3 & HB11 Management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 292ha lowland meadow. High uptake of HK7 Restoration of species-rich semi-natural grassland highly beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1335ha reedbed, 17ha lowland raised bog. Current uptake for   reedbed (HQ3/4) and fen ( HQ6/7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Solent coastline suffering from precipitous  loss of salt marsh especially around the Lymington Estuary


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 9,894ha lowland heathland, 3315ha lowland acidic grassland. High uptake of HO2 restoration of lowland heathland (14,437ha) and smaller areas under HO3 highly beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
HLS having very positive effect on  management of wildlife-rich water bodies under HQ2.  In part may be associated with areas of gravel extraction in the Avon Valley


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The use of HP9  Creation of intertidal and saline habitat is suitable


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2010ha floodplain grazing marsh. Over 95% of uptake is for the management, restoration and creation of wet grasslands (HK9-12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
HLS having very positive effect with 6726ha under HC13 Restoration of parkland/ wood pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of the woodland on the Open Forest is managed by the Forestry Commission and therefore only a small % of total stock will fall under remit of ES


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Would be beneficial if greater uptake of HD10 /11 Management and Restoration of traditional water meadows in the Avon Valley


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of the total area of uptake, roughly 30% of uptake relates to the more beneficial management with very low inputs (EK3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Important options in these large scale sweeping landscapes


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of the total only 12% relates to the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow  management (EB3) with the majority of uptake being options EB1 and EB2.  These bring considerable benefits though, as in these landscapes hedgerows are usually tightly flailed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
84% of uptake relates to options for reduced depth of cultivation (E/HD3) rather than  more beneficial option (E/HD2) to take archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 16,667ha and 424ha of lowland meadows.  Higher uptake needed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
84% of uptake relates to options for reduced depth of cultivation (E/HD3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively good uptake but could improve further


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial as these banks are a distinctive characteristic of the area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Appears to be significant stock of banks but little management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Potential for greater use of buffer strips especially along degraded watercourses


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Limited uptake even though this is a mainly arable landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Omitted from assessment as coastline is so short


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 5379 coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2749ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 8,920 ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 813ha coastal floodplain grazing marsh; 56ha mudflats


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 196ha mudflats; 5042ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 1204ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh, 513ha mudflats


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 12,729ha coastal grazing marsh.  Uptake split between management and restoration of salt marsh(HP6/7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 3,209 ha floodplain coastal grazing marsh. Uptake primarily for  maintenance of salt marsh (HP6)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake of this option would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
ES options appear to be well-targeted but more use could be made of options D2 and D7


Greatest_benefit_comments:
85% of uptake relates to the more beneficial ED2 for removal of archaeology from cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not enough to justify positive result on theme


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive - but almost no stock or uptake so not given great weight


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake roughly split between options for reduced cultivation depth and removal of archaeology from cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake would be good to ensure renewal of existing tree cover


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Potential for future uptake to renew stock of in-field and hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Potential for greater uptake to help renew avenue plantings


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Potential for much greater uptake to renew and extend stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some uptake and scope for more, to replace mature hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Scope for greater uptake to replace existing stock of mature hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake needed to replace existing mature stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Scope to improve uptake - important to renew stock of hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
In these landscapes many hedgerows  extremely gappy -replanting required to make good major gaps


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat:  24ha of reedbeds .  The limited uptake is for the maintenance and restoration of fen.  Significantly higher areas of relevant uptake would be good.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1,594ha of floodplain grazing marsh. Roughly 80% of uptake for management of wet grasslands (HK10 - 12). Higher levels of uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher levels of uptake would be very beneficial as water meadows are one of the defining characteristics of the Avon Valley


Greatest_benefit_comments:
37% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grassland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher levels of uptake would be beneficial although parklands may be being managed under Special Projects or a combination of other options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
15% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
it is anticipated that much of this uptake relates to hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  338ha lowland calcareous grassland, 278ha lowland meadows. Majority of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Few other lowland NCAs meet this threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 207ha of Coastal & floodplain grazing marsh, 96ha Purple moor grass & rush pasture.  25ha of uptake for the management of rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although not meeting the threshold this is a significantly higher level of uptake than noted in many NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
37% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a missed opportunity as parklands are highly characteristic of this NCA  although it is possible that much of this resource is being managed through private means. Two-thirds of uptake is for the maintenance of parkland and one-third for the restoration of parkland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
10% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and  the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality.  Overall unusually high levels of uptake compared to other NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
14% of uptake is for the removal of features from cultivation while the remainder is for reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 2855ha lowland calcareous grassland, 298ha lowland meadows.  Over half of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake spread between maintenance, restoration and creation of traditional orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All but 0.4km of this uptake is for Stone-faced Hedgebank management, the characteristic boundary of this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial that at least 40% of this uptake relates to option EK3 (very low fertiliser inputs)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority of uptake relates to the management  of rush pasture  -  appropriate in this NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Hedges form a component of the highly characteristic hedgebanks


Greatest_benefit_comments:
158ha (70%) of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly greater uptake required.  Uptake  almost entirely related to the more beneficial options ED2 and HD7 that take archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1,961ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The vast majority of this uptake relates to options for the maintenance of stone-faced hedgebanks (the highly characteristic Cornish hedges) EB4 / EB5 with under 30km relating to the maintenance and restoration of earth banks


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake of these options would be highly beneficial in this ancient landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority (460ha) under EK2 Low fertiliser inputs with the more beneficial EK3 Very low fertiliser inputs covering some 240ha.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The vast majority of uptake is under the more beneficial ED2 Taking archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Vast majority of uptake for hedgerow management (EB1 / EB2).  Only a very small amount of uptake for the more beneficial Enhanced hedgerow management  (EB3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 46ha sand dunes.  ES uptake could be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2,296ha of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 315ha of fen and 28ha of reedbed.  Greater uptake for fen habitats (HQ6, HQ7) would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Includes 57ha creation of wood pasture (C14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority of uptake is for restoration (C13) and creation (C14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low given that parkland is a key characteristic.  No restoration, only maintenance (C12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Around a third of uptake is for restoration (C13)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mainly maintenance but also creation of 60ha of wood pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Around 20% of uptake is for restoration and creation (C13 and C14)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
82% of uptake is for the management of  parkland (HC12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake.  Roughly half and half maintenance (C12) and restoration (C13)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake but does not meet threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake could be improved.  Hedgerow loss is an issue


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake would be very beneficial to landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Opportunity to restore degraded/overmanaged hedgerows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More uptake would help counter fragmentation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This option (PH) could be applied more widely eg in Lune valley


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial as fragmentation is an issue


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Better uptake would help counter issue of hedgerow loss


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of hedgerow planting (PH) would be beneficial to counter degradation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively good uptake although below threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mainly maintenance, not restoration or creation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All uptake under HK17 creation of grassland for target features


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant uptake of K17 for semi-improved grassland creation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not previously identified as a key characteristic.  Not enough on its own to justify positive rating for whole theme


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonably high uptake although below threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although positive, both resource and uptake are very tiny


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More C20 restoration and C21 creation of traditional orchards would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very good uptake.  68% of uptake is for restoration and creation (C20 and C21)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake mainly for restoration and creation.  Small in area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Traditional orchards where once a distinctive feature spreading inland from the Kent coast.  Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Small area although mainly restoration and creation (C20 and C21)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All restoration and creation.  But too small to justify positive result for whole theme


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Traditionally this landscape would have had mixed stock grazing but this seems to be in decline now - greater uptake would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be good.  Traditionally mixed stock grazing is important to this coastal landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake takes in a wide range of the relevant options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Presumably these are mainly hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake probably represents hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake limited although these trees (probably actually hedgerow trees) are important to landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good uptake, includes ancient trees.  At least some of the trees covered are probably hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These are probably mainly field boundary trees (often along walls as well as hedges)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake, especially on arable land, would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake reasonable but still lowish and mainly on grass, not arable


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake low and mostly on grassland not arable


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Assessed as positive given the small size of this NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable, given that there are hedgerow trees only around edges of area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake on arable land would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Excellent uptake but mainly on grass; greater uptake on arable too would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not bad uptake given that in-field and hedgerow tree cover is limited in this NCA.  But mainly on grass - better uptake on arable would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
In-field trees protected mainly on grass; greater protection on arable would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Surprisingly high uptake for this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake considering trees occur only in west


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively high uptake given that in-field trees are not a key characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake of C1 for protection for trees on arable land could be improved


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Probably potential for greater uptake of options C5 and C6 for ancient trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 244ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority (62%) of uptake is for moorland restoration (L10) but uptake is still a small proportion of total moorland resource so effect rated as neutral.  BAP Priority habitat: 16038ha upland heath


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 137ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
60% of uptake for the restoration of moorland (L10) but still a small proportion of total resource so rated as neutral.  BAP Priority Habitat: 2,179ha upland heathland, 1,998 ha of purple moor grass and rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 43ha upland heathland.  LCM figure appears to be an overestimate


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 3,285ha upland heathland.  Very high levels of uptake relate to co-location of some options.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Surprising as no uptake of moorland measures as such.  Not enough on its own to justify positive result on theme


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake could be improved; important measure for diversifying landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not enough on its own to justify positive effect on theme


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Not enough on its own to justify a positive result on theme


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 110ha upland hay meadows.  Rated positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 276ha upland hay meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 45ha upland hay meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 22ha upland hay meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 399ha upland hay meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP map suggests that there are BP priority habitat hay meadows although no figure shown here.  Positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 129ha upland hay meadow.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 156ha upland hay meadow


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No hay meadow BAP priority habitat recorded - rather odd


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake includes both HK18 Haymaking supplement  and UL20 Haymaking


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 38ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 182ha lowland acidic grassland, 12ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 734ha lowland acidic grassland, 487ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 736ha lowland heathland.  Rated neutral on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 52ha lowland heathland.  Rated positive on this basis, but borderline


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 36ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 119ha of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mainly options O2 and O3 for heathland restoration.  BAP Priority habitat: 993ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 110 lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is heathland restoration (O2).   BAP Priority habitat: 106ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
In this instance LCM appears to have significantly over-estimated the area of this habitat as there is no lowland heath BAP Priority Habitat


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 451ha lowland heathland, 15ha acidic grassland.  Greater uptake of relevant options required


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 116ha lowland heathland.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 100 ha lowland heathland.  This  habitat may be being managed under options for upland moorland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mainly restoration and creation (O2-O4).  BAP Priority habitat: 266ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1,375ha lowland heathland.  98% of uptake for restoration of heathland (HO2/HO3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Apparently no BAP priority habitat of heath, although area definitely has a healthy character


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 17ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All uptake is restoration (O2).  BAP Priority habitat:  49ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More than 50% of uptake is restoration or creation.  BAP Priority habitat: 31ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake mainly for restoration (O2 and O3).  BAP Priority habitat: 870ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 55ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1,347 ha lowland heath.  54% of uptake is for the restoration of heathland (HO2/3) heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 131ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 259ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 2404ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake despite mention as a key landscape characteristic.  BAP Priority Habitat: 316ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 39ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 33ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 205ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 692ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 131ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 87ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 120ha lowland heathland.  Uptake is mainly restoration.  Positive on this basis but not enough to justify strongly positive for theme overall


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 410ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 58ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 809ha lowland heathland. Rated neutral in this context


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 147ha lowland heathland, 583ha lowland acidic grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 16246ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 735ha lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively high uptake.  Below threshold but nonetheless possibly having some negative impact in this rolling landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
High uptake possibly having some negative impact in this rolling landscape but not enough to outweigh positive effects above.  Take care in siting this option


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Possible negative landscape impact as landscape is rolling and plots may be visible, disrupting landscape patterns


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively high uptake given small NCA sizes so possibly some negative effect


Greatest_benefit_comments:
High uptake of fallow plots may have some adverse landscape impact, although as landscape is relatively flat, the impact may be limited


Greatest_benefit_comments:
High uptake of fallow plots may have some adverse landscape impact where exposed to view in this gently undulating landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake very limited and could be improved


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive but uptake tiny in absolute terms so little effect overall


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of C17 to create successional areas would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Both uptake and stock small, so not very significant


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive on this key measure although area concerned is very small


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very small area so not accorded much significance


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive provided that it is not encroaching on heathland.  Not enough to support positive result on theme as a whole


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 50ha sand dunes.  Some uptake potentially beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 297 ha sand dune. Uptake would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 606 ha  coastal vegetated shingle,  25ha coastal sand dunes.  Uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 120ha fens and 69ha reedbeds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 54ha lowland raised bog, 35ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 152ha fens, 61ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 2903ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 3238ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats 1091ha reedbeds, 217ha fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 214ha reedbed, 99ha fen


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 111ha reedbeds, 25ha lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
12% of uptake under more beneficial option for enhanced management (EB3).  6km of hedge laying.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
15% of uptake under the more beneficial options for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3, HB11/15).  Plus  27km under capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively low uptake of options for this key landscape element


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial as ditches and dykes are locally characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Positive as ditches are characteristic of part of the NCA only


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake given that this is a small NCA with ditches only in some areas


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake of stone wall options would be good as walls are important in landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake should be greater given importance of walls as a landscape feature


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Level of uptake poor given significant resource - could be improved


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake much too low for this key landscape element


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Disappointing uptake for this key landscape feature


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant resource of walls but almost no uptake


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant resource; greater uptake needed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake given significant resource


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Unusually good uptake here.  May reflect local targeting?


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake not huge given that this is the only boundary type in this area, so theme overall classed as positive only, not strongly positive


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial as there is a significant stock of walls


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be good as there  is significant stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Targeting for stone walls appears to be poor


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Almost no uptake even though there is a significant stock of walls


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake poor given amount of stone wall and importance in landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Stone wall resource is limited but nonetheless distinctive, so uptake would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good uptake for a key landscape element.  Significant capital works for restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Excellent uptake.  Would be interesting to understand why when otherwise low uptake levels in NCA


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake although there is a significant resource


Greatest_benefit_comments:
No uptake at all for a small but vulnerable resource


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Small but notable resource evidently not being targeted


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Stone walls appear well targeted but more capital works for restoration would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good uptake/ targeting but more restoration and capital works would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mostly maintenance; more restoration would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Scope for greater uptake as drystone walls are a key characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although walls only found in a localised area, higher level of uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Better targeting of stone walls appears to be needed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Almost no uptake although resouces is significant


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Almost no uptake although considerable stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very limited uptake and for maintenance only whereas these distinctive walls are in need of restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Earth banks are quite characteristic of this landscape and greater uptake of these newish options (B12 and B13) would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
High uptake and Include considerable woodland restoration options C8


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Disappointing uptake level given importance of woodland in this landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake should be higher as woodland management is a key objective


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake should be improved, given woodland importance in landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake for this key landscape feature


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Includes significant proportion of woodland restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Reasonable uptake given scale of woodland resource


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Almost 20% of uptake is for restoration (C8)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake surprisingly low.  Improvement would yield landscape benefits


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Disappointingly low.  Valley/riparian woodlands probably especially vulnerable and would benefit from improved uptake


Greatest_benefit_comments:
A key objective with disappointingly low uptake


Greatest_benefit_comments:
More C5 sheep fencing around small woodlands would be helpful


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake indeed - woodlands therefore vulnerable to grazing


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very low uptake even though grazing is a key threat to semi-natural woodland here


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Avoid fencing along watercourses where possible


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Considerable uptake although below threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Locate fallow plots with care in landscape to avoid negative effects (may not be too prominent though in this relatively flat landscape)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Quite high uptake although still below threshold but unlikely to be prominent in this flat landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Relatively high uptake but unlikely to have negative effect in this low-lying landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Considerable uptake although below threshold.  Could have some negative impact as plots very visible in rolling landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant uptake but unlikely to be intrusive in this flat  and intensively farmed landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 205ha floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 37ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP priority habitats:  107ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 48ha lowland meadow, 40ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Rated as positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats:  97ha lowland meadows, 51ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 54ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 68ha lowland meadows, 54ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Rated positive on this basis but not enough to justify strongly positive for theme as whole


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 33ha lowland meadows;  29ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Positive on this basis


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake considered neutral only in light of BAP habitat figures.  BAP Priority Habitats: 504ha lowland calcareous grassland, 336ha lowland meadows, 250ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1350ha lowland meadows, 939ha lowland calcareous grassland, 6185ha lowland dry acid grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 12251ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 252ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 6735ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 7409ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 20225ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 389ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 34345ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 462ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 82ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority  habitat: 341ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1878ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 767ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1802ha Upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 33946ha Upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 838ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant uptake of moorland restoration.  BAP Priority habitat: 43162ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Planned coastal inundation could be appropriate here


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake for creation of inter-tidal and saline habitat on arable (HP7).  Higher levels of uptake would be very beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
43% of uptake for EK3 management of permanent pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
31% of uptake relates to the more beneficial ED2/HD7 taking archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat:  1,559ha lowland calcareous grassland.  54% of uptake for  restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 5ha reedbed. Uptake for management of reed bed (HQ3)  and HQ6/7  management and restoration of fen.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 9% is for (EK3) enhanced hedgerow management, plus 11km of  capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
of which 26ha. is for the restoration of salt marsh (HP6)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 35 ha lowland heathland, 26ha lowland acidic grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
One of the few NCAs to have a significant length of new hedgerow planting


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 62ha of floodplain grazing marsh, suggesting that the level of uptake, of which 55% is for the restoration / creation of wet grassland, is exceeding the threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
41% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Meeting the threshold of 40km for river valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake is for (ED3) reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Most likely to be associated with the management of common land/ heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Likely that some of this total relates to the management of hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 210ha lowland meadows, 144ha lowland calcareous grassland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 2959ha fens, 264ha reedbeds.  The majority of uptake is for the maintenance and restoration of fen. 7ha is for maintenance of lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly 128 km (18%) under the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Sand dunes are not identified as a BAP Priority habitat.  Some uptake could be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 2567ha lowland heathland, 212 lowland dry acid grassland. The majority of uptake is for the restoration of lowland heathland HO2


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1298ha Coastal and flood plain grazing marsh, 29ha Purple moor grass and rush pasture. Area of BAP habitats suggests that with careful targeting, effects of uptake likely to be positive for the landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake is for the maintenance of parkland / wood pasture (HC12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All uptake relates to the management of orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
2,500 ha or 33% under EK3 grassland with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
42ha (41%) of uptake for ED2 taking archaeology


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 95ha lowland meadows. 71% of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland (HK7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 36ha fen. Uptake primarily relates to the restoration of fen (HQ6)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total  uptake 10% relates to EB3 enhanced hedgerow management and HB11/12  management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality   Also  40km under capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 155ha lowland heathland, 27ha lowland acidic grassland.  Uptake relates to restoration of lowland heathland (HO2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Associated with both designed landscapes and the remains of the Wealden Iron industry


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1141ha floodplain grazing marsh. Over 95% of uptake is for the  management, restoration and creation of wet grasslands  (for overwintering and breeding waders) HK9 - 14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Majority of uptake for restoration of parkland/wood pasture (HC13)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
38% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a high number compared to other NCAs.  Noted that there is no uptake for  protection of ancient trees (HC5/6) which would be beneficial.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  233ha lowland meadows.  According to the High Weald AONB Management Plan (2009) there are 655 ha of species-rich unimproved lowland meadows and dry acidic grassland within the AONB boundary. 721 ha of ES uptake is for the restoration and creation of species-rich grassland with the remaining uptake for its maintenance


Greatest_benefit_comments:
14% of uptake is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 565 ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  This suggests that with careful targeting current uptake is having a positive effect


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher uptake would be beneficial in this landscape where parkland and wood pasture is a defining characteristic


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake relative to the importance of ponds in this medieval landscape


Greatest_benefit_comments:
There is no accurate measure of the length of dykes.  Compared to the Broads a comparable length of uptake would be 561 km, suggesting that even allowing for the small size of this NCA (36,680ha)the length of uptake of ditches is falling below the threshold


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 97ha Lowland calcareous grassland.  All uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: Reed bed area currently under investigation and so stock data is uncertain .  Uptake evenly spread between reed bed management , reed bed restoration and fen restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 1,961 ha Coastal vegetated shingle; 243ha sand dunes.  Roughly 75% of uptake is for the maintenance of sand dunes and 25% for their restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 32ha Lowland heathland; 11ha lowland dry acidic grassland. Some uptake might be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 4,732ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
76% of uptake relates to the more beneficial EK3 Very low fertiliser inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake, 18 ha (HD3) reduced depth of cultivation and 12 ha for taking archaeology out of cultivation (HD2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
63% of uptake relates to HK7 Restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats:  13ha reed bed. Uptake largely relates to the creation of reed beds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake, 8.5 km relates to Enhanced hedgerow management (EK3), another 3km to capital items for hedgerow restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 3,493ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. All but 8ha of uptake is for the management, restoration and creation of wet grasslands (for over-wintering and breeding waders) HK9 - 14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good that 46% of uptake relates to more beneficial EK3 Management of permanent pasture with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although below target this is likely to be a significant length of ditches under option within the river valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
81% of uptakes relates to reduced depth of cultivation (ED3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 574ha of calcareous grassland, 85ha lowland meadow.  Uptake  likely to cover both chalk grassland and flood plain grazing marsh.  Of total uptake  76% is for restoration of species-rich grassland (HK7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats:  330ha fen, 17ha reed beds. Uptake largely relates to reed bed and fen management and restoration.  Greater uptake of fen options would be beneficial.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 15% under Enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) or Management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12). A further 5% covers capital items associated with hedgerow restoration.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
74ha of uptake is for the maintenance of lowland heathland and 47ha for its restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Probably forming part of designed parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1339ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh including important river valley habitats. All but 9ha of this uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands (for overwintering and breeding waders) HK9 - 14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Ranked 3rd amongst all NCAs indicating a high level of uptake


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of the total area of uptake, 60%  is under the more beneficial option EK3 for Very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Can help emphasise the location of ditches


Greatest_benefit_comments:
A significant feature of the coastal plain


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 188ha lowland meadow, 38ha lowland calcareous grassland. Over 70% uptake is for restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats:  274ha reedbeds,  98ha fen. All uptake relates to reedbed management , restoration and creation (HQ3 - 5).  Some uptake for fens would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
13% of the uptake relates to the more beneficial options of Enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) /Management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality.  The remainder are under EB1/2 (154km) and combined hedge and ditch management EB8/9/10 (42km)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2,085ha of coastal floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 108ha sand dunes. Greater uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 64ha lowland acidic grassland, 45ha lowland heathland.  All uptake is for restoration of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Excluded from the overall assessment as these are likely to be gravel pits rather than historic features


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 806 ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh,  51 ha Purple moor grass and rush pasture.  The majority of the uptake is for the management of wet grassland, with a smaller area for the management of rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial.  Uptake split between the management and restoration of parkland / wood pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some uptake would be beneficial.  Mature hedgerow oaks are a key characteristic of this landscape, making a strong contribution to its well-wooded feel


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is  one of the few NCAs to have a significant area of uptake for the management of traditional water meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although below the overall threshold - meets the threshold of 40km under option within river valleys.  As localised not enough to influence the overall theme effect


Greatest_benefit_comments:
11% of uptake relates to the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake relates to reduced cultivation depth rather than the more beneficial reversion to grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These are likely to be hedgerow trees, at least in part


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 355ha lowland meadows, 70ha Lowland calcareous grassland. 58% of uptake is for the restoration/creation of species-rich grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2384ha fens; 38ha reed beds.  Much greater uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is likely to be primarily used to manage scrub on heathlands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat:  3216ha lowland heathland, 652ha lowland dry acid grassland.  The vast majority of uptake (3264 ha) is for the restoration of lowland heathland (H02)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
May be associated with past gravel workings and also the ponds and meres of the heathlands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 739ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  Wet grasslands are a significant feature of this NCA and the BAP figure alone is likely to under estimate their area


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 2190 ha (50%) under options for very low input grassland (E/HK3).  Could reflect transfer of pasture out of the Test Valley ESA.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
23% of uptake for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12). Even EB1/2 bring  considerable benefit as hedgerows are often tightly flailed


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 5% is  the more beneficial (ED2/HD7)) removal of archaeology from cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 764ha of calcareous grassland, 189ha of lowland meadow. Uptake may also  cover areas of grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1, 448ha fen. Uptake primarily for the restoration of fen


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 5% is  the more beneficial (ED2/HD7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Many hedgerows extremely gappy - replanting required


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Hay meadows traditionally characteristic of the river valleys


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 72ha lowland dry acid grassland, 47ha lowland heathland  All uptake is for the restoration of heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat; 18ha reedbeds.  The majority of uptake is for the restoration of fen


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2,323 ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh, 60ha Purple moor grass & rush pasture.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
A significant missed opportunity not to have uptake for the management and restoration of traditional water meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
From a landscape perspective it is better if these fences are avoided


Greatest_benefit_comments:
40% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 118ha lowland meadows.  HK7 providing 541 ha of restored lowland species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial if greater lengths were under EB3 Enhanced hedgerow management and HB11 Management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority is under option for Non-invasive cultivation (HD3). Higher uptake of options that take sites out of cultivation would be preferable


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority is under option for Non-invasive cultivation (HD3).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Maintenance of successional areas  under HLS - HC15, HC16, HC17 should ensure that the right balance of scrub management and woodland regeneration is occurring


Greatest_benefit_comments:
HLS contributing to maintenance (HP5) and restoration HP6 of coastal salt marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 165 coastal sand dunes. Under  HP1 sand dunes being maintained


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats 3,952ha of lowland heathland, 224ha lowland acidic grassland.  Of uptake 82% for the restoration of lowland heathland (HO2/HO3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats:  189ha reedbed. Option uptake split between fen and reedbed management.  The BAP figures given here are considered the more accurate stock data - these have been used to calculate the indicator result.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 2700ha of floodplain grazing marsh, suggesting that the threshold is not met.  Over 80% of uptake for management of wet grasslands (for waders)HK9-12,14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Would be better if there was some uptake of HD2


Greatest_benefit_comments:
246ha under HLS HC8 woodland restoration is particularly beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Opportunity being missed to restore traditional water meadows using HD11


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial that 47% of uptake is for EK3 Management of permanent grassland with very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Deer fencing can detract from the landscape if visually prominent


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 861 ha lowland calcareous grassland, 69 ha lowland meadows.  65% of uptake for restoration and creation of these habitats


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of uptake 16% is for hedgerow enhancement (EB3 Enhanced hedgerow management) and some 10 km of capital works for hedgerow restoration and laying


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly 50% of uptake for options that take archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 79ha lowland acidic grassland, 30ha lowland heathland.  Nearly half of uptake is for the  creation of heathland on arable land


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 15ha fens and 51ha reedbeds. Current uptake is for fens -  greater uptake for the management of reedbeds would be beneficial. The stock data for this NCA is likely to be misleading


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 27ha purple moor grass and rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake would be beneficial where hedgerow trees are common


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some uptake of these options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake of the relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some uptake for the management of the characteristic walls would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Over half of the uptake is for the more beneficial very low input pasture management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  195ha lowland calcareous grassland; 25ha lowland  meadows.  The majority of this uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Assumed that this  is associated with maintaining a balance of scrub on the chalk downland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP priority habitat: 262ha Coastal vegetated shingle


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial in areas where hedgerows are becoming gappy


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  521ha reedbeds.  The BAP data from the NCA Profiles suggest that this threshold is being met.  Nearly all of the uptake is for the maintenance of reed beds


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 72 ha Coastal & floodplain grazing marsh. Probable that the stock of wet grassland is less than that indicated in the database and that the uptake is therefore more beneficial than that indicated by the figures


Greatest_benefit_comments:
48% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  155ha lowland meadows , 43ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Uptake predominantly for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
26% of uptake is for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
It is suspected that this uptake relates to the protection of hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The small total uptake relates to the maintenance, restoration and creation of traditional orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
It would be beneficial if there was some uptake of this option


Greatest_benefit_comments:
None of the options are well related to this cliffed coastline with maritime cliffs and slopes


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Sand dunes are not identified as a BAP Priority habitat


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 73ha lowland dry acid grassland; 15ha Lowland heathland  Uptake is for the restoration of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 53ha of Purple Moor Grass and Rush Pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a relatively high level of uptake compared to the other NCAs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
36% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grasslands


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  394ha lowland  meadows, 248ha lowland calcareous grassland. Roughly 60% of uptake is for the maintenance of species-rich grassland and 40% for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
High levels of uptake for hedgerow options but low levels for characteristic walls and earthbanks.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Suspected that this option has, in fact, been applied to hedgerow trees


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 290ha fens. Uptake is for the restoration of fens


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 926ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  Higher levels of uptake would be beneficial.  665 of current uptake for the management of rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher lengths of uptake might be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is an unusually high indicator result for the management of small woodlands across the NCAs.  For this reason and because of the high results also for 'in-field' trees and orchards the overall effect for this theme is identified as strongly positive


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 142ha upland heathland.  Likely to be covered under lowland heathland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of  total uptake, 28% relates to the more beneficial options for very low fertiliser inputs (EK3) as opposed to EK2 which is the dominant option


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Combined hedge and ditch management makes up a further 6km of uptake


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 763ha limestone grassland, 352ha lowland meadows. Uptake possibly relating to both the areas of unimproved limestone grasslands and remaining areas of unimproved neutral meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Noted that of total length of uptake, only 17% relates to the more beneficial options of  EB3 Enhanced hedgerow management and HB11/12 for Management of hedgerows of very highly environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
60% of total uptake relates to the more beneficial options that remove archaeology from cultivation (ED2).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 397ha lowland heathland, 356ha lowland acidic grassland. 94% of uptake for the restoration of heathland (HO2_


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 53ha reedbeds.  Some uptake would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
163 ha of floodplain grazing marsh.  Higher uptake of relevant options would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly 900 ha under the more beneficial very low input pasture options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
This is a low level of uptake given the importance of rhynes to the function and landscape of the Levels


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 143ha lowland calcareous grassland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some 30km of uptake is for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
With careful targeting uptake may be benefiting the conservation management of Scheduled Monuments at risk


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 884ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 43,398ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats:  1790ha fen, 271ha lowland raised bog, 226ha reedbeds. Of the uptake 204ha is for reed beds, 73ha for fen and 25ha for lowland raised bog


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 43,398ha of coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. Although uptake is very significant, it is small compared to the total area of grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake relatively evenly spread between options for the removal of archaeology from cultivation and reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
29% of uptake is for the more beneficial very low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Ditches are a characteristic feature of the river valleys with floodplain grazing


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 418ha lowland meadows, 237ha lowland calcareous grassland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is primarily for the management of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
75km of uptake is for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3)and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Current uptake may  be bringing benefit if targeted at scheduled sites


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 144ha lowland raised bog.  Significantly higher levels of uptake for lowland raised bog would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 4207ha floodplain grazing marsh, 22ha purple moor grass and rush pasture.  These BAP figures suggest that uptake  falls below the threshold. All uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater uptake would be beneficial.  Current uptake equally distributed between removal of archaeology from cultivation and reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1448 ha upland heathland. Of  total uptake, 57% is under HLS for Moorland management and restoration while the remaining 43% is under EL6 Unenclosed moorland rough grazing.  Likely to be co-location of options.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
44% of uptake for the more beneficial EB3 very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Higher levels of uptake for restoration of species-rich grassland desirable


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 31% under enhanced hedgerow management EB3  / management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality HB11/12


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake under these options would be very beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 539 lowland heathland  and 186ha lowland acidic grassland. Transition between upland and lowland heath suggest that there should be some uptake for lowland heathland but  may be covered under moorland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
With important archaeological features on moorland surprising no  agreements for  UE13 for archaeology on moorland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The hedgerow beeches are a key characteristic of the Quantocks.  But the   relevant ELS options may not be addressing the primary issues in the Quantocks


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Earthbanks with beech a central characteristic so lack of uptake surprising


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 10,228ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good that roughly one third of uptake (some 5,000 hectares) relates to options with very low fertiliser inputs (EK3 / EL3) Beneficial if this ratio increased to 50:50


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Important to protect upland woodland from grazing stock


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 320ha lowland meadow, suggesting the threshold is met. Uptake evenly split between maintenance and restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake of HC12 - HC14 covering the management, restoration and creation of parkland/ wood pasture.  Higher uptake would be very beneficial - shortfall may be covered by HLS Capital items HAP and OES


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good that roughly a third of all uptake relates to enhanced hedgerow  management (EB3) with remainder largely under EB1/EB2


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 4,205ha blanket bog suggesting that the threshold is not met


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good roughly even mix between HC18 - 21 covering the maintenance, restoration and creation of traditional orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 920ha coastal sand dunes


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1,683ha lowland heathland and 807ha lowland acidic grassland. Important for the management of the coastal heaths.  Possible that uptake may be covered under the moorland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 623ha purple moor grass and rush pasture, 534ha floodplain grazing marsh. Uptake almost entirely relates to rush pasture management (EK4/ L4).  Benefit if greater uptake of HK9 -H K14


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Ranked 8th in terms of level of uptake across all NCAs and therefore positive in effect


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of option uptake relates to The management of stone-faced hedgebanks (EB4 / EB5)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Ranked 5th amongst all NCAs in terms of number of agreements supporting historic building restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Very limited uptake of options for stone walls although stone walls are a feature of Outakes on the moorland fringes


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial that uptake relates almost entirely to options that take archaeology out of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 148ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:  84ha lowland meadows, 34ha lowland calcareous grassland,


Greatest_benefit_comments:
of total uptake 54 km is for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low stock, explaining the lack of uptake


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 152ha lowland heathland, 34ha lowland dry acid grassland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat:   Some uptake for the management of fen would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1531ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh. 36ha purple moor grass & rush pasture. Uptake primarily of options for wet grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial if there was a higher proportion of the area under EB3 (Very low inputs) compared to EB2 (Low inputs).  Currently the ratio is roughly 40:60.   A 50:50 ratio would be better


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 658ha lowland meadows, 282 ha lowland calcareous grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
160ha relates to the maintenance of parkland / wood pasture,  remainder for the restoration and recreation of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Includes combined hedge and ditch management (some 70km). Would benefit from greater uptake under EB3 Enhanced hedgerow management (currently 66 km)and HB11 / 12 Management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (currently 164km)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial if higher levels of HC21 for traditional orchard creation reflecting that many orchards have been lost


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Again good that the majority of uptake relates to ED2 & HD7 taking archaeological features out of cultivation rather than ED3 Reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
There has been no uptake of HP5/6 for the management and restoration of salt marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 186 ha acid grassland and 15 ha lowland heath. 86% of uptake for the restoration of heathland (HO2/O£)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good that the majority of uptake relates to ED2 & HD7 taking archaeological features out of cultivation rather than ED3 Reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 882ha of floodplain grazing marsh, 212 ha purple moor grass and rush pasture. Some 20% of uptake for management and restoration of wet grassland (for waders) (HK10 - 12), with remainder for rush pasture management.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake is for earth banks (characteristic of the NCA) rather than Devon hedgebanks


Greatest_benefit_comments:
of which 1300ha of uptake is for the more beneficial very low fertiliser input options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
These ditches are confined to river valleys and coastal plains but are an important landscape feature where they are found


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 137ha lowland meadows, 24ha lowland calcareous grassland.  Uptake primarily for the restoration of species-rich grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake is fairly evenly split between the maintenance and restoration of parkland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
9.5% of total uptake is for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and for the management of hedges of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly split between maintenance and restoration  of traditional orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The vast majority of uptake relates to  options that take archaeological features out of cultivation as opposed to options for reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although meeting the threshold the areas of uptake are not significant


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 1544ha lowland heathland, 59ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Uptake largely for heathland restoration.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 453ha reedbeds.  Greater uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 3940ha Coastal and floodplain grazing marsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of total uptake 16% is for the more beneficial very low input options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 155ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
12% of uptake is for enhanced hedgerow management and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly even spread of uptake between the maintenance, restoration and creation of orchards


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 51ha upland calcareous grassland.  Area of BAP habitats suggest that threshold well exceeded. Over 2000ha of uptake is for the restoration of species-rich grasslands (which could include Culm grasslands)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
So long as uptake  is carefully targeted this should be helping the protection of scheduled monuments


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 1169ha lowland heathland, 32ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Greater uptake would be beneficial, will be partially tied in with areas of Culm grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
72% of uptake is for the removal of archaeological features from cultivation, the remainder for reduced depth of cultivation


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitats: 2948 ha purple moor grass and rush pasture (including the rare Culm grasslands); 898ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh.  The area of these BAP habitats suggest that the threshold for wet grasslands is being met. The vast majority of uptake is for rush pasture management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The vast majority of uptake is for the management of earth banks as opposed to stone-faced hedgebanks


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Low uptake of woodland options may reflect the presence of the South West Forest initiative sponsored by the Forestry Commission


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 11354ha upland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
39% under the more beneficial very low fertiliser input options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 245ha lowland meadows


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The majority of uptake is for parkland maintenance


Greatest_benefit_comments:
36% of uptake for enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11/12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 16163ha blanket bog - this area suggests that the threshold is not being met


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority habitat: 373ha lowland heathland, 364ha lowland dry acid grassland.  Probably managed under moorland options


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All uptake is for the management of rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
1781ha of Scheduled Monuments and SHINE sites on moorland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
The uptake roughly splits between options for earth banks and stone faced hedgebanks


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significantly greater uptake of options for stone walls would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 152ha upland heathland. Suspected that there is more moorland than that suggested by BAP habitats. Beneficial that all uptake is under HL10 Restoration of moorland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
It is noticeable that over 95% of the uptake relates to Low inputs (EK2 and UEL2) while less than 5% relates to the more beneficial options for Very low inputs (EK3 and UEL3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 364ha lowland meadow. Beneficial that over 70% of uptake is for Restoration of species-rich grassland (HK7)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly equal split between options  for the management of parkland HC12 and Restoration of parkland (HC13)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial that some 145km of uptake are for Enhanced hedgerow management (EB3) and capital item for hedge laying  and that a further 200km relates to the management of hedgerows of very high environmental quality (HB11 / HB12)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some 2,300ha of uptake for the Maintenance and restoration of grassland for target features


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Good that some 50% of all uptake is for orchard restoration and creation (HC20 / 21) with the remaining uptake relating to traditional orchard management (HC18).


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Currently the uptake is in the ratio 60% Reduced depth of cultivation (ED3 /HD3)and 40% taking archaeological features out of cultivation (ED2 / HD2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial that 60% of uptake relates to restoration of saltmarsh


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats:260ha of lowland acidic grassland and 247ha of lowland heathland. Beneficial that over 80% of uptake relates to the Restoration of heathland (HO2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Currently the uptake is in the ratio 60% Reduced depth of cultivation (ED3 /HD3)to 40% taking archaeological features out of cultivation (ED2 / HD2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 574ha floodplain grazing marsh, 27ha purple moor grass & rush pasture. Area of BAP habitats suggest that thresholds is met. Some 40% of uptake is for the management and restoration of wet grasslands ( for waders) (HK10,12,14) with the remainder for rush pasture management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Whilst beneficial uptake entirely relates to earthbank management (EB13/14) and not to the more characteristic stone-faced hedgebanks


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Ranked 6th amongst all NCAs in terms of number of agreements supporting historic building restoration


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly 75% of this uptake is for EK2 Low input grassland, with 25% falling to the more beneficial EK3 Very low input grassland.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 134ha calcareous grassland, 24ha lowland meadow. 85% of uptake for the restoration of these habitats


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Parkland is a very important characteristic of this landscape.  Higher uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Of this uptake roughly 530km (13%) is for the more beneficial Enhanced hedgerow management (EB3).  Higher levels of uptake of this option would be good.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
775ha of this uptake is for HK15 Maintenance of grassland for target features


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1,168ha coastal sand dunes


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 1223ha lowland heathland.  An almost equal split between uptake of options for the management of heathland (HO1) and the restoration of heathland (HO2)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Beneficial that the majority of uptake (290ha) relates to options that take archaeology out of cultivation (ED2/HD7) rather than options relating to reduced cultivation depth


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat:  81 ha reed bed. BAP habitat area suggests that the threshold is being met. Uptake is for the management of reedbeds with the exception of 11ha (HQ6) for the management of fen.  Significantly greater uptake would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitats: 316ha coastal and floodplain grazing marsh, 149ha purple moor grass and rush pasture, although the overall area of wet grasslands likely to significantly exceed this.  Just over 25%  of uptake is for the management /restoration of wet grasslands, with the remainder relating to  rush pasture management (EK4/EL4)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
1,400km of this uptake relates to earth bank management (EB12/13) and just under 50% of total uptake to the more characteristic Cornish hedges.


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2,100ha of upland heathland. Notable that restoration of moorland (HL10) covers 1446 ha


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Approximately two-thirds of uptake relates to EK2  for low inputs and one-third to the more beneficial EK3 for very low inputs


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 134ha Lowland calcareous grassland, 24 ha lowland meadows.  These BAP areas suggest that the threshold may be being met


Greatest_benefit_comments:
About 20% of uptake relates to the more beneficial EB3 enhanced hedgerow management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 677ha of blanket bog. Uptake of relevant options would be good


Greatest_benefit_comments:
2072 ha of uptake is for HK16 Restoration of grassland for target features


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 2,545ha lowland heathland.  Potentially covered by options for moorland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
All uptake relates to reduced depth of cultivation (D3)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Uptake entirely relates to the management of rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Roughly 33% of uptake for earthbank  management and restoration (EB12/13)  with the majority under EB4/5 covering the highly characteristic Cornish hedges (stone-faced hedgebanks)


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Significant majority of uptake is EK2 Low input grassland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Although meeting the threshold, the small area of uptake does not warrant a positive score for the historic environment overall


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Some uptake for the management of willow carr would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
ES coastal options not relevant to this rugged coastline


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 412ha Lowland heathland.  Uptake of options HO1 & HO2 for the maintenance and restoration of lowland heathland


Greatest_benefit_comments:
299 ha of BAP Priority Habitat Purple moor grass & rush pasture


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Mainly under EB4 stone hedge-bank management


Greatest_benefit_comments:
8km is for the more beneficial enhanced hedgerow management (EB30


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Greater level of uptake of relevant options would be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
Management of wet willow scrub in places could be beneficial


Greatest_benefit_comments:
BAP Priority Habitat: 134ha Lowland heathland.  Although ES uptake does not meet the identified threshold careful targeting may be helping the BAP Priority Habitat but overall area insufficient to score positive overall


# xx_Tbl_FG_JM_KeyChars_before_spellcheck

FG KeyChar:
•	The area is mainly covered by improved pasture.  Arable farming is a feature of the valley floors.

Edited_KeyChars:
Mainly productive improved pasture
Arable farming on valley floors
Rough pasture on valley sides


FG KeyChar:
•	Red sandstone is the distinctive building material which is used throughout the area, although there has also been localised use of limestone.

Edited_KeyChars:
Distinctive red sandstone buildings
Also some limestone


FG KeyChar:
•	The River Eden and River Petterill run broadly north-south through the area.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The River Eden and River Petterill run broadly north-south through the area.


FG KeyChar:
•	Predominant field boundaries are fences and walls, but there are also a significant proportion of hedges.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large rectangular fields
Fields mainly bounded by drystone walls and fences, with ditches in valley bottoms
Also significant proportion of hedgerows


FG KeyChar:
•	Largely low lying ground between the Lake District Fells and the Pennine escarpment, with Permo-Triassic sandstones and mudstones. Soil in the valleys tends to be clay.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Largely low lying ground between the Lake District Fells and the Pennine escarpment, with Permo-Triassic sandstones and mudstones. Soil in the valleys tends to be clay.


FG KeyChar:
•	Historic landscape features include Roman roads and the remains of Roman forts, and ruined castles associated with cross border strategic positions.

Edited_KeyChars:
Roman and medieval landscape features
Parkland and estate landscapes


FG KeyChar:
•	Around 12% of the area is classed as semi natural, with lowland heath being the predominant natural land cover, and there are also mosaics of neutral grassland, heather and unimproved acid grassland in different parts of the area.

Edited_KeyChars:
Lowland heath is main semi-natural habitat
Also mosaics of neutral grassland, heather and unimproved acid grassland
Moorland in foothills of North Pennines


FG KeyChar:
•	The main towns in the area are Appleby-in-Westmorland and Penrith.  The Eden Valley has numerous attractive villages, including Langwathby, Temple Sowerby, Warcop and Great Musgrave.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The main towns in the area are Appleby-in-Westmorland and Penrith.  The Eden Valley has numerous attractive villages, including Langwathby, Temple Sowerby, Warcop and Great Musgrave.


FG KeyChar:
•	Coniferous plantations and significant broadleaved and ancient woodlands are characteristic features.  Estate and farm woodlands, hedgerows, shelterbelts, hedgerow trees and small copses cover parts of the area.  There are also some hanging woodlands along the River Eden Corridor.

Edited_KeyChars:
Significant broadleaved and ancient woodland including hanging woodlands along River Eden
Estate and farm woodlands, shelterbelts and small copses throughout
Also some conifer plantations
Mature hedgerow trees


FG KeyChar:
•	The broad ridges of heather moorland and acid grassland that separate the principal dales in the north and east are managed for sheep and grouse.

Edited_KeyChars:
Mixed arable and pasture grazed by sheep and cattle
Unimproved rough grazing on upper slopes
Marginal rushy pastures


FG KeyChar:
•	Within the dales there are small villages and scattered farmsteads, mainly of local sandstone with stone slate or slate roofs, giving a strong vernacular character.
•	The whitewashed buildings of the Raby Estate in Teesdale are also distinctive.

Edited_KeyChars:
Buildings characterised by local sandstone with stone slate or slate roofs
Distinctive whitewashed buildings of the Raby Estate


FG KeyChar:
•	Reservoirs are scattered throughout the dales and moorland margins.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Reservoirs are scattered throughout the dales and moorland margins.


FG KeyChar:
•	The dales themselves provide sheltered pastures and hay meadows bounded by dry stone walls and hedgerows.

Edited_KeyChars:
Variety of field patterns
Mainly dry stone walls, with hedgerows and ditches in dales


FG KeyChar:
•	Alternating limestones, sandstones and shales give a stepped profile to hills and dalesides.
•	Millstone Grits cap the higher fells and form distinctive flat-topped summits.
•	Igneous intrusions of the Great Whin Sill form dramatic outcrops and waterfalls.
•	The area is of international importance for its geological sites and features, including the Whin Sill, and has been identified as a European Geopark.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Alternating limestones, sandstones and shales give a stepped profile to hills and dalesides.
•	Millstone Grits cap the higher fells and form distinctive flat-topped summits.
•	Igneous intrusions of the Great Whin Sill form dramatic outcrops and waterfalls.
•	The area is of international importance for its geological sites and features, including the Whin Sill, and has been identified as a European Geopark.


FG KeyChar:
•	In places the landscape is heavily scarred by mineral extraction, with many active and abandoned quarries and relics of widespread lead workings.

Edited_KeyChars:
Relics of widespread lead workings
Miner-farmer landscape features at dale heads


FG KeyChar:
•	There are important limestone grasslands, arctic-alpine flora and juniper scrub habitats in Teesdale and elsewhere.

Edited_KeyChars:
Important limestone grasslands, arctic-alpine flora and juniper scrub habitats
Broad ridges of heather moorland and acid grassland
High plateau of blanket bog
In valleys flower rich hay meadows


FG KeyChar:
•	Within the dales there are small villages and scattered farmsteads, mainly of local sandstone with stone slate or slate roofs, giving a strong vernacular character.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Within the dales there are small villages and scattered farmsteads, mainly of local sandstone with stone slate or slate roofs, giving a strong vernacular character.


FG KeyChar:
•	This is an upland landscape of high moorland ridges divided by broad pastoral dales; it shows slow change and cultural continuity.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This is an upland landscape of high moorland ridges divided by broad pastoral dales; it shows slow change and cultural continuity.


FG KeyChar:
•	Tree cover is sparse with woodlands being restricted to river gorges, gills, streamsides and larger coniferous plantations on the moorland ridges.

Edited_KeyChars:
Sparse tree cover
Oak-ash woodlands along gorges, gills and streamsides
Large coniferous plantations on moorland ridges
Hedgerow trees in dales


FG KeyChar:
•	Farmland is pastoral in the west, merging to mixed and arable in the east.

Edited_KeyChars:
Pastoral in the west, on floodplain
Mixed and arable in the east
Semi-improved and rough grazing on elevated land


FG KeyChar:
•	Vernacular buildings are generally of Millstone Grit and include scattered large farmsteads, sometimes with bastle and pele tower fortifications.


JM KeyChar:
•	The main Tyne valley is flat, open floodplain with some wetland areas associated with former gravel workings; the side valleys to north and south are incised with springs and waterfalls.


FG KeyChar:
•	There is a variety of enclosure patterns, with large, walled enclosures predominant in the west and hedged enclosures in the east.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large walled enclosures in the west
Large hedged fields in the east
Ditches in valley bottoms


FG KeyChar:
•	Bronze Age stone circles and cairns and Iron Age hillforts are common.
•	Very evident remains of the Roman wall, forts and associated features occur on the Whin Sill scarp.
•	There are many large country houses, often incorporating earlier medieval fortified structures and set in designed parklands.

Edited_KeyChars:
Important prehistoric, Roman and medieval remains, particularly Hadrian's Wall
Many country houses and designed parklands


FG KeyChar:
•	North of the Whin Sill there is open, windswept semi-improved and rough grazing on elevated land, with loughs and rushy pastures.
•	This contrasts with the more fertile floodplain land along the South Tyne.

JM KeyChar:
•	Ancient, semi-natural riparian woodlands are common in the tributary valleys; while higher ground on the valley sides has grass moorland, wet pastures, loughs and mires.  In the North Tyne valley hay meadows and calcareous grassland also occur.

Edited_KeyChars:
High ground has grass moorland, wet pastures, loughs and mires
Calcareous grassland and hay meadows in North Tyne valley


FG KeyChar:
•	Settlements are located strategically along the valley, which is a significant transport route through the Pennines.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Settlements are located strategically along the valley, which is a significant transport route through the Pennines.


FG KeyChar:
•	This is a narrow east-west lowland corridor that runs through a gap in the Pennine uplands, which are visible to north and south.
•	It is visually contained to the north by the parallel scarps of the Whin Sill.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This is a narrow east-west lowland corridor that runs through a gap in the Pennine uplands, which are visible to north and south.
•	It is visually contained to the north by the parallel scarps of the Whin Sill.


FG KeyChar:
•	Broadleaved woodland and conifer plantations occur on the side slopes and in the intimate wooded valley of the North Tyne.

Edited_KeyChars:
Deciduous and mixed broadleaved woodland and conifer plantations in  valley of  North Tyne
Ancient, semi-natural riparian woodlands in tributary valleys
Extensive managed estate woodlands
Mature parkland trees and avenues
Hedgerow trees in lower valley reaches


FG KeyChar:
•	Arable and cattle farming on the lower land merge into sheep farming on higher ground and moorland to the west.

Edited_KeyChars:
Arable and cattle farming on the lower land
Sheep farming on higher ground to the west


FG KeyChar:
•	Traditional buildings are generally of sandstone, with gritstone at higher altitudes.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional buildings are generally of sandstone, with gritstone at higher altitudes


FG KeyChar:
•	Large reservoirs and ornamental lakes provide distinctive areas of open water.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Large reservoirs and ornamental lakes provide distinctive areas of open water.


FG KeyChar:
•	Most of the area has large rectilinear fields enclosed by stone walls or hedgerows.

Edited_KeyChars:
Mainly large rectilinear fields enclosed by stone walls or hedgerows
Ditches in valley bottoms


FG KeyChar:
•	Sandstone and dolerite crags (the latter associated with the Whin Sill) form local landscape features.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Sandstone and dolerite crags (the latter associated with the Whin Sill) form local landscape features.


FG KeyChar:
•	There are frequent country houses and fortified defensive structures, typically set in landscaped parklands.
•	The ancient market town of Morpeth serves a surrounding medieval pattern of small, nucleated villages.
•	Villages are often centred on greens and surrounded by extensive medieval ridge and furrow and earthworks.

Edited_KeyChars:
Extensive ridge and furrow and earthworks around villages
Fortified defensive structures
Frequent landscaped parklands and estates
Large reservoirs and ornamental lakes within parkland


JM KeyChar:
•	Riparian woodlands (often ancient in origin) and wet pasture are key habitats, and species-rich pastures and meadows are found along the course of Hadrian’s Wall.


Edited_KeyChars:
•	There are frequent country houses and fortified defensive structures, typically set in landscaped parklands.
•	The ancient market town of Morpeth serves a surrounding medieval pattern of small, nucleated villages.
•	Villages are often centred on greens and surrounded by extensive medieval ridge and furrow and earthworks.


FG KeyChar:
•	This intermediate upland fringe plateau comprises a series of ridges and intimate river valleys in the north, opening out to a broader, flatter landscape in the south and east.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This intermediate upland fringe plateau comprises a series of ridges and intimate river valleys in the north, opening out to a broader, flatter landscape in the south and east.


FG KeyChar:
•	The valleys of the rivers Font, Wansbeck and Coquet are well-wooded.
•	In addition, there are mixed and ornamental woodlands and parklands within the country estates.
•	Small coniferous blocks and belts of trees occur on the more open farmland to the south.

Edited_KeyChars:
Oak, ash and alder woodlands along river valleys (often ancient in origin)
Mixed ornamental woodland in estates
Small coniferous blocks on farmland to the south
Ash and sycamore roadside and hedgerow trees


FG KeyChar:
•	Permanent pasture and semi-natural grassland are typical of the valleys and coastal fringes; inland is an open, mixed and arable landscape, with intensive cereal, beef and sheep production.

Edited_KeyChars:
Some permanent pasture in valleys and coastal fringes
Inland, open, mixed and arable landscape


FG KeyChar:
•	Traditional buildings are generally of sandstone with pantile or slate roofs.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional buildings are generally of sandstone with pantile or slate roofs


FG KeyChar:
•	The coast and islands provide rich wildlife habitats, particularly for sea birds.
•	There are intertidal flats backed by saltmarsh with patches of coastal grazing marsh in the south.

Edited_KeyChars:
Saltmarshes, intertidal mudflats and sand dunes
Patches of coastal grazing marsh


FG KeyChar:
•	The Aln, Coquet and Tweed, as well as smaller rivers, meander across the coastal plain to the sea.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The Aln, Coquet and Tweed, as well as smaller rivers, meander across the coastal plain to the sea.


FG KeyChar:
•	Large rectilinear fields are enclosed by low-cut thorn hedges or fences, with sandstone walls in parts.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large rectilinear fields enclosed by low-cut thorn hedges with few trees or fences
Sandstone walls in parts


FG KeyChar:
•	There is diverse coastal scenery dominated by high cliffs and offshore islands in the north, and by sweeping sandy bays and dunes in the south.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	There is diverse coastal scenery dominated by high cliffs and offshore islands in the north, and by sweeping sandy bays and dunes in the south.


FG KeyChar:
•	The area’s heritage reflects ecclesiastical influences and the need for border defence, including prominent medieval castles, fortifications and structures, and religious buildings, often forming outstanding coastal landmarks.

Edited_KeyChars:
Features include prominent medieval castles, fortifications and structures, and religious buildings
Complex early field systems


FG KeyChar:
•	Permanent pasture and semi-natural grassland are typical of the valleys and coastal fringes; inland is an open, mixed and arable landscape, with intensive cereal, beef and sheep production.
•	On the Whin Sill intrusions are rare, semi-natural whinstone grasslands.

Edited_KeyChars:
Semi natural acid and neutral grassland, heath and scrub on coastal fringes
Rare whinstone grasslands


FG KeyChar:
•	Settlement comprises dispersed farmsteads, small nucleated villages, fishing villages and small coastal resort towns.
•	The area south-west of Berwick-Upon-Tweed is affected by whinstone quarrying and opencast coal mining.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Settlement comprises dispersed farmsteads, small nucleated villages, fishing villages and small coastal resort towns.
•	The area south-west of Berwick-Upon-Tweed is affected by whinstone quarrying and opencast coal mining.


FG KeyChar:
•	This narrow, low-lying, windswept coastal plain has wide views east to the sea and west to the Cheviots, with striking views along the coast itself.
•	There is diverse coastal scenery dominated by high cliffs and offshore islands in the north, and by sweeping sandy bays and dunes in the south.
•	The Whin Sill intrusions produce dramatic landscape features, including the coastal cliffs at Bamburgh and the Farne Islands and distinctive inland outcrops.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This narrow, low-lying, windswept coastal plain has wide views east to the sea and west to the Cheviots, with striking views along the coast itself.
•	There is diverse coastal scenery dominated by high cliffs and offshore islands in the north, and by sweeping sandy bays and dunes in the south.
•	The Whin Sill intrusions produce dramatic landscape features, including the coastal cliffs at Bamburgh and the Farne Islands and distinctive inland outcrops.


FG KeyChar:
•	Tree and woodland cover is generally limited to clumps near farmhouses and settlements, some river valley woodlands, and occasional shelterbelts and blocks of coniferous trees.
•	Some local areas are more wooded, for example around Craster.

Edited_KeyChars:
Tree and woodland cover generally limited to clumps near settlement
Some river valley woodlands
Occasional shelterbelts and blocks of coniferous trees


FG KeyChar:
•	Traditional buildings were of sandstone and thatch, later replaced by stone slates and Welsh slates.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional buildings of sandstone and thatch, later replaced by stone slates and Welsh slates


FG KeyChar:
•	Wet peaty flushes, mires, loughs and small reservoirs occur throughout the area.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Wet peaty flushes, mires, loughs and small reservoirs occur throughout the area.


FG KeyChar:
•	Farmland comprises rectangular patterns of large open fields, bounded by drystone walls, dating from the time of the parliamentary enclosures.
•	However, blocks and belts of coniferous woodland often break up the patterns.
•	Varied moorland communities, dominated by heather and rough acid grassland mosaics, are found on the thin, sandy soils of the higher and steeper slopes.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large, open, rectangular fields bounded by drystone walls


FG KeyChar:
•	These sandstone hills form distinctive skyline features with generally level tops, north-west facing scarps, and craggy outcrops with exceptional views.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	These sandstone hills form distinctive skyline features with generally level tops, north-west facing scarps, and craggy outcrops with exceptional views.


FG KeyChar:
•	The parkland settings of the large country mansions that fringe the lower fellside slopes, eg Chillingham, Cragside and Alnwick Castle, have distinctive ‘landscaped’ features and much semi-natural broadleaved woodland cover.
•	This is an important prehistoric archaeological landscape, with ‘cup and ring’ marked rocks, Bronze Age burial cists, earthwork remains of Iron Age hillfort systems, standing stones, enclosures and cairns.
•	Remains of deserted medieval villages and ridge and furrow cultivation are common, especially on land to the east and south of the main plateau area.

Edited_KeyChars:
Important prehistoric evidence
Deserted medieval villages and ridge and furrow
Historic designed parkland landscapes


Edited_KeyChars:
Moorland, mainly heather and rough acid grassland mosaics on higher and steeper slopes
Wet peaty flushes, mires, loughs and small reservoirs throughout the area


FG KeyChar:
•	There are scattered farmsteads and small hamlets, served by the market towns of Alnwick and Rothbury.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	There are scattered farmsteads and small hamlets, served by the market towns of Alnwick and Rothbury.


FG KeyChar:
•	These sandstone hills form distinctive skyline features with generally level tops, north-west facing scarps, and craggy outcrops with exceptional views.
•	They are highest in the south, where they reach over 400m AOD.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	These sandstone hills form distinctive skyline features with generally level tops, north-west facing scarps, and craggy outcrops with exceptional views.
•	They are highest in the south, where they reach over 400m AOD.


FG KeyChar:
•	There is a transition from heather and grass moor on the higher ground, through scrub and woodland, to improved farmland and parkland on the lower slopes.
•	Extensive plantations of coniferous woodland occur in some areas.
•	Broadleaved woodland is associated with rivers and scarp slopes.
•	The parkland settings of the large country mansions that fringe the lower fellside slopes, eg Chillingham, Cragside and Alnwick Castle, have distinctive ‘landscaped’ features and much semi-natural broadleaved woodland cover.

Edited_KeyChars:
Abundant semi-natural broadleaved woodland, associated with historic parkland, rivers and scarp slopes
Some extensive plantations of coniferous woodland


FG KeyChar:
•	The flatter, more open arable farmland to the north contrasts with the strong patchwork of mixed farmland, hedgerows and hedgerow trees within the vales.

Edited_KeyChars:
Predominantly flat, open, arable farmland
Limited rough grazing on the northern and eastern edges of the Cheviots
Mixed farmland in south
Areas of wet grassland


FG KeyChar:
•	Traditional buildings are generally of sandstone or sandstone rubble with clay tile or stone slate roofs (formerly thatch, which survives in pockets such as at Etal).

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional buildings generally of sandstone or sandstone rubble with clay tile or stone slate roofs (formerly thatch)


FG KeyChar:
•	Other rivers and streams are often tree-lined and meander between raised terraces and flat gravel benches.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Other rivers and streams are often tree-lined and meander between raised terraces and flat gravel benches.


FG KeyChar:
•	There is a rectilinear pattern of small coniferous woodland blocks and shelterbelts.

Edited_KeyChars:
Strong pattern of large- and medium-sized hedged fields in vales
Hedgerows fragmented in the north, stronger in south
Also ditches (in river valleys only ) and significant length of stone walls


FG KeyChar:
•	It has many features shaped by glaciation, including drumlin fields within the Tweed valley lowlands, extensive clay and sand deposits around Millfield, and moraines, eskers and kames within the undulating vales of Coquetdale and Whittingham Vale to the south.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	It has many features shaped by glaciation, including drumlin fields within the Tweed valley lowlands, extensive clay and sand deposits around Millfield, and moraines, eskers and kames within the undulating vales of Coquetdale and Whittingham Vale to the south.


FG KeyChar:
•	Fortified castles, ‘bastle houses’, ‘tower houses’ and other defensive structures are common.

Edited_KeyChars:
Fortified castles, ‘bastle houses’, ‘tower houses’ and other defensive structures
Estate landscapes


JM KeyChar:
•	The River Tweed and its English tributaries form an outstanding example of a sandstone and limestone river.  There are also some areas of wet grassland (for example within the Millfield Plain) and fragments of broadleaved woodland on steep river banks.

Edited_KeyChars:
Outstanding example of a sandstone and limestone river
Some moorland on fringes of Cheviot uplands


FG KeyChar:
•	Small traditional villages are strategically sited at river bridging points and on the break of slope at the edge of the valley floor.
•	River Tweed has a mix of deciduous woodland and estate landscapes.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Small traditional villages are strategically sited at river bridging points and on the break of slope at the edge of the valley floor.
•	River Tweed has a mix of deciduous woodland and estate landscapes.


FG KeyChar:
•	This tranquil, agricultural, valley and plain landscape drains northwards to the Tweed and eastwards to the North Sea.
•	It has many features shaped by glaciation, including drumlin fields within the Tweed valley lowlands, extensive clay and sand deposits around Millfield, and moraines, eskers and kames within the undulating vales of Coquetdale and Whittingham Vale to the south.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This tranquil, agricultural, valley and plain landscape drains northwards to the Tweed and eastwards to the North Sea.
•	It has many features shaped by glaciation, including drumlin fields within the Tweed valley lowlands, extensive clay and sand deposits around Millfield, and moraines, eskers and kames within the undulating vales of Coquetdale and Whittingham Vale to the south.


FG KeyChar:
•	River Tweed has a mix of deciduous woodland and estate landscapes.
•	There is a rectilinear pattern of small coniferous woodland blocks and shelterbelts.

Edited_KeyChars:
Deciduous woodland along the River Tweed
Small coniferous woodland blocks and shelterbelts
Few hedgerow trees in north but many in southern vales


FG KeyChar:
•	The lower, steeper slopes have a greener appearance indicative of more productive grassland, but show signs of bracken invasion.
•	The open moorland plateaux are managed as grouse moors and for grazing by distinctive white-faced Cheviot and black-faced Border sheep; there are also elusive wild goats.
•	Better quality grassland on the lower slopes is grazed by both beef cattle and sheep.

Edited_KeyChars:
Grassland on lower slopes grazed by cattle and sheep
Open moorland plateaux grazed by distinctive Cheviot and Border sheep


FG KeyChar:
•	Traditional buildings are commonly of sandstone and slate; but clay pantile roofs are a distinctive feature of the northern valleys.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional buildings commonly of sandstone and slate
Clay pantile roofs  a distinctive feature of the northern valleys


FG KeyChar:
•	There are no modern-day cross-border roads through the Cheviots, however, and this helps maintain a sense of isolation and wilderness.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	There are no modern-day cross-border roads through the Cheviots, however, and this helps maintain a sense of isolation and wilderness.


FG KeyChar:
•	The summit is characterised by mixed areas of blanket bog and heather and by the sculpted forms of granitic ‘tors’; the treeless upper hillsides have coarse ‘white’ grassland and heather moorland.
•	The lower, steeper slopes have a greener appearance indicative of more productive grassland, but show signs of bracken invasion.
•	The hills are largely open although the lower slopes have large regular fields defined by dry stone walls or ‘dykes’ dating from parliamentary enclosures.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large regular fields from 19th century enclosures bounded by dry stone walls on lower slopes
Some hedgerows in valley bottoms
Hills mainly open


FG KeyChar:
•	The valleys also provide sheltered sites for dispersed farmsteads and small hamlets on strategic sites, sometimes with medieval fortified buildings.
•	The well-preserved remains of extensive tracts of prehistoric landscape (hillforts, settlements and prehistoric field systems) can be clearly seen; the hills are also criss-crossed by ancient Roman tracks and border drove roads.

Edited_KeyChars:
Extensive prehistoric remains relating to defence, settlement and agriculture
Ancient Roman roads and medieval defensive sites


FG KeyChar:
•	There are extensive rolling plateaux of semi-natural grass moor and heather moorland.
•	There are rare arctic-alpine flora on the scree slopes and species-rich semi-natural grasslands and wet flushes in the valleys eg the Coquet valley.

Edited_KeyChars:
Semi-natural grass moor, heather moorland and blanket bog (managed for grouse)
Rare arctic-alpine flora and species-rich grassland and wet flushes


FG KeyChar:
•	The valleys also provide sheltered sites for dispersed farmsteads and small hamlets on strategic sites, sometimes with medieval fortified buildings.
•	There are no modern-day cross-border roads through the Cheviots, however, and this helps maintain a sense of isolation and wilderness.
•	Perceptions of remoteness and solitude are affected by military training, as the south-western part of the Character Area lies within the Otterburn Training Area.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The valleys also provide sheltered sites for dispersed farmsteads and small hamlets on strategic sites, sometimes with medieval fortified buildings.
•	There are no modern-day cross-border roads through the Cheviots, however, and this helps maintain a sense of isolation and wilderness.
•	Perceptions of remoteness and solitude are affected by military training, as the south-western part of the Character Area lies within the Otterburn Training Area.


FG KeyChar:
•	This smooth, sinuous cluster of hills of volcanic origin rises to over 800m AOD and forms a wild, open, windswept landscape with broad moorland horizons.
•	There are extensive rolling plateaux of semi-natural grass moor and heather moorland.
•	On the northern flanks of the hills are deep ravines and rocky outcrops with dramatic scree slopes, glacial meltwater channels and ice-gouged hollows.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This smooth, sinuous cluster of hills of volcanic origin rises to over 800m AOD and forms a wild, open, windswept landscape with broad moorland horizons.
•	There are extensive rolling plateaux of semi-natural grass moor and heather moorland.
•	On the northern flanks of the hills are deep ravines and rocky outcrops with dramatic scree slopes, glacial meltwater channels and ice-gouged hollows.


FG KeyChar:
•	Coniferous woodland plantations occur on some upper valley slopes where they tend to interrupt the smooth lines of an otherwise open, rounded landscape.
•	Steep-sided valleys with fast-flowing burns radiate outwards and have relict semi-natural broadleaved woodland (oak, birch, alder and hazel) and gorse scrub.

Edited_KeyChars:
Relict semi-natural broadleaved woodland (oak, birch, alder and hazel) and scrub on steep valley sides
Coniferous plantations on some upper valley slopes


FG KeyChar:
•	The exposed moorland areas are heavily grazed by sheep and are characterised by both heather and improved grassland.
•	The main agricultural land use is rough or semi-improved pasture for cattle and sheep rearing, with semi-improved or improved in-bye land in sheltered valleys.

Edited_KeyChars:
Improved pasture, often on floodplain
Rough, semi-improved pasture
Cattle and sheep grazing


FG KeyChar:
•	Traditional buildings comprise scattered farmhouses and cottages of Fell sandstone with slate roofs on the upper slopes, with a few hamlets in the valleys.

Edited_KeyChars:
Local traditional buildings of fell sandstone with slate roofs


FG KeyChar:
•	There is a network of small rivers and streams in narrow gorges with sandstone crags, loughs and mires.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	There is a network of small rivers and streams in narrow gorges with sandstone crags, loughs and mires.


FG KeyChar:
•	In places these woodlands are broken up by isolated and enclosed valleys with pastures and settlements.
•	Fields are large, open, rectangular, windswept, often poorly drained and subdivided by dry stone walls or wire fences.

Edited_KeyChars:
Valley farmland with large, rectangular fields
Fields bounded by dry stone walls with some hedges and fences


FG KeyChar:
•	There are important archaeological landscapes with evidence of settlements, tracks, field systems, sheilings, burial areas and Roman forts and camps.

Edited_KeyChars:
Evidence of settlements, tracks, field systems, sheilings, burial areas and Roman forts and camps


FG KeyChar:
•	The exposed moorland areas are heavily grazed by sheep and are characterised by both heather and improved grassland.
•	There are numerous peaty mires and mosses.

Edited_KeyChars:
Moorlands dominated by heather (managed for grouse)
Blanket bog, peaty mires and mosses


FG KeyChar:
•	The area is very sparsely populated overall.
•	Military training areas at Spadeadam Forest and Otterburn affect perceptions of remoteness and solitude.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The area is very sparsely populated overall.
•	Military training areas at Spadeadam Forest and Otterburn affect perceptions of remoteness and solitude.


FG KeyChar:
•	This is a large-scale dissected landscape of high, rolling or undulating plateau with expanses of sweeping moorland, extensive coniferous woodlands, large reservoirs, and wide, long distance views.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This is a large-scale dissected landscape of high, rolling or undulating plateau with expanses of sweeping moorland, extensive coniferous woodlands, large reservoirs, and wide, long distance views.


FG KeyChar:
•	The treeless moorlands contrast with the vast areas of coniferous forest that dominate large parts of the area.
•	The extensive conifer plantations mainly consist of a patchwork of felled areas and different age-classes of non-native conifers.
•	There are few broadleaved trees, largely restricted to small woodland blocks, hedgerows and remnant semi-natural woodland in the more sheltered valleys.

Edited_KeyChars:
Extensive treeless moorlands
Broadleaved trees in small blocks, in  hedgerows and along watercourses
Remnant semi-natural woodland in sheltered valleys
Widespread non-native conifer plantations


FG KeyChar:
•	The inland plain comprises improved pasture grazed by dairy cattle and sheep.

Edited_KeyChars:
Improved pasture for dairy cattle and sheep


FG KeyChar:
•	The area includes Carlisle and numerous smaller towns and villages.  Traditional materials and styles in the area are mixed, reflecting the physical characteristics and varied history of the Solway Basin.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional materials and styles in the area are mixed


FG KeyChar:
•	At the northern end of the area, the Solway Firth foreshore comprises extensive intertidal mudflats, backed by saltmarsh with a seaward edge characterised by dendretic creeks and low soft river cliffs.
•	The southern part of the Solway coast is characterised by low cliffs formed by eroding coastal drumlins, sand and pebble beaches with sand dunes and raised beaches which were formed by changes in sea levels.

Edited_KeyChars:
Extensive intertidal mudflats backed by saltmarsh
Sand and pebble beaches with sand dunes and raised beaches
Low lying cliffs


FG KeyChar:
•	The large rectilinear pastoral fields tend to be defined by drainage ditches, small streams, low hedgerows and stone faced hedgebanks or ‘kests’.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large rectilinear fields
Drainage ditches and streams
Low hedgerows
Stone walls and stone-faced or earth banks


FG KeyChar:
•	The area is rich in archaeological remains, being located close to the English-Scottish Border and particularly in relation to Roman and medieval monastic remains.

Edited_KeyChars:
Rich archaeological remains close to Scottish border
Roman and medieval monastic remains
Water features/ponds (unknown but probably associated with mosses)


FG KeyChar:
•	Raised peat bogs, locally known as ‘mosses’ provide a contrast with the improved pasture which forms a large part of the coastal fringe area.

Edited_KeyChars:
Raised peat bogs, coastal and dune heaths and mosses


FG KeyChar:
•	The area includes Carlisle and numerous smaller towns and villages.  Traditional materials and styles in the area are mixed, reflecting the physical characteristics and varied history of the Solway Basin.
•	Dispersed nucleated inland settlements have grown around the core of a set of farm buildings, and along the coast towns and villages, including Victorian coastal resorts, have followed a more linear pattern of growth.
•	New, sometimes large scale development, is particularly apparent on the Carlisle urban fringe and also on several former 1940s airfields.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The area includes Carlisle and numerous smaller towns and villages.  Traditional materials and styles in the area are mixed, reflecting the physical characteristics and varied history of the Solway Basin.
•	Dispersed nucleated inland settlements have grown around the core of a set of farm buildings, and along the coast towns and villages, including Victorian coastal resorts, have followed a more linear pattern of growth.
•	New, sometimes large scale development, is particularly apparent on the Carlisle urban fringe and also on several former 1940s airfields.


FG KeyChar:
•	A flat, open landscape lying between more dramatic upland areas - the Cumbria High Fells and the Southern Uplands.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	A flat, open landscape lying between more dramatic upland areas - the Cumbria High Fells and the Southern Uplands.


FG KeyChar:
•	Trees and woodland are limited, with some broadleaved trees in river valleys.

Edited_KeyChars:
Limited woodland, mainly willow carr and birch scrub in river valleys
Hedgerow trees


FG KeyChar:
•	Low undulating pasture inland from the coast.  Intensive grazing by sheep and cattle in the Derwent valley which is a flat, linear pastoral landscape

Edited_KeyChars:
Mainly improved pasture
Intensive sheep and cattle grazing in Derwent valley
Occasional arable fields
Areas of managed and unmanaged rough grazing in south


FG KeyChar:
•	Although the area’s towns tend to be largely industrial, the use of local red sandstone is apparent in both urban and more rural settlements.  It is either used alone or in combination with render or red brick.


FG KeyChar:
•	Urban areas on the coast reflecting the area’s role as a coastal industry and communications centre, and characterised by barbed wire fencing, small waste dumps, derelict buildings and industrial wasteland, contrasting with the rich agricultural land and views of the high fells to the north and east.


FG KeyChar:
•	Perceptions of the area are influenced by industrial development, coastal defence works, beach tipping or pylons, overhead lines and wind farms.
•	Development is quite extensive in the lowland ridge, with wind turbines, masts and pylons and roads.  Open-cast coalmining is also a feature on the landscape.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Perceptions of the area are influenced by industrial development, coastal defence works, beach tipping or pylons, overhead lines and wind farms.
•	Development is quite extensive in the lowland ridge, with wind turbines, masts and pylons and roads.  Open-cast coalmining is also a feature on the landscape.


FG KeyChar:
•	Medium to large sized fields of improved pasture inland from the coast, are subdivided by a mix of hedgerows, hedgerow trees and wire fences.  Stone walls and hedges established on stone banks form boundaries along minor roads.

Edited_KeyChars:
Medium to large fields
Mix of hedgerows, stone walls and stone-faced hedgebanks
Ditches in river valleys
Some fences


FG KeyChar:
•	Underlying geology of coal measures, Hensingham Group and Chief Limestone Groups of Carboniferous age to the north of St. Bees Head, and to the south, an outcrop of the Permo-Triassic rocks mainly composed of the Steerton Bees Sandstone, with some overlying mudstones.  Strikingly high coastal cliffs at St. Bees Head formed by dull red sandstone.
•	Intertidal flats, a mix of shingle and pebble beaches at the northern end of the area, red sea cliffs on the central coast.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Underlying geology of coal measures, Hensingham Group and Chief Limestone Groups of Carboniferous age to the north of St. Bees Head, and to the south, an outcrop of the Permo-Triassic rocks mainly composed of the Steerton Bees Sandstone, with some overlying mudstones.  Strikingly high coastal cliffs at St. Bees Head formed by dull red sandstone.
•	Intertidal flats, a mix of shingle and pebble beaches at the northern end of the area, red sea cliffs on the central coast.


FG KeyChar:
•	Roman coastal forts form part of the Hadrian’s Wall World Heritage Site.  The spread of monasticism in the 12th century had a key influence on patterns of agricultural activity in the area, as well as woodland management.  Perhaps most evident is the more recent industrial past of the area.  There are some historic landscapes and estates in the area including Fitz Park, Cockermouth and Curwen Park, and Workington.

Edited_KeyChars:
Historic parkland landscapes and estates
Roman forts and monastic remains
Water features (unknown but possibly associated with mosses)


FG KeyChar:
•	Semi natural habitats include saltmarsh and sand dunes backing the beaches. There are areas of managed and unmanged moorland towards the south of the area and inland, which is used for rough grazing.

Edited_KeyChars:
Species-rich grassland
Lowland heathland
Lowland raised bog and mosses


FG KeyChar:
•	The main towns are Maryport, Cockermouth, Workington, Whitehaven, Millom and Barrow.  Views within the landscape are affected by the visibility of ports, manufacturing industrial buildings and chemical works, as well as Sellafield nuclear power station.
•	Development is quite extensive in the lowland ridge, with wind turbines, masts and pylons and roads.  Open-cast coalmining is also a feature on the landscape.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The main towns are Maryport, Cockermouth, Workington, Whitehaven, Millom and Barrow.  Views within the landscape are affected by the visibility of ports, manufacturing industrial buildings and chemical works, as well as Sellafield nuclear power station.
•	Development is quite extensive in the lowland ridge, with wind turbines, masts and pylons and roads.  Open-cast coalmining is also a feature on the landscape.


FG KeyChar:
•	Very few trees throughout the area, with the exception of small areas of semi-natural ancient woodland along the lowland river valleys and small woodlands and copses within fields.  Winds off the Irish Sea have an effect on both the growth rate and form of hedgerows and mature trees.

Edited_KeyChars:
Generally sparsely treed
Small areas of semi-natural ancient woodland along lowland river valleys
Small woodlands and copses within fields
Hedgerow trees


FG KeyChar:
•	A decline in cattle and an increase in sheep numbers, a reduction in shepherding and an increase in the overwintering of stock on the fells has influenced the character of the area.

Edited_KeyChars:
On higher land mainly unimproved rough grazing 
Semi-improved and improved pasture in the valleys
Mainly grazing for cattle and sheep with some arable


FG KeyChar:
•	Buildings are constructed of local stone with slate roofs

Edited_KeyChars:
Buildings of local stone with slate roofs
Many 17th century domestic buildings


FG KeyChar:
•	Glacial erosion and deposition has formed lakes and tarns in the area through over-deepening of valley floors, formation of rock basins and the creation of natural dams.
•	Silting of lakes has produced some large alluvial flats and fans.
•	Linear watercourses are lined with broadleaved trees and shrubs.  Lakes are surrounded by relatively open land.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Glacial erosion and deposition has formed lakes and tarns in the area through over-deepening of valley floors, formation of rock basins and the creation of natural dams.
•	Silting of lakes has produced some large alluvial flats and fans.
•	Linear watercourses are lined with broadleaved trees and shrubs.  Lakes are surrounded by relatively open land.


FG KeyChar:
•	Boundaries are formed by stone walls, with hedgerows and hedgerow trees in the valleys.  
•	There is largely unimproved rough grazing land in the higher areas, with semi-improved and improved pasture and rectilinear fields in the valleys.

Edited_KeyChars:
Rectilinear fields bounded by stone walls
Hedgerows and hedgebanks in valleys bottom
Ditches in valleys bottoms


FG KeyChar:
•	High fells, with deep U-shaped glaciated valleys forming steep open fellsides with rocky outcrops.  The underlying geology is composed of rocks of the Skiddaw Group, together with an outcrop of the Borrowdale Volcanic group in the Sca Fell Range towards the centre of the area.  The volcanic rock provides rugged, spectacular scenery whilst the Skiddaw group forms smooth sided mountains such as Skiddaw.  Mineral veins run through all of the rocks in the area. Scree slopes are common.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	High fells, with deep U-shaped glaciated valleys forming steep open fellsides with rocky outcrops.  The underlying geology is composed of rocks of the Skiddaw Group, together with an outcrop of the Borrowdale Volcanic group in the Sca Fell Range towards the centre of the area.  The volcanic rock provides rugged, spectacular scenery whilst the Skiddaw group forms smooth sided mountains such as Skiddaw.  Mineral veins run through all of the rocks in the area. Scree slopes are common.


JM KeyChar:
•	There is widespread evidence of prehistoric settlement (burial cairns, stone circles, enclosures); Roman influence (forts, roads such as High Street, farmstead sites); and early cultivation (ridge and furrow and lynchets).
•	Many farmhouses and other domestic buildings date from 1650-1750, a period of prosperity here.  18th and 19th century mining and processing is visible in the landscape in many areas.

Edited_KeyChars:
Prehistoric, Roman and early farming archaeological evidence and remains
Mining evidence from the industrial revolution
Ornamental parklands


FG KeyChar:
•	Mires, marshy grasslands and reed swamp in low lying areas are valued semi-natural habitats.

Edited_KeyChars:
Upland heath and grass moorland
Arctic-alpine flora
Unimproved and semi-improved grasslands
Wetlands and mires on plateaux and valley heads


FG KeyChar:
•	Agricultural settlements are found in the valleys.  The valleys also contain market towns which have expanded in response to the area’s popularity for tourism and recreation.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Agricultural settlements are found in the valleys.  The valleys also contain market towns which have expanded in response to the area’s popularity for tourism and recreation.


FG KeyChar:
•	High fells, with deep U-shaped glaciated valleys forming steep open fellsides with rocky outcrops.  The underlying geology is composed of rocks of the Skiddaw Group, together with an outcrop of the Borrowdale Volcanic group in the Sca Fell Range towards the centre of the area.  The volcanic rock provides rugged, spectacular scenery whilst the Skiddaw group forms smooth sided mountains such as Skiddaw.  Mineral veins run through all of the rocks in the area. Scree slopes are common.
•	U-shaped valleys, hanging valleys and corries higher on the mountains.  The sheltered U-shaped valleys have sloping sides and flat valley floors.
•	Silting of lakes has produced some large alluvial flats and fans.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	High fells, with deep U-shaped glaciated valleys forming steep open fellsides with rocky outcrops.  The underlying geology is composed of rocks of the Skiddaw Group, together with an outcrop of the Borrowdale Volcanic group in the Sca Fell Range towards the centre of the area.  The volcanic rock provides rugged, spectacular scenery whilst the Skiddaw group forms smooth sided mountains such as Skiddaw.  Mineral veins run through all of the rocks in the area. Scree slopes are common.
•	U-shaped valleys, hanging valleys and corries higher on the mountains.  The sheltered U-shaped valleys have sloping sides and flat valley floors.
•	Silting of lakes has produced some large alluvial flats and fans.


FG KeyChar:
•	There are relatively few trees on the exposed higher land.  Large individual trees surround lakes.  On the more sheltered sites there are extensive areas of ancient, semi-natural broadleaved, mixed and conifer woodlands.

Edited_KeyChars:
Few trees on exposed higher land
Extensive ancient, semi-natural broadleaved, mixed and conifer woodlands on lower ground
Copses and scrub provide shelter around farmsteads
Watercourses lined with broadleaved trees
Hedgerow trees


FG KeyChar:
•	Restoration has created large tracts of simple, relatively featureless agricultural land with strips of plantation.
•	Large, open, regular arable fields are interspersed with pastures grazed by sheep and cattle and urban fringe pony paddocks on the poorer, reclaimed soils.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large, open, regular arable fields
Arable interspersed with pastures grazed by sheep and cattle
Pony paddocks on the poorer, reclaimed soils


FG KeyChar:
•	Buildings are generally of red brick and slate.

Edited_KeyChars:
Buildings generally of red brick and slate


FG KeyChar:
•	Mudflats and saltmarshes are found within the river estuaries and there are expansive sandy beaches backed by dunes.

Edited_KeyChars:
Mudflats and saltmarshes along river estuaries
Beaches and sand dunes


FG KeyChar:
•	In the southern part of the area large-scale industry, urban settlements and major road and rail routes dominate the landscape.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	In the southern part of the area large-scale industry, urban settlements and major road and rail routes dominate the landscape.


FG KeyChar:
•	Areas of open water and wetland occur in areas of mining subsidence and as features within restored landscapes; in places these have been developed as recreational landscapes.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Areas of open water and wetland occur in areas of mining subsidence and as features within restored landscapes; in places these have been developed as recreational landscapes.


FG KeyChar:
•	Fields are bounded by post and wire fences or by hedges.
•	Hedgerows are generally low and gappy, with no hedgerow trees, although hedgerow condition tends to be better in the more rural, northern areas.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large, open, regular fields
Reclaimed land is simple and relatively featureless
Fields  bounded by post and wire fences or by hedgerows which are generally low and gappy
Also some walls


FG KeyChar:
•	There are large, scattered country houses, institutions (hospital, prisons, colleges), and an extensive urban fringe effect near settlements, where pit villages have often merged.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large, scattered country houses and estate parklands
Open water and wetland in former mined areas


FG KeyChar:
•	There are large, scattered country houses, institutions (hospital, prisons, colleges), and an extensive urban fringe effect near settlements, where pit villages have often merged.
•	In the southern part of the area large-scale industry, urban settlements and major road and rail routes dominate the landscape.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	There are large, scattered country houses, institutions (hospital, prisons, colleges), and an extensive urban fringe effect near settlements, where pit villages have often merged.
•	In the southern part of the area large-scale industry, urban settlements and major road and rail routes dominate the landscape.


FG KeyChar:
•	Sweeping sandy beaches and rocky headlands remain although much of the coast is developed.
•	It is heavily influenced by large-scale opencast coal mining sites, deep mine spoil heaps and colliery restoration.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Sweeping sandy beaches and rocky headlands remain although much of the coast is developed.
•	It is heavily influenced by large-scale opencast coal mining sites, deep mine spoil heaps and colliery restoration.


FG KeyChar:
•	There are prominent blocks of mixed and coniferous woodland, many of which are still maturing, mainly on reclaimed colliery sites.
•	Broadleaved woods occur on steeper valley sides and within estate parkland.
•	The coast is open, largely treeless and windswept.
•	Restoration has created large tracts of simple, relatively featureless agricultural land with strips of plantation.

Edited_KeyChars:
Coast open, largely treeless and windswept
Broadleaved woods on steeper valley sides and in estate parkland
Blocks of mixed and coniferous woodland on colliery sites


FG KeyChar:
•	Gently rolling terraces of open arable and mixed farmland with low hedges and few trees or woodlands occupy much of the area.
•	On land restored from spoil heaps or opencast mining, pastures for sheep grazing are divided by fences or strips of mixed or coniferous plantation; these landscapes lack maturity.

Edited_KeyChars:
Mixture of improved pastures and arable cropping, especially on floodplain
Pasture for sheep grazing on reclaimed land and steeper slopes


FG KeyChar:
•	There are scattered ‘green’ villages with buildings of local sandstone and roofs of red clay pantile or slate, as well as numerous mining and industrial terraces of Victorian brick and slate, and later estate housing.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional farm buildings of local sandstone with roofs of red clay pantile or slate
Also some Victorian brick and slate


FG KeyChar:
•	The area is dominated by widespread urban and industrial development and a dense network of major road and rail links.
•	Coal mining has resulted in locally-prominent opencast extraction areas, spoil heaps and recently restored sites.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The area is dominated by widespread urban and industrial development and a dense network of major road and rail links.
•	Coal mining has resulted in locally-prominent opencast extraction areas, spoil heaps and recently restored sites.


JM KeyChar:
•	Most field systems have their origins in town field enclosures of the 16th and 17th centuries and have suffered in varying degrees from field enlargement in the 20th century.

Edited_KeyChars:
16th and 17th century irregular field patterns
Patterns enlarged in places in 20th century
Fields divided by low hawthorn hedges, fences or strips of conifer plantation
Also some stone walls


FG KeyChar:
•	The area comprises gently undulating or rolling land, underlain by sandstones, shales and coal with thick layers of glacial clays, sands and gravels, and incised by the meandering rivers Tyne and Wear and their tributaries.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The area comprises gently undulating or rolling land, underlain by sandstones, shales and coal with thick layers of glacial clays, sands and gravels, and incised by the meandering rivers Tyne and Wear and their tributaries.


FG KeyChar:
•	Higher ground offers panoramic views within which the Tyne bridges and Durham Cathedral are prominent landmarks.
•	Parkland and wooded estates surrounding castles and country houses lie along the river corridors.
•	The historic riverside cities of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Durham are strategically located at bridging points of the rivers Tyne and Wear.

Edited_KeyChars:
Rich cultural heritage and landmark buildings
Remnant rigg and furrow
Parkland estates surrounding castles and country houses often sited along rivers


FG KeyChar:
•	Settlements include the spreading conurbation of Tyneside, the planned structures of new towns, and more dispersed large towns and villages further south.
•	The area is dominated by widespread urban and industrial development and a dense network of major road and rail links.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Settlements include the spreading conurbation of Tyneside, the planned structures of new towns, and more dispersed large towns and villages further south.
•	The area is dominated by widespread urban and industrial development and a dense network of major road and rail links.


JM KeyChar:
•	Ancient oak woods are found in denes and gorges and on steep river bluffs, and there are some remnant heaths and valley mires.


FG KeyChar:
•	Urban fringe land uses such as pony grazing are also found around settlements.
•	The historic riverside cities of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Durham are strategically located at bridging points of the rivers Tyne and Wear.
•	Settlements include the spreading conurbation of Tyneside, the planned structures of new towns, and more dispersed large towns and villages further south.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Urban fringe land uses such as pony grazing are also found around settlements.
•	The historic riverside cities of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Durham are strategically located at bridging points of the rivers Tyne and Wear.
•	Settlements include the spreading conurbation of Tyneside, the planned structures of new towns, and more dispersed large towns and villages further south.


FG KeyChar:
•	The area comprises gently undulating or rolling land, underlain by sandstones, shales and coal with thick layers of glacial clays, sands and gravels, and incised by the meandering rivers Tyne and Wear and their tributaries.
•	Steep gorges and denes open up in places into broad floodplains overlooked by steep bluffs.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The area comprises gently undulating or rolling land, underlain by sandstones, shales and coal with thick layers of glacial clays, sands and gravels, and incised by the meandering rivers Tyne and Wear and their tributaries.
•	Steep gorges and denes open up in places into broad floodplains overlooked by steep bluffs.


FG KeyChar:
•	Woodland cover is generally sparse but the valley sides and bluffs are well wooded (sometimes with ancient oak woods).
•	Parkland and wooded estates surrounding castles and country houses lie along the river corridors.

Edited_KeyChars:
Ancient oak woodland on valley sides, bluffs and historic estates
Hedgerow oak, ash, sycamore and beech in valleys
Otherwise tree cover generally sparse


FG KeyChar:
•	There are large, regular fields bounded by low, clipped hedges and few hedgerow trees; most farmland is open arable.
•	The land around the larger settlements shows strong urban fringe influences such as pony paddocks, sheds and allotments.

Edited_KeyChars:
Mainly open arable with occasional improved pasture
Urban fringe land used for pony paddocks and allotments
Rough coastal grassland


FG KeyChar:
•	The traditional villages of the plateau, which still have some local stone-built houses clustered around central greens, contrast with Victorian brick-built terraces.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional, local stone-built houses
Later Victorian red-brick buildings


FG KeyChar:
•	There is widespread urban development with major infrastructure corridors, scattered mining towns and villages near the coast, and large industrial estates.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	There is widespread urban development with major infrastructure corridors, scattered mining towns and villages near the coast, and large industrial estates.


FG KeyChar:
•	There are large, regular fields bounded by low, clipped hedges and few hedgerow trees; most farmland is open arable.

Edited_KeyChars:
Large, regular fields bounded by low, clipped hawthorn hedges
Fragmented hedgerow network
Some drystone walls


FG KeyChar:
•	There is varied coastal topography of low limestone cliffs and clay slopes, sandy bays and rocky headlands, despoiled in places by tipping of colliery wastes.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	There is varied coastal topography of low limestone cliffs and clay slopes, sandy bays and rocky headlands, despoiled in places by tipping of colliery wastes.


FG KeyChar:
•	Limestone quarries are prominent on the escarpment and areas of derelict or recently restored colliery land lie close to settlements.

Edited_KeyChars:
Remnant field ponds and rigg and furrow
Ornamental parklands
More recent legacy of coal mining and limestone quarrying


FG KeyChar:
•	Remnants of Magnesian Limestone grassland occur on thin calcareous soils on steeper escarpment slopes and drift-free ridges and there are limestone plant communities in old quarries.

Edited_KeyChars:
Remnants of Magnesian Limestone grassland on escarpment
Limestone plant communities in old quarries


FG KeyChar:
•	The traditional villages of the plateau, which still have some local stone-built houses clustered around central greens, contrast with Victorian brick-built terraces.
•	There is widespread urban development with major infrastructure corridors, scattered mining towns and villages near the coast, and large industrial estates.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	The traditional villages of the plateau, which still have some local stone-built houses clustered around central greens, contrast with Victorian brick-built terraces.
•	There is widespread urban development with major infrastructure corridors, scattered mining towns and villages near the coast, and large industrial estates.


FG KeyChar:
•	This gently rolling low plateau of soft Magnesian Limestones, overlain by thick glacial boulder clays, dips south-eastwards and is incised by steep-sided denes at the coast.
•	A low west-facing escarpment is dissected in the north by minor valleys separated by spurs.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This gently rolling low plateau of soft Magnesian Limestones, overlain by thick glacial boulder clays, dips south-eastwards and is incised by steep-sided denes at the coast.
•	A low west-facing escarpment is dissected in the north by minor valleys separated by spurs.


FG KeyChar:
•	Woodland cover is low, but ancient ash woods are found in steep-sided limestone denes towards the coast and on the escarpment, and occasional broadleaved woodlands occur within parkland and country estates.

Edited_KeyChars:
Sparse woodland cover
Ancient ash, oak, wych elm and yew woods in steep-sided limestone denes
Some broadleaved estate woodlands
Generally few hedgerow trees
Coastal scrub of blackthorn, hazel and juniper


FG KeyChar:
•	On the ridges, most farmland is used for sheep and cattle grazing; in the valleys there is a mixture of arable fields and improved pastures.

Edited_KeyChars:
On the ridges, most farmland used for sheep and cattle grazing
In valleys a mixture of arable fields and improved pastures


FG KeyChar:
•	Old agricultural villages lie on the ridge tops or valley floors and have buildings of local sandstone with roofs of stone or slate.

Edited_KeyChars:
Buildings of local sandstone with roofs of stone or slate


FG KeyChar:
•	Recently reclaimed land and ongoing opencast coal mining are locally prominent in the landscape.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Recently reclaimed land and ongoing opencast coal mining are locally prominent in the landscape.


FG KeyChar:
•	The ridges are characterised by large, regular grids of dry stone walls and gappy thorn hedges, crossed by straight enclosure roads and lanes.
•	Fields in the valleys are generally smaller and bounded by hawthorn hedges with scattered hedgerow oak and ash.

Edited_KeyChars:
Ridges are characterised by large, regular grids of drystone walls and gappy thorn hedges
Fields in the valleys are generally smaller and bounded by hawthorn hedges
Ditches in valley bottoms


FG KeyChar:
•	Soft and thinly bedded sandstones, shales and coals give rise to gently rounded ridges with occasional steeper bluffs; boulder clay on lower valley slopes.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Soft and thinly bedded sandstones, shales and coals give rise to gently rounded ridges with occasional steeper bluffs; boulder clay on lower valley slopes.


FG KeyChar:
•	There are numerous relics of the mining industry.

Edited_KeyChars:
Occasional parklands and wooded estates
Relics of the mining industry
Small ponds, oxbow lakes and wetlands in former gravel workings


FG KeyChar:
•	Fragments of heathland and scrub occur on infertile acidic soils on higher ground.

Edited_KeyChars:
Fragments of heathland and scrub on infertile acidic soils on higher ground
Localised areas of upland hay meadow


FG KeyChar:
•	Old agricultural villages lie on the ridge tops or valley floors and have buildings of local sandstone with roofs of stone or slate.
•	Mining villages with Victorian terraced housing of brick or stone and slate and later estate housing are scattered across the landscape, contributing an urban fringe character, particularly in the north-eastern part of the Character.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Old agricultural villages lie on the ridge tops or valley floors and have buildings of local sandstone with roofs of stone or slate.
•	Mining villages with Victorian terraced housing of brick or stone and slate and later estate housing are scattered across the landscape, contributing an urban fringe character, particularly in the north-eastern part of the Character.


FG KeyChar:
•	This rolling low upland landscape of ridges and valleys has a strong east-west grain with panoramic views from higher ground.
•	The valleys are broad with moderate slopes and occasional narrow flood plains.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	This rolling low upland landscape of ridges and valleys has a strong east-west grain with panoramic views from higher ground.
•	The valleys are broad with moderate slopes and occasional narrow flood plains.


FG KeyChar:
•	Coniferous plantations are found on the higher valley sides and ridges.
•	Ancient oak woods are found in narrow steep-sided denes and along the banks of rivers and streams.
•	Occasional parklands and wooded estates surround small country houses.

Edited_KeyChars:
Ancient oak and oak-birch woods in narrow steep-sided denes and along river banks
Hedgerow trees generally scattered oak and ash


FG KeyChar:
•	Settlement is limited and generally on the lower land around the central upland, and the villages of Orton, Crosby Ravensworth, Ravenstonedale and Shap are historic settlements with limestone buildings and walls.

Edited_KeyChars:
Historic settlements with limestone buildings


FG KeyChar:
•	Rivers through the area include the River Lune along the southern edge, River Lyennet and River Lowther.  These are generally slow flowing as a result of their permeable limestone bedrock.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Rivers through the area include the River Lune along the southern edge, River Lyennet and River Lowther.  These are generally slow flowing as a result of their permeable limestone bedrock.


FG KeyChar:
•	The area has a strong field pattern with high limestone walls and isolated ash trees forming the field boundaries.

Edited_KeyChars:
Strong field patterns
High limestone walls form field boundaries
Occasional hedgerows


FG KeyChar:
•	A distinctive block of rolling upland farmland with limestone outcrops, scars and pavements.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	A distinctive block of rolling upland farmland with limestone outcrops, scars and pavements.


FG KeyChar:
•	There are rich archaeological resources in the area.

JM KeyChar:
•	This area has very rich archaeological and historic resources including stone circles, evidence of prehistoric settlement and cultivation, Roman roads, monastic granges, planned medieval limestone villages, associated field patterns and droveways, tower houses and deer parks.

Edited_KeyChars:
Very rich archaeological and historic resources
Evidence of prehistoric settlement and cultivation, Roman roads, monastic granges, planned medieval limestone villages, associated field patterns and droveways, tower houses and deer parks


FG KeyChar:
•	Landcover is predominantly moorland with remnant heather in the upland areas, together with limestone upland.  There are extensive limestone pavement areas and scars.

Edited_KeyChars:
Mainly moorland with remnant heather and mires in upland areas
Limestone grassland, pavements and scars
Upland hay meadows


FG KeyChar:
•	Settlement is limited and generally on the lower land around the central upland, and the villages of Orton, Crosby Ravensworth, Ravenstonedale and Shap are historic settlements with limestone buildings and walls.
•	Development has mainly included limestone quarrying and stone extraction for rockeries from limestone pavements.

Edited_KeyChars:
•	Settlement is limited and generally on the lower land around the central upland, and the villages of Orton, Crosby Ravensworth, Ravenstonedale and Shap are historic settlements with limestone buildings and walls.
•	Development has mainly included limestone quarrying and stone extraction for rockeries from limestone pavements.


FG KeyChar:
•	There is limited woodland, with sheltering clumps around farmsteads, small copses of semi-natural broadleaved trees, coniferous and mixed woodlands.  The fields have scattered individual ash trees.

Edited_KeyChars:
Limited woodland
Sheltering clumps around farmhouses
Small copses of semi-natural broadleaved trees and stream-side woodland
Scattered ash trees in fields


FG KeyChar:
•	The area is largely rough grazing for both sheep and cattle.  The higher areas have open moorland, whilst the slopes have rough grassland, heather and bracken and are used for grazing.

Edited_KeyChars:
Largely rough grazing for both sheep and cattle


FG KeyChar:
•	The area has few settlements due to the inaccessible and exposed landform.  There are limited, small hamlets and farmsteadings scattered across the area.  Traditional materials used are gritstone or sandstone with flagged roofs.

Edited_KeyChars:
Traditional building materials of gritstone or sandstone with flagged roofs


