JCA No. 31 - Morecambe Coast and Lune Estuary
Overall comments (note 1)
This area, squeezed between the sea and the Bowland Fells, is oriented towards the coast, but also has very mixed land uses and landscape types, including very open as well as very urban areas. There could be limited opportunities for biomass crops but these would need to be carefully considered to avoid adverse impact on this vulnerable and very visible landscape.
| Generic landscape characteristics (note 2) | Key landscape characteristics (note 3) | Potential effects (PA, N, PB) (note 4) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRC | Miscanthus | ||
| Topography (note 5) | Glacial deposits of boulder clay and marine alluvium form a generally low lying landscape. A Millstone Grit outcrop is found at Heysham Head, creating cliffs and a rocky foreshore. Drumlins characterise much of the area - drowned in places where they meet the coast. |
N - There are several landscape sub-types within this small character area, and on flatter lower areas there may be limited opportunities for SRC. Planting should avoid the tops of drumlins, reclaimed salt marsh and the coastline. |
N - There are several landscape sub-types within this small character area, and on flatter lower areas there may be limited opportunities for Miscanthus. Planting should avoid the tops of drumlins, reclaimed land and coastline. |
| Woodland (note 6) | Trees are scarce in this low landscape, generally confined to low, often wind sculpted trees and bushes along field boundaries. |
PA - There are very few opportunities for mitigation of SRC, which could appear very alien in the coastal plain. |
N - There are very few opportunities for mitigation of Miscanthus in the landscape through trees and woodland. |
| Boundary features (note 7) | The large rectilinear pastoral fields are defined by drainage ditches, low hedgerows and, in some higher areas, drystone walls. |
PA - Boundary features are low or invisible from a distance, and SRC would stand out in the landscape |
PA - Boundary features are low or invisible from a distance, and Miscanthus would stand out in the landscape |
| Agriculture (note 8) | The inland plain comprises improved pasture which is grazed by dairy cattle. The poorer draining clays and coastal marsh areas are grazed by cattle and sheep. Drained areas of moss and coastal plain are under arable cultivation or intensive market gardening. |
N/PB - Areas under arable cultivation may be able to accommodate some SRC |
N/PB - Areas under arable cultivation may be able to accommodate some Miscanthus, particularly near settlement where there is a more complex land use pattern |
| Settlement and development (note 9) | The area includes the former county town of Lancaster and the seaside town of Morecombe. It also has a range of industrial influences including iron work, landfilling and the nuclear power station at Heysham. Caravan parks and other holiday related developments are found along the coast. The area is a major communications corridor including roads, railways and canal. |
PB - Urban fringe areas including holiday parks and industrial installations have greater capacity to visually accommodate SRC, although it could adversely affect the character of remnants of unspoilt countryside under development pressure. |
PB - Urban fringe areas including holiday parks and industrial installations have greater capacity to visually accommodate Miscanthus, although it could adversely affect the character of remnants of unspoilt countryside under development pressure |
| Semi-natural habitats (note 10) | Most areas of moss have been drained and improved for agriculture, though some areas of moss, comprising raised mire, remain near Heysham and are valued semi-natural habitats. |
PA - SRC should not be planted where it could affect remaining semi-natural habitats. |
PA - Unsuitable for Miscanthus |
| Historic features (note 11) | There is a history of mossland reclamation and private enclosure dating from the 12th century, with larger scale enclosure from the 17th century, including pumping to drain the lowest areas. Lime kilns and former coastal features may be found inland. |
N - SRC should not be planted where it would damage or obscure evidence of former land uses |
N - Miscanthus should not be planted where it would damage or obscure evidence of former land uses |
| Rivers and coasts (note 12) | Along the coast, the foreshore comprises extensive intertidal mudflats and sand banks, backed by saltmarsh with a seaward edge characterised by dendretic creeks and low cliffs. The Lune estuary extends inland to Lancaster. |
PA - Coastal areas are unsuitable for SRC |
PA - Coastal areas are unsuitable for Miscanthus |
| Views and inter-visibity (note 13) | This is a low-lying landscape with wide uninterrupted views over the coastal plain, shore and sea. Inland, low drumlins can limit views, and beyond, rising land provides panoramic views. |
N - The intermittent impact of SRC on views would need to be assessed for each locality. |
N – The intermittent impact of Miscanthus on views would need to be assessed for each locality. |
The information contained in the above table and accompanying footnotes has been produced by Natural England, on behalf of Defra, to assess opportunities and optimum sitings of energy crops
1. Overall comments
This section summarises the key characteristics of the JCA and the potential impacts and issues concerned with energy crop planting. It aims to provide an overall indication of the suitability for biomass crop establishment. In JCAs where the physical characteristics are so extreme that it is unlikely that land managers will want to plant biomass crops this is generally noted.
2. Generic landscape characteristics
The headings are based on those used in Natural England’s Countryside Quality Counts (CQC) project, with the addition of ‘topography’ and ‘views and inter-visibility’. They provide a way of breaking down the physical and visual qualities that help to make up the landscape. The potential impacts of energy crops have been assessed against this common framework.
3. Key landscape characteristics
This section aims to highlight for each of the generic categories, the specific landscape features and characteristics within each JCA that may be relevant to the growing of energy crops
4. Potential effects
This section summarises the main potential effects of SRC and miscanthus on each of the key landscape characteristics and features. In making the assessment we considered both the presence or absence of crops, and the the effects of scale and pattern in the landscape. Where the impacts are likely to differ between SRC and miscanthus this has been noted. Although it is very difficult to estimate impacts at such a general level we have attempted to assess whether the landscape impact could be beneficial, neutral or adverse, as follows:
- PB - Potentially beneficial
- N - Neutral
- PA - Potentially adverse
5. Topography
Topography, or landform, is often one of the main influences on landscape character, particularly in hilly or upland areas. We have summarised the overall topography of each area, together with an explanation of any specific or exceptional areas or major landform types. Topography will influence how obtrusive energy crops might be in some areas, or how they might fit in well in others.
6. Woodland
This covers all types of woodland, from ancient and semi-natural woodlands to commercial plantations, and includes broadleaved, conifer and mixed woodlands. As well as woodland type, we are interested in the pattern and scale of woodlands and how woodland cover varies across the JCA. In some areas there are close associations between specific types of woodland and particular landforms. Issues of concern include how biomass crops might contribute to or impact on local patterns of woodland cover, and what layouts or scale might be appropriate.
7. Boundary features
These include all forms of traditional boundaries, including hedgerows, stone walls and ditches. We are also interested in field patterns, particularly where these are of historic importance or are distinctive to the area. Issues considered included whether the establishment, growth or harvesting of energy crops could have an impact on traditional and valuable boundaries, either through direct damage (eg to allow access for farm machinery) or by obscuring or affecting the integrity of existing field patterns.
8. Agriculture
Agriculture includes arable, pasture (livestock), horticulture and mixed farming. In areas that are already intensively cropped, energy crops are likely to be less of an issue, and the impacts could be beneficial or neutral depending on scale. Adverse impacts are more likely in pastoral areas, particularly in low intensity, unimproved grassland areas. In areas where there is an existing underlying trend from grass to arable, the assessment has taken account of any existing landscape and land management priorities that may exist.
9. Settlement and development.
This covers population centres, roads, other infrastructure and mineral workings. In most cases energy crops are unlikely to have a significant impacts. However, in some cases there may be issues concerning the scale or pattern of planting where this would impact on the character of the local road network, or significantly affect the setting of towns or villages.
10. Semi-natural habitats
In this section we are concerned with the presence or absence, scale, and pattern of semi-natural habitats, other than woodland which is covered under 6. In general, many impacts will only be apparent at the detailed site level, which is outside the scope of this exercise. We have only commented where it is likely that biomass crops would impact on semi-natural habitats that are an integral part of the landscape.
11. Historic features.
Historic features refer not just to visible monuments and remains, but also historic areas such as parks and battlefields. As well as the presence or absence of features, we are interested in their density and pattern of distribution, and whether they are above or below ground. Specific, extensive archaeological or historic landscapes are noted. Issues considered included whether planting would obscure or damage historic sites, or whether it would affect the setting or integrity of a historic site. It is important to note that historic remains are extremely widespread and many have not been fully recorded. At this scale we have only referred to obvious sites and concentrations of sites. More detailed site assessment will normally be necessary.
12. Rivers and coasts
Water plays a key role in determining landform and defining landscape character. Issues of concern include whether energy crops could obscure watercourses or disrupt drainage patterns, and any hydrological and coastal management issues.
13. Views and inter-visibility
In some JCAs, views in, out or across an area are a key characteristic of the landscape. These may be broad, sweeping views or local, intimate ones. A key concern will be whether biomass crops would obscure or otherwise have an impact on the nature of these views.
Page last modified:
15 March, 2007
Page published: 10 December, 2002