JCA No. 59 - Wirral
Overall comments (note 1)
The Wirral shares some characteristics with the nearby Cheshire Plain, Cheshire Sandstone Ridge, and Mersey Conurbation, but its unique character is due to its being a peninsula, with outward views from coast and sandstone ridges. Its physical characteristics lend themselves to limited biomass crop planting in low-lying areas, but the countryside is small scale, highly valued by urban population and at the same time vulnerable to urban pressures, and in practice opportunities for planting without adverse impact in some respect may be very limited.
| Generic landscape characteristics (note 2) | Key landscape characteristics (note 3) | Potential effects (PA, N, PB) (note 4) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRC | Miscanthus | ||
| Topography (note 5) | Low lying undulating plain punctuated by wooded sandstone ridges. |
PB/PA - Lowlying landscape with some limited potential to accommodate SRC. Ridges and their settings should be avoided |
PB/PA - Lowlying landscape with some limited potential to accommodate Miscanthus. Ridges and their settings should be avoided |
| Woodland (note 6) | Predominantly mixed woodland with high proportion of mature pines concentrated on sandstone ridges. |
PB/PA - Woodland within low lying areas only would help to accommodate SRC in the landscape, but ridges should be avoided. |
PB/PA - Woodland within low lying areas only would help to accommodate SRC in the landscape, but ridges should be avoided. |
| Boundary features (note 7) | Medium sized field pattern with intermittent clipped hedgerows. Some red sandstone walls. Former marshland with geometric field pattern bounded by ditches. |
N – SRC would dominate the hedgerow pattern but at some stages of the coppice cycle hedges would help to screen it. Red sandstone walls are valuable in terms of local distinctiveness and SRC should not be planted where they would be screened. |
PB - Hedgerows would help to contain and screen Miscanthus for at least part of the year. There could be opportunities for enhancement by hedgerow tree planting. Red sandstone walls are locally distinctive and should not be hidden by Miscanthus planting. |
| Agriculture (note 8) | Mixed agricultural land, market gardens, extensive horsiculture. |
PB - Varied land use pattern has potential to accommodate SRC |
PB - Varied land use pattern has potential to accommodate Miscanthus |
| Settlement and development (note 9) | Commuter belt, with towns and villages extended and coalescing due to suburban development, busy roads, set in rural matrix with country estates, scattered farmsteadings. |
N – Urban fringe landscape with remnant parkland is under considerable development and other pressures, and there is potential for adverse impact on remaining traditional countryside. |
N – Urban fringe landscape with remnant parkland is under considerable development and other pressures, and there is potential for adverse impact on remaining traditional countryside. |
| Semi-natural habitats (note 10) | Intertidal mud/sand flats and salt marshes along the Dee estuary, extensive dune systems at Meols, extensive areas of heathland associated with sandstone outcrops. |
PA - These habitats are unsuitable, as well as sensitive to changes in character. |
PA - These habitats are unsuitable, as well as sensitive to changes in character |
| Historic features (note 11) | Country estates, designed landscapes, former port at Parkgate |
PA - SRC could potentially lead to weakening and degradation of historic landscape character. |
PA - SRC could potentially lead to weakening and degradation of historic landscape character. |
| Rivers and coasts (note 12) | Variety of coastal landscapes, with silted Dee estuary, sandstone cliffs at Thurstaston, dunes, low-lying reclaimed marshes |
PA - Coastal areas are popular visitor destinations but vulnerable to changes in character. SRC should be avoided near coastline. |
PA - Coastal areas are popular visitor destinations but vulnerable to changes in character. Miscanthus should be avoided near coastline. |
| Views and inter-visibity (note 13) | Excellent outward views from sandstone outcrops to Mersey estuary, Merseyside, Dee estuary and North Wales. Inward views usually distant, across estuaries. |
PA - SRC should not be planted in any locations where visitors’ or residents’ viewpoints are affected. |
PA - Miscanthus should not be planted in any locations where visitors’ or residents’ viewpoints are affected |
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