JCA No. 129 - Thames Basin Heaths
Overall comments (note 1)
Open unenclosed land between heavily populated towns and smaller settlements. The area is recognised as an internationally rare habitat with a high conservation value, 17% is in the North Wessex Downs AONB. Potential for biomass crop plantations around large towns, road networks, gravel extraction sites and possibly in the river valleys or the wooded areas of the west. The poor quality acidic soil, predominantly to the west, does not lend itself to biomass plantation.
| Generic landscape characteristics (note 2) | Key landscape characteristics (note 3) | Potential effects (PA, N, PB) (note 4) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRC | Miscanthus | ||
| Topography (note 5) | A flat to gently sloping plateau with steep sided river valleys. |
PB - There is potential in the lower-lying flatter valleys for SRC. |
PB There is potential, particularly on the western fringes, for Miscanthus. |
| Woodland (note 6) | Large coniferous plantations and broadleaved mixed woodland. Belts of woodland along roads and large wooded (low density) gardens. |
PB – The existing pattern has potential to help accommodate SRC into the wooded feel of the west. |
PB – The existing pattern has potential to help accommodate Miscanthus. |
| Boundary features (note 7) | Small - medium sized irregularly shaped fields -extensively hedged with oak, holly, ash or hazel (south west). Unenclosed heathland and coniferous forestry (West). Hedges reinforced, or post and rail fencing at riding schools and stud farms of the urban fringe. |
PB – Areas with good hedgerows. Avoid unenclosed heathland. |
PB – Areas with good hedgerows. Avoid unenclosed heathland. |
| Agriculture (note 8) | Small-scale intensive pasture with widespread horse grazing. Little productive arable land due to poor soils. |
PA/N – SRC could appear out of place in predominantly pastoral landscapes. Mixed farming land may provide scope for introduction. |
PA/N - Miscanthus could appear out of place in predominantly pastoral landscapes. Mixed farming land may provide scope for introduction. |
| Settlement and development (note 9) | Military installations are significant - Aldermaston and airfields at Farnborough / Greenham Common. |
Planting by permission of the MoD. |
Planting by permission of the MoD. |
Major transport routes (M3, M4, M25 and A34). Winding roads / lanes link villages and farming settlements. Large towns heavily populated and developed (Ascot, Camberley, Farnborough and Woking). Sand and gravel extraction in the Kennet Valley. |
PB/N - Potential for mitigation. Harvesting may impact on the character of the smaller roads and lanes. |
PB/N - Potential for mitigation. Harvesting may impact on the character of the smaller roads and lanes. |
|
| Semi-natural habitats (note 10) | An internationally rare habitat with a high conservation value. Wet pasture, reed beds and large areas of heathland – heathland loss due to housing / suburban development, plantations, scrub woodland and nurseries. |
PA - Where semi-natural habitats would be affected –avoid further loss of heathland. SRC would introduce enclosure into an open landscape, in need of conservation. |
PA - Where semi-natural habitats would be affected –avoid further loss of heathland. Miscanthus would introduce enclosure into an open landscape, in need of conservation. |
| Historic features (note 11) | Numerous prehistoric, Roman and medieval settlements. Henges, long / round barrows, ancient field systems, lynchets, early medieval hunting forests (Forest of Evesley and Bracknell Forest) and flood meadows and mills. Many more potential sites of archaeological interest. |
Avoid known archaeological sites and their settings, and respect historic landscape character. |
Avoid known archaeological sites and their settings, and respect historic landscape character. |
| Rivers and coasts (note 12) | Kennet Valley (south) comprises wetland vegetation. Lush water meadow landscapes. Regular flooding of the river Kennet in winter restricts land use to permanent pasture. |
PB/N – Could address the need for management of willow along watercourses. Retain and manage the pastoral waterside landscapes of the valleys. |
PA – Not suited to the regularly flooding of the open pasture landscape of the valleys. |
| Views and inter-visibity (note 13) | Public access to the smaller grass dominated heathlands. Restricted intimate views of southwest due to large trees. |
PA/ N– Would restrict open views of the heathland landscape. The south-west may provide an opportunity for SRC within an already tree enclosed area. |
PA/N – Would restrict open views of the heathland landscape. The south-west possible opportunity for Miscanthus within an already enclosed area Change of character. |
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: 11 May 2007
Page published: 11 May 2007