JCA No. 155 - Carnmenellis
Overall comments (note 1)
Dominated by a high granite plateau that retains some unenclosed moorland but much land enclosed into small pasture fields surrounded by Cornish hedges. Watercourses create shallow valleys radiating out across the lower ground. The topography, lack of woodland and dominance of low Cornish hedges creates an open landscape with wide views across it and to surrounding areas and the coast. Rich historic landscape including World Heritage Site status associated with the remains of the tin and copper mining industry.Energy crops could be accommodated in the lower more fertile areas to the south where horticulture is mixed with stock farming, but only on a small scale that respects and does not mask the existing field pattern. In a few places SRC could link to existing woodland and scrub within valleys, again on a small scale. There may also be opportunities around the urban fringe where settlements butt up to the JCA boundary.
| Generic landscape characteristics (note 2) | Key landscape characteristics (note 3) | Potential effects (PA, N, PB) (note 4) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRC | Miscanthus | ||
| Topography (note 5) | Undulating landform dissected by small streams radiating from the highest points on an irregular plateau where occasional exposed outcrops of the granite remain on the highest points. Where watercourses leave the granite uplands for lower slate areas, they cut steeper valleys. |
Soils and exposure limit potential yields on upland plateau. Also impractical on steep edge slopes and in steeper valleys. |
Soils and exposure limit potential yields on upland plateau. Also impractical on steep edge slopes and in steeper valleys. |
| Woodland (note 6) | Trees and woodland uncommon due to exposure and past use by mining industry
Wet willow woods in higher and shallower valleys, more deciduous woodland in lower areas where valleys are steeper. |
N/PA – Planting would introduce increasing enclosure in a predominantly open and non-wooded landscape |
PA – Soils likely to be too poor and valley slopes too steep. Planting would introduce increasing enclosure in a predominantly open and non-wooded landscape |
| Boundary features (note 7) | Central open moorland surrounded by pattern of small fields with granite Cornish hedges .A mix of ancient irregular fields and a later more regular rectilinear pattern is found. | PA – planting would obscure field patterns and create enclosure in a predominantly open landscape. | PA/N – planting would obscure field patterns and create enclosure in an open landscape. Planting in larger more regular fields may be appropriate if not in large contiguous blocks. |
| Agriculture (note 8) | Pasture on higher ground and edges of plateau, some open moorland and rough grassland but most enclosed in small fields. | PA – a loss of pasture or moorland would alter the landscape character. | PA – a loss of pasture or moorland would alter the landscape character. |
| On the lower land to the south and fringes of the area a transition to more intensive dairy farming with some areas of horticulture on more gentle and fertile slopes. | N – small areas particularly linked to existing woodland. Larger areas of planting would create more enclosure in the landscape. | N – within mixed areas opportunities for planting on a scale that compliments existing landscape & land use patterns | |
| Settlement and development (note 9) | Dispersed settlement pattern of hamlets and farmsteads and villages mainly of recent industrial (mining) origin. Some large urban areas on fringes. | PB – opportunities may exist on the urban fringe to soften and screen elements of the larger settlements abutting the area. | PB – opportunities may exist on the urban fringe to soften and screen elements of the larger settlements abutting the area. |
| Linked by narrow lanes either winding or straight to follow the mixed field patterns. | PA – movement of harvesting equipment may be difficult. | ||
| Semi-natural habitats (note 10) | Heathland, boggy mires, rough grassland and scrub on higher parts and steeper slopes of granite plateau and valleys. | PA – where planting would result in loss of heathland, scrub and rough grassland. | PA – where planting would result in loss of heathland, scrub and rough grassland. |
| Historic features (note 11) | A rich historic landscape ranging from Neolithic settlements and ancient field systems to extensive remnants of the 19th Century tin and copper mining industry. | PA – Avoid these and other known archaeological sites and their settings, masking ancient field patterns, and respect historic landscape patterns | PA – Avoid these and other known archaeological sites and their settings, masking ancient field patterns, and respect historic landscape patterns |
| Rivers and coasts (note 12) | Streams and rivers radiate out from the upland plateau forming long and gentle often wooded/scrubbed valleys. | N - if ‘natural’ scrub and woodland in valleys not impacted and landform not masked. | N - if ‘natural’ scrub and woodland in valleys not impacted and landform not masked. |
| Views and inter-visibity (note 13) | Expansive views from higher ground. Open landscape also facilitates long views from within lower undulating areas, unless enclosed by mature hedges, areas of scrub or in the wooded valleys. | PA/N – on higher ground and more open areas crops would restrict views. Less impact within sheltered valleys or on urban fringe, although views out from the settlements may be affected | PA/N – on higher ground and more open areas crops would restrict views. Less impact within sheltered valleys or on urban fringe, although views out from the settlements may be 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