DELIVERING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN NATIONAL TRUST LANDSCAPES: DEVELOPING A LAND CAPABILITY PROCESS KA Hearn 1 and TRE Thompson 2 1 National Trust, Heelis, Kemble Drive, Swindon, Wilts, SN2 2NA, UK, E-mail: katherine.hearn@nationaltrust.org.uk; 2 Consultant in Soil Resources, 40 Bedford Road, Stagsden, Bedford, MK43 8TP, UK SUMMARY The National Trust is implementing a Land Capability process in order to assess the most appropriate ecosystem services for any single area of its land. Availability of mapping, especially soil mapping, and interpretation of condition assessment data, and hence risk, are proving to be problematic. However, the process is a useful new way of assessing land management options and impacts, involving different disciplines and interests, and is highlighting new areas of significance for the Trust. INTRODUCTION The National Trust owns 260,000ha of land acquired for its natural beauty, historical interest and wildlife value in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Ecosystem Services are delivered in abundance. The holdings include 1000 farms; over a third of the internationally important SSSIs, some 70,000 ha of organic soils; 2% of the soil carbon in those countries; 100 million visits annually to the countryside, 65,000 archaeological and cultural sites, and surface and ground s providing supplies for millions. The Trust recognises increasing pressures on land to deliver multiple products, as outlined in Our Land for ever, for everyone http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/servlet/file/store5/item472891/version1/w-our-land.pdf This report outlines seven major functions or ecosystem services for Trust land. These are: production (food and wood); services; carbon storage; bio- and geodiversity; landscape and cultural history; access, recreation and experience, and space for development. Land management is underpinned by six main principles. These are: managing our land for multiple benefits; protecting natural resources; respecting both natural and cultural heritage; reducing our carbon footprint; responding to change, and managing our land for and with people. METHODS A Land Capability process is being developed to enable the Trust to optimise provision on any particular site. This is based on an assessment process that includes the following steps: 1. Defining initial objectives. 2. Gathering evidence (including map layering see Table 1). 329
Table 1: Checklist of main attributes relevant to Land Capability SOIL Soil type (sand, lithomorphic, brown soils, podzols, logged, peat, etc.) Soil depth Soil stoniness Soil structure (strength) Agricultural grade Organic matter and carbon content Erosion risk GEOLOGY & TOPOGRAPHY Aquifers Ground condition Landslips Floodplain Altitude Gradient Coastal erosion risk Location (accessibility, etc.) WATER Surface present (lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, estuary, coast) and condition Flooding (river, coast, flash/surface ) course connectivity Land drainage Water availability for abstraction (see also Geology) Catchment size and location of site in catchment CLIMATE Climate rainfall total, frost, wind Climate change - maximum summer Temperature forecast Climate change - winter and summer rainfall forecast DESIGNATIONS Designations Biodiversity restoration and corridor potential current land cover and habitat Tranquillity, wildness, remoteness What risks are we experiencing or are likely? 3. Assessing vulnerability (taking condition, quality and risk into account, based on site survey and condition data). Table 2: The Land Capability Process: Vulnerability Threats to soil and related resources on Kilmester Farm under 2 possible future scenarios (note these are hypothetical, as the farm has recently gone from arable to organic beef, and there is no proposal to change in the near future) Example of vulnerability and risk for a farm in Oxfordshire Threats Current state Risk under future use scenarios Inherent vulnerability Risk under current management Agricultural intensification return to maize, cereals etc or mixed Nature conservation & public access focus Threats to the soil resource Soil erosion Soil organic matter decline Soil compaction (damage to structure) Contamination Loss of soil biodiversity (tillage) Threats to from land use and management Pollution from both diffuse and point sources (nutrients, pesticides, organic matter, sediment) Damaging alterations to flows (low and flood flows) / - Threats to plant and animal communities Loss of or damage to habitat 330
To assist with risks and vulnerabilities for different soil types, risks have been identified for each major function of land for each of 27 Soilscapes units in the Soilscapes soil map classification (Soilscapes, see References). Table 3: Example of risks associated with Livestock Farming in one of the Soilscapes units Livestock farming Suitability Well Marginally Un Risks/constraints Compaction risk risk risk Type of erosion Water Wind Erosion Organic matter status Soil nutrition Medium Medium risk of loss with cultivation and intensive non-organic production risk of nutrient loss by leaching Run off related pollution Leaching related pollution Extreme Acidification risk of increasing acidity without regular liming 4. Assessing capability (judgement). There are very few hard and fast thresholds to help with deciding on Capability, so this has to be a judgement based on the information and discussion with experts and others who know the site well. In outline, examples of Capability are given in the following table. Table 4: Examples of characteristics of the most suitable (or Capable) land for the National Trust s main functions Production of food Most fertile soil; ; suitable climate Production of timber Gradients and locations suitable for harvesting; woods sited to maximise benefits for flood risk management Water services C store Biodiversity Landscape and cultural heritage Rocks holding ground for drinking supplies; soils and topography suitable for holding flood ; opportunity for coastal defence setback Peat and other soils with organic matter Infertile soils; natural vegetation; geographically linked areas available Distinctive scenery; rich history of human settlement; undeveloped; tranquillity; undisturbed soils Access, Recreation, Experience (Variously) located near urban areas; remote and topographically challenging; natural vegetation; resilient soils; Space for development Stable soils; located with transport links; land not contaminated; 5. Reviewing objectives and future management as necessary. 331
RESULTS About 20 sites have been visited in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and case studies are being prepared. The following worked example attempts a scoring system for suitability for a farm under two scenarios Table 5: Scenario A for a Sussex farm under arable and dairy There are few functions of land provided, and several high and moderate risks. A - Current use Land unit Functions of Land Primary Food Arable and dairy Whole farm Capability Potential rating degradation moderately moderate risk + Ground marginally high risk - recharge Clean supply marginally high risk - Landscape quality well moderate risk ++ Archaeological moderately high risk + record Physical access moderately moderate risk + Spiritual refreshment moderately moderate risk + Land Capability Score Combined rating 4 Comments Table 6: Scenario B for a Sussex farm under extensive grazing and woodland Many more functions can be provided, and risks are much lower. B Option 1 Land unit Functions of Land Extensive farm + woodland Whole farm Capability rating Potential degradation Primary Food well slight risk +++ Timber well slight risk +++ Ground recharge well slight risk +++ Clean supply well slight risk +++ Carbon storage in soil marginally no risk 0 Combined rating Comments 332
Greenhouse gas reduction moderately slight risk ++ Biodiversity - Habitats well no risk +++ Biodiversity - Key moderately no risk ++ species Landscape quality well no risk +++ Archaeological record moderately no risk ++ Historic landscape moderately no risk ++ Physical access well no risk +++ Contact with nature well no risk +++ Spiritual refreshment well no risk +++ Land Capability Score 35 DISCUSSION So far this system has been applied at a farm or NT holding scale, rather than a catchment scale. National Trust staff find the approach useful, but require simplification of what is by necessity a complex approach. The maps can be difficult to obtain. Some are held by the National Trust on licence and there are limits to the number of licences which can be afforded. Others are publicly available, but difficult to access in remote Trust offices with poor internet connections. Accurate soil mapping is key, as the Capability of holdings is often defined in different sectors by different soil types. Soil mapping is held on licence, is generally at a small scale, and may be out of date. Quality and condition data can be difficult to interpret. Furthermore, it may be hard to estimate the difference changing land-use can make on a site of a limited size in an extensive catchment or on a large ground body. For example, in floodplains peat soils will have a prime function for carbon storage; alluvial soils will have many options. However, the holistic process is valuable, and has resulted in new and significant features of National Trust properties coming to the fore. REFERENCES Soilscapes Soilscapes is a much simplified, interactive web-based version of the National Soils Map for England and Wales provided by the National Soil Resources Institute via www.landis.org.uk 333