4 case studies - natural england

71Geological conservation

This chapter presents a series of case studies based on actual experience in conserving

geological sites. At least one case study is presented for each of the Earth Science Conservation

Classification (ESCC) site types. The case studies were chosen to provide practical illustrations

of the range of issues associated with geological site conservation in general, rather than to

highlight specific sites.

Most or all of the sites here are in private ownership and their use as case studies does not

imply that they are open to public access. In all cases, permission for access should be sought

from the owner, occupier or appropriate authority.

4 Case studies

Former sea-cliffs and adjacent development at Black Rock, Brighton, East Sussex. Colin Prosser/English Nature

72

Conservation issues discussed here

• The importance of early discussions with local planningauthorities and quarry operators to ensure that geological conservation is considered with respect to regular quarry operations and quarry restoration schemes.

• The use of planning conditions for the protection of geologicalsites.

Site descriptions

Barrington Chalk Pit SSSI isdesignated for Cretaceousstratigraphy, exposing theuppermost part of the Gault Clay,the Cambridge Greensand, the WestMelbury Chalk Formation, theTotternhoe Stone and part of theZig Zag Chalk Formation. The site isparticularly important as the onlyremaining exposure of theCambridge Greensand, renownedfor its large and diverse vertebrateand invertebrate fossil faunas.

Broadway Quarry, Worcestershire,exposes a series of limestones,sandstones and mudstones of LowerJurassic age. The site is not an SSSIbut is locally important as the typesection of the Harford Member, a sequence of mudstones andsandstones, overlying the ScottsquarMember of the Birdlip LimestoneFormation, which is not as well-exposed elsewhere in theCotswolds. The quarry operatorbrought the site to the attention ofthe local RIGS group and part of thesite is to be designated as a RIGS.

4.1 Barrington Chalk Pit and Broadway QuarryActive quarries (EA) in Cambridgeshire and Worcestershire

Management issues andsolutions

At both quarries, the primaryobjective is to ensure that thefeatures of interest remainexposed and accessible throughoutthe working lives of the quarriesand when extraction ceases.

At Barrington Chalk Pit,principles for conserving theinterest at the site duringcontinued quarrying operationsand restoration have been agreedbetween English Nature,Cambridgeshire County Counciland the quarry operators. As partof a phased restoration, a benchedconservation face, with routesallowing access to the fullsuccession, will be left atrestoration. However, the floor ofthe pit, where the CambridgeGreensand is exposed, is subjectto flooding. While extractioncontinues, this is managed bypumping. Flooding will become aproblem once extraction ceases.This means that the retention andmaintenance of exposures of theCambridge Greensand willbecome problematic at that time.

Broadway Quarry has planningpermission for an extension thatwill lead to the loss of the existingexposure of the Harford Member,for which the site is geologicallyimportant. However, the quarryextension will provide furtherexposures of the Harford Memberand will also provide theopportunity to design and retain aconservation section within therestored site. Liaison between thequarry operators and the localRIGS group has resulted in theinclusion of a planning conditionrequiring the creation of aconservation section about 200 m

in length to be retained atrestoration. The section will bedesigned so that it will beaccessible for study and isproposed for a RIGS designation.The conservation section is to becreated after completion ofextraction. There are plans toinvolve the local RIGS group inmanaging the exposures andauthorising future access forinterested parties.

Conservation outcome

Liaison between conservationorganisations, local planningauthorities and quarry operatorshave played a vital role insecuring the future of thegeological interests on these sites.This has been achieved throughincluding conservation faceswithin the restoration plans,supported through conditions setout in the mineral permissions.

Important fossil finds at Barrington Chalk Pit SSSI,where the quarry operators have a keen awareness ofthe scientific significance of the geology. CEMEX



• Use of a grant to conserve, enhance and promote importantgeological features.

• Using site interpretation to assist site management.

Site description

Clee Hill Quarries, Shropshire, areoperated by Hanson Aggregates.The quarries expose the doleriticClee Hill Sill, intruded during thelate Carboniferous. Clee HillQuarries include the currentlydormant Incline Quarry and theactive Dhustone Quarry. Bothquarries provide outstandingexposures of the Clee Hill Sill.


The Aggregates LevySustainability Fund (ALSF) wasintroduced in April 2002 as ameans of distributing some of therevenue raised through theAggregates Levy, a tax on primaryaggregate extraction applicableacross Great Britain. Ten per centof the money raised through theAggregates Levy is used tofinance the Sustainability Fund,which is distributed through grantsby a number of organisations,including English Nature.

Grants have been awarded tosupport local projects in Englandthat increase or promotebiodiversity and/or geodiversity.Grant provision for geologicalprojects aims to support themanagement, conservation andinterpretation of geological

4.2 Clee Hill QuarriesActive and disused quarries (EA and ED) in Shropshire

features associated withaggregate quarrying, aswell as increasing accessfor the purposes ofscientific research,education, recreation andtourism.

In 2003, HansonAggregates submitted anALSF grant applicationaimed at providing thegeneral public, schoolsand geological interestgroups with anopportunity to learn aboutthe geology of Clee HillQuarries. This was to beachieved through theconstruction of safefootpaths and viewingplatforms, withinterpretation panelsproviding informationabout the geology andhistory of mineral extraction at thesite. The aim of the project was topromote a better understanding of the links between geology,quarrying, restoration andgeological conservation. This was to appeal to both local andnational interest groups.

The grant application wassuccessful. Design work wasundertaken by Hanson’s in-housegeologists, landscape architectsand estates management team.

The viewing platforms, withinterpretation boards, were openedin July 2004. The platformsprovide good views of thegeological exposures, but fenceshave been installed to restrictaccess to unsafe areas. Theinterpretation boards provideinformation about the geology andhistory of mineral extraction atClee Hill and were developed by

Hanson, with several partners,including the ShropshireGeological Society, ShropshireRIGS Group, Shropshire WildlifeTrust and South ShropshireDistrict Council.

The viewing platforms are usedregularly by schools and variousgroups, including the local RIGSgroup, amateur geologicalsocieties, academic institutionsand local residents.


The viewing platforms at CleeHill Quarries are a good exampleof how a mineral operator, withlocal partnership, can secure agrant to help provide the localcommunity and specialist groupswith an educational facility thatpromotes geology and helpspeople to understand mineralextraction processes.

The opening of the viewing platform with interpretation panel in 2004.Hanson Aggregates

74


• The creation of an alternative geological conservation sectionadjacent to a quarry which is being landfilled.

• Improved safety and access to a geological interest.

Site description

Asham Quarry SSSI is designated forits late-glacial and post-glacialdeposits which are important inunderstanding late Quaternaryenvironmental changes in south-eastern England. The post-glacialdeposits are unusually thick and arebelieved to provide a nearcontinuous record of environmentaland landscape changes. Molluscanfaunas contained within them haveallowed a particularly fullreconstruction of Holocene palaeo-environmental conditions.The deposits are also important forcarbon dating. The Quaternarydeposits overlie the CretaceousChalk for which the site wasworked. Chalk extraction left adeep quarry and permission tolandfill the site was given whenworks ceased.

4.3 Asham QuarryA disused quarry (ED) in East Sussex

The alternative section at Asham Quarry SSSI, constructed by Haul Waste. Natalie Bennett/English Nature


Landfilling from the base of theformer quarry up to the level ofthe Quaternary deposits wouldhave conserved the special interestof the site and made access to thedeposits easier. There were,however, concerns regarding theloss of the extra void space at thetop of the quarry for landfill andover the safety of the site,particularly where landfillingoperations are ongoing. Therewere also concerns over the visualimpact of leaving a void space inopen countryside within the SouthDowns Area of OutstandingNatural Beauty (AONB).

The developer, the local planningauthority and English Natureagreed an alternative solutionwhich involved complete infillingof the existing void and creationof a new exposure adjacent to thelandfill, as mitigation for infillingthe original quarry. The creationof the new exposure was fundedby the developer and was sitedadjacent to the original sections,but in an area of relief which

renders the excavation lessvisually intrusive.

The section took two days toconstruct and consists of anamphitheatre-shaped void, whichis around 3 m deep at its maximumdepth. Fencing surrounds theexposed section, with a gate andsteps for entry. Access is obtainedby permission from the site office.The new section also provides asafe environment for studying thedeposits.

Maintenance of the site requiresvegetation management andoccasional re-exposure of the soft sediment, but deterioration of the site has been slow andmanagement works haveconsequently been minimal todate.


Negotiations between the mineraloperator, local planning authorityand English Nature ensured thecreation of an alternativeexposure, securing the geologicalinterest at the site, and leaving thequarry void available for landfill.



• Integrating conflicting statutory conservation interests.

• A partnership approach to secure the conservation of geological and archaeological interests.

• Creation of a conservation face as part of quarry restoration.

Site description

Eartham Pit, Boxgrove SSSI, is arecently disused sand and gravel pit inWest Sussex. It is designated as anSSSI for a complex sequence ofQuaternary sediments, containingevidence of a number of differentclimatic intervals, which occur beside afossil chalk cliff. The site is alsoimportant for Quaternary faunalremains associated with the cliff andbeach sequence. Certain horizonswithin the sequence contain anextensive interglacial small mammalfauna, while large mammals, othervertebrates, molluscs and pollen alsooccur. In addition, the site isarchaeologically important as a rarePalaeolithic human occupation siteand has yielded numerous artefactsand early human remains. The site isconsidered to be of major importancein piecing together the Quaternaryrecord of Britain and NorthernEurope.


While Eartham Pit was stilloperational, it became subject to theROMP (Review of Old MineralPermissions) process under theEnvironment Act (1995), which

4.4 Eartham Pit, BoxgroveA disused quarry (ED) in West Sussex

identified the need for ongoingscientific recording as extractionprogressed. Consequently, geologicaland archaeological recording havetaken place throughout extractionand, more recently, restoration of thesite. This ongoing research is vital inorder to gain maximum scientificbenefit because material wouldotherwise be lost through thequarrying and restoration processes.

Since the quarry ceased to operate,the main management issue is relatedto the different approaches toconserving geological andarchaeological interests on the site,which in this case are conflicting. Ingeneral, it is necessary to maintainpermanent exposures of geologicalfeatures for ongoing study,particularly on a site like Eartham,where the environmental context ofthe sedimentological andpalaeontological interests is important.In contrast, the normal approach toarchaeological conservation on anartefact site like Eartham is to burythe interest features to preventunauthorised removal of specimensand degradation.

There is recognition by EnglishNature and English Heritage, which are responsible for the archaeologicalinterest, that the most vulnerableinterests at the site dictate its futuremanagement. It is difficult to avoiddisturbing or damaging thearchaeological interest with ageological conservation section, asthe archaeological artefacts arewidespread across the site.

However, a revised minerals planningpermission includes a conditionrequiring provision of a geologicalconservation section as part of therestoration. A location for this, in anarchaeologically less sensitive part ofthe site, has now been identified.


Recording of the geological interesthas taken place as quarrying hasprogressed. The need for bothrecording and a final geologicalconservation section is recognisedas part of the minerals planningpermission. Having agreed anapproach with the local planningauthority and English Heritage,English Nature and the operator arecurrently working in partnership toidentify an area in which to place ageological conservation section aspart of the final restoration of thesite.

Further information

BENNETT, N. 2000. Best of bothworlds. Earth Heritage, 14, 8–9.

ROBERTS, M. 1998. MiddlePleistocene sediments andarchaeology at Eartham Quarry,Boxgrove, West Sussex. In: TheQuaternary of Kent and Sussex, A Field Guide, 187–213.Quaternary Research Association.

Eartham Pit, Boxgrove SSSI. Natalie Bennett/English Nature

76

Conservation issuesdiscussed here

• The use of partnerships and management plans in securing positive conservation outcomes.

Site descriptions

Both sites discussed here are disused quarries and geologicalSSSIs. The quarries lie withinforestry plantations and are ownedand managed by Forest Enterprise.

Lime Craig Quarry, Stirling, exposesthe Dounans Limestone and otherelements of the tectonicallydisrupted Highland Border Complex.The evidence provided by fossilsfrom the Dounans Limestone, aswell as other units belonging to theHighland Border Complex, is ofgreat importance for the dating ofthese rocks and for understandingthe relationships of the HighlandBorder Complex to adjacentterranes.

Teindland Quarry, Moray, is a keysite for interpreting and dating late Quaternary events andenvironmental change in Scotland.It is one of a few sites in Scotlandwith deposits dating from the lastinterglacial, and provides crucialevidence for environmentalconditions at this time.

4.5 Lime Craig and Teindland QuarriesDisused quarries (ED) in Stirling and Moray, Scotland

Clearance works in progress at Teindland Quarry. John Gordon/Scottish Natural Heritage


At Lime Craig quarry,encroachment of trees up to andonto the quarry faces is the mainmanagement issue. The seedingand growth of saplings on thequarry faces results in the interestfeatures becoming obscured,limiting both visibility andphysical access to the exposures.

At Teindland Quarry, the growthof gorse and the accumulation ofspoil has obscured the exposures.The penetration of roots fromtrees growing above the faces also disrupts the geologicalfeatures and there is a potentialrisk of further damage from treesbeing blown over in strong winds.Occasional fly-tipping also occurs.

In order to positively conserve thegeological features at the quarries,management plans were agreedbetween Scottish Natural Heritage(SNH) and Forest Enterprise. AtLime Craig Quarry, the

management plan addresses theremoval of young trees from bothon and around the exposures. AtTeindland Quarry, themanagement plan includesremoval of scrub by hand, fellingof trees close to the quarry faces,limited removal of spoil, accessimprovements to the site anderection of fencing to prevent fly-tipping. Funding for the workis provided jointly by ForestEnterprise and SNH.


Both sites demonstrate working in partnership with landowners.The development of managementplans for both sites has ensuredthat Forest Enterprise is now moreaware of the importance of thegeological interests at the sites andis actively involved in carryingout long-term management.



• The need for vegetation clearance and re-excavation to maintain soft sediment exposures in disused quarries.

• Partnership approaches to site management.

Site description

Robin’s Wood Hill Quarry SSSI is adisused quarry in the Robin’s WoodCountry Park, Gloucestershire. Thesite is designated for Jurassicstratigraphy and palaeontology. Itis considered to contain the bestinland section through the MiddleLias in Great Britain and has yieldeda diverse range of fossils.

Weybourne Town Pit SSSI is adisused lime pit in Norfolk. It is thetype locality for the QuaternaryMarly Drift, a distinctive chalk-richtill found in Norfolk.

Both sites are visited by universitiesand geology groups from aroundthe country and it is important tomaintain the exposures in goodcondition for further study.


Both sites have been disused forabout 50 years and the exposureshad become seriously degradedthrough vegetation growth andslumping of the relatively softfaces. In addition, preferentialslumping of soft clay-rich units atRobin’s Wood Hill has leftunstable, overhanging ledges, thatrepresent a potential hazard forvisitors.

4.6 Robin’s Wood Hill Quarry and Weybourne Town PitDisused quarries (ED) in Gloucestershire and Norfolk

At Weybourne Town Pit, EnglishNature and the local parish councilare involved in management of thesite. Vegetation thinning andclearance is carried out on the faceto maintain an exposure of theMarly Drift. Most of the pit iscovered by relatively mature treesbut, because the face is only a fewmetres high and does not need tobe viewed from a distance, tallertrees are allowed to remain, inorder to provide shade and inhibitscrub growth on the face itself. Itis necessary to maintain an accesspath to the face through thewooded area.

At Robin’s Wood Hill,Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust andGloucestershire RIGS Groupcarried out regular vegetationclearance in the past but re-colonisation is rapid and the claysare prone to slumping. Majorworks involving the excavationand re-profiling of faces, as wellas the clearance of vegetation,were carried out in 2000. Thiswas partly funded by English

Nature’s Face Lift Programme andsupervised by the GloucestershireRIGS Group. Access formachinery was created to theupper levels of the former pitthrough the construction of ramps.The ramps were left in place inorder to provide permanent accessto the upper levels of the quarry.As well as clearing previouslyexisting exposures, additionalexposures were excavated,improving the value of the site asa whole.


Vegetation clearance, re-excavation and re-profiling of unstable exposures is vital ifdisused quarries like Robin’sWood Hill and Weybourne Town Pit are to be maintained in a condition suitable for researchand educational use. Partnershipsbetween statutory natureconservation bodies and localorganisations and groups can bevery effective in managing such sites.

Robin's Wood Hill Quarry SSSI after clearance works. Mark Campbell/Gloucestershire Geoconservation Trust

78


• The impact of landfill on a geological exposure in a disused quarry.

• The failure of the planning system to protect an SSSI in a situation where a planning permission predates the notification of the SSSI.

Site description

Webster's Claypit SSSI lies within thecity of Coventry. The site wasnotified as an SSSI for Carboniferoussandstones and mudstones of theEnville Formation. The exposures atWebster's Claypit represented theonly available exposure of alluvialplain deposits within the EnvilleFormation. The site has also yieldeda distinctive fossil flora, reflectingmore humid conditions than othersites of the same age and wasconsidered the best British site forstudying Upper Palaeozoic conifers.

Conservation issues

Webster’s Claypit was notified asan SSSI a short while afterplanning permission to landfill thesite had been granted. Therefore,under planning law, the planningpermission for landfilling the sitetook precedence over the statutorynature conservation designationand the associated legislationaimed at conserving the SSSI.

Although legally powerless in thissituation, English Nature maderepresentations to the localplanning authority to try andpersuade them to retain aconservation section within the

4.7 Webster’s ClaypitA landfilled disused quarry (ED), West Midlands

site alongside partial landfill. Thelocal planning authority, however,wished to see the quarry infilled inorder to provide a much-neededgreenspace area with footballpitches within this urban setting.

Arguing a case for theaccommodation of the geologicalinterest within the site was madedifficult by both the localimportance attached to the proposedend-use of the site and by healthand safety concerns arising fromhaving a rock face included withinan inner-city recreational area.


Although the site was designatedas an SSSI, the pre-existence of aplanning permission for landfillmeant that the local planningauthority was in full control of theconservation outcome. DespiteEnglish Nature and other parties,such as the Warwickshire WildlifeTrust, making strong pleas for thesite to be conserved, no variancefrom the planned total landfill wasforthcoming.

It is unlikely that the geologicalimportance of Webster’s Claypitwas fully appreciated by the local

planning authority. This illustratesthe need for geologists toundertake activities that raise theawareness of decision-makers ofthe importance of designatedgeological sites.

This site has now been fullylandfilled and the geologicalexposures lost. This case providesa very rare example of ageological SSSI that has beencompletely destroyed.

Further information

PROSSER, C. 2003. Webster’s ClayPit SSSI – going, going gone…butnot forgotten. Earth Heritage, 19, 12.

Webster’s Claypit showing good exposure. Colin Prosser/English Nature

Webster’s Claypit, now infilled to a point where thegeological interest is permanently buried.Colin Prosser/English Nature



• Geological conservation in an urban environment.

• The importance of community partnerships and involvement in managing and promoting disused quarry sites for geological conservation and education.

4.8 Wren’s Nest and DryhillRestored disused quarries (ED) in the West Midlands and Kent

The conservation of unstable, steeply dipping beds,which expose spectacular ripple marks on the beddingplanes, provides a particularly difficult challenge at theWren’s Nest. Mick Murphy/English Nature


The Wren’s Nest NNR is locatedin the heart of an urban housingestate and is subject to the usualpressures that impact on areas ofopen space located in urbanenvironments. A managementteam, based on the reserve,perform a range of duties,including management ofvegetation, maintenance of fencesand footpaths, leading tours of thereserve and maintainingrelationships with the localcommunity.

A geological trail and some veryrobust interpretation boards havebeen put in place on the reserve.Problems such as vandalism andfly-tipping result in ongoingmaintenance work for the reservestaff. All on-site interpretationand safety fences have beendesigned to be robust and

Site descriptions

The Wren’s Nest SSSI includes a number of disused limestone quarries,located in a heavily urbanised area of Dudley, West Midlands, in the heart ofthe Black Country. The Wren’s Nest is internationally renowned for the widerange of fossils of Silurian age which have been discovered there, especiallyduring the period it was worked between the 18th century and about 1920.The site has yielded a fauna of well-preserved corals, crinoids, brachiopodsand trilobites. To date, over 600 different fossil species have been formallydescribed from the Wren’s Nest. There are significant rock exposures on thesite, including reefs and several spectacular ripple-marked bedding surfaces.The limestone pillars and caverns of the Seven Sisters Mine (see separate casestudy) are also located within the Wren’s Nest.

The Wren’s Nest is an internationally famous geological SSSI, and wasdeclared a National Nature Reserve (NNR) in 1956, one of the first NNRs inGreat Britain declared solely on the basis of its geology. The Wren’s NestNNR is managed by Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council by agreementwith English Nature.

Dryhill SSSI, Kent, is a disused quarry which exposes sandstones and sandylimestones of Cretaceous age. The sandy limestone, known locally as 'rag’,was quarried for building stone and roadstone until the early 1900s, sincewhen the quarry has remained disused. Kent County Council, with thesupport of English Nature, has declared the site a Local Nature Reserve (LNR).

80

Dryhill Quarry, designated both as an SSSI and LNR,provides an excellent scientific educational andrecreational resource. Interpretation panels helpvisitors to understand the geology exposed in thequarry faces. Colin Prosser/English Nature

vandal-proof, and considerableimprovement has been achievedthrough community involvement.This is aimed at encouraging thosewho live locally to develop asense of ownership and pride inthe site, and in doing so, to helpmaintain and enhance, rather thanabuse what is an internationallyimportant geological reserve.

In order to manage fossilcollecting, a Fossil CollectingCode has been established.Collecting fossils from the rockfaces and the use of tools is notpermitted and only a fewrepresentative specimens may becollected from the loose scree.This allows visitors to enjoy theexperience of collecting fossilswithout unduly depleting theresource.

Safety is a major issue on theWren’s Nest. Unstable rock facesand mine entrances are securelyfenced off and viewing in theseareas is only permitted from safeviewing platforms. The formermines here are also prone tocollapse and areas above knownmine tunnels are also securelyfenced off.

Funding for the management ofDryhill LNR comes from thelocal planning authority andpotentially from other sourceswilling to support the managementand development of LNRs. Inadvance of the official opening ofthe site as an LNR, some rockexposures were cleared ofvegetation and scree by KentCounty Council, the local RIGSgroup and other local volunteers.Kent County Council continues tomonitor the site to ensure the rockexposures remain well-exposedand safe for visitors to use.

An integrated approach to natureconservation usually works verywell in urban environments. Boththe Wren’s Nest and Dryhillpromote wildlife alongsidegeology and aim to provide thepublic with access and recreationas well as with an experience ofnature. Both sites also show theclose links between the geologyand wildlife, demonstrating howbare geological faces and disusedquarries can become wildlifehabitats as well as geologicalresources. On both sites, somefaces have been cleared ofvegetation to allow access to thegeology, whilst others have beenleft for wildlife.

At the Wren’s Nest, thegeological trail, accompanyinghandbook and a hands-onexperience of geology providesthe basis of interpretation.Ancient reefs, well-preservedfossils, a rippled sea-bed andspectacular caverns all help toinspire visitors, especially schoolchildren, for whom a teachingpack for the site has beenproduced. A visitor centre hasalso been established whichincludes a geological mural, fossildisplays and space for the schoolchildren to carry out educationalactivities.

At Dryhill, interpretation panelsprovide on-site explanations ofthe geology for visitors.


The Wren’s Nest NNR andDryhill LNR demonstrate howdisused quarries can be managedand interpreted for public as wellas for scientific and educationaluse. In both cases, enthusiasticlocal planning authorities,

committed to managing the sites,have been critical to the successof the sites, as has been theinvolvement of local geologicalgroups and the local community.Both sites have been verysuccessfully developed aseducational resources.

Further information

CUTLER, A., OLIVER, P. G., & REID, C.G. R. 1990. Wren’s Nest NationalNature Reserve geologicalhandbook and field guide. Dudley:Dudley Leisure Services Departmentand Peterborough: NatureConservancy Council.

PROSSER, C. 2002. Geological firstfor Kent. Earth Heritage, 17, 24.



• The conflicts between geological conservation and coastal protection on an actively eroding coastline.

• The importance of taking a strategic rather than piecemeal approach to coastal management.

4.9 Chewton BunnyA coastal cliff and foreshore site (EC) in Hampshire

The cliffs west of Chewton Bunny have been protected and re-graded to a point where no geological exposures are available for study. Colin Prosser/English Nature

Site description

Chewton Bunny is a small valley that cuts the coastline at the boundarybetween Dorset and Hampshire on the south coast of England. The valleyhas been landfilled in the past and the stream that originally ran down thevalley has been culverted.

Chewton Bunny lies within the Highcliffe to Milford Cliff SSSI, which consistsof a long stretch of relatively soft cliffs, composed of Palaeogene sedimentsthat are rapidly eroding. The sediments around Chewton Bunny are ofinternational geological importance, forming the international stratotype for the Bartonian Stage of the Eocene Epoch. The sediments are veryfossiliferous, yielding some of the best preserved and most varied fossilfauna of the British Eocene. The fossil fauna includes molluscs, fish, reptiles,mammals, and birds as well as a range of fossil plants.

82

The unprotected cliffs immediately east of ChewtonBunny show good exposure of the Bartonian Stagestratotype. Proposals to protect and drain this part ofthe cliffs were the subject of a public inquiry held in 1991.Colin Prosser/English Nature


This stretch of coastline is subjectto high erosion rates andillustrates many of the difficultieswhich arise from taking apiecemeal approach to coastalmanagement. Coastal protectionworks along the coast to the westof Chewton Bunny, at nearbyHengistbury Head, have disruptednatural coastal processes, resultingin a reduced supply of beach-forming material and acceleratedrates of erosion. As a response tothis, the area of cliff immediatelyto the west of Chewton Bunnywas subjected to several phases ofcoastal protection and cliffstabilisation. This resulted in lossof geologically important cliffexposure, although the continuityof the Bartonian Stage stratotypestill remained. These works inturn resulted in increased erosionrates on the unprotected andnaturally eroding cliffs immediatelyto the east of Chewton Bunny,with the threat of erosion into thelandfilled area at Chewton Bunnyand potentially seriousenvironmental consequences.

To counter this erosion, a furthercoastal protection schemeimmediately to the east ofChewton Bunny was proposed.This scheme involved diggingthree drains into the cliff face andplacing rock armour at the base ofthe cliff. If implemented, thisscheme would have resulted in thestratigraphic continuity of theinternationally importantBartonian Stage stratotype beingbroken.

After negotiation between EnglishNature and the local planningauthority, it was agreed that the

proposed rock armour directlyagainst the cliff would be replacedby a less damaging offshorebastion, which would not obscurethe cliff and which would slowerosion rather than halt itcompletely. No agreement couldbe reached, however, with regardto the proposals to dig three largedrains into the cliff face.Alternative drainage proposalswere put forward by EnglishNature which would not directlyimpact upon the cliffs, but thesewere not accepted and the issue of the drains was subsequentlyconsidered at a public inquiry. At the inquiry, English Nature,backed by the geologicalcommunity, presented the case forconserving the cliff line withoutinserting drains into it. The localplanning authority argued thatprotecting the coastline fromerosion was the highest priority.After a three day inquiry, theplanning inspector concluded thatone drain should be permitted.This compromise was not ideal foreither side, resulting in furtherdamage to, but not completedestruction of, the stratigraphiccontinuity within the site.


The original proposed coastalprotection scheme was modifiedafter discussions with EnglishNature. The use of an offshorebastion has slowed erosion at thesite while retaining access to thegeological exposure. Theinsertion of one drain has partlyinterfered with the continuity ofthe stratigraphical succession atthe site but this has caused lessdamage than would have beencaused by the three drains originallyproposed. The case highlights theimportance of taking a strategicview of coastal management,rather than implementingindividual coastal protectionschemes, without consideration of their knock-on effects.

Further information

PROSSER, C. 1992. Key sites go to inquiry. Earth ScienceConservation 30, 15–16.



• Managing the conflict between the demand for coastal protection and the need to allow coastal erosion to continue to maintain a geological exposure.

• The development of site management plans with ongoing monitoring.

Site description

Dimlington Cliff SSSI is located on thenorth-east coast of Humberside. Thecliff is about 15 m high and is erodingat an average rate of about 1.8 m peryear.

The site is designated as an SSSI forQuaternary sediments which provide an important constraint on the timingof ice advance and on environmentalconditions during the late Devensian,between about 26,000 and 13,000years ago. The site is also known forthe presence of glacial erratics derivedfrom Scotland and Scandinavia.


Coastal protection is the main threatto conserving the geological interestat Dimlington Cliff. Locallandowners, residents and otherinterested parties have long wishedto see the area protected fromerosion by some form of coastalprotection. Any process, however,which inhibits or prevents erosionwould be detrimental to thegeological interest and, in the caseof hard engineering works againstthe cliff, could effectively destroythe interest by permanentlyconcealing it.

4.10 Dimlington CliffA coastal cliff and foreshore site (EC) in Humberside

The threat of coastal protection isexacerbated by the presence of theEasington natural gas terminalimmediately south of the site. Theneed to protect the terminal led tothe construction of a rock revetmentin 2000. Although this does notextend to the actual site, it remainsto be seen if it may cause areduction in sand transport along theshore, leading to accretion of sandon the shore to the north andreduction in wave attack at the clifffoot. This could allow a debris fanto form at the foot of the cliff,which could become vegetated,obscuring the exposures for whichthe site is designated.

Other issues on the site haveincluded the unconsented dumpingof household waste, the laying ofcables from wind farms and theconstruction of pipelines from NorthSea oil rigs.

The coastal protection scheme forEasington was designed to minimisethe impact on Dimlington CliffSSSI. A Beach Management Planhas also been prepared to help co-ordinate and focus the managementand monitoring work of the HumberEstuary Coastal Authority Groupsince the construction of the coastalprotection scheme.

The Beach Management Plan includesa detailed monitoring programme(Easington Coast Protection SchemeMonitoring Plan) of the DimlingtonCliff SSSI and the beach. The aim ofthe monitoring scheme is to assesswhether the beach levels areincreasing as a result of coastalprotection construction to the south,thus reducing erosion rates. Anumber of threshold conditions aredefined which, if exceeded, trigger amitigation programme. Thethreshold condition is determined bya build-up of sand on the beach faceto the north of the revetment frontingthe SSSI that would, if it persisted,reduce the erosion rate and obscurethe exposure at the site. Themitigation programme would involvemoving sand to compensate for anyslowing of natural sand movementcaused by the coastal protectionscheme.


The development andimplementation of the BeachManagement Plan and the EasingtonCoast Protection Scheme MonitoringPlan ensure that continued monitoringof the site will take place. This willhelp to assess the impacts from thecoastal protection scheme andincludes detailed mitigation measures.

Cliff erosion at Dimlington. Peter Wakely/English Nature

84


• The effects of coastal protection schemes in reducingcoastal erosion and thereby causing degradation of a geological interest.

• The potential for coastal protection works in one area tohave knock-on effects on an adjacent stretch of coastline.

Site description

Hengistbury Head forms a headlandbetween Bournemouth andChristchurch Bay on the south coastof England. The headland is part ofthe Christchurch Harbour SSSI,which has both geological andbiological interests. The softeroding cliffs at Hengistbury Headexpose Palaeogene sediments,which are important forstratigraphy, palaeoenvironmentalstudies and palaeontology. Thereare also archaeological interests onthe cliff top.


Hengistbury Head has beensubject to engineering works overmany years to slow cliff erosion in order to help protect the public amenity, habitat andarchaeological interests which are present on the headland.

A long groyne, constructed toretain a beach in front ofHengistbury Head, and thus slowerosion, has been effective inreducing erosion, but hascontributed to the disruption oflongshore drift, reducing the

4.11 Hengistbury HeadA coastal cliff and foreshore site (EC) in Dorset

Erosion of the cliffs at Hengistbury Head has led to a number of proposals aimed at protecting this piece of coastline.However, increased protection is likely to isolate the cliffs from marine erosion and lead to the exposures becomingdegraded and vegetated. Colin Prosser/English Nature

supply of beach material to partsof Christchurch Bay to the east.The consequent diminution ofbeaches on Christchurch Bay hasresulted in an increase in the rateof cliff recession, resulting in theconstruction of a number ofcoastal protection schemes. Manyof these structures have directly orindirectly obscured some of thegeological interest features onHighcliffe to Milford Cliffs SSSI,to the east of Hengistbury Head.

Further coastal protection schemesat Hengistbury Head have beenproposed which may result infurther reduction of cliff erosionrates. This would bring about thedegradation of the geologicalinterest, as slumped materialbuilds up in front of the cliff faces.

A management agreement hasbeen negotiated for part of thecoastline at Hengistbury Head.This involves the use of

machinery to remove materialfrom the foot of the cliff in areaswhere wave erosion is no longereffective in maintaining a cleanexposure.


Negotiations between EnglishNature and the local planningauthority have ensured that freshcliff exposures are maintained.However, mechanical removal ofdegraded material from the foot ofsome areas of the cliffs is requiredto ensure that the geologicalinterest is not obscured.

Further information

BRAY, M. AND HOOKE, J. 1998.Geomorphology and Managementof Sites in Poole and ChristchurchBays. Coastal Defence and EarthScience Conservation, 233–266.Bath: Geological Society.


4.12 Lee-on-the-SolentA coastal foreshore site (EC) in Hampshire

Site description

The Lee-on-the-Solent to Itchen Estuary SSSI, Hampshire, is a large coastal site with mixed biological and geological interests. The site is biologically important for a number of coastal habitats which support several bird species as well as anoutstanding assemblage of nationally scarce coastal plants. The site is designatedfor Quaternary gravel deposits and Palaeogene vertebrate fossils.

The vertebrate fossils occur in Eocene sediments on the foreshore at Lee-on-the-Solent. The site is particularly important for the diversity andabundance of its fossil fish assemblages, including a large number of shark species.It is also one of very few locations to yield fossil birds of mid-Eocene age in the UK and constitutes the type site for five different bird species. The interest is generally concealed beneath shingle and sand but is intermittently exposed onthe foreshore at extreme low tides and following storm shift of shingle.


• Managing the conflict between the demand for coastal protection and the need to conserve important coastal foreshore exposures.

• Early consultation in the planning process to agree acceptable compromises.

• The importance of monitoring the impacts of developments.

Replenished shingle material and rock groynes at Lee-on-the-Solent. Fine sediments imported with the shingle were selectively transported offshore and deposited as a thick drape over the interest features. Dave Evans/English Nature

86


With the close proximity of thetown of Lee-on-the-Solent, coastalprotection is the main issue forgeological conservation. Coastalprotection structures had existedprior to notification of the site asan SSSI in 1992 but did notsignificantly impact on the interestat the site. These structurescomprise a concrete promenadealong the sea front and woodengroynes retaining shingle on theforeshore.

The local planning authority,however, subsequently proposedthe replacement of the woodengroynes with a series of larger andmore extensive rock groynes,while also undertaking beachnourishment by importingadditional material onto the beach.This posed a threat to the geologicalinterest features in four ways:

• Direct damage to the sedimentsfrom heavy machinery during groyne construction.

• Permanent concealment of parts of the interest by the footings of the rock groynes.

• Concealment of the interest features by the beach-feed.

• Interference with natural coastal processes, with possible long-term impacts upon the geological interest and to biological interests in adjacent areas.

Consultation between EnglishNature and the local planningauthority took place at an earlystage in the planning process. Asa result of the consultation, it was

agreed that the length of selectedrock groynes would be reduced andappropriate beach levels wereagreed. Vehicular access routeswere also agreed to reduce potentialdamage from heavy machineryduring the works. Consequently,only minor damage was caused tothe sediments during constructionand the impact of the new groyneson the geological interest wasminimised.

Although appropriate beach levelswere agreed, too much beachmaterial was imported to the site,and this included a large volume offine silt and clay. The latter spreadout to form a thick drape over theouter part of the foreshore,significantly concealing the interestfeatures. It was initially hoped thatthe excess material would beremoved naturally by storm activity.After allowing time for thesediment to settle, however, itbecame clear that sediment levelswere unlikely to be reducednaturally. Following furtherdiscussions with English Nature,the local planning authority agreedto remove some of the excess beach material. Although some ofthis excess material has now beenremoved, this has yet to fullyameliorate the effects of over-feeding.


Early consultation led to anacceptable solution that permittedcoastal protection to be constructedwhile effectively conserving thegeological features. Over-feedingof the beach during the works led to negative impacts on thegeological interest features.Further consultation was required to reach a new agreement to remove some of the excess materialthat had been imported on to the site.



• How inappropriate management can adversely impact on a geological interest.

• Using a management agreement and access control to conserve a geological interest.

4.13 Browgill and Stockdale Becks, Skelghyll Beck, Doe Lea and Betton DingleRiver and stream sections (EW) in Cumbria, Derbyshire and Shropshire


Management issues on these sitesinclude:

• vegetation encroachment

• inappropriate tree planting

• dumping of material in the channel

• engineering structures obscuring exposures.

Vegetation is a major issue onsome stream sections. Whenstream power is sufficient,vegetation is unlikely to take hold,at least on the stream banks.Vegetation may, however, be aproblem on cliffs and crags abovethe stream. Where naturalprocesses are not sufficient tomaintain clear sections, grazingmay provide an effective solution.

At both Skelghyll and BrowgillBecks, much of the exposure takesthe form of cliffs and crags abovethe streams. At both sites, changes

Site descriptions

The four sites covered here are all geological SSSIs. Betton Dingle is part of alarger SSSI which also has a biological interest. Doe Lea Stream Section is also aLocal Nature Reserve (LNR).

The section at Skelghyll Beck, Cumbria, is designated for a succession of Silurian(Llandovery Series) Shales and mudstones. The rocks are very fossiliferous,containing a rich and diverse graptolite assemblage. The site is of greatimportance for local lithostratigraphy, as well as national and internationalbiostratigraphy.

The sections at Browgill and Stockdale Becks are important for similar reasons,and complement Skelghyll Beck in providing additional exposures of youngerLlandovery Series rocks.

Betton Dingle provides a series of exposures of Middle Ordovician age in theShelve area of Shropshire. The graptolite and trilobite assemblages that occurhere enable correlation of the Shelve successions with other areas, as well as theinterpretation of the changing environments in which these rocks were formed.

Doe Lea Stream Section, Derbyshire, is the British stratotype for the base of theBolsovian Stage of the Upper Carboniferous (Westphalian C). The AegiranumMarine Band, which is exposed at Doe Lea, marks the base of the Bolsovian Stageand is a critical marker horizon traceable across much of Europe.

Skelghyll Beck, Browgill and Stockdale Becks and Betton Dingle are all deeplyincised upland stream sections. Exposure typically occurs in the stream beds, onthe banks and in crags and cliffs above the stream. Betton Dingle lies withinwoodland. Doe Lea may be regarded as an example of a lowland stream whereexposure is limited to the bed and the banks.

Skelghyll Beck SSSI, Cumbria, showing the vegetatedbanks of the stream. Colin Prosser/English Nature

88

in management regimes have ledto vegetation growth which hasobscured exposures. SkelghyllBeck was fenced off as a meansof controlling erosion, whichwas perceived to have beencaused by over-grazing, walkers,and the activities of geologists.As a consequence of fencing thesite and prevention of grazing,vegetation has now become aserious problem, concealingmuch of the geological interest.

Similarly, the lower reaches ofStockdale Beck were fenced offand trees planted, inhibitingaccess to the exposures, becauseof a perceived problem withfossil collecting. In both cases,these actions have resulted in thegeological exposures becomingdegraded by vegetation growth.The underlying cause of thischange in management regimeappears to have much to do withsome geologists accessing thesesites without the permission ofthe landowners.

Betton Dingle is situated inmature woodland and someexposures are difficult to accessbecause of vegetation cover. Thepresence of a mature canopy,however, has the overall positiveeffect of inhibiting the growth ofscrub, which would otherwiseobscure the geological features.The trees do not generally concealthe geological exposures, whichare mostly on the stream bed.

At Betton Dingle, past attempts tocontrol bank erosion haveinvolved the dumping of soil andbuilding waste against the banks.This has not caused any seriousproblems on the site, as thematerial does not cover anycritical exposure and tends to be

washed away. This is not,however, a recommendedapproach in general, as it couldlead to negative impacts ongeological exposuresdownstream.

At Doe Lea, the originalstratotype exposure wasinadvertently lost through thebuilding of a concrete weir thatcovered a critical part of theexposure. Subsequently, a newsection was identified andexcavated in the stream bankaway from the weir. A formalmanagement agreement ensuresthat Doe Lea is positivelymanaged for its geologicalinterest. Vegetation cover is alsoan issue at Doe Lea and scrubclearance was undertaken in 2002under English Nature’s Face LiftProgramme. Access is controlledby a permit system to help protectthe site from vandalism.


Vegetation management is oftennecessary on stream sections.Grazing and scrub clearance canhelp maintain clear exposures anda mature woodland canopy cansometimes help restrict scrubgrowth on stream banks. On twoof these sites, differingperceptions of site users andlandowners with regard to the useof the site are among the rootcauses for the current conditionsof these sites. This highlights theimportance of maintaining a goodunderstanding of the issuesinvolved in the management ofaccess to the interest features.Good liaison betweenlandowners, the geologicalcommunity and conservationistsmay be the key to the successfulmanagement of these sites.



• Illustrating how natural river processes maintain fresh river cliff exposures.

• Linking sites as part of a geology trail.

Site description

The Onny River Section SSSI liesnorth-west of Craven Arms inShropshire. Rocks of UpperOrdovician age are exposed in lowriver cliffs. The unconformitybetween the Ordovician CaradocSeries and the overlying SilurianLlandovery Series is also exposed.

The importance of the site wasrecognised in the 19th century.Many of the sections exposed in theOnny Valley and in nearby quarriesremain of importance to geologists.

A teaching trail exploring theOrdovician rocks of the Onny Valleysites has been developed. Creationof this trail involved the cooperation of landowners, localcouncils, statutory bodies and localand national geological societies.The trail is way-marked and isaccompanied by a trail booklet.

4.14 Onny RiverA river cliff site (EW) in Shropshire

The Onny River cliff section showing the unconformity between the Caradoc Series of the Ordovician and LlandoverySeries of the Silurian. Colin Prosser/English Nature


The Onny River cliff exposures arelocated in a relatively remote areaand have not been subject todevelopment or river managementpressure. As such, there are nothreats to this site at present.Management of river cliff sites,such as the Onny River Section,generally involves as littleinterference with the natural riverprocesses as possible. Naturalerosion at the site keeps the sectionsfresh and clear of vegetation.

Potential threats that could ariseinclude engineering schemes thatwould reduce the amount of bank-side or riverbed exposure, or anyworks that could lead to a change inthe overall flow regime of the river,reducing erosion rates, for example.It is also possible that irresponsiblefossil collecting from the river cliffcould undermine the river bank,leading to pressure to have thebanks protected against suchactivities.


Providing that the natural riverprocesses are allowed to continue,the integrity of the river cliffsections will be maintained. Thus,a regime of non-interference is theappropriate managementrequirement for this site. This siteforms an integral part of thescientifically and educationallyimportant Onny Valley river trail.The 1.75 km long trail illustratesvery well the benefits of linking anumber of sites together and ofpromoting sites like this to a wideraudience, thereby encouragingtheir conservation for the future.

Further information

TOGHILL, P. 1992. Onny Valley,Shropshire: Geology Teaching Trail.Geologists’ Association Guide No. 45.London: Geologists’ Association.

90


• Conservation of inland outcrop sites.

Site description

The steep hillside of Mam Tor is partof the Castleton SSSI, Derbyshire, andis designated for its thick sequence ofCarboniferous clastic sediments. It isrenowned for active landslides, forwhich it is also designated.

Burrington Combe SSSI, Somerset, is asteep-sided gorge, similar to CheddarGorge (see separate case study).Unlike Cheddar Gorge, BurringtonCombe is designated for itsstratigraphy – a thick section ofDinantian limestones and associatedmarine rocks. It is a classic site forstudying the Lower Carboniferoussuccession in southern England. It isalso notified for its karstgeomorphology and for a range ofassociated biological interests.

Raw Head SSSI is a partly woodedescarpment in Cheshire. The site isdesignated for a sequence of LowerTriassic sandstones. Raw Head is partof the Cheshire Sandstone Trail, aseries of walks on the sandstoneridges of Cheshire, which arepromoted by the local planningauthority for recreation andeducation.

4.15 Mam Tor, Burrington Combe and Raw HeadInland outcrop sites (EO) in Derbyshire, Somerset and Cheshire

Mam Tor, Derbyshire. Richard Cottle

Burrington Combe SSSI after scrub clearance.Simon Lee/English Nature


Vegetation control is the mainmanagement issue on natural inlandoutcrops in lowland areas. Incontrast, in upland areas, naturalprocesses are often sufficient tomaintain geological features free ofvegetation, particularly becausevegetation growth rates tend to belower. Other issues include treeplanting and recreational damage.

Mam Tor is a good example of a site which needs no management tomaintain excellent geologicalexposures. The active landslipsproduce a steep scarp slope so thatvegetation cannot take hold.

Vegetation control is an importantmanagement issue at BurringtonCombe. The site had become veryovergrown with invasive scrub overa number of years, partly obscuringthe geological exposures andaffecting the quality of the karst andthe biological features. A majorvegetation control initiative, over thelast few years, has now reversed thegeological and biological decline,greatly enhancing the geologicalexposures.

Mature forestry plantation at RawHead had resulted in the sandstoneexposures becoming obscured bytrees and scrub. Although the rockscould still be studied close-up on thesteep slopes, there was very littleexposure visible from the publicpaths through the site, which isbeing promoted for its geology bythe local planning authority. Arecent initiative has cleared selectedareas of trees and restored someimportant exposures, enhancing thesite aesthetically and educationally.


Some inland outcrop sites need noactive management, as naturalprocesses are sufficient to maintainexposures. On the other hand, manysites, particularly those in lowlandareas, require active vegetationmanagement to maintain exposures.



• Conservation management of the only working underground metalliferrous mine in Britain.

Site description

Florence Mine SSSI, near Egremont,Cumbria, is the only workingunderground metalliferrous mine inBritain. Because it is still beingworked, it is one of the fewunderground mines in Britain whichcan be regarded as an exposurerather than finite site.

The underground exposures of ironore represent the only remainingthree-dimensional exposures of theglobally renowned West Cumbrianhaematite deposits. The origin ofthese deposits remains controversialand, consequently, the exposures inFlorence Mine are of major scientificimportance for future studies oftheir genesis.

Access is available to the public inthe form of an underground tour,run in conjunction with the MineHeritage Centre.

4.16 Florence MineAn underground mine exposure site (EU) in Cumbria

Botryoidal haematite (kidney ore) from Florence Mine SSSI. David Green/Manchester University Museum


As a working mine, the material ofinterest at Florence Mine isconstantly being removed and freshexposures created. Removal ofmaterial in this way is not aproblem from a conservationperspective as long as the minecontinues to be worked, andproviding the ore body is notcompletely worked out.

The main conservation managementissue is ensuring that theunderground mine remainsaccessible and free from flooding.Currently, the mine is pumped aspart of the mining operation, thecost having been borne by BritishNuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL),who took water from the mine touse in the cooling systems of thenearby nuclear power station atSellafield.

However, the production of powerat Sellafield ceased in 2003. Thisremoved the demand for water andso the pumping by Sellafield will

eventually stop. As a result,Florence Mine could becomeuneconomical because of the highcost of pumping that it would thenhave to bear. If the mine closes andpumping ceases, it would flood andbecome inaccessible, effectivelydestroying the scientific value ofthe site.

The Nuclear DecommissioningAgency has agreed to fund pumpingfor another three years, allowingtime for an alternative source ofenergy funding to be sought. Asustainable energy solution forpumping water from the mine usinghydroelectric or wind power ispresently being explored by theFlorence Mine Partnership. It ishoped that a practical andeconomically viable solution can beachieved to safeguard the long-termfuture of this unique geological site.


Although the future of FlorenceMine is uncertain, a solution to thelonger term threats is being activelysought.

92


• Management of surface land use to protect buried geologicaldeposits.

• Impacts of development adjacent to the site.

Site description

Little Oakley Channel Deposit SSSI,Essex, is designated for a series ofQuaternary sediments deposited in ariver channel, which was cut into anolder river terrace gravel sequence.An abundance of animal and plantremains, critical to the interpretationof the environment at the time ofdeposition and channel formation,has been recorded from the site. Thedeposits at Little Oakley are especiallysignificant as they represent a warmerperiod of the Quaternary (theCromerian) and because they clearlydemonstrate a link between riverterrace deposits in East Anglia andthose in the Thames Valley.

The deposits at Little Oakley areburied beneath land currently inagricultural use. The land is laid toarable use and the surface is,therefore, relatively featureless withno visible geological interest. Accessto the deposits at Little Oakley iscurrently through the use ofboreholes, small recorded trial pitsand temporary exposures.

Management issues

It is generally accepted that it isoften impractical and unnecessaryto provide and maintain apermanent exposure at extensiveburied interest sites, which are bydefinition in situ reserves of

4.17 Little Oakley Channel DepositAn extensive buried interest site (EB) in Essex

material available for future study.The conservation priority forextensive buried interest sites,such as Little Oakley, is to ensurethat the deposits are neitherdisturbed, other than for scientificstudy, nor permanently concealed.

Whilst neither situation has arisenat Little Oakley itself, there havebeen cases in the past wherechanges in land use havecompromised the scientific interestat extensive buried interest sites.It is, therefore, necessary to beaware of the impacts ongeological sequences of anyproposals that involve changingland use on or adjacent to buriedinterest sites. Being undeveloped,typically flat areas of land, thesesites are often selected for newdevelopment, involving theconstruction of solid impermeablestructures that restrict or preventaccess to the deposits beneath.

In addition, disturbance can occurfrom development adjacent to asite. Although the developmentmay not impact directly on thesite, new service routes andinfrastructure may be required topass through the site. Transportroutes, pipelines, drainage works,

storage of materials and generalincreased usage of the area mayall disrupt the scientific integrityof the site. The effects of adjacentdevelopments are not always fullyappreciated until after planningpermission or other licences havebeen granted.

The management in place at LittleOakley is relatively straightforward.Current agricultural practice is toplough and cultivate the area. Theploughing disturbs the surface buthas been ongoing for many yearsand works to a set depth, thereforehaving little impact upon theunderlying geological interest.Should agricultural practiceschange, however, monitoring willneed to be undertaken in order togauge any change in the conditionof the site.


Agricultural land managementpractices above the Little OakleyChannel Deposit currently have noimpact on the buried interestfeatures. Future changes in landuse, however, could have seriousimpacts on the site and wouldneed to be considered on a case bycase basis.

Agricultural land overlying the buried interest at Little Oakley. Dave Evans/English Nature



• Vegetation management and cleaning of an exposure to maintain favourable condition of a canal cutting site.

• The role of local voluntary geological groups in managing geological sites.

Site description

Brewin’s Canal Section SSSI islocated in an urban area of Dudley,West Midlands. The canal cuttingexposes sandstones of Silurian age,unconformably overlain by a CoalMeasures conglomerate. A verticaldolerite intrusion cutting throughthe Silurian and Carboniferousstrata is also exposed here. This is ahistorically important section, usedand illustrated by Sir RoderickMurchison in his classic, pioneeringresearch into the Silurian rocks ofGreat Britain.

4.18 Brewin’s CanalA canal cutting (ER) in Dudley, West Midlands


This section is subject toprogressive loss of exposure asvegetation becomes established.A build-up of talus also obscuresthe lower parts of the section.Physical access to the north-eastside of the cutting is restricted bythe canal. Occasional fly-tipping from the bridge abovethe section also has an impact onthe exposure.

In order to retain good exposureat this site, the periodic clearanceof vegetation from the rock faceis necessary. This requires theuse of mechanical and hand tools.The cleaning of the exposures

The north-east canal bank after the clean-up exercise in March 2001, showing the unconformity between the Silurianand Carboniferous rocks. Graham Worton/Dudley Museum and Art Gallery

Brushing moss from the rock faces to produce a fresh exposure. Graham Worton/Dudley Museum andArt Gallery

with brushes is also of value inimproving the state of the faces.

Over the past 10 years, the BlackCountry Geological Society, basedin Dudley, have organised clearanceof vegetation, talus and fly-tippedrubbish. Narrow boats were usedto remove spoil and rubbish toappropriate disposal points.

The canal cutting is adjacent toSaltwells Local Nature Reserve(LNR), which includes Doulton’sClaypit, another geological SSSI.The local authority wardenservice, which manages SaltwellsLNR, includes Brewin’s Canal intheir patrol of the area. This helpsto reduce vandalism and fly-tipping on the site.

94

The south-west canal bank, showing the dolerite intrusion before vegetation clearance. Graham Worton/Dudley Museum and Art Gallery

Canal narrow boat loaded with debris after clearing vegetation on the south-west canal bank.Graham Worton/Dudley Museum and Art Gallery

Brewin’s Canal is regularly usedfor educational purposes andthere is great potential forpromoting it to a wider audience,linking to the geologicalexposures at the Saltwells LNR.Intrepretation boards, aimed atthe general public, have beeninstalled on both sites.


Regular management of the canalcutting is required. Voluntarygroups have carried outvegetation clearance, cleaning ofthe rock exposures and removalof fly-tipped rubbish. As aconsequence of these activities,the site is being maintained ingood condition for scientific andeducational usage.

The dolerite intrusion after vegetation clearance. Graham Worton/Dudley Museum and Art Gallery



• Degradation of exposures as a result of vegetation encroachment and scree build-up.

• Early consultation in the planning process to convert a potential threat to a site into a site enhancement opportunity.

Site description

Farley Dingle SSSI is a road cuttinglocated on the A4169 near Wenlock,Shropshire. The site is designated asan SSSI for exposures of the Silurian(Wenlock Series) Farley Member ofthe Coalbrookdale Formation in thetype Wenlock area.

4.19 Farley DingleA road cutting (ER) in Shropshire

General view of Farley Dingle road cutting duringconstruction. Jonathan Larwood/English Nature


The site was originally a disusedrailway cutting. As is typical formany disused railway cuttings, theexposures of this classic sectionwere largely concealed byvegetation and fallen rock debris.

In 1992, a proposed re-routing ofthe A4169 through Farley Dinglethreatened to destroy the section.Following consultation with EnglishNature at an early stage in theplanning process, ShropshireCounty Council agreed to takeadvantage of the new route and toleave a permanent exposure in thenew road cutting.

A new steep section wassubsequently created, greatlyimproving the exposure andenhancing the SSSI. The steepnessof the section inhibits growth ofnew scrub and helps to maintain theexposure. The soft and friablenature of the shales means that theface is prone to weathering, withrock fragments spalling off, creatinga build-up of scree at its base. Thispresented a significant hazard

because of the proximity of theroad. In order to counteract thisproblem, the face was obliquelybenched during the creation of thenew section. This providedscientific benefits by allowingeasier access to higher levels ofthe face.

A crash barrier has been erected tofurther reduce the safety risk.This serves the dual purpose ofhelping to prevent rock debrisfrom falling onto the road and alsoprotects visitors to the site fromtraffic.


Through negotiation with the localplanning authority, the newroadside section has significantlyenhanced the Farley Dingle SSSI.It cannot be overstated that theopportunity to discuss theretention of a geological section atan early stage within the planningprocess was crucial to the successof the project. This allowed timeto agree on a design for the steepsection with platform access,which could be accommodatedwithin the new road design.

Further information

LARWOOD, J. G. AND MARKHAM,D. 1995. Roads and geologicalconservation: a discussiondocument. Peterborough: English Nature.

96

4.20 Ainsdale Sand DunesAn active (IA) and static geomorphological (IS) site in Merseyside


• Improving the natural mobility of an active process geomorphological site to maintain the integrity of both the site geomorphology and the biodiversity that it supports.

Site description

Ainsdale Sand Dunes, Merseyside, is part of the Sefton Coast SSSI,which is designated for bothgeomorphological and biologicalinterests. It is a National NatureReserve (NNR) and forms part of alarger internationally importantwildlife site. The geological interestincludes most of the NNR, managedby English Nature, and part of theadjacent Formby Dunes, managedby the National Trust.

The main geomorphologicalinterests are mobile sand dunes and intertidal bars on the foreshorethat are renowned for their varietyof bedforms. There are multiplebiological interests in a range ofhabitats, some of which dependdirectly on the activegeomorphological processes.The static dunes are also ofgeomorphological interest.


A large proportion of the site wasplanted with pines in the early1900s to stabilise the dunes. Thishad a significant impact on thehabitats and the natural functioningof the mobile edge of the dunes.Over time, however, naturalprocesses have re-assertedthemselves and efforts are being

made to restore the habitats andprocesses on the seaward side of thesite. Although the site is primarilymanaged for its biological interest,the effect on the geomorphologicalinterest is positive. The mainmanagement activities include:

• Extending the area of open dune habitat through the removal of pine plantation from the seaward edge of the NNR.

• Maintaining and extending the area of fixed open dune by grazing with Herdwick sheep.

• Progressively creating a more diverse structure within the remaining 115 ha pine plantation with associated benefits for wildlife.

The removal of part of theplantation has caused concernsamong some local people. Themain issue is differing opinions onthe value of the trees versus thedune habitat. A lot of work hasbeen done on liaison and increasingcommunication to explain why thesite is being managed in this way.

To help inform the management ofthe site and to provide a researchdatabase, English Nature and SeftonBorough Council currentlyundertake an extensive monitoringprogramme.

The site monitoring includes:

• Commissioning aerial photographs every five years, to assess the changes in the morphology of the sand dune system.

• Collecting, listing and compiling of maps and GIS data.

Stable dune slack near Fisherman’s Path, Ainsdale. Peter Wakely/English Nature

• Collection of daily climate data.

• Monthly water level readings.

• Collection of geomorphological data, relating to coastal erosion and accretion.


Although the site is mainly managedfor its biological interest, theimportance of the activegeomorphology is recognised andthe system is allowed to functionnaturally. The managementtechniques used to enhance thebiology of the site have a positiveimpact on the geomorphology.


4.21 Birling GapA static (IS) and active geomorphological site (IA) in East Sussex


• Conservation of active and static geomorphological sites threatened by a coastal protection scheme.

Site description

Birling Gap forms an important partof the Seaford to Beachy Head SSSI inEast Sussex on the south coast ofEngland. There are two designatedgeomorphological interests at BirlingGap, one active and one static. Theactive geomorphological interestconsists of a cliff-beach-shore-platform system developed on chalk,stretching between Seaford andBeachy Head. The staticgeomorphological interest consists ofcliff exposures at Birling Gap whichdemonstrate one of the best examplesof a complete cross-section through adry valley, with associated valley fill,in Great Britain. The chalk in the areaof the dry valley has experiencedintense periglacial weathering whichhas had an impact on the strengthand stability of the cliff sections.With coastal chalk habitats in GreatBritain making up about 57% ofEuropean coastal chalk habitats, thebiological importance of the chalkforeshore is also significant.

Potential threats andsolutions

The cliffs at Birling Gap areeroding rapidly, posing a risk to agroup of cottages on the cliff top.Because the dry valley feature and the underlying chalk are verystrongly weathered, they are even more susceptible to erosionthan the surrounding cliffs.Consequently, erosion rates in the

area of the dry valley are high. Inan attempt to protect the cottagesat Birling Gap, local residents putforward proposals to build a rockrevetment at the foot of the dryvalley cliff section to reducecoastal erosion.

The proposed coastal protectionscheme would, however, haveimpacted upon the SSSI in anumber of ways. Firstly, it wouldhave obscured the dry valley andprevented the ongoing erosionrequired to maintain the exposureof the feature. In addition, therevetment would be potentiallydamaging to the active processinterest by disrupting the naturalcoastal processes operating withinthe wider area, which is largelyfree from coastal protection.Furthermore, the rock revetmentwould reduce the aesthetic qualityof the site and its constructioncould result in damage to the

View along the beach at Birling Gap in 1999, showing the dry valley cross-section in the foreground and the whitermore resistant cliffs in the distance. Mick Murphy/English Nature

wave-cut platform and itsassociated wildlife. In addition,the longer term impact upon thenatural evolution of the coastalsections was unclear.

English Nature, the National Trustand the Sussex Downs ConservationBoard opposed the planningapplication and the case was heardat a public inquiry in 2000. As aresult of the public inquiry, theapplication for a coastal protectionscheme was refused by theSecretary of State for theEnvironment.

English Nature, backed by manyletters of support from thegeological community and localschools, argued that the proposedscheme would have an adverseeffect on the geomorphologicalinterest of the site and itseducational use. The NationalTrust and the Sussex Downs

98

Weathered chalk cliffs at Birling Gap in 1999. Mick Murphy/English Nature

Conservation Board also opposedthe scheme, expressing concernabout the visual impacts on thisspectacular and naturally evolvingstretch of coastline.

The planning inspector made thefollowing points:

• Development proposals affecting SSSIs must be subjectto special scrutiny.

• The importance of a scientific feature stems from its intrinsic merit and is not reduced if it has not been fully investigated.

• It is society, through legislation, rather than scientistsalone, that places a value on protected sites such as SSSIs.

The applicants argued that arefusal of planning permissionwould be contrary to certainarticles of the Human Rights Act, stating that it was their

right to protect their property. The Secretary of State concludedthat failure of the State to exerciseits powers to protect a person’shome from environmental blightmay constitute an interferenceunder the European Conventionon Human Rights. However, hewent on to say that these arequalified rights which require abalance to be struck between theindividual’s rights and theinterests of the wider community.

A further issue relating to this caseinvolved redefining the exactlocation of the SSSI boundary.Since the site was first designatedas an SSSI, coastal erosion atBirling Gap had resulted in thecliffs eroding back to a positionlandward of the original SSSIboundary, as depicted on thenotification documents. The sitewas re-designated with a newboundary, prior to the publicinquiry, to ensure that the interestfeatures in the cliffs remainedwithin the SSSI boundary. This isa potential issue on many coastalsites, where erosion may result inthe cliff-line migrating inland ofthe original SSSI boundary.


The geomorphological interest atBirling Gap is secured for theforeseeable future. Balancing theneed to protect property fromeroding cliffs with the need toconserve the coastline and naturalprocesses is always a challengingissue.

Further information

PROSSER, C. 2001. Spectacularcoastline saved. Earth Heritage,16, 4–5.



• The negative and positive effectsof quarrying on a landform.

• Management and promotion of an integrity site.

Site description

The Blakeney Esker in NorthNorfolk, within the Wiveton Downs SSSI, is arguably the best-developed esker in England.It extends over a distance of some3.5 km from Blakeney to Glandford.The esker is composed of sands andgravels which were deposited inchannels, cut through chalk-rich till.The origin of the esker has been thesubject of much scientific debateover the years.

4.22 Blakeney EskerA static geomorphological site (IS) in Norfolk

Worked-out hollow at Blakeney Esker, representing part of an original channel. Mick Murphy/English Nature


Eskers are potentially valuablesources of sand and gravel but,because they are landforms,quarrying can have a significantnegative impact upon their integrity.Quarrying can, however, play animportant role in creatingexposures, aiding understanding ofthe internal composition, structureand formation of an esker.

Historically, a number of pits weredeveloped along Blakeney Esker forsand and gravel extraction. All ofthese pits are now disused. Anegative effect of this quarrying hasbeen to fragment the classiclandform feature. In addition, manyof the sand and gravel channeldeposits within the landform have

been removed by quarrying and areno longer available for study.

However, the quarrying also createdtemporary exposures through thesand and gravel channels. Thesewere used by researchers toinvestigate the origin of the eskerwhile quarrying activities weretaking place. Without thequarrying, it would not have beenpossible to access these exposures,which have been vital for thescientific understanding of theesker. Negotiations with theoperator led to a small sand andgravel deposit from one of theworkings being retained as aconservation section. In addition,worked-out hollows, whichrepresent parts of channels, havebeen conserved to demonstrate theoriginal morphology of the channels.

100

Norfolk County Council haspurchased part of the BlakeneyEsker at Wiveton Downs,protecting this part of theremaining landform from furtherquarrying activities and opening itto the general public. Managementof the geomorphological interest isbeing undertaken in conjunctionwith a heathland restorationproject which involves clearanceof gorse and other scrub. Aninterpretation board was installedin 2004 to explain the importanceof the geomorphological features tothe general public.

Remnant sand and gravel deposit at Blakeney Esker. Most of the sand and gravel deposits have been removed. Mick Murphy/English Nature


Negotiations with the mineraloperator led to research beingundertaken during the working life of a quarry operation andconservation of features whichwould have otherwise beendestroyed. Through the purchaseof the site by the Norfolk County Council, the integrity of the remaining landform hasbeen secured.

Further information

GRAY, J. M. 1992. The BlakeneyEsker, Norfolk: conservation andrestoration. In: STEVENS, C., andothers, eds. Conserving ourLandscape, 82–86. Peterborough:English Nature.

Gorse burning at Blakeney Esker as part of a heathlandrestoration project. Mick Murphy/English Nature



• Vegetation management to maintain a static geomorphological site.

• Management of climbing activities which may damage geomorphological features on the rock surfaces.

Site description

Rusthall Common SSSI, Kent, is animportant site for geomorphology.During the Quaternary, Kent wasnot glaciated but had a periglacialclimate, with development ofpermafrost. The sandstone rocks atRusthall Common, originally formedduring the Cretaceous Period,exhibit a range of surface features,which are characteristic ofweathering in a periglacialenvironment. These weatheringfeatures occur on a range of scales,from small-scale textures on therock surfaces, such as honeycombweathering, to large-scale features,such as the spectacular Toad Rock,which was sculpted by wind erosion.The site is on common land and ismanaged by Tunbridge WellsCommons Conservators for publicaccess and conservation.

4.23 Rusthall CommonA static geomorphological site (IS) in Tunbridge Wells, Kent


During late Victorian times,Rusthall Common was far moreopen than at present. Since thattime, the rocks had becomegradually obscured by trees andscrubby vegetation. This vegetationhad a negative impact on thescientific value of the site byobscuring the large-scalegeomorphological features.

In order to address this problem,English Nature’s Face LiftProgramme funded a phasedvegetation clearance project on thesite, aimed at re-exposing importantfeatures. Management workinvolved thinning trees andcarefully removing invasive plantspecies, such as bramble andrhododendron. An interpretationboard was also produced to explain

Toad Rock, Rusthall Common SSSI. Mick Murphy/English Nature

the importance of the site to visitorsto attempt to limit damage to thesensitive geomorphological features.

Rusthall Common is one of the‘Southern Sandstone’ group of sites.These are used by climbers fromacross the region, because of thescarcity of other natural rockexposures, suitable for climbing, inLondon and south-east England.Climbing is not generally adamaging activity on geologicalsites, except where the scientificimportance lies in surface featureson the rocks, particularly where therocks are relatively soft. Both ofthese conditions apply to the rocksat Rusthall Common, where thesmall-scale surface weatheringfeatures form part of the notifiedinterest and the sandstones are softand friable. Damage can occur byrope abrasion and rock bolting aswell as by general wear and tear.

102

Small-scale sandstone weathering features at RusthallCommon. Mick Murphy/English Nature

Carved graffiti on rock surface at Rusthall Common.Mick Murphy/English Nature

In order to limit damage to thegeomorphological features atRusthall Common, one area offace has been set aside forclimbers to use, but climbing isdiscouraged on other parts of thesite. In addition, a code ofconduct for climbers using the‘Southern Sandstone’ sites ispromoted by climbingorganisations. The code ofconduct details specificprecautions and methods forclimbing on soft sandstones inorder to conserve the specialsurface features.

The rocks are also prone todamage by vandalism. Carvedgraffiti is unsightly and ispotentially damaging to small-scale weathering features. Paintedgraffiti is also potentiallydamaging and cannot be easilyremoved because of the likelihoodof causing additional damage.Vandalism is difficult to control

and even the presence of a signexplaining the scientificimportance of the site may havelittle impact.


An extensive programme ofvegetation management hasgreatly enhanced the scientificvalue of this site. Liaison with theclimbing community and thesetting aside of a particular area ofthe site for climbers has beeneffective in helping manage theimpact of climbing activities.



• The use of conservation-sensitive solutions to allow the natural processes in a dynamic river system to continue to operate, whilst mitigating against flood risk.

Site description

The River Feshie alluvial fan islocated at the confluence of theRiver Feshie and the River Spey. The fan forms part of the RiverFeshie SSSI, designated for theimportant fluvial processes andlandforms associated with a highlyactive, braided, gravel-bed riverwithin a mountainous catchmentarea. The river is typically steepand powerful with wide, shallowchannels. The current active fan has a complex history of channelchanges and is set within a muchlarger relict fan, formed towards theend of the last glaciation. The areasurrounding the Feshie alluvial fan isused for sheep and cattle grazingand for forestry.

4.24 River FeshieAn active geomorphological (IA) site in the Cairngorms, Scotland


Flooding and bank erosion havebeen an issue for agriculture andforestry for centuries. Majorfloods during the winters of 1988/9 and 1989/90 directedlocal concern to the Feshie-Speyconfluence where it wasconsidered that persistentchannel change of the Feshiewas contributing to the floodingproblem. It was also thoughtthat there was a possible linkbetween water backing upbehind gravel brought into theSpey by the Feshie and highflood levels upstream at LochInsh.

In response to these concerns,local landowners carried outchannel straightening andbulldozed gravel banks toalleviate channel overspill in theapex area of the Feshie Fan. In1990, the local planningauthority proposed a FloodAlleviation Scheme for theBadenoch and Strathspey area,which included the Feshie-Speyconfluence. The proposals

Engineered channel at the apex of the River Feshie fan. John Gordon/Scottish Natural Heritage

involved mitigation works(including re-grading thechannel and removing gravelbars) designed to increase theflood conveyance of the Speyand constraining the Feshie to achannel on the eastern marginsof the historic alluvial channel.

Following objections by ScottishNatural Heritage (SNH) to theoriginal proposals on grounds ofpotential damage to thegeomorphological interest of theFeshie-Spey confluence and thehydrology and physical habitatof the River Spey Insh MarshesSSSI upstream, the report of apublic inquiry in 1992 concludedthat the original proposed worksshould not proceed. SNHsubsequently consented amodified proposal to cut a floodalleviation channel through thegravel bars below the Feshie-Spey confluence and permittedrepairs to damaged floodbanksalong the lower Feshie.

A conservation strategy for thesite has now been set out bySNH that is based on anassessment of the geomorphological

104

Flooding on the alluvial fan of the River Feshie inOctober 1990. John Gordon/Scottish Natural Heritage

sensitivity of different zones.Within high and mediumsensitivity zones, no newengineering structures should beintroduced and maintenance ofexisting flood banks shouldcease. Within the low-sensitivityzone, conservation-sensitiveflood protection measures(ideally distant flood banks)should be permitted. Within theactive channel zone of the Spey,partial dredging may bepermitted to alleviate localisedflooding in the reach re-sectioned in 1992.

It is recognised that successfulmanagement of the confluence isdependent on the landownersand SNH working together toprotect the conservation interestof the site. Forest Enterprisehave responded to the likelihoodof channel switching andflooding of their land by fellingunproductive forest and notseeking to control the river.


An assessment in 1999 showedthat the river engineering carriedout in 1990 had been locallydamaging. As no significantengineering measures have beenimplemented since that time, thishas allowed the river system torecover and reconstruct adynamic channel system.

The current conservationstrategy guides development toappropriate areas and mitigatesthe flood risk, whilst allowingthe active processes, for whichthe site is designated, to operate.

Further information

HOEY, T. B., SMART, D.W.J.,PENDER, G., & METCALFE, N.1998. Engineering methods forScottish gravel bed rivers. ScottishNatural Heritage Research, Surveyand Monitoring Report, No. 47.



• Non-intervention and controlled access to conserve an active geomorphological site.

Site description

Wootton Bassett Mud Spring SSSI,Wiltshire is an unusual site,designated for the occurrence of aseries of active mud springs. Thevents emit liquid mud all year roundand at accentuated rates afterperiods of prolonged rainfall. Thismud dries and accretes around thevents, forming mounds (mudblisters) up to 10 m long, 5 m wideand 1 m high.

The exact processes involved are notfully understood but are related tothe occurrence of the Ampthill ClayFormation, overlying an aquifer inthe limestone of the Coral RagFormation, both of Jurassic age.Geochemical evidence indicates thatthe water contained in the mudoriginates from the Coral RagFormation aquifer and has asufficient hydrostatic head to drivethe spring. The upwelling mud alsocontains fossils from the AmpthillClay Formation.

Conservation issues andsolutions

The site is owned by WiltshireCounty Council but is not open tothe public. It is surrounded byagricultural land and has beenfenced-off for many years toprevent risk to farm animals.The site was originally planted aswoodland to mark it on the groundas a dangerous area. In 1990,prior to its notification as an SSSI,

4.25 Wootton BassettAn active geomorphological site (IA) in Wiltshire

Fluidised clay flowing from the mud spring at Wootton Bassett. Peter Wakely/English Nature

an attempt to render the site saferesulted in over 100 tonnes ofquarry stone and rubble beingtipped into the mud springs, onlyto sink out of sight within 30minutes. Access to the site iscontrolled by Wiltshire CountyCouncil, primarily because ofhealth and safety issues, but thisalso helps to prevent damage tothe site.

The main management principle isnon-intervention. As long as thesite and its surroundings are leftundisturbed, the processes whichunderlie the active system arelikely to continue. The greatestthreat to the site is likely to beexternal and related to direct, orindirect, interference with thehydrological regime which isresponsible for the mud springsphenomenon. This could happenthrough inappropriatedevelopment in the surroundingarea or large-scale abstractionfrom the aquifer. However,because the system is very

complex and not yet fullyunderstood, the impacts ofdevelopment or water abstractionwould be very difficult to predict.


Non-intervention is required tomaintain the integrity of thenatural processes and features ofthe mudsprings. Controlled accesshelps to restrict damage to the site.

Further information

BRISTOW, C.R, and others. 2000.The lithostratigraphy,biostratigraphy and hydrogeologicalsignificance of the mud springs atTemplars Firs, Wootton Bassett,Wiltshire. Proceedings of theGeologists’ Association, 111, 231-245.

GOSNELL, R.P. 1996. More on theWootton Bassett mud springs.Geology Today, 12, 61–62.

106


• Management of a cave system by controlled access.

Site description

The Bagshaw Cavern system is partof the Bradwell Dale and BagshawCavern SSSI in the Peak District ofDerbyshire. The system has around3 km of cave passages, formed inthinly-bedded limestones of LowerCarboniferous age. The cave isscientifically important for itspassage morphology, speleothemsand cave sediments.


One of the main issues associatedwith the conservationmanagement of caves in general isinappropriate or irresponsibleusage by cavers and other visitors.Potential problems includepollution, disturbance of cavesediments and damage to, orremoval of, cave decoration.

The most effective ways ofminimising problems associatedwith caving are by communicationof good conservation practicethrough the national and localcaving organisations and byencouraging local caving groupsto take responsibility formanagement of caves in theirarea. Good management of accessto caves can have very positiveconservation outcomes byrestricting access to sensitiveareas, controlling visitor numbersand ensuring that all visitors arewell-informed about goodconservation practice.

4.26 Bagshaw CavernA cave (IC) in the Peak District of Derbyshire

Full Moon Chamber in Bagshaw Cavern. John Taylor/Derbyshire Caving Association

In the case of Bagshaw Cavern,there is only one entrance to thesystem, which makes accesscontrol easier. The DerbyshireCaving Association (DCA) hasworked closely with the owner of the cave to devise an accesssystem that uses a gradingclassification based on thesensitivity of different parts of the cave.

Access control is achievedthrough gating, taping andmeeting with the landowner priorto visits. The main entrance isgated and there are additionalgates within the cave to preventunauthorised access to certainparts of the system. Taping is alsoused to indicate restricted areas.The keys are obtained through theowner, who provides furtherinformation on access restrictionsand sensitivity.

A number of usage types havebeen defined which dictate what

restrictions are imposed onparticular groups of visitors.These restrictions are based on thesensitivity of different areas andthe potential impact of the usagetype. For example, guidedadventure trips involving relativelylarge groups are restricted to theleast sensitive areas of the cave.Leader-controlled trips, involvingsmall groups and led by anexperienced caver with expertknowledge of the cave, are permittedto the more sensitive areas.Exploration usage, which mayhave high potential for damage toscientific features, is only carriedout by experienced cavers withconsent from English Nature.


The access control system atBagshaw Cavern is an effectivemeans of managing the cave andensuring the long-termconservation of the fragile andsensitive system.



• Managing a karst landscape for geological and biological interests.

4.27 Cheddar GorgeA karst site (IK) in Somerset

General view of the spectacular limestone gorge atCheddar. Peter Wakely/English Nature


The site has been subject to a gradualchange over many years from adominantly grassland environment,with just a few trees on the steepercliffs, to a significantly diminishedgrassland area, with dense scrub andsecondary woodland. This hasoccurred in response to a reduction ingrazing in the 1930s and the effectsof myxomatosis in the 1950s. Froma geomorphological perspective, thegorge was losing its rugged, rockycharacter as the cliffs, screes andslopes became increasingly coveredin scrub and woodland.

In order to reverse the effects of lossof grassland and the spread of scrub,a major programme of tree and scrubclearance was initiated and grazing

Site description

Cheddar Gorge, located in theMendip Hills in Somerset, is Britain’slargest and best known limestonegorge. It was formed by fluvialerosion and weathering of theCarboniferous Limestone over aperiod of about 2 million years.

Cheddar Gorge is part of TheCheddar Complex SSSI which isnotified for multiple geological andbiological interest features. Thegeological interests include karst,caves, minerals and fossils. Thebiological interests include a widerange of semi-natural habitatswhich support several rare plants.

was reintroduced to the area.The main driver for this work hasbeen conservation of the biologicalinterests but the karst interest has also benefited indirectly from the work. A gradual improvement to thegeological and biological interests hasbeen observed, but the managementregime needs to be sustained.


The development of a managementprogramme for restoring the grassland habitats has benefited both the biological and geologicalinterest features.

108


• Irresponsible collecting of fossils and minerals at sites with a finite resource.

Site description

Birk Knowes SSSI, Lanarkshire,Scotland, is internationallyrenowned for Palaeozoic jawlessfish and arthropod fossils.

Hope’s Nose to Wall’s Hill SSSI,Torquay, Devon, is renowned forthe occurrence of unique and veryfinite gold-bearing carbonate veinswithin Devonian limestones.

Management issues

At both Birk Knowes and Hope’s Nose, irresponsible over-collecting of fossils andminerals respectively hassignificantly damaged thegeological resources at the sites.

Birk Knowes is a remote site thathas been the target ofirresponsible fossil collectingsince the 1970s. At Hope’s Nose,intensive and unconsentedremoval of specimens by the useof power saws has effectivelydestroyed the geological interestat the site.

At Birk Knowes, there have beenmanagement agreements since1984 with the landowners. Theseallow Scottish Natural Heritageto manage the site on thelandowners’ behalf. In the early1980s, a permit system wasintroduced in an attempt tocontrol collecting and safeguardthe resource. Ironically, the most

4.28 Hope’s Nose and Birk KnowesCollection problems at finite fossil and mineral sites (FM) in Devon and Lanarkshire

intensive collecting took placewhile this system was inoperation. The system failed,primarily because it was ignoredby the very people it wasdesigned to control. The site’sremoteness made it difficult tomonitor, enabling collectors towork unnoticed.

In 1995, Scottish NaturalHeritage stopped issuingcollecting permits and, as a lastresort to safeguard the remainingresource, the site was closed andfenced. Notice boards have also been erected with collectingadvice in four languages. Tosafeguard the remainingfossiliferous rock, a plan has beendrawn up to ensure the maximumamount of scientific informationis derived from the remainingfossil resource. There have alsobeen initiatives to retrieve anyfossil material that collectorsdiscarded while searching for therarest and most completespecimens.

In order to try to safeguard thefinite mineral resource at Hope’sNose, the site was notified as anSSSI with a special legalcondition attached, requiring thewritten consent of English Natureprior to the collection ofspecimens. Hope’s Nose,however, is an easily accessiblesite but is concealed from publicview. Consequently, as with thepermit system at Birk Knowes,the requirement to seekpermission before undertakingany collecting was difficult toenforce and was ignored byirresponsible collectors. Thelandowners were powerless as itwould be necessary to constantlypolice the site to preventunauthorised collecting.

Collectors used power saws toremove whole sections of thecarbonate veins which hosted thegold, leaving virtually no materialof interest exposed. Because theveins die out laterally over a shortdistance, there is little likelihoodof exposing similar material inthe future. The damage to themineral resource at Hope’s Nosewas extreme, resulting ineffective destruction of theinterest.

At the time of the damage at bothsites, mainly in the late 1980s andearly 1990s, English Nature andScottish Natural Heritage hadlittle power to act against thirdparty damage (in contrast todamage inflicted by site owners).In England, the Countryside andRights of Way (CRoW) Act of2000 rectifies this by introducingstiff penalties for those foundguilty of damaging SSSIs.

Fencing erected to deter fossil collectors at Birk Knowes.Colin MacFadyen/Scottish Natural Heritage



The tiny but internationallysignificant resource at BirkKnowes has been over-collected,with serious loss of fossilmaterial and, consequently,potential scientific knowledge.At Hope’s Nose, over-collectinghas resulted in almost completedestruction of a unique mineralinterest. Both sites demonstratethe problems associated withmanaging collecting of a highlysought after finite resource inisolated areas. Althoughspecimens from Birk Knowes andHope’s Nose can still be seen inmuseums, they can no longer bestudied in their original context.

Mineral collectors have removed most of the gold bearing carbonate veins at Hope’s Nose using power saws. Mick Murphy/English Nature

Further information

MACFADYEN, C. 2001. Getting togrips with asset strippers, EarthHeritage, 15, 10.

MURPHY, M. 2001. Minerals in thehands of the collectors, EarthHeritage, 15, 14–15.


• The need for consultation throughout the planning process for proposed developments.

• Conservation of soft sediments of finite extent.

• The inclusion of reserve areas as a resource for the future.

Site description

Purfleet Chalk Pits SSSI and Globe PitSSSI are disused chalk quarries, situatedin Essex on the outskirts of London,close to the M25 Dartford Crossing.The sites are designated as SSSIs for theoccurrence of unconsolidated sedimentswhich are important for understandingthe Quaternary history of the RiverThames. In both cases, the interestfeatures are restricted in extent and, asa consequence, are being managed asfinite sites. The sites are also renownedfor the occurrence of abundantPalaeolithic human artefacts. Both sites are of high scientific importance.

These sites were originally worked forchalk which was extracted to serve thelocal cement industry. The overlyingQuaternary sands and gravels were alsoextracted as an aggregate resource.Because of their location in a highlyurbanised area close to London, therewas strong pressure to develop the sitesafter quarrying ceased. Subsequentdevelopments have further reducedwhat was already a restricted resource.

The remaining exposed interests areconsidered as finite features forconservation purposes. One area ofPurfleet Chalk Pits, which has neverbeen quarried, has been recentlyincorporated into the SSSI as a buriedresource for future study.

110

4.29 Globe and Purfleet PitsDisused quarries with finite interest features (FM and FB) in Essex


At Globe Pit, there are a numberof conservation issues. Firstly, thedeposits are finite in extent.Secondly, the deposits areunconsolidated and mechanicallyweak. Thirdly, there is very littlespace between a housingdevelopment on the floor of thedisused pit and the quarry face.

The last situation should not haveoccurred, as the initial applicationfor a housing development madeclear the need for an area of greenspace to be left between theproposed development and thegeological interest in the quarryfaces, to allow visual and physicalaccess to the sections of interest.The initial development proposals,however, were modified duringthe planning process, withoutfurther consultation with EnglishNature. The modified plans were

Newly notified unquarried reserve area at Purfleet Chalk Pits SSSI. Mick Murphy/English Nature

approved by the local planningauthority, allowing properties tobe built with gardens encroachingwithin a few metres of the face.This lack of consultation hasresulted in severely restrictedaccess to the geological interestfor both study and sitemanagement.

Consequently, the management ofGlobe Pit presents significantchallenges, in particular themaintenance of a clean, stable facein the soft sediments. Theexisting face is becomingovergrown and degraded butcontinued removal of scrub andre-excavation of fresh faces is nota realistic option because theinterest is very finite in extent.However, because of theproximity of the buildings andgardens, it will probably becomenecessary over time to removecollapsed material. This is likelyto have a serious impact on the


Development encroaching on the Quaternary depositsat Globe Pit. Eric Steer/English Nature

Students examining the small exposed section at Purfleet Chalk Pits. Natalie Bennett/English Nature

interest because of its limitedextent. The proximity to theproperties also increases thelikelihood of material being tippedon site. Unfortunately, there is nopotential for expanding the siteoutside of its current boundary.

Purfleet Chalk Pits have beensubjected to severe developmentpressure after quarry operationsceased, with major industrialdevelopments and associatedinfrastructure being constructed.Although geological conservationhas been given consideration ingranting planning permission fordevelopments, the remainingimportant geological exposuresare very finite and sensitive.As developments have takenplace, further pressure has beenexerted on the already finiteresource. As at Globe Pit, thesediments are unconsolidated and

prone to collapse and there is littlepotential for re-excavation of freshfaces because of the finite natureof the deposits.

In order to ensure that there willbe a resource of material availablefor scientific study in the future atPurfleet Chalk Pits, the site wasrenotified as an SSSI in 2003 toincorporate an extra area ofunquarried land, which isunderlain by similar sediments.This area will act as a reserve andcan be excavated in the future ifthe scientific need arises.


The exposed geological resourcesat both sites are strictly finite andthe unconsolidated nature of thesediments has resulted inmechanically weak sections with atendency to collapse. At Purfleet,the incorporation of a buriedreserve into the SSSI relievessome of the pressure on theexisting finite exposures. There isno such reserve at Globe Pit and itis important to consider themanagement of the site verycarefully, while potential solutionsare investigated.

Further information

BENNETT, N. 2000. Best of bothworlds. Earth Heritage, 14, 8-9.

BRIDGLAND, D.R., and others. 1995.Purfleet interglacial deposits:Bluelands and Greenlands Quarries.In: The Quaternary of the LowerReaches of the Thames, a FieldGuide, 167–184. QuaternaryResearch Association.

112


• Using a rock store to conserve a fossil insect interest in an active quarry and landfill site.

Site description

Clock House Brickworks SSSI islocated within a quarry and landfillsite in Surrey. The site is quarriedfor clay and the void space is usedfor phased landfill as discrete areasare worked out.

The site has been designated as anSSSI for Lower Cretaceous (Wealden)stratigraphy, sedimentology andpalaeontology. It is particularlyimportant for the occurrence offossil insects which occur in relativeabundance at certain horizons. Theinsect assemblages are verysignificant as they are of great valuein the interpretation of Wealdenenvironments.


Although it has been possible to study most aspects of thegeology of the site as quarryoperations have proceeded,studying the fossil insectsrequires a special approach.The insects are restricted toparticular siltstone horizonswhich are of no economic valueand are discarded as waste.The process of searching thesiltstone for fossil insects is slow and does not keep pace with the quarrying.Consequently, there was a dangerthat this important resourcecould be permanently lost.

4.30 Clock House BrickworksA mine dump (FD) and active quarry (EA) in Surrey

In order to conserve the fossilresource, the quarry operatorsprovided an area for an off-sitefenced rock store, where a largequantity of insect-bearingsiltstone could be kept safe fromdestruction. The local planningauthority provided a vehicle totransport the material to thestore. Approximately 100 tonnesof insect-bearing siltstone wastransported to the rock store.This has ensured a supply ofsiltstone that has lasted around10 years beyond the working lifeof the area from which thematerial came and has formed aprolific source of fossil insectsand other fossil organisms.

In order to protect the off-siterock store from vandalism,secure fencing and a padlockedgate were erected. The rock hasbeen regularly turned over inorder to provide fresh material towork. Once recovered, the bulkof the insect remains go intocollections at the Booth

Museum, Brighton. Other morecommon material, such as fishteeth and scales, may becollected by individuals.


The fossil insect resource atClock House Brickworks wassecured beyond the working lifeof the extraction area. Thisprovided both improvedaccessibility and a means tosuccessfully collect insects andother fossils. Scientificallyvaluable material, that wouldotherwise have been lost duringquarrying and landfillingoperations, has been conserved.

Further information

English Nature, Quarry ProductsAssociation and Silica and MouldingSands Association. 2003.Geodiversity and the mineralsindustry – conserving our geologicalheritage. Entec UK Ltd.

Typical fossil-bearing block from the rock store. Peter Austen


4.31 SkiddawA large upland site in Cumbria with finite mineral (FM), minedump (FD) and finite underground (FU) interest features


• Conserving important finite mineral and mine dump sites while allowing continued appropriate usage.

Site description

The Skiddaw Group SSSI in Cumbriais a large upland site with multiplegeological, archaeological andbiological interests. The SkiddawGroup SSSI has been designated for12 separate geological interests.These include a number of minedumps and mineral sites in theformer mining area of the CaldbeckFells, which is renowned worldwidefor the quality and variety ofmineral specimens discovered there.This case study concentrates onissues associated with conservationmanagement of the mineralogicalinterests within the Skiddaw Group SSSI.

View over Roughton Gill showing large mine dump, Skiddaw Group SSSI. Mick Murphy/English Nature


The main threat to the mineralresource within the Skiddaw GroupSSSI is over-collecting of specimens.Irresponsible collecting over manyyears has resulted in significantdamage to important parts of theresource. Some important areashave been depleted to the point thatlittle or no material of mineralogicalinterest now remains.

Additional related damage has beencaused to the landscape by collectorsdigging large trenches. The blocked-off entrances to somedisused mines or levels have beenforced open, posing a serious hazard.There has also been concern thatirresponsible collecting was having a negative impact on thearchaeological interest of certainmine dumps.

A large area of the Skiddaw GroupSSSI is owned and managed by the

Lake District National ParkAuthority (LDNPA). In January2000, in order to safeguard theinterests at the site, the LDNPA, inconsultation with English Nature,the British Geological Survey, theRussell Society and other mineralcollecting groups, introduced apolicy to control mineralcollecting on the Caldbeck Fells.

In order to monitor activities onthe site to provide bettermanagement of its wide range ofinterests, anybody wishing toremove mineral or rock specimenshad to apply to the LDNPA for apermit. The permits were grantedannually to collectors for scientificresearch purposes, providing theycould scientifically justify theircollecting activities.

This system was seen as toorestrictive and, in 2004, themineral collecting permit policywas reviewed and revised. As afirst step, English Nature and the

114

LDNPA carried out an assessmentof the geological andarchaeological value andsensitivity of the mineralogicalsites in the Skiddaw Group SSSI.

In March 2005, followingextensive consultation withinterested parties, the LDNPAintroduced a revised permitsystem. Under the new scheme,the Caldbeck Fells have beendivided into colour-coded zones(red, amber and green) which areof varying sensitivity. The idea isto allow some educational andamateur collecting in green zones,while maintaining tightrestrictions in more sensitive areas(red zones). All collectors willstill require a permit, but theapplication process has beensimplified for green zones, as allcollectors are now required tofollow a code of conduct whichsets out collecting procedure.This system provides a moreflexible approach to grantingpermits, giving greater access toamateur collectors and educationalgroups, while protecting the keysensitive areas.

LDNPA rangers, voluntarywardens and the police enforce thepermit system and a coordinatedsystem of patrols has been set up.It is hoped that the visiblepresence of wardens at varyingtimes will be effective in deterringunauthorised mineral collecting.

The LDNPA aims to ensure, as faras possible, that the archaeologicaland geological heritage of themine workings are conserved andthat legitimate research andrecreational activities cancontinue.

Although the site is heavily usedfor recreational and educationalactivities, including mineralcollecting, scope exists for furtherpromotion of the geologicalinterest. As well as educationaldays, there are plans to makecollections of mineral specimensfrom the area available for publicuse. The LDNPA is also workingwith the Mines of LakelandExploration Society (MOLES),and a local history society to setup a mining exhibition.


Although the revised permitscheme is in the early stages ofimplementation, the managementtechniques employed by theLDNPA at the Skiddaw GroupSSSI should better protect thegeological and archaeologicalheritage of the area, safeguardinglegitimate interests and improvingpublic safety. So far, the permitsystem appears to be successful indeterring irresponsible andunauthorised collecting.


4.32 WrithlingtonA mine dump (FD) in Somerset

Collecting plant and insect fossils at a Rockwatch eventfor children in 1994. Colin Prosser/English Nature


When the reserve was created, theintention was to recover scientificallyimportant fossil material for researchpurposes. The site is also used foreducational purposes by universities,schools, museums, geologicalsocieties and schools. Theseeducational visits take place under thesupervision of geological specialists.

Conditions for using the site also setout measures to manage the way inwhich the resource is collected.These include an obligation to recordall fossil insects found and to makethem available for scientific study.Fossil plants are also recorded, but,unless they are of particular interest,specimens may be retained by thecollector.

Extensive collecting from the siteover a long period of time hasinevitably resulted in a decrease inthe quality and quantity of fossilmaterial being retrieved. In order to help address this issue, the rockstore is regularly turned over in orderto expose fresh material. A state isnow being reached, however, wherethis activity provides a diminishingreturn. Inevitably, the time will comewhen the majority of fossils havebeen recovered and the resource willbe exhausted.

This approach to site management hasresulted in maximum scientific andeducational gain from what is astrictly finite resource. It has enabledthis rare Carboniferous fossil resourceto be recovered, studied and curated.Most of the insects recovered fromWrithlington are now housed in theCity of Bristol Museum and ArtGallery. The experience gained atWrithlington has had the effect ofrenewing interest in these types of

fossil assemblages. As aconsequence, new insect fossils havebeen recovered from other disusedtips and opencast workings.


As a result of the initiative atWrithlington, a large amount of highly important fossil material hasbeen collected. Before work began atthe site in 1984, there were less than200 specimens of fossil insect knownfrom the whole of the BritishCarboniferous. Now, more than1,300 specimens of fossil insects andother arthropods have been recovered from the site, many of them new toscience. The understanding of BritishUpper Carboniferous fossil insectassemblages has been substantiallyincreased by this initiative and it hasencouraged the search for suchassemblages on Coal Measures siteselsewhere.

Further information

AUSTEN, P. A. 2001. The Writhlingtonexperience. In: BASSETT, M.G. andothers, eds. A Future for Fossils, 67–70.Cardiff: National Museum of Wales,Geological Series No.19.

JARZEMBOWSKI, E. A. 1991. The rockstore at Writhlington. Earth ScienceConservation, 29, 12–13.


• Recovery and collection of important fossils from a mine dump.

• The involvement of geological societies and groups, school parties and the general public in the recovery of scientifically important fossils.

Site description

Writhlington SSSI forms part of adisused colliery tip located in thevillage of Lower Writhlington, nearRadstock, Somerset. During thereprocessing of the tip in 1984, inorder to recover unpicked coal, theCoal Measures mudstones werefound to contain a significant fossilinsect assemblage. Some 3,000 tonsof this mudstone were set aside as areserve (Writhlington GeologicalNature Reserve) and resource forthe future collection of these insectassemblages. The reserve is fenced,gated and locked. Use of the site isby permission only.

Funding for the creation of thereserve and for interpretation camefrom a range of sources. In recentyears, a regular mechanical turnoverof the dump to expose freshmaterial has been undertaken.

The site is internationally importantbecause of the high diversity andlarge numbers of Carboniferousfossil insects and other arthropodsthat have been recovered from themudstones. The site also yieldslarge numbers of well-preservedfossil plants.

116

4.33 Alderley EdgeA finite underground mine (FU) in Cheshire

Copper mineralisation in Alderley Edge mine. English Nature


• Management of finite underground mines by controlled access.

Site description

Alderley Edge SSSI, Cheshire, isdesignated for its mineralogicalinterest. The site comprises severalmines where ores, chiefly of copper,with minor amounts of lead, cobalt,vanadium and arsenic, occur insedimentary host rocks of Triassicage. The ore deposits and thesedimentary host rocks remainaccessible for study within thedisused mine workings. Mined fromthe Bronze Age until the early 20thcentury, Alderley Edge mineworkings extend over an area of 1.5 km2 with at least 12 km oftunnels. Important features of themineralisation and its relationship tothe sedimentary host rocks aredisplayed in unweathered sections inthe mines. In addition, parts of thesite are designated as a ScheduledAncient Monument (SAM).


Mineral collecting can be a seriousthreat to the conservation ofdisused underground minesbecause the resource becomeseffectively finite once the minecloses. Access control andpromotion of good practice are the most effective methods ofconserving the finite mineralresource.

The National Trust owns most ofthe land and leases the mines toDerbyshire Caving Club (DCC).

As part of the conditions of thelease, no minerals may beremoved from the mine. TheDCC work closely with theNational Trust, ManchesterMuseum and the CountyArchaeologist to manage andinterpret the site.

Work by the National Trust andCheshire County Council hasmade the surface features safe.Several mine shafts have beencapped and access points to themine levels have been fitted withlocking gates. Members of DCChave worked underground to clearand secure the mine tunnels andthe internal access betweendifferent mine levels.

Access to the mine is by priorarrangement with DCC and tripsare led by an experienced DCCmember. Visits to certain areasare limited to small numbers ofexperienced cavers or mineexplorers because of safety

considerations. DCC also offersan open weekend every yearwhere members of the generalpublic can visit the moreaccessible and safest areas of themine workings.


Joint action by the National Trust,Cheshire County Council andDerbyshire Caving Club hassecured the site and allowed safeaccess to the features of interest.The geological and archaeologicalinterests of the site are beingconserved while allowingcontrolled recreational andeducational use.

Further information

The DCC website provides further information on the Alderley Edge mines:www.derbyscc.org.uk/alderley



• A partnership approach to resolving safety issues related to mine instability while retaining access to a mine.

Site description

Seven Sisters Mine is located withinthe Wren’s Nest SSSI and NationalNature Reserve (NNR) in Dudley, WestMidlands (see separate case study).The site is owned by DudleyMetropolitan Borough Council andmanaged by them through agreementwith English Nature.

Silurian limestone was quarried andmined at the Wren’s Nest from the18th century until about 1920. TheSeven Sisters Mine is a spectacularexample of pillar and stall mining.As limestone was extracted from thethickly bedded lower part of theMuch Wenlock Limestone, large pillarsof the limestone were left supportingthe mine roof. At the Seven Sisters,so-called because seven pillars wereonce visible from the surface, thelimestone mine opens onto thesurface. Until recently, when thecavern entrances were temporarilyfilled with aggregate for safetyreasons, visitors could see down intothe steeply inclined mine with itspillars and stalls.

Seven Sisters Mine is of particularimportance as the only remainingaccessible limestone mine in the BlackCountry. In 2004, the Wren’s Nestreceived Scheduled Ancient Monument(SAM) status as a recognition of itsimportance to industrial archaeology.The site is also of importance as aroosting habitat for bats (protectedspecies) with at least five differentspecies of bat having been recorded.

4.34 Seven Sisters MineA finite underground mine (FU) in Dudley

Seven Sisters Mine in the early 1960s. Geoffrey Prosser


The NNR management plancovers routine management of thegeological and biological interestsof the Wren’s Nest and isimplemented by DudleyMetropolitan Borough Council.As part of the management plan,significant changes to all featuresof interest at the Wren’s NestNNR are recorded and reported toEnglish Nature.

In recent years, the mainmanagement issues at SevenSisters Mine have related to theprogressive collapse of the mineroof with the associated risk to thepublic and any ensuing liabilitymatters. Collapse of part of themine had already resulted in thearea around the mine entrancebeing fenced off with a 2.4 mhigh, steel palisade fence, andregular mine stability inspectionstaking place to monitor safety. Inorder to retain a good view of thecavern entrances and supportinglimestone pillars, a viewingplatform was constructed.

Further high-profile collapseswithin the mine in 2003 pushedscrutiny of the various ongoingmanagement issues to theforefront of the local planningauthority’s considerations. In thissituation, some local planningauthorities may have prioritisedhealth and safety at the expense ofthe scientific and heritageimportance of the Seven SistersMine. In this case, an engineeringsolution was sought, which tookaccount of both health and safetyand conservation needs at the site.In order to achieve this, a workinggroup of interested parties,including the local planningauthority, English Nature, miningengineers, geologists and localhistorians was set up to try to finda solution.

This partnership approachresulted in an engineeringsolution being developed whichretained visibility of the mineentrances and limestone pillarswhich make up the Seven Sisters,ensured access to some cavernsfor bats, and enabled the cavernsto be stabilised by filling them

118

Fenced entrance to Seven Sisters Mine prior tostabilisation works and infill.Colin Prosser/English Nature

with loose dry aggregate.Although the caverns have beenlargely filled by the aggregate,the mine entrances andsupporting pillars are still visible.Furthermore, this approach meansthat the future option ofcompletely removing theaggregate from the mineentrances and strengthening theroof with rock bolts remainsviable, should funding becomeavailable.

The partnership approach to thisproject, involving engineers,conservation professionals,contractors and the localcommunity in the design stage ofthe work, has been accepted as anational demonstration projectunder Construction Excellenceand achieved a gold star award,the highest honour. The projecthas also been awarded full markson the Considerate ConstructorsScheme of the Office of theDeputy Prime Minister. Thisaward was based on successfulbalancing of public safety andenvironmental issues, togetherwith the adoption of a partnershipapproach that involved a widerange of interested parties.


The involvement of a wide rangeof interested parties in designinga solution to conserving the keyfeatures of the Seven SistersMine, while addressing importantpublic safety issues, has resultedin a successful conservationoutcome. Safety issues, whichcould have resulted in completeloss of the features of this mine,have been addressed in a mannerwhich conserves them in the shortterm and offers an opportunity toenhance them in the longer term.

Further information

CUTLER, A., OLIVER, P. G., & REID, C. G. R. 1990. Wren’s Nest NationalNature Reserve geologicalhandbook and field guide.Dudley: Dudley Leisure ServicesDepartment and Peterborough:Nature Conservancy Council.



• Scientific excavation and recording of a finite and unique fossil resource.

• Deliberate burial of a finite resource for long term conservation.

• Use of a planning condition to conserve a finite resource on a development site.

Site description

A group of in situ fossilised trees ofCarboniferous (Westphalian) age,about 310 million years old, lie inthe grounds of a new housingdevelopment in Wadsley, Sheffield.Although fossil trees and roots arenot uncommon in the UpperCarboniferous, the occurrence ofnumerous fossil tree stumps in oneplace is rare. Wadsley is one of onlytwo known examples in GreatBritain. The other is some 20million years older and located inVictoria Park, Glasgow.

The Wadsley fossils occur in aninclined bed of sandstone. At least13 stumps and numerous tree androot remains are preservedtogether. The site has provided aunique insight into the lowerrooting structures and under-surfaces of Westphalian trees,revealing how the rooting systemsgrew and interacted.

4.35 Wadsley Fossil ForestA finite buried interest site (FB) in Sheffield, South Yorkshire


The fossil forest was discoveredin 1872 during building work inthe grounds of the MiddlewoodHospital. Excavations into theunderlying sandstone initiallyexposed the fossilised remainsof 10 large tree stumps, thelargest around 3 m in diameter.The fossils were described byProfessor Henry Clifton Sorbyin 1875. Sorby realised theimportance of leaving thefossils where they were foundand had wooden sheds erectedover three of the best fossilstumps to protect them from theelements. The sheds eventuallyfell into disrepair and the fossilswere re-exposed to theelements. Damage by fossilcollectors was also a problem.By the mid-20th century, thesite had become seriouslydegraded with little evidence on the surface of its uniquegeological resource.

In 1987, at a time when the sitewas changing ownership, it was cleared of vegetation and re-excavated under the guidanceof Sheffield City Museum andthe Sorby Natural HistorySociety. Four in situ stumpswere rediscovered and the sitewas designated as an SSSI.

Sheffield City Museum,Sheffield City Council andEnglish Nature established apartnership to decide how tomanage the site. There was achoice between a major schemeto develop the site as a visitorattraction, or to re-bury thefossils and develop on-siteinterpretation to mark theirpresence. The latter was

chosen as the most realisticoption in the light of availableresources.

Subsequently, when planningpermission for a housingdevelopment was granted, acondition was attached to theplanning consent, requiring afull programme of scientificexcavation, with recording andconservation of the fossils priorto re-burial, as part of anycurrent or future development.An added proviso was thatinterpretation could be expanded and the fossils re-exposed if required.

The programme of work tookplace in 2003. Groundclearance established the levelof the tops of 13 fossilised treestumps. Soil and overburdenwere removed by hand tools.Rooted vegetation was cutrather than pulled, in order toavoid damage to underlyingfeatures, and then treated withweedkiller. Once the stumpswere revealed, they werecarefully cleaned and werecovered at night to protect themfrom the elements.

Recording during removal of theoverburden included a site diary,detailed survey records and bothphotographic and finds records.A detailed plan, tied into theOrdnance Survey National Grid,was produced to form the basisfor future interpretation. Inaddition, a latex mould wastaken to enable a resin cast to bemade from the largest and mostintact fossilised tree stump.Following this process, thefossils were buried to providelong-term protection againstweathering and collecting.

120

Tree stump exposed prior to cast-making and re-burial.Jonathan Larwood/English Nature

A further phase of activities isplanned to promote WadsleyFossil Forest. This will coincidewith transferring the ownershipof the SSSI to the local planningauthority. The site will then bemaintained as a landscapedpublic open space.

South Yorkshire RIGS Group,English Nature and SheffieldGalleries and Museums Trust arekey partners in the project. Tworeplicas are to be made from themould that was taken. One castis to be located on site withaccompanying information. Thesecond will form a key exhibit innew displays of local geology atWeston Park Museum. Theproject archive will be retainedby Sheffield Galleries andMuseums Trust. With theinvolvement of a local school, aninformation leaflet is planned, aswell as a series of rock andfossil hands-on activity daysboth at the museum and on site.


As a result of attaching acondition to the planningconsent, the fossils at Wadsleywere successfully excavated,catalogued and conserved for thelong term by re-burial.

Further information

BOON, G. 2004. Buried treasure –Sheffield’s lost forest laid to rest(again). Earth Heritage, 24, 8–9.


5.1 Introduction

This Guide to good practice focuses on the practicalities of site-basedgeological management and conservation, based mainly on experience ofgeological SSSI and RIGS management. It is important, however, that site-based conservation is considered in a wider context. Geological sitesmust be managed alongside a range of environmental interests, includingspecies and habitats, landscapes and archaeological heritage. Not only is itimportant to consider other designations and the positive role they may playin geological conservation, it is also important to understand the benefits ofintegrating site management. This chapter, therefore, briefly examines thevalue of a more integrated approach to environmental management and thecontext that can be established at a wider scale. It also considers LocalGeodiversity Action Planning, which provides a framework for deliveringgeological conservation.

Sustainable development is at the heart of Government policy and practiceand is reflected in the recently published Planning Policy Statement 9:Biodiversity and Geological Conservation. This planning policy statementpromotes the conservation and enhancement of biological and geologicaldiversity as an integral part of social, environmental and economicdevelopment and directly encourages the conservation of biodiversity andgeology in the wider landscape as well as on protected sites.

In response to the need for a more integrated and holistic approach to thenatural environment, a new government agency, Natural England, is beingcreated. This brings together nature conservation and landscape functionsin England, with an explicit sustainable development remit, in onegovernment agency. Geodiversity (Gray 2003), a concept which includesgeology, geomorphology and soil, will play a central role in adopting thisnew integrated approach in Natural England and in supporting the deliveryof sustainable environmental management (Stace & Larwood 2006).

5.2 Integrated environmental management

In simple terms, geology and geomorphology influence habitat, soil,landform, aspect and drainage pattern and are, therefore, fundamental tolandscape diversity and to the management and conservation ofecosystems.

Geological sites and their management may provide immediate and direct benefits to biodiversity (English Nature 2004a, 2004b, 2004c).For example, fresh rock faces, scree slopes and eroding and weatheringsections may provide nesting sites for birds as well as habitats suitable fora range of invertebrates requiring disturbed ground. Scrub and vegetationmanagement, to maintain geological sections, can increase the diversity ofhabitat from bare, open ground, through a succession of habitats to maturewoodland, and can significantly benefit the wildlife of an area. Equally,management of biological sites is often beneficial to geology. Maintainingnatural processes and management activites such as scrub clearance are asimportant for biodiversity as they are for geology.

5 Geological conservation in context

122

Wildlife sites, as well as beingprotected as SSSIs, may also beafforded additional protection,under the European Habitat andSpecies Directive, as Special Areasof Conservation (SAC) and SpecialProtection Areas (SPA). Includedwithin these designations areinterests such as limestonepavements and salt marshes, whichare strongly geological andgeomorphological, or, morespecifically, habitats such as the‘vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlanticand Baltic Coasts’, whosemanagement is largely compatiblewith the management of theirassociated geology.

Integrating geological andbiological site management isbeneficial, therefore, in a numberof ways and managementprescriptions are often compatible.For example, managing scrub forgeology also benefits biodiversityand vice versa. Also, wildlifedesignations, particularly at aEuropean level, can provide furtherlegislative protection to ageological site. For example, wherecoastal engineering works affect ageological site on an eroding cliff,an SAC designation for its habitatwill provide a powerful additionalmechanism for arguing againstcoastal protection.

5.3 Landscape designation and management

Landscapes are fundamental to the character of any area and arevalued for their cultural and historicassociations, as well as their naturalcharacteristics. Central to this is theway that landscapes reflectgeological diversity, from rollingchalk downs to rugged uplands, andfrom changing land-use to variationin local building style.Lichen-covered granite, Cornwall. Mick Murphy/English Nature


In England, there are a range of landscape designations. National Parks,Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) and Heritage Coasts areconsidered to represent England’s finest landscapes and are affordedlegislative protection to maintain their quality and character. Theirmanagement is focused on conserving their natural beauty, wildlife andcultural heritage and promoting sustainable land management, in keepingwith their varied character. In England, 159 Joint Character Areas(Countryside Commission & English Nature 1997) provide a landscapeframework that is based on physical, historical and cultural influences onlandscape. These landscapes are described and assessed using LandscapeCharacter Assessment and it is this that provides a basis for landscapemanagement decisions within and outside of protected landscapes.

The approach to Joint Character Areas and Landscape CharacterAssessment further reflects the value of adopting a holistic approach toenvironmental management, particularly as landscape provides a tangibleframework for demonstrating how geology, habitat, species and people all fit together. This can directly benefit geological site conservation.For example, a conserved quarry can be used to demonstrate a source ofbuilding stone characteristic of local buildings and also provide a rareopportunity to see what underlies the landscape. Equally, understandinghow important geology is in our landscape, including villages, towns andcities (Bennett and others 1996), and the way it influences land use,economy and settlement pattern, strengthens the value of geology and,therefore, the justification for its conservation.

The Malvern Hills in the Abberley and Malvern HillsEuropean Geopark. Jonathan Larwood/English Nature

124

Geological sites within a National Park or an AONB benefit from theadditional protection that these designations bring. Consultation with therelevant authority is important and this may also provide opportunities forgaining further resources, particularly where geological sites are consideredin the context of landscape and where access to geological sites is encouraged.Wider expertise in site management may be available and geologicalinterpretation could be part of a broader National Park or AONB strategy.

5.4 European Geoparks

The European Geopark Network (EGN) was established in June 2000.A European Geopark is a territory with geological heritage of Europeansignificance and a strong management structure, which includes asustainable development strategy. European Geoparks tend to comprise anetwork of sites, including geological SSSIs and RIGS, within a widergeological setting. There are currently 25 Geoparks within the EGN,including the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and theAbberley and Malvern Hills in England. A European Geopark’smanagement and conservation is based upon existing legislation andmanagement plans.

An important aim of the EGN is to promote sustainable developmentwithin the Geopark by using geology and this is primarily achieved throughgeotourism. The emphasis on geotourism reflects a growing realisation ofthe important role that geology has to play in tourism and its potentialeconomic value (McKeever, Larwood, & McKirdy 2005). Much of thework of European Geoparks is, therefore, aimed at raising the geologicalawareness of visitors and local communities so that geology is more clearlyvalued and the need for its conservation is better understood and supported.

This approach can directly benefit site-based geological conservation.The successful conservation of sites is essential to the success of anyEuropean Geopark, as these sites are an important part of achievingsuccessful geotourism. European Geoparks add profile and further value to the geology of an area and this in turn can help achieve better supportfrom local planning authorities as well as local communities for theconservation of geological sites. The return can be more resources forgeological conservation, interpretation and promotion.

5.5 World Heritage Sites

The Dorset and East Devon Coast was inscribed as a UNESCO WorldHeritage Site for its outstanding geology in 2001. It is currently the onlynatural World Heritage Site in mainland Britain and is among a globalnetwork of natural and cultural properties that are considered to be of‘outstanding universal value’, including the Grand Canyon, the GreatBarrier Reef, the Taj Mahal and Stonehenge.

The Dorset and East Devon Coast World Heritage Site includes 13geological SSSIs, a National Nature Reserve, several European HabitatDirective sites and overlaps with two Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.


The management and conservation of the World Heritage Site is complexand, as with European Geoparks, is primarily based upon the establishedmanagement objectives and plans for the range of designated sites that itincludes. The management issues are typical of an eroding coastlinewhich is, in places, highly developed, leading to demands for coastalprotection. The Dorset coast, particularly between Charmouth and LymeRegis, is one of the most famous fossil collecting localities in the worldand much time is devoted to the management of collecting and theprovision of guidance on good collecting practice.

The successful inscription of the Dorset and East Devon Coast WorldHeritage Site in part reflected the well-established, site-basedmanagement and conservation on this coastline. The World Heritage Sitecross-cuts two county boundaries and a large number of site designationsand its future management is very much based on integrating theconservation objectives across this range of interests. The WorldHeritage Site also raises the value of the individual geological sites that itincludes as it provides a global context for their importance.

5.6 Local Geodiversity Action Plans

Local Geodiversity Action Plans (LGAPs) are a new and effectivemechanism for the delivery of geological conservation. Developed, inpart, from the experience of Biodiversity Action Planning, LGAPsprovide a context for the broad range of activities associated with geologicalconservation. LGAPs encompass the tradition of site conservation, notonly linking local and national sites in one plan, but also placing sites in a wider context. Importantly, LGAPs involve a wide range oforganisations, groups and individuals in their development and delivery.An LGAP establishes a process and provides a shared framework for thedelivery of geoconservation that previously has not existed.

The coast at Charmouth, Dorset and East Devon CoastWorld Heritage Site. Jonathan Larwood/English Nature

126

Local Geodiversity Action Plans – sharing good practice (English Nature2004d) sets out core principles for the development and delivery of asuccessful LGAP. LGAPs vary according to local circumstances butthere are fundamental similarities between them. They are typicallybased on administrative boundaries, are developed through partnership, in wide consultation, and establish a measurable process. An LGAPestablishes shared aims and objectives with measurable targets andactions:

• Geodiversity audit: an important early objective that can include a standard audit of the geology, geomorphology and geological sites of an area as well as an audit of available information and skills.

• Communication and education: promoting an understanding and wider awareness of geodiversity and encouraging participation.

• Influencing planning: influencing local plans and planning guidance to support the delivery of the action plan and geological conservation.

• Conservation and management: establishing clear goals for the conservation and management of geological sites, natural processes and the geodiversity of our landscape.

• Resources: establishing clear objectives for the resourcing (money and people) of the action planning process.

Company GAPs are now also being developed. These take the sameLGAP principles but apply them to a company or organisational geologicalresource. This could include the land holdings of a mineral extractioncompany or an organisation involved in extensive land management.

LGAPs provide a framework for the integrated delivery of geologicalconservation, integrating site-based conservation into the wider context ofthe LGAP area. They are driven locally and, where they are mostsuccessful, are established through wide consultation and partnership thatengages a range of groups and individuals beyond the traditionalgeological community. They provide a shared strategic direction whichhelps justify support for site-based geological conservation, demonstratethe wider relevance of geological sites and allow for the better targetingof resources.


1945: National Geological Reserves in England and Wales

This report by the Geological Reserves Sub-Committee of the NatureReserves Investigation Committee, identified “a list of sites meritingpermanent protection as Geological Reserves of national importance”,and marked the first steps towards developing a systematic approach tothe conservation of our geological heritage on a national scale.

1947: Command 7122 – Conservation of nature in England and Wales

This report by the Government-appointed Wild Life Conservation SpecialCommittee recognised geological conservation alongside wildlifeconservation and made recommendations as to how the Governmentcould engage in a national nature conservation effort.

1949: The National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act and the Nature Conservancy

The Government passed the National Parks and Access to theCountryside Act and established, by Royal Charter, the NatureConservancy. This established a legal framework for nature conservation,including geological conservation, and a government body responsible fordelivery. The Act empowered the Nature Conservancy to establishNational Nature Reserves (NNRs) for the purposes of natureconservation. It also recognised that it would be a long time, if ever,before all the important wildlife and geological sites could be acquired asnature reserves. It contained a provision, therefore, for the NatureConservancy to notify local planning authorities of important areas, notyet managed as nature reserves, as areas of Special Scientific Interest,now known as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), by reason oftheir flora, fauna or geological or physiographical features. Although theAct gave no direct protection to SSSIs, it enabled a local planningauthority, once notified of an SSSI, to protect it from adversedevelopment under the controls of the planning system.

1973: The Nature Conservancy Council

The Nature Conservancy Council Act split the Nature Conservancy intotwo parts. The executive part, including the geological conservationfunction, was reconstituted as the Nature Conservancy Council (NCC), anindependent council with greater autonomy. The research arm of theNature Conservancy remained within the Natural Environment ResearchCouncil as the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology.

1977: The Geological Conservation Review

The Geological Conservation Review (GCR) was initiated to establish amore systematic and scientifically rigorous approach to the identificationof nationally important geological sites than had previously been the case.The GCR provided a systematic site assessment and selection exercise

Annex A: Chronology of geological conservation in England

128

carried out on a Great Britain scale and involved a wide range ofgeological specialists from academia, museums and industry, assessingsites within discrete subject areas (Ellis and others 1996). All geologicalsites considered at a national level for conservation as SSSIs have beensubject to thorough assessment by specialists in their field through theGCR process. The main phase of the GCR was completed in 1990 andall site descriptions are being published by The Joint Nature ConservationCommittee (JNCC). Section 2.2 discusses the GCR process in more detail.

1981: The Wildlife and Countryside Act

This Act improved arrangements for the effective conservation of SSSIs.Under the 1949 Act, only local planning authorities had to be informedabout the existence of an SSSI. The 1981 Act required the statutorynature conservation bodies to inform all owners and occupiers, as well asplanning authorities and the government, about the location of an SSSI.Owners and occupiers also had to be informed about the nature of thefeatures which were identified as being of special scientific interest andabout the types of operations or activities that may damage these specialfeatures. The 1981 Act also contained a provision enabling a localplanning authority to make a Limestone Pavement Order, on eitherlandscape or nature conservation grounds, to prevent the removal of rockfrom limestone pavement areas.

The provision for notification of geological sites as SSSIs has beenwidely adopted across Great Britain and is the major tool used to deliverthe conservation of nationally important geological sites. In Englandalone, there are currently around 1,240 SSSIs notified for a geologicalinterest, almost 30 per cent of the total number of English SSSIs.

1990: Earth science conservation in Great Britain – a strategy

In 1990, the Nature Conservancy Council (NCC) working with thegeological community, published a strategy which, for the first time, setout a framework for geological conservation in Great Britain. TheStrategy had six main themes that provided direction for geologicalconservation in the 1990s. These were:

• maintaining the SSSI series based on the GCR• expanding the RIGS network • developing new conservation techniques• improving site documentation• increasing public awareness• developing international links.

1990: Regionally Important Geological and geomorphological Sites (RIGS)

The 1990 strategy document formally introduced the concept ofRegionally Important Geological and geomorphological Sites (RIGS).Since 1990, the RIGS movement has expanded rapidly and served to


establish a voluntary geological conservation sector at regional and locallevel, resulting in conservation activity taking place on hundreds of sites.

RIGS are locally or regionally important sites usually identified within acounty or region that are considered worthy of protection for theirgeological or geomorphological importance. RIGS are selected andmanaged by RIGS groups, sometimes called trusts, and are typicallymade up of locally-based geologists, conservationists, teachers, museumworkers and planners, usually working at a county level. Although RIGShave no statutory protection, the details of many RIGS have been passedto local planning authorities and these sites receive some protectionthrough planning policies relating to the relevant local plan (see Chapter2). Although still relatively young, the RIGS movement has resulted inincreased conservation activity and involvement in geologicalconservation at a regional and local level.

1990: The Environmental Protection Act

This Act led, in 1991, to the Great Britain-wide conservation agency, theNature Conservancy Council, being split into three country-basedagencies: the Countryside Council for Wales, English Nature and ScottishNatural Heritage. Alongside these three agencies, the overarching JointNature Conservation Committee (JNCC) was created, havingresponsibility for research and advice on nature conservation at bothUnited Kingdom and international levels.

1994: Planning Policy Guidance 9: Nature Conservation (PPG9)

In 1994, this planning policy guidance provided the first recognition ofRIGS within the planning system.

1999: The Association of UK RIGS Groups (UKRIGS)

Between 1990 and 1999 the number of RIGS groups and their levels ofactivity continued to grow, leading to RIGS groups or equivalents beingestablished in most areas of England and Wales, and in some areas ofScotland and Northern Ireland. A consequence of this growth was anincreased national profile and momentum and a desire for greater nationalrecognition and independence from established conservation bodies.Thus, by 1999, an independent national umbrella body, the Association ofUK RIGS Groups (UKRIGS), was established.

1999: RIGS handbook

This handbook provided advice and guidance on good geologicalconservation practice to RIGS groups across the UK.

2000: The Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act

This Act greatly strengthened legislation relating to the conservation ofgeology and wildlife in England and Wales. It placed emphasis on

130

management rather than just conservation of SSSIs. It encouragedpartnerships to help deliver positive management on SSSIs, but whereappropriate management could not be secured through agreement, theCRoW Act made it possible to impose management. This made itpossible to tackle sites that were deteriorating through neglect, as well asthose suffering from deliberate damage. The Act also required that allpublic bodies should conserve and enhance SSSIs, meaning thatgovernment departments, local planning authorities and privatised utilitieshad to consider how their functions may affect SSSIs, and plan their workaccordingly.

The CRoW Act also made it an offence for anyone to knowingly orrecklessly damage an SSSI, providing significantly more power in dealingwith damage on SSSIs resulting from third-party activities, such asirresponsible fossil or mineral collecting.

2001: The UKRIGS Development Strategy

This document set out, for the first time, an independent vision and seriesof objectives aimed at supporting the RIGS movement.

2001: The Dorset and East Devon Coast World Heritage Site

In 2001, the first World Heritage Site in England to be inscribed onaccount of its geology came into being, with the inscription of the Dorsetand East Devon Coast. This provided geological conservation in GreatBritain with an increased profile and an international stage on which todevelop and share good practice. Of particular importance were theopportunities to promote geology, geological conservation and geotourismto a wide audience. For further details see Chapter 5.

2002: Local Geodiversity Action Plans

By 2002, it was increasingly accepted that effective geologicalconservation required a planned, holistic and participative approach andthat a site-based approach alone was not enough. Thus, building on theapproach taken to the conservation of biodiversity, the concept ofgeodiversity action planning was initiated. This included both LocalGeodiversity Action Plans (LGAPs), produced for a particulargeographical area, and Company Geodiversity Action Plans (CGAPs),produced for the holdings of a business such as a minerals extractioncompany. These plans integrate objectives for national and localconservation designations with those for other geological features ofinterest and are developed and delivered in partnership. For furtherinformation see Chapter 5.

2002: The Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund

The Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund (ALSF) provided, for the firsttime, a very significant source of funding for geological and geologicalconservation projects.


The ALSF arose from the Aggregates Levy, a tax on the commercialexploitation of aggregate, introduced in Great Britain in April 2002. The Aggregates Levy was intended to bring about environmental benefitsby making the price of aggregates better reflect the cost of the impacts ofaggregate extraction on the environment, and by encouraging the use ofrecycled materials. The importance of the Aggregates Levy for geologyand geological conservation is that approximately 10 per cent of themoney raised is allocated to the ALSF, part of which is used to fundprojects delivering geological conservation or interpretation in any areaaffected by aggregate extraction. Eligible activities have included sitemanagement, interpretation, access provision, promotion and specimenrescue. The ALSF has also been a major funder of the geological auditaspect of LGAPs. The ALSF has made a major contribution to geologicalconservation, education and awareness raising, through channellingsignificant sums of money into these areas of activity, and has been ofimmense importance in supporting the work of the RIGS movement.For further details see the Clee Hill Quarries case study, Chapter 4.

2003: Geology Trusts

The growth and increasing diversity of the RIGS movement led to someRIGS groups forming partnerships to co-ordinate their work. One suchgroup, The Geology Trusts, was launched in 2003 and has beensuccessful in securing resources and delivering projects.

2003: European Geoparks

Throughout the 1990s, levels of geological conservation activity at aEuropean and international scale continued to grow with the EuropeanAssociation for the Conservation of the Geological Heritage (ProGEO)providing a focus for activity. In 2003, one European initiative, EuropeanGeoparks, made an impact in England with the declaration of EuropeanGeoparks for the Abberley and Malvern Hills and the North PenninesArea of Outstanding Natural Beauty. These European Geoparksintroduced a new conservation label and approach to geologicalconservation in Great Britain and are demonstrating how to delivergeological conservation on a wider scale. For more information seeChapter 5.

2005: Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS9)

The publication of this planning policy statement represented a major step forward in terms of achieving greater recognition for geologicalconservation in the planning system in England. This policy statement,which replaced PPG9 (1994), gave geological conservation a higherprofile by including it in its title, and through making more specificreference to it throughout the policies. In particular, it made a number of important statements about the need for the planning system to delivergeological conservation across the whole landscape, not just on protected sites.

132

2006: The creation of Natural England

The creation of Natural England, through the merger of English Naturewith parts of the Countryside Agency and the Rural DevelopmentService, points the way forward for conservation of the naturalenvironment in England. It reflects a recognition that the naturalenvironment is best managed in an integrated, holistic way. NaturalEngland brings together geology, geomorphology, soils, habitats,landscape and public access and recreation, creating an organisationwhere geological conservation can be delivered as part of themanagement of the whole natural environment.

Claverley Road Cutting SSSI, Shropshire.Peter Wakely/English Nature


The Earth Science Conservation Classification (ESCC) was originally devisedas a conceptual classification for geological sites by the Nature ConservancyCouncil (NCC). The ESCC was first published in the NCC Earth sciencestrategy document (Nature Conservancy Council 1990a), which describes therationale behind the classification in detail. Since then, the ESCC has beenused extensively by all of the UK statutory conservation agencies as a primarytool in the conservation and management of geological sites.

The ESCC uses site type as the basic unit of classification (Table B1). Theclassification allows generic threats and conservation strategies to be definedfor the different site types. For example, most disused quarries have similargeneric conservation issues associated with them, which are very differentfrom the generic issues on most coastal sites. The ESCC forms the basicclassification for monitoring and condition reporting on geological sites,paralleling the BAP Broad Habitat Type for biological conservation.

The ESCC was used in its original form for 14 years from 1990 to 2004without any formal modification. Although the original classification isfundamentally sound in principle, practical implementation over a number ofyears has helped identify some areas for improvement. The classification hasrecently been revised and agreed by all of the UK statutory conservationagencies. Table B1 shows the original and revised classifications.

The revised ESCC has 16 different site types in three main categories:exposure or extensive (E), integrity (I) and finite (F) in contrast to the originalclassification, which had 11 site types in two main categories. The distinctions between the three main categories are important, reflectingfundamental differences in conservation strategies.

Annex B: A revised Earth Science Conservation Classification

Table B1: The original and revised ESCC categories shown together for comparison.

Original classification Revised classificationExposure sites Exposure or extensive sitesActive quarries and pits EA Active quarries and pits EADisused quarries, pits and cuttings ED Disused quarries and pits EDCoastal and river cliffs EC Coastal cliffs and foreshore ECForeshore exposures EF River and stream sections EWInland outcrops and stream sections EO Inland outcrops EOMines and tunnels EM Exposure underground mines and tunnels EU

Extensive buried interest EBRoad, rail and canal cuttings ER

Integrity sites Integrity sitesStatic (fossil) geomorphological sites IS Static (fossil) geomorphological ISActive process geomorphological sites IA Active process geomorphological IACaves and karst IC Caves IC

Karst IKFinite sites

Unique mineral, fossil or other geological site IM Finite mineral, fossil or other geological FMMine dumps ID Mine dumps FD

Finite underground mines and tunnels FUFinite buried interest FB

134

Exposure or extensive (E) sites contain geological features which arerelatively extensive beneath the surface. The basic principle is thatremoval of material does not cause depletion or damage to the resource,as new material of the same type is being freshly exposed as material isremoved. The main management aim is to achieve and maintain anacceptable level of exposure of the interest features. Site types includeactive quarries and mines, disused quarries, rail and road cuttings, coastalcliffs and foreshore, inland outcrops and extensive buried interest sites.

Integrity (I) sites are geomorphological and are characterised by the needfor holistic management. Damage to one part of a site may adverselyaffect the site as a whole. In the case of active process sites, thefundamental principle is to maintain the active processes by non-interference as far as possible. Site types include active and staticgeomorphological sites, caves and karst.Holme Fen, Cambridgeshire, is an extensive buried

interest site, where the underlying sediments contain animportant Holocene environmental and climatic record.Mick Murphy/English Nature


Finite (F) sites contain geological features that are limited in extent sothat removal of material may cause depletion of the resource. Thefeatures are often irreplaceable if destroyed. The basic managementprinciple is to permit responsible scientific usage of the resource whileconserving it in the long term. Hence, it is often necessary to implementcontrols over removal of material. Site types include many mineral andsome fossil deposits, mine dumps, finite underground mines and finiteburied interest sites.

One of the main changes in the classification is the introduction of thefinite category. Sites in this category would have been classified asintegrity under the original classification. The new main category wasintroduced to distinguish between geomorphological sites, where holisticmanagement is required, and sites where the resource is limited in extent(finite) and where specimen collecting is often a serious problem.Although there are some overlaps as in caves, for example, wherecollecting may sometimes be a problem, introducing this distinctionfacilitates the process of describing generic threats and managementstrategies for these different site types.

An important change has been the introduction of extensive buried andfinite buried categories. The absence of a buried category in the originalclassification was a serious omission, as there are large numbers of thesesites. For example, in England there are more than 100 buried interestgeological SSSIs out of a total of about 1,240. The need to define bothEB and FB categories caused a minor dilemma in terminology as theconcept of a buried exposure site is meaningless by definition. This led tothe introduction of the term ‘extensive’ into the general classification.

Doulting Railway Cutting SSSI, Somerset. Mick Murphy/English Nature

136

There have been several changes within the E group of sites. Cuttingshave been split from disused quarries (ED) and given a separate newcategory (ER). Coastal cliffs and foreshore have been merged into asingle category. River cliffs have been removed from the original ECcategory, stream sections have been removed from the EO category andthe two merged into a single new category (EW). In addition the EMcategory has now been relabelled EU to reflect its direct correspondencewith the FU category.

One change in the integrity group is the splitting of caves and karst intoseparate groups. Another change has been the redefinition of the originalIM and ID site types as FM and FD.

Another important change is the introduction of the finite underground(FU) category which has a direct counterpart in the exposureunderground (EU) category. Most underground mines in Britain aredisused and fall into the former rather than the latter category. In general,once a mine ceases to operate, the resource becomes effectively finite asthere is usually little likelihood of exposing fresh material undergroundwithout blasting.

Limestone pavement in the Burren, County Clare,Ireland. Mick Murphy/English Nature


Why monitor geological sites?

Site monitoring is a fundamental part of the long-term conservation ofgeological sites for a number of reasons. Firstly, it is necessary toregularly check on sites to ensure that damaging activities are notoccurring and that natural degradation is not preventing the site frombeing used for the reasons for which it is being conserved. Secondly,monitoring is an essential part of the process of positive management ofgeological sites, as it helps to identify what management action may beneeded. Thirdly, the statutory conservation agencies are required toreport to Government on the condition of all SSSIs. A monitoring cyclehas been agreed with Government whereby all SSSIs must be monitoredat least once every six years, although many sites require more frequentmonitoring. The monitoring frequency depends primarily on thesensitivity of the site to damage.

Regular monitoring allows threats to the interest of the site to be detectedor foreseen, so that appropriate measures can be taken. Site monitoringin turn informs site management so that appropriate solutions to site-specific problems can be devised when setting objectives for siteconservation and drawing up site management plans.

Site condition reporting is performed within the statutory agencies usingelectronic databases. On a basic level, a condition assessment is enteredunder one of six fixed categories: favourable, unfavourable recovering,unfavourable no change, unfavourable declining, part destroyed anddestroyed. This classification of site condition is used primarily forstatistical purposes in reporting on groups of sites under variouscategories or on the SSSI coverage as a whole. There is also a facility toenter more detailed information on site condition.

Practical site monitoring

The Earth Science Conservation Classification (ESCC), discussed inChapter 2 and Annex B, is used as the primary classification formonitoring purposes by the statutory agencies in the UK. The varyingtypes of human activity or natural degradation processes, that are likely todamage or inhibit usage of the scientific interest of a site, can beconveniently categorised according to ESCC site type (see Table 2.1,Chapter 2). Generic threats are defined for each site type and these listsare then used to create monitoring forms, termed generic favourablecondition tables, for each of the site types. Examples of genericfavourable condition tables for ED and FM sites, similar to those used byEnglish Nature, are given in Tables C1 and C2.

The main threats to the conservation of geological exposures in disusedquarries and pits (ED), as indicated on the form, are landfill, buildingdevelopments, rubbish tipping, obscuring of exposure by vegetation orbuild-up of scree and flooding. In the case of SSSIs, the appropriateagency is required by law to be consulted during the planning stage of abuilding development or landfill application or if an owner is intending to

Annex C: English Nature’s approach to monitoring geological sites

138

undertake an activity for which consent is required, such as dumping ofrubbish. It is still, however, important to regularly monitor such sites toensure that planning conditions are not being contravened, unconsentedactivities are not taking place and there is no damage by third parties,such as fly-tipping. It is also important to monitor natural degradationprocesses so that actions, such as scrub management and scree clearance,can be undertaken to positively manage the site for the geological interest.

Table C2: Example of a generic favourable condition table, as used by English Nature, for FM sites.

FINITE MINERAL, FOSSIL OR OTHER GEOLOGICAL SITE (FM)

Attribute Target Yes/no Site visit commentsExposure of features of interest The features of interest are exposed or can

practically be re-exposed if requiredVegetation Vegetation is not obscuring or damaging the

features of interestTipping or landfill There is no unconsented tipping or landfill

obscuring or damaging the features of interestTree planting There is no unconsented tree planting

obscuring or damaging the features of interestEngineering works There are no unconsented engineering works,

including inappropriate restoration works, obscuring or damaging the features of interest

Specimen collecting There is no irresponsible or inappropriate specimen collecting

Table C1: Example of a generic favourable condition table, as used by English Nature, for ED sites.

DISUSED QUARRIES AND PITS (ED)

Attribute Target Yes/no Site visit commentsExposure of features of interest The features of interest are exposed or can

practically be re-exposed if requiredVegetation Vegetation is not obscuring or damaging

the features of interestTipping or landfill There is no unconsented tipping or landfill

obscuring or damaging the features of interestTree planting There is no unconsented tree planting

obscuring or damaging the features of interestEngineering works There are no engineering works, including

inappropriate restoration works, obscuring or damaging the features of interest

Planning condition observation Planning conditions and restoration agreements or plans are being observed on site

Geological specimen collecting There is no irresponsible or inappropriate specimen collecting


Specimen collecting is generally not considered to be a damaging activityon most types of geological site, if carried out in a responsible manner.Responsible collecting on exposure sites usually does not result indamage to the interest, as removal of rock should reveal more material ofthe same type. In fact, on sites which are rapidly eroding or where activequarrying is taking place, material will be lost if not recovered. On thesesites, responsible collecting is an essential part of site conservation and isoften encouraged by the statutory agencies.

It is generally only on finite sites, such as mineral and fossil sites with astrictly finite resource, that over-collecting becomes a serious threat toconservation. In extreme cases, over-collecting can result in completedestruction of the resource. On many SSSIs with a sensitive or finiteresource, there is a legal requirement on owner/occupiers and third partiesto obtain consent from the appropriate statutory agency before collectingor allowing specimens to be collected. This applies to several FM andFD sites and to all cave sites (IC). In monitoring such sites, any evidenceof unconsented specimen collecting may indicate that the site is beingdamaged, but this needs to be measured against the extent of theremaining resource and usually requires expert judgement.

It is important to note that site access for third parties (ie permission toenter a site for scientific and/or educational purposes) is not used by thestatutory agencies as a criterion in determining site condition. Whilemaintaining site access for scientific and, where appropriate, educationalpurposes is a desirable goal in site conservation, the fact that a landownermay refuse permission to third parties to enter a site does notautomatically mean that the site is in unfavourable condition. Under theprovisions of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000), EnglishNature has power of entry to any SSSI in England for monitoringpurposes and to enforce positive management of the site, if necessary.There is, however, no requirement by law on any landowner to permitaccess to third parties for scientific and/or educational purposes. Siteaccess can be an important criterion for determining the condition ofcertain locally important sites that have been selected primarily for theireducational value.

Monitoring procedure

The first step in monitoring a site is to choose the correct genericfavourable condition table, according to its ESCC code. As noted above,some sites can have more than one ESCC code. If a site has beenpreviously monitored and site-specific conservation objectives have beenproduced (see Chapter 2), these should be used in conjunction with thegeneric favourable condition table to assess site condition.

For statutory sites, the SSSI citation is used to determine what featuresare designated. More detailed descriptions of the interest features onSSSIs are available to statutory agency staff in site managementdocuments. English Nature produced Site Management Briefs (SMBs)for all geological SSSIs in the early 1990s. Similar documents exist for

140

some locally important sites, such as some RIGS. The SMBs, andequivalent documents in the other agencies, are the primary referencesource in undertaking site monitoring, providing a baseline against whichchanges in site condition can be measured.

The SMBs contain general descriptions of the scientific interest features,GCR and SSSI citations and maps, photographs of the site and, in manycases, annotated maps of the sites depicting the location of interestfeatures and photographs. Potential threats to the interest features andother information relevant to site conservation are normally detailed. Inaddition, a program of production of site-specific conservation objectiveshas been underway in English Nature since 2002. These provide veryspecific information on what condition the interest features should be infor the site to be considered as favourable.

The second step in monitoring is to visit the site and to use the sitemanagement document to locate the special interest features. Thedistribution of interest features on geological sites is very variable. Some,such as certain mineral vein interests, may be very localised at one or twoplaces within a site. Others, such as many types of stratigraphic interest,may be distributed across the entire site. Once the interest features havebeen located, they should be assessed using the appropriate genericfavourable condition tables and, if they exist, the site-specificconservation objectives.

In addition to visual assessment, fixed-point photography should be usedto record the condition of the interest features. It is generally sufficient torecord the positions from which photographs have been taken on a map ofthe site. In this way, further site monitoring visits can reproduce similarresults and a long-term photographic record of the site can eventually beproduced.

It is normally necessary only to assess the general condition of theinterest features. If a site is notified for a stratigraphic interest in aparticular series of beds, for example, and the location of these beds isknown from the site management document or conservation objectives,then it is sufficient to check that the beds are well enough exposed todemonstrate the stratigraphic interest. It should not be generallynecessary for monitoring purposes to re-investigate the geology of thebeds to check that they do actually demonstrate the features for which thesite was selected. This should have been done as part of the site selectionprocess.

In general, therefore, monitoring does not have to be performed by anexpert in the particular branch of geology for which the site is notified,provided that high quality site management documents exist. There are,however, exceptions where monitoring may require more expertassessment. Active process sites (IA) are one example where this simpleapproach to monitoring may not be sufficient and expert assessment maybe necessary. Mine dumps (FD) are another example where assessmentof site condition by an expert mineralogist may be required, as a non-

Dee Cliffs, Farndon, Cheshire. Mick Murphy/English Nature


expert is unlikely to be able to identify the minerals of interest and theoverall condition of the resource.

For the purpose of basic condition assessment and statistical reporting, asite can be considered to be in favourable condition if it matches thegeneral criteria of the favourable condition table. If any of the attributesof the site do not meet the criteria, the site may not be in favourablecondition and a further assessment may be required. Because there isoften a significant degree of subjectivity involved in using the generictables, it is important to produce site-specific objectives against whichfuture site condition can be measured.

River South Tyne and Tynebottom Mine SSSI, Cumbria, is an example of a site with active process, mine dumpand underground mineral interests.Mick Murphy/English Nature

142

The cliffs at Tintagel, Cornwall. Mick Murphy/English Nature


AUSTEN, P. A. 2001. The Writhlington experience. In: BASSETT, M.G. and others, eds. A Future for Fossils, 67–70.Cardiff: National Museum of Wales, Geological Series No 19.

BASSETT, M.G., and others, eds. 2001. A Future for Fossils. Cardiff: National Museum of Wales, Geological SeriesNo 19.

BENNETT, N. 2000. Best of both worlds. Earth Heritage, 14, 8–9.

BENNETT, M.R., and others, eds. 1996. Geology on your doorstep – the role of urban geology in earth heritageconservation. Bath: The Geological Society.

BOON, G. 2004. Buried treasure – Sheffield’s lost forest laid to rest (again). Earth Heritage, 24, 8–9.

BRAY, M., & HOOKE, J. 1998. Geomorphology and management of sites in Poole and Christchurch Bays. CoastalDefence and Earth Science Conservation, 233–266. Bath: Geological Society.

BRIDGLAND, D.R., and others. 1995. Purfleet interglacial deposits: Bluelands and Greenlands Quarries. In: TheQuaternary of the Lower Reaches of the Thames, a Field Guide, 167–184. Quaternary Research Association.

BRISTOW, C.R, and others. 2000. The lithostratigraphy, biostratigraphy and hydrogeological significance of the mudsprings at Templars Firs, Wootton Bassett, Wiltshire. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 111, 231–245.

CAPITA SYMONDS. 2004. Geological and geomorphological conservation: a guide to good practice. WestSussex: Capita Symonds, unpublished report.

COUNTRYSIDE COMMISSION & ENGLISH NATURE. 1997–99. Countryside character regional reports:Volumes 1–8. Cheltenham: Countryside Commission.

CUTLER, A., OLIVER, P. G., & REID, C. G. R. 1990. Wren’s Nest National Nature Reserve geological handbookand field guide. Dudley: Dudley Leisure Services Department and Peterborough: the Nature Conservancy Council.

ELLIS, N.V., and others. 1996. An introduction to the Geological Conservation Review. GCR Series No 1.Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.

ENGLISH NATURE, Quarry Products Association and Silica and Moulding Sands Association. 2003. Geodiversityand the minerals industry – conserving our geological heritage. Entec UK Ltd.

ENGLISH NATURE. 2004a. Geology and biodiversity – making the links. Peterborough: English Nature.

ENGLISH NATURE. 2004b. Geological conservation benefits for biodiversity. Peterborough: English NatureResearch Report, No 561.

ENGLISH NATURE. 2004c. Linking geology and biodiversity. Peterborough: English Nature Research Report,No 562.

ENGLISH NATURE. 2004d. Local Geodiversity Action Plans – sharing good practice. Peterborough: English Nature.

GOSNELL, R.P. 1996. More on the Wootton Bassett mud springs. Geology Today, 12, 61–62.

GRAY, J. M. 1992. The Blakeney Esker, Norfolk: conservation and restoration. In: STEVENS, C., and others, eds.Conserving our landscape, 82–86. Peterborough: English Nature.

Annex D: Bibliography

144

GRAY, M. 2003. Geodiversity valuing and conserving abiotic nature. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

HOEY, T. B., SMART, D.W.J., PENDER, G., & METCALFE, N. 1998. Engineering methods for Scottish gravelbed rivers. Scottish Natural Heritage Research, Survey and Monitoring Report, No 47.

JARZEMBOWSKI, E. A. 1991. The rock store at Writhlington. Earth Science Conservation, 29, 12–13.

LARWOOD, J. G., & MARKHAM, D. 1995. Roads and geological conservation: a discussion document.Peterborough: English Nature.

LARWOOD, J.G., & DURHAM, E. 2005. Involving people in geodiversity. Peterborough: Joint NatureConservation Committee.

MACFADYEN, C. 2001. Getting to grips with asset strippers, Earth Heritage, 15, 10.

McKEEVER, P., LARWOOD, J.G., & McKIRDY, A., 2005. Geotourism in Ireland and Britain. In: DOWNING, R.K., & NEWSOME, D., eds. 2005. Geotourism. Oxford: Elsevier, 221–242.

MURPHY, M. 2001. Minerals in the hands of the collectors, Earth Heritage, 15, 14–15.

NATURE CONSERVANCY COUNCIL. 1990a. Earth science conservation in Great Britain, a strategy.Peterborough: Nature Conservancy Council.

NATURE CONSERVANCY COUNCIL. 1990b. Earth science conservation in Great Britain, a strategyappendices. A handbook of earth science conservation techniques. Peterborough: Nature Conservancy Council,.

O’ HALLORAN, D., and others, eds. 1994. Geological and landscape conservation.Bath: The Geological Society.

PROSSER, C. 1992. Key sites go to inquiry. Earth Science Conservation, 30, 15–16.

PROSSER, C. 2001. Spectacular coastline saved. Earth Heritage, 16, 4–5.

PROSSER, C. 2002. Geological first for Kent. Earth Heritage, 17, 24.

PROSSER, C. 2003. Webster’s Clay Pit SSSI – going, going gone…but not forgotten. Earth Heritage, 19, 12.

ROBERTS, M. 1998. Middle Pleistocene sediments and archaeology at Eartham Quarry, Boxgrove, West Sussex.In: The Quaternary of Kent and Sussex, a field guide, 187–213. Quaternary Research Association.

STACE, H., & LARWOOD, J.G. 2006. Natural foundations: geodiversity for people, places and nature.Peterborough: English Nature.

TOGHILL, P. 1992. Onny Valley, Shropshire: geology teaching trail. Geologists’ Association Guide No 45.London: Geologists’ Association.

TOWNLEY, H. ed. 2003. Mineral collecting and conservation – hammering out a future? Proceedings of a one-day conference in Salford, 16 April 2003. English Nature Research Reports, No 505.

WILSON, R.C.L. ed. 1994. Earth Heritage Conservation. Bath: The Geological Society, in assocation withMilton Keynes: The Open University.


Organisation Function WebsiteCountryside Council for Wales Government agency responsible for geological www.ccw.gov.uk

conservation in WalesEnglish Nature* Government agency responsible for geological www.english-nature.org.uk

conservation in EnglandScottish Natural Heritage Government agency responsible for geological www.snh.gov.uk

conservation in ScotlandEnvironment and Heritage Government department responsible for geological www.ehsni.gov.ukService, Northern Ireland conservation in Northern IrelandJoint Nature Conservation Government agency responsible for the Geological www.jncc.gov.ukCommittee Conservation Review (GCR) and for UK-wide

geological conservation issues.Countryside Agency* Government Agency responsible for countryside wwwcountryside.gov.uk

issues including landscape protectionUKRIGS Association of RIGS groups in the UK www.ukrigs.org.ukThe Geology Trusts A partnership of RIGS groups working as ‘trusts’ Various websites, for example

www.glosgeotrust.org.ukGeoConservation Commission The GeoConservation Commission is a forum for www.geoconservation.comof the Geological Society geological conservation in the UK. The major of London organisations and groups interested in geological

conservation are represented on the commissionProGEO European association for geological conservation www.progeo.seBritish Institute for An independent group of geoscientists committed See ProGEO websiteGeological Conservation to geological conservationGeologists’ Association An organisation serving the interests of both www.geologist.demon.co.uk

amateur and professional geologists in the UK Geological Society of London UK national society for professional geoscientists, www.geolsoc.org.uk

hosts the GeoConservation CommissionDorset and East Devon Coast Management of the Dorset and East Devon Coast www.jurassiccoast.comWorld Heritage Site Team World Heritage SiteUNESCO Selection and inscription of World Heritage Sites whc.unesco.orgEuropean Geopark Network Coordination of European Geoparks www.europeangeoparks.orgGeological Curators Group An organisation dedicated to improving the status www.hmag.gla.ac.uk/gcg

of geology in museums and raising the standard of geological curation

Natural History Museum Promotion and curation of world class rock, www.nhm.ac.ukfossil and mineral collections

British Geological Survey National geological survey for Great Britain www.bgs.ac.ukQuaternary Research Organisation for Quaternary research www.qra.org.ukAssociationBritish Geomorphological Professional organisation for geomorphologists www.bgrg.orgResearch Group in Great BritainBritish Caving Association Organisation for British caving www.british-caving.org.ukPalaeontological Society Professional organisation for palaeontologists www.palass.orgRockwatch Nationwide club for young geologists www.rockwatch.org.uk

* From October 2006, the current roles of English Nature, the Landscape, Access and Recreation division of the Countryside

Agency and the environment activities of the Rural Development Service will be brought together to form a new independent

body – Natural England.

Annex E: Finding out more about geological conservation

Front cover photographs:Top left: Sproxton Quarry, Leicestershire. Mick Murphy/English NatureMiddle left: Kingsand, Cornwall.Mick Murphy/English NatureBottom left: M5 motorway, Somerset. Mick Murphy/English NatureMain: High Force, County Durham.Mick Murphy/English Nature

English Nature, the RuralDevelopment Service and theCountryside Agency. Working in partnership to conserve and enhance our landscapes and natural environment, to promotecountryside access and recreation as well as public well-being, now and for future generations.

This is one of a range ofpublications published by: External Relations Team English NatureNorthminster HousePeterborough PE1 1UA

www.english-nature.org.uk

© English Nature 2006

Printed on Evolution Satin, 75% recycled post-consumer wastepaper, elemental chlorine free.

ISBN 1 85716 906 9

Catalogue code ST11.8

Designed and Printed bystatusdesign.co.uk, 3M.

4 case studies - natural england

Documents