The effective stewardship of monuments requires the expertise and co-operation of a range of professional and advisory bodies if site management is to benefit natural habitats and archaeological features. One aspect of the work of Field Monument Wardens, identifying opportunities for sustainable management, hinges upon this integrated, multi-disciplinary approach. Often, the level of conservation intervention need only be slight, but nevertheless can significantly improve longer term site management. Several examples from the East Midlands both represent diverse monuments, themes, and agencies nationally, and serve to emphasise the importance of conservation partnerships
Leicestershire's wardens have recently provided advice about aquatic habitats at two monuments. At the well preserved moated site and associated fishponds at Empingham the owners were considering the excavation and restocking of the fishponds; the Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group advised that a change of use would be difficult to achieve, but that as a wet grassland, the site offered a valuable habitat for many plants and invertebrates. On the basis of this advice, the owners decided against any dramatic change. At Stapleton medieval moated site, the owner wished to improve the quality of the water-filled moat where silting and loss of vegetation had degraded its value to amphibians and invertebrates. Liaison between the Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group, EH, and the owner identified the best approach for site conservation, enhancing habitat and archaeological features.
 |
EH Management Agreements enable occupiers to achieve positive management of archaeological sites; careful clearance of scrub and weeds, for example, can enhance long term nature conservation efforts. At Glenfield, a large medieval moated site and garden enclosure was overgrown with rough grass and weeds. An agreement with EH paid for the thinning of vegetation throughout the monument as part of its longer term management to allow for controlled grazing, pasture improvement, and greater biodiversity. Similarly, at Earlshaw Moated site, Caunton, Nottinghamshire, an agreement financed the clearance of vegetation from the moat arms and island in order to control vegetation and sapling growth as part of a local conservation approach. The moated site is partly surrounded by trees and adjacent to a newly created plantation funded by a separate Woodland Grant Scheme. Displaced wildlife has adapted to these new habitats with thinning timed to avoid the nesting season.
The management of trees and woodland on monuments is an important aspect of site conservation. Tree root-plates can quickly destroy archaeological deposits as they expand while wind-throw can result in the uprooting of trees along with large clumps of earth. An initiative between EH and the Forestry Commission's, Forest Enterprise is establishing management plans for the scheduled monuments on their land (currently 570 sites). Field Monument Wardens offer archaeological advice to local Forest District officers, forming the basis for these management plans. Annesley motte and bailey castle in Nottinghamshire, for example, until recently was covered in dense vegetation, now the Norman earthworks have now been exposed, with surrounding trees and scrub providing new wildlife habitats; the trees near the earthworks will be monitored annually. A management plan has also been agreed for a Viking barrow cemetery comprising almost 60 barrows at Heath Wood, Ingleby, Derbyshire which is the only one of its type known in England. The plan gives particular emphasis to the clearance of trees and vegetation from the mounds themselves as part of the Forest Enterprise's silviculture operations within the plantation. At Beacon Hill Camp near Woodhouse Eaves, Leicestershire County Council have agreed a strategy for the control and removal of bracken which until recently covered large areas of the slopes below the summit. This will allow the public to understand the relationship of the earthworks to the Iron Age hillfort.
 |
A partnership approach allows for the careful assessment of archaeological and nature habitat implications even where protected species pose a threat to archaeological remains; early discussion to identify ways forward also reduces the potential for discord. Badger setts, particularly, require a sensitive approach. Several cases have involved close co-operation between EH, English Nature, local badger groups, and site occupiers. The Leicestershire and Rutland Badger Group have assisted EH at Lyddington, Rutland, where they agreed a strategy for managing damage to the site based upon careful gating to restrict badger access, and a similar approach has been agreed for a site near Stoke Golding, Leicestershire, where a sett had become established in a bank. The Leicestershire and Rutland Badger Group has also secured an English Nature licence to undertake work after assessing and monitoring the setts. Through such co-operation, ways of limiting further sett expansion damage have been identified without harming the local badger populations. On a smaller scale, at an isolated hilltop site, Brundcliffe Hlaew, near Hartington in the Derbyshire Peak District, badgers had burrowed into a rare class of burial mound, of Anglo-Saxon or Viking date. It is one of only 50 or 60 such monuments recorded and authenticated nationally. Following assessment and monitoring of the sett, the High Peak Badger Group concluded that it had become redundant, and a licence was obtained to permit its careful destruction.
All these examples demonstrate the importance of partnership to EH's work at the local level. The effectiveness of securing site management through negotiations with other organizations not directly concerned with archaeological conservation has now evolved to a significant extent. In turn, EH's focus upon monument conservation has often secured the survival of species and habitats which might otherwise be threatened.