4. Summary Conclusion on Method of Approach
 4.1
Introduction
The above analysis shows that a number of very useful lessons
were learnt from the project. It is not practical, or desirable,
to conclude a definitive or preferred method to involve local communities
from this. The chosen method for a particular study will always
depend on local human and financial resources as well as the particular
demands of the project. In addition to the work involved in organising
the exercises, considerable professional time is needed in editing
and compiling the results and reviewing and updating the draft landscape
character assessment.
The adopted approach worked well, given the limitation of time
and resources. Benefits arose from being flexible and modifying
the approach as circumstances dictated. In the event, it was not
possible to meet all of the objectives identified at the outset.
Achievements, or otherwise, relating to each of the initial objectives
are summarised below.
4.2 To record the perceptions and values
that members of the local community attach to their landscape.
The methodology enabled the recording of perceptions and values
held by the local communities both at an early stage of the process,
uninformed by any aspect of the landscape character assessment process,
and mid-way through the project when the participants had a better
understanding of the landscape character assessment process. It
was found that as new information was acquired, people’s values
did not change but the knowledge gained did enable them to articulate
their opinions better. Where perceptions did change, this was because
they had been based on a lack of knowledge or a more narrow view.
The process helped to point out features that were intrinsic to
the local landscape and often taken for granted, only being missed
once they were lost. Local distinctiveness was valued by all.
The perceptions and values the participants attached to the Test
Valley landscape varied from a general attachment to the wider area
and characteristics, features such as the riverside pubs, good fishing
opportunities, to detailed knowledge of a very localised area, where
small changes mattered, such as the demolition of an old wall, changes
in water levels in the streams. Few regarded the borough of Test
Valley as a landscape entity. Most participants considered that
the landscape of Test Valley merged with adjacent landscapes (the
New Forest, the Downs) but all valued the Test Valley for its landscape,
and its natural and historic interest. They were however concerned
that they had little or no control over the rural environment; that
it was ill managed and untidy and that in part they were unwelcome.
The more rural dwellers felt threatened by ever expanding features
of urban life.
The participants expressed their view that it was important to
involve local people in the process, not only as they know and understand
their area well but they have strong views on the issues affecting
their area. They felt that the process should not be the preserve
of professionals and special interest groups.
a) Views from the Initial Focus Group Meetings
Above all, the greatest overall impression is that the local communities
find the countryside within which they lived unspoilt, rich and
tranquil, even ‘superb’, with ‘lovely places to
go’. The variety of the landscape is notable with particular
importance attached to the ‘New Forest’ part of the
Borough, the open aspects of the downs, the lush farmland and river
of the Test Valley and the tributaries with wooded valleys. Few
unattractive elements are mentioned except for the quarries along
the river valley sides.
The River Test is generally considered the borough’s greatest
asset:
‘The Test is a chalk trout stream, one of the best in
the world.’
‘If Test Valley is going to be defined the river must
define it, because although there is chalk and wetlands and various
styles of country in between, the basic description, the thing that
makes it, is the river.’
‘The river goes right the way through it, and is the
main feature. The quality of that river, there are very few rivers
in the country of that standard. It is a very clean river. It is
full of fish. You can really enjoy yourself there and appreciate
the beauty of it round here. I think that is the central attraction
of it.’
The Test Valley Borough landscape is not considered to have a
strong identity, although many recognise that the north differs
from the south and that the River Test Valley defines and links
the Borough. It is recognised that parts of the south lay within,
or were similar to, the New Forest. Otherwise the landscape has
little in common with its neighbours such as the Wiltshire Downs
(referred to as the Salisbury Downs). Local people seem generally
unaware of the special wildlife habitats of the Borough but value
what they see. The decline in some species, mostly birds, and the
rise in others such as deer and pheasants (perhaps from a decline
in hunting) is however noticed.
Access to the Test Valley countryside is a particular issue, with
many people commenting on lack of footpaths, car parks serving accessible
areas, information about the area and areas where the public are
welcomed. Some residents would like to see more country parks. As
a result few feel that the countryside plays a significant role
in their lives. Many find woodland more attractive to walk in, compared
to the openness of the downs. The north is considered better served
than the south, except for within the New Forest.
‘I wouldn’t particularly know of the different
kinds of landscape out there because I haven’t been given
the access’.
It is not thought that the landscape has a strong historical tradition,
with the notable exception of Romsey (‘steeped in history’),
the River Test trout fisheries, Danebury Hill Fort, historic houses
in the south and the typical thatch, flint and red brick buildings.
Andover is perceived as all new and unrelated to the history of
the rest of the borough.
The greatest source of change is seen to be:
Alterations in farming practice, in particular loss of pasture
and farm buildings, poor maintenance of hedgerows (hedge cutting
is a big issue) and ditches, the creation of larger fields and introduction
of large areas of single crops
Changes in farming management are blamed for increased flooding,
loss of wildlife, increased polluted watercourses
The over expansion of urban areas (in particular Andover) and
loss of traditional local ways of looking after the landscape
The increase in golf courses and equestrian activity
Changing social structure resulting in alterations to the built
form of the villages and heavier traffic
The expansion of Andover is a key concern of the north Test
Valley residents. As one resident puts it:
‘The farming community used to be very widespread. The
town (Andover) has scattered it all, because you started off with
a small town, and then it started going out like a spider’s
legs, and those legs have now got fatter and fatter, so the farming
communities around have got thinner and thinner’.
In contrast the small ‘sleepy’ villages around Andover
with their traditional thatched dwellings are ‘much valued’.
There is no particular perception that any one area is more in
need of protection than another: all green rural areas and their
villages are worth protecting. Many see farmers as the guardians
of the countryside and the character of the landscape and therefore
both the credit and criticisms are accredited to the farming community.
Little mention is made of the role of the local authorities or environmental
groups. There is more interest in the conservation of the existing
landscape than in creating new landscapes, and in fact there is
some criticism of ‘excessive and artificial landscaping’
as a part of new developments.
‘If we can keep farming then we’ll maintain this
scenery’.
b) Summary of Views from the Workshop
The following cover the more general views expressed at the workshop.
Particular comments on the landscape character types and character
areas have been included under the Community Perceptions in the
Test Valley Community Landscape Project: Landscape Character Assessment.
March 2004. The main themes have been picked out from the contents
of the transcripts.
Purpose of the Study: there was concern about
the purpose of the study and whether the participants were wasting
their time. For example:
‘Maybe the outcome of this should be made much clearer
and much earlier on for the people that are involved in it. So you
don’t feel kept in the dark.’
‘We were a bit suspicious because we thought it was
to do with planning’. ‘Yes we thought there was a conspiracy,
I am not totally unconvinced that there is not.’ ‘If
you are being really cynical you could say - well have they just
done this so that they can say that they are just asking the people
what they wanted but they don’t take any notice’.
‘Will it make a difference; hopefully someone is not
just going through the motions to say they have done it. But if
they are actually going to somewhere or other, put this into documentation,
and then in other areas, such as the planning department, they will
make reference to it. Therefore it will be a completely useful document.’
‘There is one good thing, doing something is better than doing
nothing.’ ‘I would like to see this go all the way,
where it is a document and it is referred to.’
Change: many were well informed of the causes
of change and saw the process as long term. For example:
‘You have to remember that for the last 2,000 years
people have been trying to get their living off these downs. If
you are going to fossilise it and say it has got to be a museum,
it has got to be done through (farmers) because he didn’t
push hedges out for nothing. He did it for a sane reason’.
‘I think commercial farming in five years time won’t
exist myself, what we are talking about putting the hedges back
will probably enhance the fields and they will be more sympathetic
to people riding horses, more walking and tourism, that is what
it is going to be.’
‘This (demand for irrigation) comes back to our business
of hill water, taking out so much water from the aquifers that the
land is becoming drier and I think possibly in the near future it
is going to be an issue because arable land will no longer be arable
because it will be dry.’ ‘Because the water table (is)
being lowered by this constant withdrawal of this water for commercial
purposes’.
‘Overall the whole area of the southern area is at risk
from people who either want to dig holes in it or build houses on
it’. ‘You find yourself in a village and come back in
10 years time you find yourself in a town.’
‘There was a lot of talk about keeping things the way
they are, which is very important. But we are actually going to
have to have to think about how things are going to change. Not
necessarily just about how to keep things the way they are’.
Hedgerows: views varied on the main causes of
damage. For example:
‘But I think also too that the hedgerows now are gradually
being ripped up to let farmers make the fields bigger so they can
use the huge implements they use.’ ‘I think that has
slowed down. There are grants and things flying around. Ashley is
a big sheeping estate and I know he has got a lot of hedge covering.’
‘They have got to be maintained as well, that is the problem.
They go and plant them and then they are totally ignored because
of the busy times. So they just disintegrate.’ ‘There
is a wonderful piece of proper hedge laying that someone has done
just down Foxes Lane in Wellow. I would love to say – could
we not support farmers doing that.’ ‘Poor quality hedgerows
is important, in particular quite a number of the verge side hedgerow
are the responsibility of the highways authority who are being singularly
remiss in that respect.’
Woodland: when asked about the priority for woodlands:
‘Moving away from the pine to the more traditional English
trees.’ ‘Changing the character of the woodland is one
of the aspects and improving access.’ ‘But a wood is
no use to anyone unless it has open space in it because it is very
devoid, it is the change in the land/woodland that makes the environment
interesting and diversified.’ ‘So it is all very well
having woodland but you need to keep some open spaces as well and
to use it usefully.’
‘There needs to be some kind of woodland management,
other than just leave it until it falls down.’ ‘I think
if you manage an area correctly and enhance it in the way you can
make it accessible to people. It is also going to have the side
effect that there will be less vandalism because people will see
it.’
Fields: there was importance attached to local
history. For example:
‘I don’t know if you are aware of it but in this area
all the fields from the original estate will have their own names
and now suddenly the hedges are ripped out and what would have been
three or four fields is now one field.’ ‘The farmer
who managed the land would have his map with all the names of the
fields on his map.’ ‘These downs never were fenced and
when they were fenced they were always as large fields. I don’t
think on a lot of these downs there were hedges. The sheep went
out there for miles.’
Heathland: perceptions varied as to what
constituted heathland. For example:
‘If someone said ‘heathland’ to me I would think
of where heather grows. We don’t have heather so much.’
The heath is growing this year where there has been less stocking
let at it and the gorse has been cut.’ ‘There has been
so little gorse cutting in the past few years the gorse is very
intrusive.’ ‘If they do less grazing then the heather
will come back.’ ‘I think I would agree that normally
with heathland it is associated with Scots pine.’
MOD land: there were many concerns. For
example:
‘Air fields at Middle Wallop. There is never a dark night
up there, the light pollution in the village from the camp.’
‘They don’t need to have their lights going up as well
as down’. ‘The openness around Danebury Ring is essential;
the last thing you want to see is the airfield slowly encroaching
its way towards Danebury Ring.’
‘The MOD rifle range at Barton Stacey has a huge impact
on the visual environment. It has these huge butts that they shoot
at.’ ‘It is pretty well camouflaged, unless you are
looking for it.’ ‘If you go along the A30 it stands
out quite well, they use it a lot and the noise factor is quite
high.’ ‘All around Shipton is the tank training area.
So it is a huge impact.’
Minerals and Waste: proper restoration
of these sites was a key issue: For example:
‘Restoring the mineral extraction I think is most important.’
‘I do feel that the restoration of minerals and waste sites
is important. We don’t want any more.’
Natural beauty: the report was criticised for the lack of reference
to the beauty of the area. For example:
‘It (the study) doesn’t say how beautiful it (the
Test Valley) is, it is all quite negative.’ In response to
the question ‘Does the beauty of this countryside come out
in this document?’ ‘No’. ‘Hardly anything
is said.’
Terminology: this was generally a problem.
For example:
‘Intrusion out, enrichment out
and also a plea for intimate out. It is a technical term’.
A debate on the meaning of secluded/remote: ‘It is secluded’.
‘No, I don’t think it is, if I lived there I wouldn’t
say I live in Mottisfont, it is remote.’ ‘It is secluded,
it is not remote.’ ‘I wouldn’t say Mottisfont
is secluded.’ ‘I would.’ ‘Parts of the Tytherley’s
feel is very secluded.’ ‘It is a proper rural landscape.’
‘Rural, yes, definitely, more rural than remote.’
Top
4.3 To use the process to encourage and develop
links between rural and urban sectors of the community.
It was not possible to develop this aspect very far. With the
exception of Andover, the more urban communities of Test Valley
(in Romsey, Chandlers Ford, North Badddesley) saw themselves as
part of the rural landscape and links between members of the community
tended to depend on the activities and interests of individuals.
It was noted that the study process did help to achieve a better
understanding of rural issues in those who up to then had little
involvement in rural affairs.
The study also highlighted the divide between the perceptions
of those who live in Andover and those living across the rest of
the Borough but was not able to provide an opportunity to bring
the parties together. In general the participants from Andover were
not so actively involved in discussions.
Top
4.4 To help create a greater level of public
understanding and awareness of issues affecting the landscape and
those aspects that create the landscape character.
This was a most productive and rewarding aspect of the study.
Although, by the workshop stage only a relatively small number of
people were involved, they expressed an improvement in their understanding
and awareness of the inter-relationships within the landscape, generated
by both the information they had been given and their on-going dialogue
in a new way of appraising their landscape.
Participants found that the process had helped them to appreciate
differences between areas and given them a wider vocabulary to describe
these differences. Some residents used the word ‘empowered’
to describe how they had gained from the process. Participants said
that they had obtained a better knowledge of other parts of the
Borough and the influence that farmers had on the landscape form
of the countryside. The initial focus groups acted as a control
or baseline, where we were able to record the perceptions and values
of people who had previously had no reason to give a great deal
of thought to defining landscape character and landscape issues.
The workshop went onto develop an understanding and awareness of
the issues involved in characterisation of the landscape.
The participants found it relatively easy to understand the concept
of landscape types, although they were unable to distinguish subtle
differences such as ‘small’ or ‘medium scale mixed
farmland and woodland or ‘enclosed’ or ‘semi-enclosed’
landscapes. The sub division of the types into specific character
areas was also grasped easily and related well to the participants’
sense of belonging to a particular area. The Key Characteristics
were readily understood, but Issues were more difficult to grasp.
In general there was a greater awareness of some issues than others,
often resulting from a lack of interest in issues that did not affect
them directly.
The process had also encouraged debate within some participants’
families and friends. Particularly encouraging were the suggestions
from the participants of other ways of involving the wider community
in the discussions such as through school projects, parish involvement,
using local records and illustrative material. Many participants
expressed an interest in a continuing involvement in the landscape
character assessment process.
Views on Community Involvement
The following are extracted from the ‘wash-up’ session.
On the Focus Groups: ‘I found the first
one (the Focus Group meeting) very interesting and useful. I went
not knowing what to expect and I was really able to contribute and
say, put our views across…….This time (the Workshop)
we were just going through really a check list. There wasn’t
a lot of time to say why this happened.’ ‘I personally
liked the first session more so than today. There have been aspects
of today that have been quite interesting but the pathway seems
to have really led to confirmation rather than change I think.’
On empowerment: ‘I suppose I am scared
as to whether lots of discussion will make any difference if you
like.’ ‘I hope that we make some difference that is
all.’ ‘I might take this information into the school
where I work and hopefully I will be able to affect some young people
who live in the community as well.’ ‘It has made us
all think about what is happening. The first one woke me up and
made me realise I had views about the thing that I would never of
had the opportunity to voice or think about to a great extent. So
it made us think a lot more about what is happening.’
‘I don’t know if we will get a copy of the amended
draft.’ ‘Then we would know that, if you ever came back
to us for another opinion or we ever did one of these again, we
would know it was worthwhile. We would know that we hadn’t
given a day and an evening of our time for nothing.’
On the Workshop: ‘This time round we
were able to delve into the reasons for the structural changes that
happen in agriculture, farming and villages and rural life. Which
really gave the answers of why we were having to look at the environment.
It is much deeper than just a physical change.’ ‘I think
I learnt a lot from everybody not just the survey, from other people’s
input as well.’ ‘We rubbed a few cobwebs away today
but we were kept in the dark very much at the first meeting.’
On who to involve: ‘You want someone
who is just a villager, who lives in a village and has an opinion
and who, I class, is just a run of the mill person and not a member
of the council and haven’t got a particular agenda they want
to back.’ ‘I think if perhaps you could take some of
this to schools, I think that is when we are really going to hit
home.’ ‘They are not all yobs, most of them have some
good opinions. It is their countryside. It will be theirs and not
ours.’
Top
4.5 To involve the local community in determining
the most appropriate broad strategies and guidelines for the landscape,
through land management and development policy and control.
The process enabled very little debate on the strategies and guidelines.
Summary strategies which were included in the Draft Summary for
Consultation were considered at the workshop and these were amended
to reflect more specific characteristics of the character area.
Terminology such as ‘landscape structure’ was difficult
for residents to understand and has been amended. Requests were
made to include ’conserve’ as well as ‘enhance’
as strategic objectives for some areas, where appropriate. However,
in some cases these comments were more relevant to guidelines on
specific issues.
At the ‘wash-up’ session several participants regretted
that they had not been able to discuss guidelines and expressed
a wish to be able to comment on the final document and its guidelines
and to see the process through to the end. Their comments have however
been used to inform the final review of the guidelines.
No further consultation is to be undertaken on the Test Valley
Community Landscape Project. The classification, description and
identification of key characteristics and key issues will be adopted
as SPG but it is proposed to append the guidelines to the main report
as an advisory document.
4.6 To inform the Local Strategic Partnerships
of environmental aspects of the Borough and County Community Strategies.
The Test Valley Landscape Character Assessment and this report
will provide valuable information to assist in the development of
both Borough and County Community Strategies.
Click
here for a printable version of this page.
Click
here to download this page to your computer in Adode PDF format.
Click
here to obtain a free copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
|
