Folly Farm, Somerset, England

T

REVOR

D

AVIES

Preamble.Although Folly Farm is very successful at IREM by meticulously managing for farm production, commercial forestry management, environmental education and biodiversity management, it poses an interesting question of whether its ongoing management practices, that are made possible by generous public donations, various grants and dedicated voluntary labour, can be used as a useful template for IREM in modern commercial farming. As you will

An overview of the Folly Farm site, Somerset, England. Photo by Glyn Bissix.

The old farmhouse at Folly Farm. Photo by Glyn Bissix.

see, Folly Farm is in essence a museum of traditional farming methods that mimics old farming methods that were practised several decades ago of necessity rather than by design.

Introduction

In response to the food shortages experienced in the Second World War, British agricultural policy, bolstered by generous subsidies, focused on self-sufficiency and developed one of the most intensive agricultural systems in the world. While per acre production was very high, this came at a cost to environmental quality and required massive inputs of fertilizers, pesticides and petroleum products. In the past decade or so, more attention has been paid to restoring the environmental quality of the countryside by reducing certain subsidy forms and introducing others that stimulate more environmentally sensitive resource management methods. Folly Farm is located approximately 10 miles south of Bristol, a city of some half a million people in southwest England. The farm sits in an undulating rural area, close to the Mendip Hills, a lime- stone upland that also includes Cheddar, the origin of the famous cheese. The site is presently owned by the local Avon Wildlife Trust and is managed by the Trust as a nature reserve which also includes traditional farm operations. It was purchased by the Trust in 1987 from a member of the Strachey family, who were Lords of the local manor – Sutton Court. Prior to acquisition by the Trust, it had been let as a tenanted farm, and for most of the 20th century was used for dairy cattle, sheep and pigs. In the 1780s, it had been landscaped as an ornamen- tal farm (ferme ornée) so that the gentry of the manor could enjoy a coach ride and admire the views before dinner.

Farm Description

The farm is set into a curved ridge of land that provides wonderful viewpoints and, perhaps more importantly, has discouraged intensive farming on its steep hillsides (toward the rear of the farm). This has helped maintain a habitat of unimproved natural grassland and has also preserved an area of ancient woodland on its slopes. Significantly, the lower flatter fields that have been ploughed and fertilized repeatedly are less interesting for wildlife. This farmland then has three main components: (i) unimproved grassland; (ii) improved grassland; and (iii) woodland. The unimproved grassland and woodland form the nature reserve, while the improved grassland is given over to sheep and beef cattle grazing. The sheep and cattle are owned and managed by a local herdsman who rents the grazing rights. Interestingly, some areas of improved grassland have recently been planted to extend the woodland, while beef cattle graze the unimproved grassland during the winter months. The 17th-century farmhouse, which is currently vacant, occupies the farm’s centre. Presently, the outbuildings are utilized as workshops, tool sheds and rest rooms for the volunteer workforce, and lecture rooms for the various educational courses held there. This building complex is presently being converted into a residential environmental education centre.

Unimproved grassland

Unimproved grasslands constitute 50 acres located on a curved ridge with moderate to steep slopes rising approximately 300 feet, forming a natural amphitheatre. The soils are mainly neutral limestone and clay, which support unimproved natural grassland interspersed with large areas of scrub (mainly blackthorn and bramble), species-rich hedges and mature trees.

The whole of this sector has been designated a ‘Site of Special Scientific Interest’ (SSSI) which is a central government designation that gives some level of legal protection to help maintain integrity as an unimproved grassland habitat. These species-rich grasses support many impor- tant flora such as cowslips, heath spotted orchids and pepper saxifrage, while among the butterflies, marsh fritillary, brown argus and marbled white predominate. Roe deer have been seen browsing, and barn owls hunt over the tussocky grass; in addition, kestrels occasionally hover over the grassland, while buzzards are a common sight soaring at height over these grassy slopes. A key indication of the undisturbed nature of the grassland is the number of large (12–18 inches high) anthills that dot these slopes.

Despite the predominance of natural processes at work in this sector, challenges in main- taining a desired wildlife habitat occur. For example, scrub would overrun the grassland if left uncontrolled. Therefore, a level of control is achieved by cutting back the scrub with both powered brush cutters and hand tools. The debris is then carefully burned to avoid undue soil enrichment. Due to the presence of nesting birds in these areas of blackthorn and bramble, however, control strategies can only be implemented during the October–March period.

Poaching, trampling and breaking the soil into wet muddy patches, which is caused by cattle pulverizing the soil with their hooves during wet conditions, is also a problem. This is particu- larly problematic at gateways and ‘narrows’ that occur between clumps of scrub, and is especially evident toward the end of the normally wet winter. In addition to degrading wildlife habitat, this also makes the footpaths impassable. As this is an open-access farm with footpaths especially created to encourage visitors, and because this is a SSSI where any form of imported surface material is not permitted, it is important to manage this problem in an environmentally acceptable way. This is normally achieved by widening narrow access points where possible, or by forming alternative routes for walkers.

Improved grassland

The improved grassland areas are fenced mainly for sheep grazing, but are also used, to a lesser extent, for cattle. Grazing results in constantly cropped grass that provides very little habitat for small mammals or a variety of flora. This grazing area was considerably reduced in 1999 by the creation of extensive ‘barn owl corridors’. Moving the stock fencing back from the field boundaries by some 30 yards, forming broad continuous runs of rough grassland, created these corridors. This strategy provides an improved habitat for small mammals such as field moles that form the basic diet of barn owls. Nationally, barn owls have been in decline. This is thought to be due mainly to the loss of grass margins that resulted from intensive agricultural development. A recent site survey indicates that moles are already colonizing these corridors, and all owl boxes placed in proximity show signs of roosting. Most importantly, grazing inten- sity has been adjusted to the reduced grazing area; significantly, organic farming techniques have been introduced recently, and there appear to be few conflicts between the farming activities and nature conservation. Indeed, light grazing of the SSSI is not only acceptable, it is considered necessary to produce a desirable habitat.

Woodland

There are two major woodland areas within the boundaries of Folly Farm. While they have many similarities, Dowlings Wood has been designated an SSSI, while the other, Folly Wood, has not. This difference in designation is due in part to past management practices and in part

to location. The more protective restrictions inherent in an SSSI designation impacts the wood- lands’ use and management. This difference has resulted in Dowlings Wood having a wider variety of flora and fauna species and consequently being of greater natural history interest.

In addition to the two main woodlands, there are also three orchards on the farm. One is adjacent to the farmhouse and consists of mature apple trees, while the other two have recently been completely replanted with traditional apple varieties, some of which are becoming quite rare.

Dowlings Wood

Dowlings Wood extends approximately 25 acres over a sloping site that is predominantly fairly wet due to poor drainage of the underlying soil. The trees are mainly ash, pedunculate oak, wych elm and hazel, while the ground cover includes ramsons, cuckooflower, bluebells, dog’s mercury, wild garlic, early purple orchids and herb paris. A large badger sett is a prized wildlife asset and is situated on the edge of the wood. Roe deer, grey squirrels and rabbits are also present.

An extensive management programme of coppicing is being carried out to promote greater diversity of the habitat structure and, as a consequence, provides greater interest for wildlife. Coppicing is an ancient forest management technique that involves the selective cut- ting down of trees to ground level and the nurturing of sprouting of fresh growth from the base.

The selected mature trees left standing help provide a range of habitat within the coppiced area. Deer browsing of the tender regrowth is a major problem that has been overcome by surrounding each coop with a 6 ft high chestnut paling fence. While this fencing detracts from the natural appearance of the woodland and sometimes necessitates re-routing of the foot- paths, it is considered essential for successful regeneration and sustainable wood production.

Bat, bird and dormouse boxes have been sited throughout the wood to encourage population stability as well as help monitor their presence. From an IREM perspective, it is important to note that although a ‘way-marked’ walk is routed through Dowlings Wood, other, more inten- sive activity is not encouraged. It is also important to note that the felled timber created from coppicing has been used for making charcoal on-site, firewood and other woodland products.

Folly Wood

Folly Wood covers an area of some 20 acres of mature woodland that has been extended to approximately 60 acres by the recent planting in adjacent improved grassland. As with Dowlings Wood, the mature area has been coppiced at certain locations. Folly Wood is used extensively for educational and recreational purposes, particularly during the summer. It has several footpaths running through it, including one that has been levelled and surfaced with crushed stone to provide an ‘access for all’ trail. Consequently, these trails are suitable for people using wheelchairs and parents with children in pushchairs. Courses are held throughout the summer term for classes of school children to improve their understanding of, and relationship with, nature and the environment. Much of this activity takes place within Folly Wood.

A deep ravine, through which runs a small stream, dominates the east end of the wood.

To one side of the ravine and easily observed from a platform on the ‘access to all’ trail is a badger sett; two fox earths have also been noted in this area. Among the birds recorded are buzzard, sparrowhawk, great spotted woodpecker, green woodpecker, goldcrest, chaffinch, blackcap, great tit and wood pigeon.

The newly planted areas mentioned earlier were formed on improved pasture previously grazed by sheep that had little biodiversity. The planting was carried out between 1993 and 1997, using mainly one-third ash, one-third oak and one-third a mixture of wild cherry, field

maple, crab apple, Scots pine and holly. It is expected that only one in nine of the planted stems will survive to maturity; however, the variety and the unpredictability of which stems and which species survive promises a species-rich and diverse, although even-aged forest structure in the future. Wide rides (areas left for grasses) have been incorporated throughout the planted areas to provide access and to maximize woodland edges to give habitat diversity.

In some areas, the saplings were fitted with plastic sleeves to protect against browsing, while other areas were completely surrounded with deer-proof fencing. Experience has shown that protection with tubes has been most beneficial for tree vitality; perhaps because of this shielding, it also provides protection against the elements during the early stages of growth.

Farm Management

The day-to-day cost of running Folly Farm is met by the Avon Wildlife Trust, which is funded by membership subscriptions and occasional grants and legacies. Although Folly Farm is the largest property owned by the Trust, it also manages 30 other nature reserves as well as its head office in Bristol. Central government money, funded through the Countryside Commis- sion, is available for specifically defined tasks such as hedge laying, tree planting and provi- sion of public access. Capital projects may also be partly funded through the Heritage Lottery Fund. One such project has been approved to fund a renovation and conversion of the farmhouse and its outbuildings to make them suitable to accommodate residential courses.

There are no permanent staff currently in residence at the farm, or indeed employed full- time at the site. The general maintenance of the farm buildings and nature reserve is carried out, within their abilities, by a group of volunteers 1 day a week. However, this is an ageing workforce comprised of semi-retired men and women, including this case study’s author. This workforce is split into three work parties consisting of six conservation workers, three building maintenance workers and a smaller group who maintain the garden at the front of the farm- house. The conservation party spends its time clearing scrub, forming and maintaining foot- paths, replacing and repairing fences and gates, as well as constructing simple bridges and viewing platforms. Bird boxes have been made and sited, and require annual inspection. This core group’s efforts are occasionally augmented by large groups of usually younger people who come in on weekends and carry out the more arduous manual labour such as scrub clear- ance, an almost continuous task from November to March. Contractors carry out large-scale coppicing, and work such as tree felling and major fencing projects as and when required.

The farm is open to public access at all times, and visitors are encouraged. A car park is provided near the farmhouse from which three ‘way-marked’ walks emanate; one of which is the ‘access for all’ trail. A fourth walk is planned and will be available in the future when way-mark signs, stiles and ‘kissing gates’, etc., are in place. One extremely positive note is that very little vandalism or damage has occurred despite the open and generally unsupervised nature of the site. This may be due to its distance from a population centre; people have to make a special effort to visit the site and in general it seems that visitors are sympathetic to the Avon Wildlife Trust’s aims.

Discussion Questions

1. Identify six initiatives regarding the management of natural resources from your com- munity or region that appear to support the liberalization of the global trade agenda and the promotion of a sustainable society agenda (three of each). To what extent is each of these initiatives implemented successfully? To what extent do these examples overlap in their trade liberalization and sustainability objectives?

Case Study Discussion Questions

9. While it can be said that the primary aim of the Avon Wildlife Trust and its volunteers at Folly Farm is to enhance the area’s value as a site of nature conservation, to provide access and to provide interpretation which, hopefully, will improve visitors’ educational and recre- ational opportunities and increase their enjoyment of wildlife, to what extent can it also be seen as a laboratory for sustainable farming and integrated resource and environmental management?

10. To what degree do you believe that the resource management techniques employed at Folly Farm are both useful for enhancing environmental quality and practical in today’s farming environment?

11. Who benefits and who loses from farmers adopting more environmentally friendly resource management practices?

12. If a farm near you was to manage its land resources more to enhance biodiversity, to what extent do you believe it is reasonable to subsidize farmers from tax revenue to fund the farmer’s extra costs and forgone profits? From what level of government should these subsidies be drawn? What other ways are possible to sustain these environmentally sensitive practices over the long term?

2. The Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District, which was formed in 1933, was charged with the responsibility of integrating ‘multiple purposes, multiple means and multiple participants’. Consider a natural resource management initiative in your home region and either identify how this project involves multiple purposes, multiple means and multiple participants, or think about how it might do so to better serve society.

3. Given the experience of places such as Dartmoor National Park, UK, Kananaskis Country in Alberta, Canada, and the Great Barrier Reef in Queensland, Australia, what do you consider to be the trade-offs for single interest natural resource exploitation industries (e.g. forestry, fishing and mining) that must operate in multiple-use, integrated resource and environmental management situations?

4. The text suggests that there are few, if any, examples of large-scale integrated forest resource management projects throughout the world. What influences forest managers to pursue single purpose – usually forest fibre extraction – objectives rather than practice more integrative, multiple-objective strategies?

5. Australian farmers are increasingly looking toward integrative resource management methods. What factors lead them towards this and what influences seemingly stand in their way? Are there examples in your own region that illustrate similar circumstances?

6. Frontier developments are said to be a substantial challenge to environmental manage- ment, sustainable development and integrated resource management, and rarely live up to their initial billing. What factors create the most difficulty in improving the life-style of local inhabitants in these regions? Identify an example of frontier development reasonably close to your own region and discuss the pros and cons of this development.

7. What management challenges do you see as critical in trying to corral a large residential population with a broad range of industrial and recreation interests to follow a coordinated approach to ecosystem-based resource and environmental management?

8. The US National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was said to falter because of inadequate biophysical data, insufficient time, scarce social data and problematic weighting systems in developing an environmental impact assessment (EIA). Identify an example of each of these concerns for a real or hypothetical case and explain why each would create difficulty in making a useful impact statement.

References

Atkinson, N. (1991) Dartmoor National Park: Second Review 1991. Dartmoor National Park Authority, Bovey Tracey, Atkinson, N. (1992)UK. Dartmoor National Park Local Plan: Including Minerals and Waste Policies – Consultation Draft 1992.

Dartmoor National Park Authority, Bovey Tracey, UK.

Baker, D.C., Young, J. and Arocena, J. (2000) An integrated approach to reservoir management: the Williston Reservoir case study.Environmental Management25(5), 565–578.

Behan, R.W. (1990) Multiresource forest management: a paradigmatic challenge to professional forestry. Journal of Forestry 88(4), 12–18.

Bellamy, J. (1999) Evaluation of Integrated Catchment Management in a Wet Tropical Environment: Collected Papers of Land and Water Research Development Corporation. (R & D Project CTC7–2) Institutional arrangements for ICM in Queensland. CSIRO Tropical Australia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Bellamy, J., McDonald, G., Syme, G. and Butterworth, J. (1999) Evaluating inte- grated resource management.Society and Natural Resources12(4), 337–353.

Bissix, G. and Bissix, S. (1995) Dartmoor (UK) National Park’s landscape management:

lessons for North America’s Eastern sea- board. In: Herman, T., Bondrup-Nielsen, S., Martin, J.H. and Munro, N. (eds).Eco- system Monitoring and Protected Areas.

Science and Management of Protected Areas Association, Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada, pp. 563–571.

Bissix, G. and Rees, J.A. (2001) Can strategic ecosystem management succeed in multi- agency environments?Ecological Applica- tions: a Journal of the Ecological Society of America11(2), 570–583.

Blunden, J. and Curry, N. (1988)A Future for Our Countryside. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, Born, S. and Sonzogni, W. (1995) IntegratedUK.

environmental management: strengthening

the conceptualization. Environmental Management19(2), 167–181.

Boyack, S. (2000)National Parks for Scotland:

Consultation on the National Parks (Scotland) Bill. Scottish Executive, Edinburgh, UK.

Gamble, D.J. (1978, March) The Berger Inquiry: an impact assessment process.

Science19, 946–952.

Goodwin, R.F. (1999, April–September) Re- developing deteriorated urban waterfronts:

the effectiveness of US coastal manage- ment programs. Coastal Management 27(2–3), 239–269.

Hooper, B., McDonald, G. and Mitchell, B.

(1999) Facilitating integrated resource and environmental management: Australian and Canadian perspectives. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 42(5), 747–766.

Humphrey, S., Burbridge, P. and Blatch, C.

(2000) US lessons for coastal management in the European Union. Marine Policy 24(4), 275–286.

Ketchington, R. and Crawford, D. (1993) On the meaning of integration in coastal zone management.Ocean and Coastal Manage- ment21(2), 109–127.

Mannion, A.M. (1991) Global Environmental Change: a Natural and Cultural Environ- mental History. Longman Scientific and Technical, London.

Margerum, R.D. (1997) Integrated approaches to environmental planning and manage- ment.Journal of Planning Literature11(4), 459–475.

Mazmanian, D.A. and Kraft, M.E. (1999) The three epochs of the environmental movement. In: Mazmanaian, D.A. and Kraft, M.E. (eds) Toward Sustainable Communities: Transition and Trans- formations in Environmental Policy.

MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 3–43.

Mitchell, B. (1986) The evolution of integrated resource management. In: Lang, R. (ed.) Integrated Approaches to Resource Planning and Management. University of Calgary Press, The Banff Centre School of