Section 1: Physical and human influences
Section 2: Visual character of the landscape
Section 3: Landscape evolution and change
Section 4: Landscape strategies and key recommendations
Section 5: Landscape guidelines

Section 1: Physical and human influences

Introduction

The Nottinghamshire Coalfield is a heavily industrialised region associated with a broad belt of exposed, coal bearing rocks that lie along the eastern fringe of the Pennines. It forms part of a larger region which extends northwards from the western outskirts of Nottingham and includes some of the major industrial towns and cities of Derbyshire and south/west Yorkshire. In Nottinghamshire it occupies only a small area along the western edge of the County, between Stapleford and Stanley. This area, like the region as a whole, has seen constant change and development since the industrial revolution, when there was rapid expansion of heavy industry, transport networks and housing to accommodate the huge increase in population. The result is a complex intermingling of farmland, sprawling settlements, industrial artefacts, modern commerce and derelict areas, creating a mosaic of disparate land uses. Although these land uses are not confined to the Nottinghamshire Coalfield, there is a much clearer distinction between the urban and the rural environment in other parts of the County.

Despite the fact that it is now dominated by urban and industrial activity, the Nottinghamshire Coalfield retains many remnants of its agricultural past, while the underlying topography also makes a significant contribution to landscape character and sense of place. In order to understand fully the character of the region, it is necessary, therefore, to understand the factors that have contributed to its formation. The underlying geology, for example, has a very strong influence on regional character, not only in the way in which it affects landform, soils and vegetation, but more particularly in the human activities, such as coal mining, that are dependent upon it.

The shape of the land

Coal Measures strata, comprising shales and layers of sandstone alternating with seams of coal, outcrop along the south-western edge of Nottinghamshire. This area extends westwards into Derbyshire and represents the historic “exposed” coalfield as distinct from the adjoining “concealed” coalfield, which underlies an increasing thickness of Permo-Triassic beds to the east. Despite their shared industrial heritage, these two parts of Nottinghamshire have a significantly different physical character.

The whole of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield has a markedly undulating topography owing to differential weathering of the hard sandstones and less resistant shales. The absence of massive sandstones, however, causes the southern part of the region to have a more subdued relief than that found further to the north in the Yorkshire Coalfield. To the east, the region is bounded by the Magnesian Limestone escarpment, which rises as a prominent feature above the Coal Measures in many places.

The highest point in the Nottinghamshire Coal Measures is near Huthwaite, where the surface rises to just over 200 metres. The land falls away from this point into the Rother Valley to the north, the Amber Valley to the west and through the limestone escarpment via the River Meden to the east. To the south of this watershed the region is drained by the River Erewash, which for much of its length serves as a natural boundary between Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. The Erewash rises on the Magnesian Limestone, and below Pinxton, where the river turns southward, it has cut a relatively deep valley along the crest of a local anticline in the underlying Coal Measures. This has caused profitable coal seams, including the much worked Top Hard Coal, to be exposed along both sides of the valley, promoting the development of two corresponding belts of mining settlements, closely connected by a network of roads and railways. At Stapleford, the Erewash leaves the Coal Measures and passes through a gap in a ridge of Triassic rocks, before joining the River Trent at Long Eaton.

The numerous minor streams that drain into the Erewash have created a dissected, undulating topography with many small hills and ridges, separated by narrow, in places steep-sided valleys. The Erewash itself lies in a broader valley floored by a narrow alluvial floodplain. Between Pinxton and Ilkeston the river follows a strongly meandering course across this floodplain. Its meandering nature is obviously an historical feature, as the name Erewash is derived from the Old English “Irre Wiske”, which means winding stream.

Soils

The soils in the area are stagnogleys and are typical of soils found over carboniferous shales and mudstones. They vary from clayey to loamy in texture and are frequently waterlogged. Their stoniness varies, those around Teversal and Annesley being more stony than those around Underwood, Cossall and Trowell. In many areas the soils have been greatly disturbed due to past opencasting, which, depending on the care taken in storage and relocation, can increase the problems of waterlogging. Drainage schemes therefore frequently have to be installed after restoration. There are some localised patches of sandy soils within the area.

Landscape history

In common with the Magnesian Limestone Ridge, the landscape of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield has been undervalued and under researched. Often dismissed as an area which was untouched woodland until late in the Saxon period, and thereafter one of poor settlements on poor land, the principal interest has been its industrial heritage. Even this, however, has not received the depth of attention it deserves. This industrial character and the extent of the conurbation which has developed through industrialisation has acted as a barrier to study; so many easier, more immediately profitable areas of investigation are to hand. Indeed, the Nottinghamshire Coalfield is not any easy area to research, but the story of its landscape is no less interesting than that of any other region in Nottinghamshire.

Little can be said about the prehistoric and Roman landscapes of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield. The built-up character of much of the region, and its land uses and soils, do not produce the differential crop growth over buried archaeological remains which inform us so much about other areas of the County. Here, we are dependent upon upstanding remains, such as earthworks, and the discovery of objects. The presence of prehistoric hunter-gatherers and settled farmers is shown by stone tools and fabrication debris picked up on the surfaces of ploughed fields and the even more occasional metal tools. Recent reports of pottery and settlement remains encountered in the evaluation of proposed developments in the Coal Measures in Derbyshire illustrate the potential behind these discoveries and suggest that it is only a matter of time until more substantial evidence is revealed.

Evidence of Roman settlement is likewise limited to finds of pieces of pottery and hoards of coins. That these occur at all disproves earlier beliefs that this was an area which was unattractive to prehistoric and Roman settlement. Indeed, there is no evidence to suggest that the Nottinghamshire Coalfields did not share in the general pattern of landscape history of progressive woodland clearance, which intensified during the last millennium BC and resulted in a well cleared farming countryside during the Roman period. A concession may be made to the traditional interpretation, in that the extent of woodland recorded in Domesday Book in 1086, and the character of settlement during the Saxon period in so far as it can be discerned, suggest either that social and economic change at the end of the Roman period was dramatic in this region, or that the Roman landscape here included significant woods. Most probably, the truth lies somewhere between.

The evidence of Domesday Book is that the Nottinghamshire Coalfield was well-wooded in 1086. The recorded place names reflect this, with significant numbers, like Wansley or Brinsley, incorporating the element leah, meaning a clearing. Other names imply a low density of settlement leaving space for Scandinavian incomers, indicated by the bi element of Kirkby, or subsequent expansion reflected in elements such as thorpe or the English term thwaite in Estwait, the original form of Eastwood. Other names, however, may imply less wooded environments. Sutton, south farm or village, was with Kirkby within a district called Ashfield, of which the place-name elements imply open, cleared countryside. This is most likely to refer to the heaths on the adjacent Magnesian Limestone Ridge, but could be extended to include the fields of both communities which are likely to originate in the Roman cleared landscape.

The place name Kirkby implies foundation in the late 9th or early 10th century. However, the presence of a church from which it took this name may suggest that this was a far older community, renamed by the new immigrants. This raises the possibility that other communities could have been renamed and thus be older than they appear. It has to be unlikely that the “Brown” whose name described the farm at Brinsley was any other than the Brown recorded as its owner in 1066. While this may support the argument for late settlement in the woodland of the region, it may derive from a late renaming. Renaming of communities, particularly to incorporate the names of local lords, appears to have been not uncommon from the late 9th century onwards. Current models of Early and Middle Saxon settlement are of a dispersed settlement pattern, not unlike that of the Roman period. By the 9th century, and more particularly from the 10th century, under the pressures of a rising population and the growing powers of local landlords, this dispersed pattern began to be replaced by one of nucleated villages, with people grouping together around the farm of the local lord or in other geographically favoured locations. While this nucleation does not appear to have been universal in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield, which may explain the scatter of small communities particularly south of Selston, it may be another factor in the renaming or late character of the names of some communities. In all events, this nucleation was probably an influence in the formation of the larger villages of Sutton, Kirkby, Teversal and Greasley. At Selston, it seems that the process may never have been completed, which would be one explanation of the polyfocal community visible on post-Mediaeval maps.

By 1086 much of the basic settlement pattern of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield was established. Some communities were large nucleated villages, others can have been no more than farms. Some were barely, if at all, populated, possibly as a result of depredations at the time of William the Conqueror’s military campaigns against the North in the years after 1067, more likely in consequence of poor harvests, high taxation and hunger. The entries for arable in the region show the same unspecialised mixed farming regime found elsewhere in Nottinghamshire at this date. A leaning towards animal husbandry may have been likely because of the availability of pasture in the woodland and on the moors of the Magnesian Limestone Ridge and in the Erewash Valley. Unfortunately, this cannot be confirmed from Domesday Book because in Nottinghamshire this did not record livestock or pasture. Only a little meadow was recorded in the region.

Communities were generally sited on outcrops of sandstone within the Coal Measures, where soils were a little lighter and better drained for arable. Some were close to the junction of the Coal Measures and the Magnesian Limestone where they were able to exploit differing agricultural resources, with heathland grazing on the limestone and, as later sources show, arable and woodland grazing on the clays of the Coal Measures. Elsewhere a pattern which became more marked in subsequent centuries was emerging, in which settlements were located on the edges of blocks of woodland, with their fields to one side and the woodland on the other. Again, later sources enable the locations of much of the Domesday Book woodland to be identified. Most of this was recorded as being wood pasture and therefore of a fairly open character. Underwood (coppiced woods) is mentioned in six communities. This is one of the relatively few areas in Nottinghamshire where underwood appears in 1086.

The story of the Middle Ages in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield is one of expanding settlement and the gradual degradation of its woodland. Under Henry II, along with the rest of Nottinghamshire north of the Trent, it was included under Forest Law. In 1232 Henry III redefined and reconfirmed the traditional boundaries of Sherwood Forest to the east of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield which was thereby disafforested. Only certain enclosed woods, or hays, notably Fulwood in Sutton in Ashfield and Willey Hay in Greasley parish, were left under the administration of the Forest officials and were accounted for at meetings of the Forest courts. Consequently, these were referred to as being part of Sherwood Forest, although they were physically outside of its boundaries. The generally well-wooded and empty character of the region in at least the early Middle Ages is reflected in the hunting parks set up by the nobility. At least six of these are known.

The three centuries after the Norman Conquest were marked by a continuing rise in population. The Nottinghamshire Coalfield saw an expansion in settlement, with new farms and hamlets being established on the edges of woodland, such as Westwood and Underwood, continuing the process already begun in the Late Saxon period. Communities which were recorded as waste in 1086, like Eastwood and Newthorpe, were re-established and existing settlements grew. Open fields were reorganised or laid out for the first time. The woodland served as grazing, used in common between neighbouring communities.

A limited reconstruction of the Mediaeval landscapes of Eastwood and Newthorpe may help illustrate the general situation of the period. This is based on a variety of documentary references and later maps, in particular an estate map of Eastwood dating to 1736. Eastwood was a small community throughout the Middle Ages; indeed Newthorpe, which exhibits some regulation or planning in its layout and was owned by Lenton Abbey, was probably larger. To the west of Eastwood lay its open fields, which at their maximum appear to have totalled at least five. North of the fields, along the side of the Beggarley Brook, were the main meadows, laid out in strips or doles. West again of both meadows and fields, running the length virtually of the parish beside the River Erewash, there was pasture land, described as meadow in 1736. In the north and east of the parish there was woodland in the Middle Ages. The northern area is probably to be identified as that called Cokehagh in 1450 and the pasture closes shown there in 1736 are likely to result from assarting. East of the village lay Fulwood, not to be confused with the royal wood of the same name mentioned above, which by 1736 was open common. This wood extended across into Newthorpe parish. By the late Middle Ages at least, an open, cultivated field stood between the woodland and Newthorpe village, probably carved out of the wood edge at some earlier date. Fulwood was grazed in common between the two communities. In the late 13th century Lenton Abbey made an agreement with the lord of the manor of Eastwood whereby the Abbey was permitted to enclose part of Fulwood and fell the trees therein. This provoked a complaint from the Rector of Eastwood that he was unable to exercise his right to pasture in that part of the wood, which was not upheld because the land was held to lie in Newthorpe. By the early 14th century there had also been clearances on the north of this woodland in Eastwood. Two areas beside the Eastwood to Newthorpe road called “the Breaches” in 1736 may be identified with “Le Breche” of 1318 and “Le Gressbreches” of 1482.

These examples from Eastwood illustrate the process by which much woodland was cleared in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield during the Middle Ages, by piecemeal enclosure and felling on the one hand and by common grazing on the other. Assarting was recorded in Brinsley in 1249 and both new assarts and common of pasture were mentioned in 1250. Some of this pasture will have been for sheep; wool produced in Brinsley was mentioned in a document of 1281. By the beginning of the 14th century much of the region was opened up, with woodland becoming more and more confined to the more remote locations or degenerating towards grassy common heath. In contrast to the situation shown in 1086 by Domesday Book, by 1343, when Beauvale Priory was founded, there was so little land available that the endowment promised to it could not be fully achieved. Part of that endowment was the once royal wood of Willey Hay, which had been leased out for many years previously and clearly had long been converted to arable and grazing.

The documentary record is insufficient to permit an accurate estimate of the effect of the Black Death and subsequent visitations of plague in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield, but there is no reason to believe that it suffered any less than elsewhere. Equally, there is no evidence that any community in the region disappeared as a direct consequence of these pestilences. They did however usher in a period of protracted social and economic change, which produced a swing away from arable production towards animal husbandry. It is likely that this was easily accommodated in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield, which may have already had a leaning in this direction because of the readily available pastures. The result was a movement towards enclosure which is largely unrecorded but spanned the later 15th to 17th centuries. Again, this may have been less revolutionary in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield, in that many fields may well have been enclosed, having been created as such in assarting the woodland. However, field boundaries in some locations, particularly adjacent to villages or hamlets, do seem to reflect the strip layout of former open fields.

On the whole, there is little evidence that development in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield was arrested by the difficulties of the later Middle Ages. Only at Kimberley does it appear that the community may have failed. In 1428 it was recorded that there were less than ten householders in the village, implying that its population had fallen, but this could have been no more than a formula to justify the transfer of the rights in Kimberley church to that of Greasley. Other evidence suggests that, however reduced, a community in Kimberley continued in existence through the following centuries. Otherwise, the clearance of woodland, or the maintenance of existing clearances, continued. By the early 16th century most of the woodland between communities, like Fulwood between Eastwood and Newthorpe, had been reduced to open common. These commons continued to be used by their neighbouring communities for grazing, and possibly also for temporary cultivation on the same “breck system” that operated in the Sherwood region and Magnesian Limestone Ridge. All this is illustrated by the complaint raised by Beauvale Abbey in 1535 on behalf of its tenants in all the surrounding communities, that the lord of the manor of Brinsley and his ancestors had denied them their rights of common pasture by enclosing part of “Brynnesley Woode otherwise More”, of which enclosure part had been cast open and part remained enclosed. In 1667, when Dr Robert Thoroton wrote his “Antiquities of Nottinghamshire”, he described the royal wood of Fulwood in Sutton in Ashfield as “an old decayed wood, now only a great common without wood”.

The great commons of the Nottinghamshire Coalfields remained unenclosed until the late 18th century. By this time they had already begun to be picked at in a piecemeal way, particularly to provide houses for tenants many of whom were engaged most of the time in activities other than farming. As early as 1623, when the lord of the manor of Brinsley sold out, he insisted on being indemnified against “claims concerning cottages and enclosures built or taken in within 20 years from waste ground called Brynsley More”. In 1736 the nucleus of what was to become New Eastwood was already in existence with some plots being described as being “took of the common”. Eastwood Common in 1736 also shows that land use was developing also, for part had been separated off and was named Brockholes Leys, indicating an area of rotational grassland. In 1774 most of the commons were still open, by 1836 most had been enclosed. The last to go was Selston Common, enclosed after 1865 and provoking a storm of protest and riot.

With the enclosure of the commons the basis of the modern agricultural landscape of the region was complete. This was a patchwork of fields of varying shapes and sizes according to their origin, larger and regular on the previous commons, smaller and more intricate with fuller hedges in older enclosures, with a scatter of hamlets and individual small farms interspersed between larger villages, and remnant patches of ancient woods reinforced by occasional ornamental planting. In 1798 the agricultural regime was described as being mixed but weighted towards arable, because the wetness of the clays made pastures difficult to maintain. Grass was often a rotational crop, therefore, being grown for between one and three years before being ploughed in. By the end of the 19th century, with improved drainage and a large and growing market demand for animal products, grassland predominated. This balance has altered with post-World War II farming policies, with arable becoming quite extensive on the better soils and the loss of some hedgerows to accommodate modern machinery.

But the modern landscape of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield is not agricultural; to most people’s eyes it is industrial. Coal mining has a long history in this area and has long been an important component in its landscape. Coal claimed to come from here has been found on a Roman site in the Fens. The surface exposure of coal seams soon led into digging for it and the development of mines. Documents record mining in the region from the 13th century onwards, when it was already a principal fuel, for at least industrial purposes, in Nottingham. The industry grew very gradually over the centuries, becoming of considerable significance in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, although output was tiny by comparison with the 20th century. In consequence the region is littered with bell pits, shafts sunk to reach the more shallow seams. Many of these are levelled, but some are visible as circular mounds like those at Strelley, often with stands of trees on or around them as can be seen on Trowell Moor.

The first expansion in industry, however, was in textiles, during the 18th century, with the expansion of framework knitting. The primary effect of this on the countryside was the erection of small rows of knitters’ houses and of cottages, frequently on the edges of the commons. This was replicated a little later, as the coal industry expanded, in the building of colliers’ cottages and rows. Both strengthened the local tradition of the part-time farmer, who cultivated a smallholding and kept some cattle and pigs in addition to knitting or mining. By the early 19th century the landscape was beginning to change under the stimulus of industry. The Cromford and Erewash Canals had been built, giving access to wider markets; villages were expanding and new settlements were appearing; roads had been turnpiked and networks of tramways, the most famous connecting Mansfield and Pinxton, were being developed to move coal from pits to loading stations on roads and canals.

The revolution came with the development of deep mining and the railways. From the 1830s the coal industry began a dramatic expansion which reached its climax in the last quarter of the century. There was a huge influx of population, and a massive building programme to house it, along with the development of ancillary industries, services, railways and other infrastructure to serve the coal mining and the new population. The result was the transformation of the landscape into one which appears to be largely built-up, with a conurbation extending out from Nottingham to Eastwood and ribbons and concentrations of settlement elsewhere. This pattern, reinforced by 20th century development, particularly housing and roads, of which the M1 is the most dominant, has dissected the agricultural landscape leaving it often as isolated blocks surrounded by urban and suburban settlement. Industry has also transformed part of the agricultural landscape, with opencast mining and waste heaps which, now restored, have introduced new contours, new field layouts and some new woodland.

It is this urbanised and industrial landscape which has led to the underestimation of the landscape of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield and of the depth of its history. Even through this modern development, however, it is still possible to read the earlier landscapes. Much fascinating detail about these awaits discovery. Nevertheless, it is clear that the influence of the past is as present in the landscape here as anywhere else in Nottinghamshire.

Return to top

Section 2: Visual character of the landscape

Introduction

The character of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield is very much controlled by the nature of the underlying geology. This is reflected not only in the shape of the land, but also in the associated pattern of land use and settlement. The land has a distinctive, undulating topography, characterised by a recurring pattern of hills, ridges and shallow valleys, but this is almost everywhere dominated by industrial activities, in particular coal mining, and extensive urban development.

Although most of the mines have now closed, the legacy of pit heaps, sprawling urban settlements and associated infrastructure is still clearly visible throughout the region. Together with the remnants of past agricultural landscapes, these are the regional characteristics that differentiate the Nottinghamshire Coalfield from surrounding areas.

In contrast to Sherwood and the Magnesian Limestone Ridge, urban and industrial influences are so all-pervasive in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield that they have become the very essence of the landscape, despite the many pockets of agricultural land that remain throughout the region. Consequently, although characterised by a mosaic of disparate land uses, the region has a surprisingly strong sense of place when viewed at a landscape level.

The Nottinghamshire Coalfield can be sub divided into two distinct landscape types. These have been classified generically which means that, theoretically, the landscape types could occur at any location within the country where there are similar physical resources and historical patterns of land use. In reality the landscape types possess a distinctively local character, because they share the broad characteristics of the regional character area, or represent a particular aspect of that character.

Coalfield farmlands

A densely settled, industrial landscape characterised by mining settlements and pit heaps, intermixed with pastoral farmland

Characteristic features Varied undulating topography Closely spaced mining settlements Pockets of pastoral farmland Small to medium-sized hedged fields Network of narrow winding lanes Mine sites, pit heaps and disused railway lines Rows of red brick terrace housing Scattered, small broad-leaved woodlands

Landscape description

The Coalfield Farmlands is a densely settled and heavily industrialised landscape, characterised by sprawling urban settlements, intermixed with pockets of mainly pastoral farmland. Although a significant proportion of the land area continues to be used for agricultural production, it is the association with heavy industry, in particular coal mining, that is the dominant influence on the character of this landscape. Pit heaps and closely spaced mining settlements, often prominently situated on hilltops, are rarely out of sight, while the associated infrastructure of railway lines and canals is an ever present reminder of the transport network that helped to stimulate the rapid industrialisation of this area during the 18th and 19th centuries. The Coalfield Farmlands is almost entirely associated with outcropping Coal Measures, which give rise to a dissected, undulating topography drained by numerous small rivers and streams. The associated heavy, poorly-draining soils have tended to constrain agricultural improvement and traditionally this part of Nottinghamshire has been an area of small pastoral farms. This is reflected in the semi-regular pattern of mainly small to medium-sized fields which characterise many of the remaining agricultural areas. These fields are often enclosed by thick, species-rich hedgerows. In contrast, land that has been restored following opencast mining is usually distinguished by a more regular pattern of fields defined by thorn hedges or wire fences.

Despite the fact that many areas of farmland are surrounded on two or more sides by built development, the urban edge is rarely well-defined and often broken by fingers of green space. This is typically utilised for a variety of purposes, including pony paddocks, allotments, playing fields and other leisure activities. In a few places, however, it is still possible to find quiet, rural scenes, which contrast markedly with the busy, urban fringe character that generally pervades this landscape. Indeed, one of the distinguishing features of the Coalfield Farmlands is its many contrasts, especially at a local level. Adjoining parcels of land can often appear quite different to one another depending on the balance between built development and open land, the presence of industrial or mining sites, the nature of the local landform, or the occurrence of particular features of interest, such as hedgerows or woodland.

Most of the mines in the Coalfield Farmlands have now closed, but the pit heaps, urbanised settlement pattern and the rows of red brick terrace housing remain as an enduring legacy of this industry. Some settlements, such as Awsworth, Brinsley and Jacksdale, still retain their discrete identity and continue to be a characteristic component of the landscape. Elsewhere, development for residential and other manufacturing, commercial and retail uses has extended out from former mining settlements, often along main road corridors. At Kimberley, Eastwood, Kirkby in Ashfield and Sutton in Ashfield this has led to the amalgamation of separate mining settlements into larger urban areas.

Although largely overwhelmed by mining related development, the original pattern of rural settlement has survived in one or two places, notably at Cossall, Bagthorpe and Stanley. These hamlets retain much of their original character and, together with the remaining brick built farmsteads scattered throughout the area, they provide an impression of the former pattern and style of settlement. The network of narrow, winding lanes is also a locally distinctive feature which bears witness to the formerly more dispersed rural settlement pattern.

River meadowlands

A narrow, pastoral river corridor landscape, in places contained by settlement edges, pit heaps and railway embankments

Characteristic features Narrow alluvial floodplain Meandering river channel Views often contained by built development and railway embankments Permanent pastures grazed by cattle and horses Patches of wet grassland and marsh Riverside alders and scrub Bushy hawthorn and willow hedgerows

Landscape description

The dissected, undulating topography of the Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire Coalfield is drained by numerous streams and small rivers. Where the latter have developed an alluvial floodplain, they are characterised by a narrow, river corridor landscape. In Nottinghamshire, this landscape is associated with the River Erewash, from near its source at Kirkby in Ashfield to a point below Stapleford where it enters the Trent Valley. As with river valley landscapes elsewhere, wet grassland, grazing animals, riparian trees as well as the river itself are recurring features along the length of the Erewash Valley. In the Nottinghamshire Coalfield, however, the character of this landscape has been strongly influenced by the industrial development of the region. The River Meadowlands thus have a distinct urban fringe character, and the alluvial corridor of the River Erewash, like most of the other rivers in the region, is often contained by settlement edges, pit heaps, or railway embankments.

Grazing meadows, often with patches of wet grassland and marsh, are the dominant visual element in this river valley landscape. Typically these are enclosed by bushy thorn hedges, but ditches and wire fences are also a feature in places. Where they remain relatively unimproved, alluvial meadows are an important wildlife resource, while the undisturbed pastoral scenes evoked by the presence of grazing livestock provide a welcome contrast to the surrounding busy, often heavily urbanised landscapes. The most extensive area of undisturbed river meadow occurs in the upper part of the Erewash Valley, between Jacksdale and Brinsley tip. Subsidence, caused by coal mining, has led to the formation of several shallow lakes along the river corridor in this area.

The river channel, although not in itself visually prominent, is nonetheless a key landscape element, especially where it retains a natural bank profile supporting marginal aquatic and bankside vegetation. Riparian trees and scrub are also a feature in places, emphasising the meandering course of the river. Such features not only provide a valuable habitat for plants and animals, but they create a sense of visual and ecological continuity along the length of the river corridor, particularly where they are associated with unimproved meadow or pasture.

Return to top

Section 3: Landscape evolution and change

Introduction

This section examines the main forces that have brought about change and evolution within the Nottinghamshire Coalfield over recent decades. It does this by discussing how the current structure and pattern of land use has developed, paying particular regard to agriculture, woodland, transport, industrial/residential development and mineral extraction. It also considers the trends and pressures that may produce landscape change in the future.

Agriculture

The coalfield area was traditionally managed for mixed farming, following the early enclosure of the area between the later 15th and 17th centuries. In the mid 19th century, some significant areas of common land survived at Bagthorpe and Selston, whilst rough ground and heath were recorded as recently as the 1930s around Underwood and Selston. The more recent trend from the 19th century up until the Second World War has been towards permanent pasture, with 70% of farmland being grazed by dairy cattle. Cattle have traditionally been favoured over sheep due to the incidence of liver fluke in the wet pastures.

The underlying Coal Measures give rise to poor soils, which in turn has led to the pattern of small-sized, irregular fields enclosed by mixed hedgerows. Small farm sizes are traditional, and from the 1930s the trend was reinforced by the miners’ smallholding movement, which in the area around Selston accounted for around 40% of all holdings. Despite the small size of holdings, which were generally less than 2 hectares, the scheme was supported by the County Council and survives to the present day. The majority of holdings in the region are still below 50 hectares.

Since the Second World War there has been a gradual process of agricultural improvement. This has been less intensive than elsewhere in the County, largely due to the poor soils and drainage problems, which are greatly exacerbated by mining subsidence. Agricultural land is almost entirely low quality, with very occasional small pockets of high quality land. Most improvement has been confined to applications of fertiliser and pesticides, together with drainage schemes. The pattern of land tenure in the area has also prevented large-scale agricultural improvement. Therefore, despite a certain amount of conversion to arable, the farming has remained largely pastoral with meadows, pastures and rough grazing. Small farm units, allotments and paddocks are typical, especially on the urban fringes. Consequently the general field pattern is of small intact enclosures; this is especially marked in the Erewash Valley and around settlements.

Where soils are slightly better, there has been more extensive hedgerow removal and conversion to arable cropping, but intensification has had generally less impact in this region than in the rest of the County. Where arable farming does occur, the main crops are cereals (wheat and barley), rape, and potatoes and sugar beet, for example in the Teversal and Annesley area.

Trees and woodland

The evidence of Domesday Book is that the Nottinghamshire Coalfield was well-wooded, as indicated by place names like Eastwood and Underwood. Other place names, however, suggest less wooded environments, such as Kirkby in Ashfield and Sutton in Ashfield, which could have been cleared as early as Roman times. Piecemeal enclosure and felling during the Middle Ages led to large-scale woodland clearance, and by the mid 19th century contemporary maps show hardly any woodland surviving. Tree-lined river corridors have remained until the present day, although the upper reaches of the River Meden and River Erewash are treeless except at Portland Park. Woodland cover has remained fairly constant at around 4% throughout the 20th century with the distribution pattern being one of small, often ancient broad-leaved woodlands. Over 80% of the woodlands are less than one hectare in size. Examples of these small ancient woodlands include Watnall Wood, Dove Dale Wood, Coppy Wood and parts of Millington Spring.

Recent trends and changes suggest that coniferous woodlands are increasing at the expense of broad-leaved woodlands, whilst losses of woodland are more likely to be due to urban/industrial development or new roads than to farmland. Scrub development has occurred in some of the river valleys, on derelict land and on disused railway lines. There are also a few large estates with associated woodland planting. The relatively stable percentage of woodland cover means that some planting or natural regeneration must have taken place to balance the losses to development.

Industry and mineral extraction

The coal industry has played a central role in the economic life of this area, with much of the region traditionally dependent on mining employment. Coal extraction in Nottinghamshire dates back to the 13th century, and by the early 19th century many bell pits and shallow mines had been sunk in this area. Larger, deep mines began to be developed in the middle of the 19th century, with over 40 established in this area between 1870 and 1910. As mining technology improved, the deep mines progressed further east across the County and opencast schemes began to appear on the exposed coalfield.

Deep mining has taken place between 400 and 900 metre depths and has produced large amounts of waste. The impact of the resulting spoil heaps and associated colliery development has been significant, and now the decline of the mining industry is also having a major impact upon the area. This has disrupted the local economy and worsened local landscapes, as reclamation schemes have not always kept pace with the rate of closure. In addition, many pits date from a period when planning control was less stringent and restoration proposals minimal. Recently this has improved. Various initiatives are under way to stimulate the economic regeneration of the coalfield which may utilise disused colliery sites and associated derelict areas. Subsidence, however, has always been a problem and will continue into the future.

Large-scale opencast schemes are a more recent development and have a different impact. In general they are not as closely associated with the local community; being shorter-term developments they do not generate associated village developments. Road rather than rail tends to be used for transport and, although there are no permanent pit heaps as such, there is huge noise and disruption during working. Opencast operation necessitates the removal of large tracts of countryside which cannot be exactly restored to their former condition. Opencasting became more frequent during the Second World War when workings were essentially shallow (10-15 metres); depths of 80-200m can be achieved nowadays. The worked-out sites can also be used to dispose of waste, which has further implications for transport and pollution. There is a limited resource available for opencast in the County, with most prospects located in the Erewash Valley.

Urbanisation

The coalfield is a densely populated area; colliery sites and mining settlements are rarely out of view, which gives a persistent urban fringe effect to the landscape. The region skirts the edge of Sutton in Ashfield and Nottingham, but the only other settlements of any size are Eastwood and Kimberley, the remainder being mining villages and other small settlements. Widespread ribbon development creates the impression of a greater level of urbanisation than is actually the case and future development is now restricted by the Green Belt, which covers all of the area south of Kirkby in Ashfield.

Although the traditionally dominant coal industry has declined, urban expansion continues, and the impact of increased car ownership has had a significant effect on this already well-populated area. The M1 bisects the area between Trowell and Strelley, and between Selston and Pinxton. Other major roads include the A610 between Kimberley and Eastwood, and the A38 connecting Sutton in Ashfield with the M1. Local routes between settlements are becoming congested as road traffic increases; the historic pattern of winding roads and lanes is often inadequate for the volume of traffic. There have been proposals to widen the M1 and improve the A6002 between Stapleford and Trowell Moor, whilst Awsworth and Cossall have recently been by-passed.

More recent industrial development, new housing, car dealers, motor repair chain stores, out-of-town supermarkets and retail developments tend to spread along the improved highways network. This gives the impression of a never-ending urban sprawl with few breaks between. The urban fringes are also under pressure from the more mobile urban population which has increasing leisure time to spend away from home.

Return to top

Section 4: Landscape strategies and key recommendations

Introduction

When applied to the landscape, the notion of “character” is not a concept that merely concerns itself with aspects of scenic quality. The character of the landscape derives from a complex interaction of a wide range of physiological and historical phenomena. These include geology, topography, soils, ecology, archaeology, architecture, and local customs and culture, as well as the pattern of land use, settlement and fields. It is the varied interaction between these factors which produces the local and regional variations in character for which the English landscape is famous. The diversity of that character is a central part of our landscape heritage and vital to people’s appreciation and enjoyment of the countryside.

The landscape that we see today is a product of its historical evolution, reflecting the underlying physical resource and the changing nature of human exploitation of the land. The landscape will, of course, continue to change and evolve, reflecting the changing priorities and demands that society places on it. Over recent decades, however, these priorities and demands have often degraded rather than improved the fabric of the landscape. There is now a general consensus that positive action is needed to reverse this trend, and that this should place a high value on conserving and enhancing the inherent character and diversity of our landscapes.

A series of Landscape Strategies and Key Recommendations is set out in this section for each of the landscape types within the region. These should be read in conjunction with the Landscape Guidelines that appear in Section 5. Collectively, these will provide the framework for conserving and strengthening the distinctive character and features of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield. They will help to ensure that landscape character is reflected in the many decisions and actions that affect its continuing evolution. The intention is not to fossilise change, but to provide a context that will enable policy making, planning and landscape management decisions to be made which respect and sustain the diversity and character of our countryside.

Landscape Strategies
These recognise the forces acting upon the landscape and set the broad vision for its future management. The Strategies provide the framework for conserving and enhancing the character and distinctiveness of the landscape. The Landscape Strategies are given in the form of a short summary title, followed by a reasoned justification of why it has been chosen. The strategy options defined for each landscape type generally relate to one, or more than one, of the following four courses of action:
A: Conservation, where the traditional landscape character and “sense of place” are strong, or where many landscape features are notable for their landscape, ecological or historical value. The Landscape Strategy will encourage the good management of the key features which characterise the landscape and recommend the avoidance of out-of-character development.
B: Enhancement, where landscape character is still reasonably strong, but the overall structure and individual features are in decline. The Landscape Strategy will relate to areas where landscape character is perceived to be under threat, and where positive action is required to strengthen the overall character and structure of the landscape.
C: Restoration, where landscape character or individual features have suffered significant decline or damage, but the underlying character and patterns within the landscape are still evident. The Landscape Strategy will seek to replace characteristic features and rebuild the character of the landscape.
D: Creation, where little of the original landscape character or landscape features remain. The Landscape Strategy will set a vision for a new landscape. This will either relate to the characteristics of a former landscape through a process of reconstruction, or aim to create a new and different landscape.

Key Recommendations

The Landscape Strategies are supported by a series of Key Recommendations. These develop and focus the overall strategy further by identifying the main actions and priorities for each landscape type. The Key Recommendations are presented as a series of aims, each followed by a justification describing the recommended course of action. The Landscape Strategies and Key Recommendations are summarised at the beginning of the description of each landscape type.

Coalfield farmlands
Landscape strategy

Conserve and enhance the overall unity and distinctive, small-scale character of the landscape

Key Recommendations Conserve and strengthen the small-scale pattern of hedged fields and lanes Conserve pastoral character and promote measures for enhancing grassland diversity Identify opportunities for small-scale tree and woodland planting Promote measures for retaining and enhancing the distinctive local character of mining villages

Landscape strategy

• Conserve and enhance the overall unity and distinctive, small-scale character of the landscape

Despite being an urbanised and, in places, degraded landscape, the Coalfield Farmlands does, nonetheless, have a distinct sense of place, as reflected in its small-scale character and semi-regular pattern of fields, lanes and settlements. This character is perhaps best represented in areas, such as that between Brinsley and Selston, where there is an intermingling of pastoral farmland, mining settlements and public open space. There are also one or two areas within the Coalfield Farmlands, most notably around Stanley, which still retain a surprisingly strong rural character. In many places, however, the essential structure of the landscape has been disrupted, or simply overwhelmed, by agricultural intensification, opencast mining, or recent urban and industrial development. These changes have resulted in both an erosion of local distinctiveness and a gradual decline in the overall unity of the landscape.

It is clear from the above analysis that the Coalfield Farmlands is an extremely variable landscape and that, while certain areas may have survived relatively intact, the continuing impact of urban development and opencast mineral extraction is threatening to destroy the very fabric of the landscape. Although there is a need to conserve existing features and patterns that contribute to local distinctiveness, there is also considerable scope for landscape enhancement, particularly in relation to the effective mitigation of existing and future development. The overall approach to management should thus involve a combination of conservation and enhancement - to conserve those features that contribute to local distinctiveness, while at the same time looking for opportunities to enhance the small-scale character and overall unity of the landscape.

Key recommendations

• Conserve and strengthen the small-scale pattern of hedged fields and lanes

The key to achieving the overall strategy for the Coalfield Farmlands is to conserve and, where necessary, restore the essential fabric of the landscape, as defined by the underlying landform and the surface pattern of fields and lanes. Priority should thus be given to maintaining and strengthening the semi-regular pattern of hedged fields. Most hedges are closely trimmed and many are gappy, or dying out at the base. There is a need, therefore, for more appropriate management, in particular to move away from hedges being excessively tidy and low cut. Replacement planting is also necessary in some areas to restore the structure of the landscape. The aim should be to focus initially on strengthening and replanting primary hedgelines, that is those that can be traced for a distance of two or more fields. These include roadside hedgerows and those that mark farm and parish boundaries. Measures should also be adopted to encourage natural regeneration of hedgerow trees.

• Conserve pastoral character and promote measures for enhancing grassland diversity

The heavy, poorly-draining soils found in the Coalfield Farmlands are not particularly suited to arable cropping and traditionally this has been an area of small pastoral farms. Although dairying remains the predominant land use, agricultural intensification, stimulated by post-war farming policies, has led to the ploughing up and reseeding of many older pastures, with a consequent decline in grassland diversity. There has also been a shift towards arable cropping on the better soils, resulting in the loss of landscape features such as hedgerows. With farmers and landowners increasingly being encouraged to adopt the role of countryside managers, opportunities should be sought, through appropriate agri-environment schemes, to conserve and where necessary restore grassland diversity. Particular attention should be paid to stocking densities in urban fringe situations, so as not to destroy the variety and quality of existing species-rich grasslands.

• Identify opportunities for small-scale tree and woodland planting

Tree and woodland planting can often be used to good effect to enhance the structure and unity of farmed landscapes, especially in those areas where the traditional pattern of hedged fields is in decline. Well-designed planting can also help to soften the visual impact of unsightly urban or industrial development. Although the existing level of tree cover in the Coalfield Farmlands is relatively low (3.9%), there is considerable scope for enhancing the character and quality of this landscape through new tree and woodland planting. A key requirement, however, is that any new planting must be designed to complement and strengthen the existing small-scale character of the landscape. Hedgerow tree planting, and the creation of discrete woodlands up to about 10 ha in size, would be particularly appropriate.

• Promote measures for retaining and enhancing the distinctive local character of mining villages

Settlement character in the Coalfield Farmlands is perhaps best represented by the older mining communities that grew up to serve the local coal industry. Although most of these settlements expanded rapidly during the early part of this century and now comprise a mix of building styles, many retain rows of red brick terrace housing and other industrial artefacts from earlier periods. Continued residential and light industrial development, however, is threatening to swamp the identity and distinctive character of these old mining communities, replacing them with a rather bland and characterless suburban landscape. Steps should be taken to reverse this trend by ensuring that all new development is designed in such a way that it reinforces the character of individual communities. Particular attention should be given to developing an architectural expression of community identity, which reflects both the original function of the settlement and something of the vernacular character of the region as a whole.

River meadowlands
Landscape strategy

Restore and enhance the visual and ecological continuity of the river corridor

Key Recommendations Seek opportunities for restoring the character and ecological diversity of alluvial grasslands Retain and enhance the diversity of river channel and bankside vegetation Promote riverside tree planting as a means of enhancing the continuity of the river corridor Consider opportunities for creating wet valley woodlands on suitable sites

Landscape strategy

• Restore and enhance the visual and ecological continuity of the river corridor

Meandering rivers, flanked by riparian trees and grazing meadows with patches of wet grassland and marsh, are the key elements which contribute to the special character and continuity of this landscape. Where these elements occur together in a unified pattern, they create a strong sense of place and feeling of naturalness. The development of the underlying coalfield, however, has had a major impact on the character and quality of this landscape, particularly in the lower part of the Erewash Valley. Views from within the river corridor are often contained by settlement edges, pit heaps, or railway embankments, while opencasting has completely modified the landscape in a number of areas. These features not only disrupt the continuity of the river corridor, but they impart an intrusive, urban fringe character to more or less the whole of the valley. This is reinforced by the presence of overgrown and gappy hedgerows, wire fences, weed infested pasture and patches of scrub, all of which create an impression of dereliction and neglect.

From the above analysis it is clear that, despite its many detractive features, there is considerable potential for enhancing the character and continuity of this landscape, particularly with regard to mitigating the impact of urban and industrial development. The general approach to management should thus involve a combination of restoration and enhancement - to restore and enhance the visual and ecological continuity of the river corridor landscape.

Key recommendations

• Seek opportunities for restoring the character and ecological diversity of alluvial grasslands

Alluvial meadows, with patches of wet grassland and marsh, are one of the special features of the River Meadowlands, providing undisturbed, pastoral scenes within a busy urbanised setting. Although the continuity of the landscape is reinforced by the meandering river channel and its associated riverside trees, it is this continuous strip of meadowland which visually defines the river corridor. Visual and ecological continuity can easily be disrupted by agricultural improvement, opencasting, or simply by lack of management leading to an invasion of coarse grasses and scrub. If the latter process is allowed to continue, the long-term effect will be to fragment the continuity of the river corridor landscape, which in places will gradually take on a more wooded appearance. This strategy seeks to reverse such trends by conserving and where necessary restoring the pastoral character and associated ecological diversity of alluvial grasslands within the Erewash Valley.

• Retain and enhance the diversity of river channel and bankside vegetation

The river channel itself is a key component of this landscape. It is particularly important as a habitat for plants and animals and every effort should be made both to improve water quality and retain features such as meanders, islands, riffles, cliffs and backwaters that are associated with a more natural channel profile. Together with riparian trees, scrub and other bankside vegetation, these features make a significant contribution to the special character of the riverside environment. Where the river has been modified by engineering works, opportunities should be sought for diversifying the channel profile, either by natural processes, or through direct intervention. The latter might include reprofiling to create a more natural bank profile, or cutting a notch into the base of the bank to allow for colonisation by emergent plants.

• Promote riverside tree planting as a means of enhancing the continuity of the river corridor

Scattered waterside trees and patches of scrub make a significant contribution to the overall character and continuity of riverine landscapes. These features not only help to define the meandering course of the river channel, but they provide a degree of enclosure in a landscape that often lacks other three-dimensional elements. Riverside trees are particularly important for mitigating the visual impact of urban and industrial development in the Erewash Valley, and where tree cover is lacking the quality of the landscape is often significantly reduced. The extent of riparian tree cover is variable and for the most part reflects the degree to which the river channel has been modified by engineering works. There are thus many areas that would benefit considerably from tree and shrub planting, using locally occurring native species. Where possible, riverside tree planting should be undertaken as part of a package of measures to enhance the riverside environment.

• Consider opportunities for creating wet valley woodlands on suitable sites

Woodland cover in the Erewash Valley is very low (2.3%) and consists mainly of hawthorn and willow scrub. Much of this is of recent origin, reflecting the decline in traditional farming practice, particularly in the most heavily urbanised parts of the valley. Given the problems associated with grazing in urban fringe situations, the dilemma is how best to manage these areas, while at the same time conserving the visual and ecological continuity of the river corridor. Although standard woodland planting would be inappropriate, there may be scope for creating natural, wet valley woodlands along selected parts of the river corridor where raising the water table is not restricted by urban development. There could be many benefits in considering such an option in the more degraded part of the valley below Awsworth tip.

Return to top

Section 5: Landscape guidelines

Introduction

The Landscape Guidelines that follow act as the mechanism for implementing the aims of the Landscape Strategies and Key Recommendations by indicating how specific aspects of landscape character can be conserved, enhanced or restored. The Guidelines are design-based and relate to the management of all the individual features and components of the landscape, highlighting possible courses of action and mechanisms for implementation. The Guidelines provide the framework to place wider landscape considerations at the heart of the conception and design process for individual projects. They also recommend appropriate courses of action for integrating nature conservation measures into the process of change.

The Landscape Guidelines are presented in the form of a summary statement, followed by a justification for that course of action. The Guidelines are grouped under a number of topic headings, rather than by landscape type, as this better reflects the specific management issues and range of potential users of this manual. To aid clarity each topic area has been assigned a stylised symbol as follows.

	Rural villages		Parkland and ornamental grounds
	Farmsteads and rural dwellings		Historic features
	Urban development		Farmland
	Woodland		Recreational land
	Hedgerow trees		Highways and rural lanes
	Hedgerows		Utilities and industrial sites
	Meadowland and pasture		Development mitigation
	Rivers and stream lines		Mineral extraction

Conserve the distinctive, vernacular character of mining villages

The traditional coalfield villages were built in a vernacular style of red brick terrace housing. In many areas the original villages have been absorbed into larger, more modern settlements and their character lost. Where traditional mining villages still exist their vernacular character should be conserved.

Promote measures for achieving a better integration of mining villages and other development in the countryside

The Nottinghamshire Coalfield is a densely settled, industrialised landscape with significant areas of disused and despoiled land. Urban edges often appear harsh and abrupt with little effort expended on integrating built developments into the landscape. New tree and woodland planting around existing development provides the best method of softening this impact. The aim should be to enhance the setting of mining villages and other development, rather than screen them from view. It is important for local residents that views out from settlement are retained. Off-site woodland planting increases the opportunity to integrate settlement and modern developments with the surrounding countryside, and tie them in with the wider landscape structure. Planting should complement the smallscale character of the landscape and avoid damage to ancient field patterns and species-rich grasslands. There are opportunities for much more extensive woodland planting in the pockets of farmland that have become virtually enclosed by urban development, perhaps up to 65% or more of the total area. Only locally native tree and shrub species should be used.  New developments should avoid straight and densely built edges and allow open green breaks and areas of new tree planting to run into developments. Existing tree and woodland features should be retained and incorporated into the design.

Conserve and enhance tree cover around farmsteads and rural dwellings

Clumps of trees are an important feature around farmsteads and rural dwellings where they provide shelter and give a sense of proportion and balance to the built environment. Mature trees are particularly valuable as local landmarks where their presence often produces a strong sense of place. Trees can soften  the hard edges of new buildings and help to link the new development into the wider farmed landscape. Tree planting, using locally occurring species, should be encouraged around farmsteads and rural dwellings. The intention is not to hide the buildings, but rather to integrate them into the landscape. Ornamental species planted as quick growing screens, particularly Leylandii, should be avoided.

Agricultural buildings should be sited, designed and landscaped to blend with the surrounding farmed landscape

Farmsteads have traditionally been constructed using materials that conform with the vernacular style. This is generally one of red brick and pantile roofed buildings although farmsteads constructed of local magnesian limestone with red pantile roof are found along the fringe of the Magnesian Limestone Ridge region. The farmsteads are an essential part of the landscape fabric, contributing greatly to the local sense of place. The older farmsteads are often surrounded by small pasture fields, hedgerows and mature trees.  These features ensure that the buildings are well integrated into the wider farmed landscape. At many locations new farm buildings have been built which are large and constructed from materials that do not complement or fit in with the vernacular style. When considering the siting and design of new agricultural buildings, careful consideration should be given to positioning and choice of building materials. Existing features such as hedgerows, woodlands and trees can be used in conjunction with landform to reduce the visual impact of large buildings. New landscape features can be created using locally characteristic species, to help blend agricultural buildings into the landscape. These should form an important part of the design process and not be used as a means of simply screening unsightly buildings.

Enhance landscape character with new woodland planting of appropriate design, scale, composition and location

Woodland planting can be used to good effect to enhance the visual, amenity and ecological diversity of the Nottinghamshire Coalfield, as long as the location and scale of new woodland planting reflect the scale and character of the surrounding landscape and the advice given in the Key Recommendations for each landscape type. Woodlands are typically broad-leaved, small and scattered, semi regular in shape, and frequently ancient in origin. This scattered distribution pattern and small size is a key feature of the landscape and non-native, larger-scale woodland planting would thus be inappropriate. Any new planting should reflect the existing pattern, have semi-regular outlines, be predominantly native broadleaves and complement the size of the surrounding fields, rising to a maximum size of approximately 10 ha in areas where the field pattern is fragmented. Despoiled urban fringe areas should be targeted for new planting. Planting in the intact, small-scale pastoral landscapes should generally be avoided unless very small in scale.

Conserve all areas of river valley woodland and scrub and enhance landscape character through the planting of new wet woodland in appropriate areas

The upper reaches of the River Meadowlands are clothed with narrow strips of broad-leaved woodland. Elsewhere in the valleys woodland is comparatively rare with the exception of small areas of broad-leaved woodland and scrub. Their frequently damp nature and native composition means that they are usually very valuable in nature conservation terms. In the past wet woodland was more common, but many areas have been lost to agriculture and development. Further loss should be avoided and opportunities should be sought to re-create wet river valley woodland in the more degraded parts of the valleys. The extent of such woodland will depend on the degree to which water levels can be manipulated, but in theory there is no reason why the majority of the more degraded areas and despoiled urban fringe sites could not be included. Woodland planting should be avoided in areas where the traditional riverine character is strong and the main management focus is on conserving and strengthening the undisturbed pastoral character of the landscape.

Conserve all  ancient and native deciduous woodland sites

There are a number of native, deciduous woodlands in the coalfield area, some of which are ancient in origin. Unfortunately many more such woodlands have been reduced in size and number by the development of the coalfield and associated infrastructure. The highest priority must be afforded to the conservation and appropriate management of all ancient woodland sites. In nature conservation terms, native deciduous woodlands provide habitat for a much wider range of flora and fauna than do non-native woods. Ancient woodlands in particular accommodate vast ranges of species, including invertebrates, fungi and wildflowers which can only survive in the specialised conditions provided therein. Some woodlands have been planted with conifers and non-native deciduous species. The wildlife value of such woodlands is often less than that of native deciduous woodlands. Further use of non-native species in existing woodlands should be avoided and wherever possible restocking with appropriate native trees and shrubs should be the management priority.

Consider options for restocking mixed and non-native broad-leaved woodlands to increase the proportion of native tree and shrub species

Woodlands in the Nottinghamshire Coalfield are generally broad-leaved; however, a few have been planted with non-native species, thus departing from the traditional appearance of the area. The use of appropriate species in well-designed mixes is important in determining how well tree planting will fit into the landscape. The selection of species in woodlands needs to accommodate a wide range of considerations, including the balance to be struck between nature conservation, landscape enhancement and commercial timber production. It is important however that broad-leaved species predominate if the traditional appearance of the landscape is to be maintained. Restocking with appropriate native trees and shrubs should be the management priority.

Conserve and enhance tree cover through the planting and regeneration of hedgerow and stream-side trees

Outside woodlands, trees are not particularly common in the Coalfield Farmlands, but do occur in hedgerows locally, often where hawthorn and other species have been allowed to continue growing. Hedgerow trees help to define and emphasise the pattern of hedged fields, enabling filtered views across the rolling farmland and hills. Hedgerow trees are also locally important in the River Meadowlands where they can add structure and interest to the landscape whilst providing valuable wildlife habitat. The establishment of more hedgerow trees should be a priority for increasing tree cover, along with appropriate woodland planting. Hedgerow tree cover should therefore be maintained and enhanced, either through selection and natural regeneration, or the planting of individual hedgerow trees in gaps. Ash, oak and willow are the principal species. In addition, there are occasional lines of trees along the sides of the streams which cross the region. These irregularly shaped linear features add variety and interest to the landscape, often forming historic boundaries. Such trees enhance the local landscape and provide valuable wildlife habitat, but many are over-mature and are not being replaced. Riparian tree and shrub-lined features should be conserved and managed to retain their interest. Their linear nature should also be strengthened by encouraging natural regeneration or through new planting. Willow and alder are the principal tree species along with ash and a range of riparian shrubs.

Conserve the historic pattern of small-scale irregular fields

The historic pattern of hedged fields is an important and distinctive feature of the region, with small, often irregular fields reflecting an early enclosure period. This pattern also forms an important visual and wildlife feature and represents a link with the farming past and the history of land ownership. Hedgerow features give coherence and continuity to the landscape and provide an important habitat for many species.  The field pattern is of particular importance within this region due to the high proportion of species-rich ancient hedgerows. The retention of the field pattern is crucial if the character of the landscape is to be maintained. Although there has been some rationalisation, the field pattern has remained largely intact. In areas where the pattern has become fragmented it is especially important to conserve primary hedgerows, particularly along roadsides, footpaths, bridleways and parish boundaries. In the River Meadowlands, sinuous hedgerows defining the edge of the flood plain are sometimes an important feature and these should be conserved to help maintain the continuity of the river corridors.

Promote the positive management of hedgerows as landcape features

The early enclosure landscape found in the rural parts of the Coalfield Farmlands contributes greatly to the character of the region. However, some hedgerows in the pastoral areas are undermanaged and their long-term health is a potential problem. In the River Meadowlands the same problems often occur. Conversely, in the areas where arable agriculture has become dominant, the hedgerows have been intensively managed to maximise the cropping potential of the land. These hedges tend to be low, gappy and unhealthy. The field enclosures are the principal structural component of the landscape in many areas and the maintenance of the hedgerow network is essential if the distinctive character of the region is to be retained. In order to enhance the overall field pattern, hedgerows should be managed positively as landscape features. This should involve laying, coppicing and trimming as appropriate. The aim should be to achieve “fuller” and thicker hedgerows. Excessively gappy hedgerows should be gapped up to maintain and enhance the field pattern.

New or replacement hedgerow planting should complement the existing structure and traditional pattern of hedged fields

Hedgerow removal has taken place in some areas of the region, sometimes for agricultural purposes, but more frequently for industrial development. Other hedges have simply suffered through mismanagement and have become discontinuous and/or unhealthy. Opportunities for the replacement and replanting of hedgerows should be sought. Restoration plans for areas of opencast and ex-collieries should include hedgerows where appropriate and avoid creating geometric fields with straight hedgelines. The region has many ancient hedgerows which are species-rich and of great historical and wildlife value. The species of these mixed hedgerows are locally characteristic and typical of the soil type on which they are found. Gapping up or replacement of such hedges should mimic the original species composition wherever possible.

Conserve the character of remaining pastoral landscapes

Permanent pasture, grazed by cattle, is a dominant component of the less industrialised areas of the region. The comparatively poor soils in combination with impeded drainage have meant that wholesale conversion to arable has been impractical. The pastures are often relatively unimproved and associated with a small-scale field pattern, old mixed hedgerows and occasional areas of ridge and furrow. The intimate pastoral areas provide a vital link with the historic character of the region, introducing varieties of scale, colour, and texture to the wider, often industrialised landscape pattern. It is vital that this diversity is maintained by conserving the traditional pastoral character of the region.

Conserve all areas of riverside pasture and flood meadow

The essential character of the River Meadowlands is conferred by riverside pasture and flood meadow. Pastoral farming is traditional and, unlike in many other parts of the County, conversion to arable agriculture has been uncommon. The alluvial meadows, wet pastures and meandering river channels provide a valuable habitat for a wide range of plants and animals, as well as being essential features of the river corridor landscapes. In recent decades there has, however, been some loss of alluvial meadowland. This has occurred through agricultural improvement, urban expansion or mineral development and has resulted in an erosion of the traditional character of the river corridors. In order to arrest this process and prevent further fragmentation it is vital to conserve all remaining areas of flood meadow and pasture. Where grasslands have been lost from the river corridor, opportunities should be sought to restore pastoral character. This may be achieved through the restoration of land used for mineral works or by government grants which seek to promote environmentally friendly farming.

Manage grasslands in a traditional manner and consider opportunities for converting arable land back to pasture

The permanent pastures of the River Meadowlands and Coalfield Farmlands were traditionally used for haymaking and summer grazing using low-input forms of management. These methods created floristically diverse habitats of high nature conservation interest, supporting a wide variety of invertebrates and other animal life. Many of the pastures are now managed intensively, leading to a decline in their aesthetic and ecological value. Where opportunities arise, a return to traditional forms of management should be encouraged. This will help to maintain and enhance the conservation value of these grasslands and improve their visual appeal. Where grasslands have been converted to arable, features are often lost with a subsequent fragmentation of the character of the pastoral landscapes. Opportunities to restore pastoral character should therefore be sought. This may be achieved through the application of government grants and incentives that seek to promote environmentally friendly farming.

Enhance the visual and ecological continuity of river corridors by the planting, management and regeneration of riparian trees such as willow and alder

Riparian trees including willow, alder and ash survive on some stretches of the River Meadowlands but in places they have been lost or are declining. The remaining riparian trees give structure and diversity to the local landscape and define the meanders of the river, whilst providing valuable wildlife habitat.  In places, the traditional management practices of coppicing and pollarding are evident, adding to the character. Existing riparian trees should therefore be retained and managed. Significant stretches of river have limited tree cover and would benefit from a programme of tree and shrub establishment along the river bank. Tree establishment initiatives can be an effective way of defining river channels in areas where arable cultivation has encroached to the river bank. Natural regeneration and planting of riparian trees should be encouraged where appropriate.

Encourage the continuing practice of pollarding to maintain the traditional riparian character of the landscape

Some of the willows which line main river channels and their tributaries have been pollarded in the past. Pollarded willows are historic and attractive riparian features. Although the original reasons for pollarding willows are no longer strictly relevant, it is important that the practice of pollarding is continued if these traditional waterside trees are to be maintained. Neglecting to pollard and repollard willows can lead to top-heavy branches breaking off, sometimes splitting the main bole and threatening the life of the tree.  Repollarding at the appropriate time prevents this from occurring. A proportion of the willows in the region are repollarded on a regular basis but many are neglected.  To retain these attractive trees as part of the traditional waterside landscape, pollarding is crucial.

Conserve and enhance the diversity of aquatic and marginal vegetation associated with river channels

Marginal and aquatic vegetation along river channels contributes significantly to the visual interest of the riverside environment as well as providing habitats of high wildlife value, supporting a range of flora and fauna. However, modern farming methods and river engineering techniques have eliminated all but a few of these original wetlands, creating uniform steep-sided channel edges with little space for emergent vegetation and little opportunity for colonisation by riverside trees and shrubs. In such areas opportunities should be sought to diversify the riverside environment. This might include reprofiling to create a more natural bank profile, or cutting a notch into the base of the bank to allow for colonisation by emergent plants. Identification of riverside enhancement opportunities should be based on detailed survey of individual river corridors.

Prepare and implement landscape masterplans for conserving and restoring the visual integrity of historic parklands

A small number of mature parkland landscapes are located within the region, creating localised areas of formal, well-wooded countryside. Apart from their historical significance, these features form an important structural element in the landscape, especially where parkland and woodland components have survived as a single cohesive unit. The break-up of large estates since the last war, however, has led to the fragmentation and decline of some of these historic landscapes, while others are disintegrating more gradually with the passing of time. Measures should be taken to address these issues through the preparation and implementation of landscape masterplans for individual parkland areas. These masterplans should respect the historical and visual integrity of the landscape within each area. This may involve bringing together a number of landowners where the whole area is no longer in single ownership. Priority should be given to the phased renewal of estate woodlands and clumps of trees, and to the restoration of parkland that has been converted to arable cultivation.

All areas of ridge and furrow should be managed to maintain their historic interest

Grasslands containing ridge and furrow landscapes are found in a small number of fields within the region. The ridge and furrow grasslands are remnants of mediaeval landscapes that were enclosed and set to pasture. Many ridge and furrow grasslands have been lost over recent decades with the ploughing up and arable conversion of land. This has increased the historic importance and rarity of the remaining features.  Where ridge and furrow survives, its very antiquity is an indicator that the grassland sward has never been ploughed and reseeded and it is often floristically diverse. Ridge and furrow grasslands therefore have high historic, landscape and nature conservation interest. All surviving areas should be conserved.

Retain and manage field ponds to maximise their visual and ecological value

Field ponds are not very common in the area, but were once in widespread use as a source of water supply for stock.  Many have been filled in or drained to give increased field capacity, or have been neglected and become overgrown through lack of management. It is estimated that nationally 75% of field ponds have disappeared. Where they still exist they form interesting landscape features and represent a link with traditional farming methods. Although their practical function is often no longer relevant, field ponds do provide diverse wildlife habitat and do add to the visual appeal of local landscapes, and are of historical interest. For these reasons it is important to retain and sensitively manage those which remain.

Farmland should be managed positively to enhance its landscape and wildlife interest

A variety of options is now available to farmers within the current set-aside scheme. These range from short-term rotations through to longer-term schemes where the same piece of land can be set aside over several years. Land managed under habitat and forestry schemes can now count as part of the set-aside obligation under the Arable Area Payments Scheme. There is now considerable scope for land to be managed positively in order to enhance landscape and wildlife interest. Both wildlife and landscape features can be restored or created at the field scale, or as conservation headlands and wildlife and grass margins. Such areas are of greatest value where they provide linkages between existing features such as woodlands, hedgerows, streams and ponds. The longer-term options allow the restoration and creation of a range of features such as wildflower meadows and damp lowland grasslands. Woodland establishment schemes are now eligible to be counted as set-aside, offering significant opportunities to enhance landscape character.

Conserve rural character by retaining existing features in all development schemes

The suburbanising influences associated with new development are an increasing pressure on the rural character of the countryside. These influences are having a subtle, but cumulative impact, especially on all matters of design. Examples include: the external modernisation of buildings; the erection of corporate roadside signs; the replacement of roadside hedges with quick growing ornamental screens; the increased use of security fencing; and even standardised landscaping schemes. Much more discretion is needed when applying design standards in rural landscapes. In particular, original features such as walls, traditional gates and pillars, roadside hedges and mature trees should be retained if at all possible. Where this is not possible, consideration should be given to moving or replacing such features.

The design of recreational and sporting facilities, such as golfcourses, should reflect the character of the local landscape

The provision of leisure facilities in the countryside is increasing; disused mine sites are sometimes suitable for such developments, for example the dry ski slope at Cossall.  Although urban and industrial development has had a large impact upon the character of the region, there are still many areas where traditional rural landscapes survive.  The introduction of large numbers of ornamental or coniferous trees, the removal of hedgerow or stream-line trees, or the erection of modern buildings using introduced materials would compound the growth of suburban character. In the more remote areas it would also lead to fracturing of the rural unity of the landscape. To minimise intrusion, the design of recreational facilities should be done sensitively to retain and enhance the traditional character, features of interest and local sense of place. Any developments should make a positive contribution to the quality of the landscape, with a comprehensive assessment of the potential impact of any recreational or sporting development on the landscape character of the area.

Conserve and enhance the rural character and historic features associated with roads and lanes

The irregular network of rural lanes and roads is an important characteristic of the region. Whilst a large proportion of the highways have been upgraded to accommodate contemporary demands, there are still many lanes that contain special features, including species-rich verges; thick roadside hedgerows; narrow sunken lanes; hedgebanks and mature roadside trees. These are important features in their own right and a central component of the region’s rural character. They should be conserved and managed to retain their historic, visual and ecological interest. Any improvements to the road network should respect local landscape diversity by avoiding uniformity and standardised treatments and by replacing any lost features.

Diversify roadside character through the management and creation of flower-rich grasslands on highway verges

Roadside verges serve a number of practical purposes, including acting as a buffer between the road and the ditch/ hedge, a safe place for walkers and riders, and a convenient place to locate services. As well as these practical functions, roadside verges also perform an aesthetic and ecological function. Flower-rich meadows and pastures would once have been common in this landscape as the agricultural emphasis was historically stock rearing. In recent years many fields have been agriculturally improved to increase grass productivity, and consequently their landscape and wildlife interest has been reduced. There may, however, be opportunities to re-create this interest by diversifying roadside verges. Such strips of grassland do not require fertiliser and can, therefore, provide good opportunities to improve the attractiveness of the landscape. The conservation interest of the verges should therefore be maintained and, where possible, enhanced through appropriate management. The creation of flower-rich verges containing native, slow-growing grass species would add to the visual appeal and diversity of the landscape, offer greater habitat potential for wildlife and require less management than many of the existing verges. The creation of new verges and the reseeding of disturbed verges offer obvious opportunities for this.

All road improvement schemes should include a landscape impact assessment

The construction of new roads and the widening or realignment of existing roads can have a major impact on the character of the landscape. The visual impact of new roads can often be reduced by careful route selection. It is important therefore that landscape considerations are carefully assessed at the start of all such schemes, as no amount of landscaping will disguise the impact of a badly chosen route. Where improvements to existing roads are necessary, an early assessment should also be undertaken to identify locally important features that need to be retained or replaced.

Conserve rural character by limiting standardised treatments during highway improvement schemes

The improvement of rural roads and lanes to meet modern highway standards invariably results in the removal of existing features and the introduction of new suburban influences into the countryside. Traffic calming measures should therefore be considered as an alternative in rural areas. Where improvements are necessary, standardised treatments such as concrete kerbing, galvanised crash barriers, new or replacement street lighting and the erection of modern road signs should be used only where absolutely necessary. Such features are not only visually intrusive but also look out of place in the countryside. As an alternative, consideration should be given to the use of more traditional materials and locally distinctive designs for such things as kerbing, street lighting and road signs.

Landscaping around utilities and other rural development should be better integrated into the wider countryside

Landscaping around utilities and other development in the countryside usually involves screen planting in geometric blocks, or on raised bunds, to hide new development. While these mitigation measures are better than nothing at all, the effect is often lost because the contrast between the landscaped area and surrounding farmland is just as obvious. In rural areas the success of landscaping around sites, such as sewage works, will depend to a large extent on how well they have been integrated into the wider landscape. Particular attention should be given to the treatment of the site perimeter to ensure that it is tied strongly into the adjoining field pattern. Similarly, tree planting within the site should be linked to new or existing trees beyond the perimeter of the site. Better siting and design of new buildings should also be considered in addition to landscaping works. It is better to soften a well-designed building with a few trees than hide an ugly building with screen planting.

Restoration of pit heaps should, wherever possible, be to a mixture of small-scale woodland and grassland uses, avoiding large-scale planting

There are many derelict mine sites in the area, a legacy of the declining coal industry. Most of these include pit heaps which were traditionally restored to agriculture. In recent years agricultural surpluses have rendered this unnecessary and alternative uses for disused pit heaps have been explored. Design proposals should take account of local landscape character, identified by a thorough survey of the surrounding area at the planning stage. As the characteristic landscape of this area is largely grassland with scattered small woods, this should be reflected in the reclamation of pit heaps to amenity uses. Large-scale planting should be avoided as it is not characteristic in this landscape. Instead, restoration schemes should seek to reinstate a small-scale pattern of hedged fields, woodlands and public open space.

Restoration proposals for opencast sites should take account of local landscape character

The underlying Coal Measures have been exploited by past opencast schemes and there are a number of opencast prospects within the region. Previous restoration schemes have left featureless, open landscapes which contrast unfavourably with their surroundings. Future restoration proposals should be based on a detailed assessment of landscape character. This should relate the site itself to the wider landscape so that it is set within a broad framework that fully recognises the character of the region and its landscape types. Within the Coalfield Farmlands, schemes should generally seek to reinstate a smallscale pattern of hedged fields, with hedgerow trees, woods and pasture using locally characteristic species. Restoration within the River Meadowlands should aim to create low-lying meadows, wet woodlands and wetlands, rather than areas of open water. The latter are not a feature of this landscape and ecological restoration should focus on the creation of wet meadow and marsh rather than aquatic habitats. In this way it will be possible to formulate a landscape management plan for the area that accords with the character of the wider landscape.

Return to top

Species List
Nottinghamshire Coalfield

Dominant Species
Other Species Present

The following list includes native tree and shrub species that are commonly found within the Nottinghamshire Coalfield region and are suitable for inclusion in planting schemes. These are important for determining the area’s regional character. A range of other native species may also be appropriate to particular locations or sites. In these cases professional advice should be sought. A list of organisations able to provide such advice has been included in the section 'Further Information'.

TREES	Woodlands	Hedges	Hedgerow Trees	Wet Areas/Streamsides
Alder
Ash
Aspen
Beech
Birch (Silver)
Cherry (Wild)
Crab Apple
Elm (English)
Elm (wych)
Lime (Small Leaved)
Lime (Large Leaved and Hybrid)
Maple (Field)
Oak (Common)
Rowan
Willow (Crack)
Willow (White)
Yew

SHRUBS	Woodlands	Hedges	Hedgerow Trees	Wet Areas/Streamsides
Blackthorn
Broom
Dogwood (Common)
Gorse
Guelder Rose
Hawthorn
Hawthorn (Midland)
Hazel
Holly
Osier
Privet (Wild)
Rosa Spp.
Willow (Goat)
Willow (Grey)