Loweswater: a case study on the importance of local scale for ecosystem management

Lisa Norton, Claire Waterton, Judith Tsouvalis, Stephen Maberly, Linda May, Alex Elliott, Nigel Watson, Ken Bell, John Rockliffe, Leslie Webb, and the Loweswater Care Project.

RELU aims to help deliverModern, sustainable and competitive farmingProtection of the environmentBeneficial social and economic outcomes

Interdisciplinary scienceStakeholder engagementKnowledge transferIntroduction to the Rural Economy and Land Use programmehttp://www.esrc.ac.uk/relu

Loweswater is a small catchment ~ 8km in the Lake District National ParkIntroduction to study site

Understanding and acting within Loweswater Community catchment managementSoil nutrient cycling, climate regulation, air quality, biodiversity Landscape cultural, recreationaesthetics, inspirations, heritage etcFresh water quality and quantityFood productionLoweswater

LoweswaterA small dispersed rural community of ~100 residents, predominantly over 50 years old including 8 farmers and a high proportion of incomers choosing to live in a beautiful landscape.

Loweswater Care Project

The Loweswater Care Project (LCP) is a grassroots organisation made up of local residents, businesses, farmers, ecologists, sociologists, agronomists, environmental agencies and other interested parties. We work collectively to identify and address catchment-level problems in an inclusive and open manner. The LCPs vision is to gain a better understanding of the diverse challenges faced by the Loweswater catchment and together to seek economically, socially and ecologically viable ways forward and put them into practice.

An experiment in rural catchment managementMission statement

Land managementBiodiversity on landBiodiversity in waterNutrients on landNutrients lost to waterEconomic viabilityCommunityLandscape structureLake structureNatural England/Defra(CAP)Environment Agency(WFD)Lake District National Park AuthorityNational TrustEcological research at the catchment scaleFarmers

Model objectivesTo understand how what is done in the catchment is related to the algal blooms in the lake

What are the building blocks for the Loweswater model?

Land cover information Land management information and soil P levels for farmed land (local data) Numbers of people (local data) Septic tank condition, use and management (local data) Rainfall (local data) Lake discharge Wind speed Air temperature/humidity Cloud cover Lake data for validation

Loweswater catchment model

Modelling strategy

P-loads predicted by the different scenarios

ScenarioDescriptionS1Current land cover & stocking densities(A = Septic tanks as point sources)S2All farmland changed to deciduous forest(A = Septic tanks as point sources)S3All improved grassland changed to natural grassland(A = Septic tanks as point sources)S4No cattle; double sheep(A = Septic tanks as point sources)S5Double cattle; half sheep(A = Septic tanks as point sources)

Chlorophyll production vs SRP load for the scenarios

What the modelling shows Despite simplifications the three models, PLANET (farm), GWLF (hydrological) and PROTECH (algal) were successfully linked to produce a reasonable simulation of the effect of the land on the lake

Currently, the lake will need to improve to reach Good Ecological Status for the WFD

The models suggests that if the load was halved, the lake could be brought to good ecological status (time). The model could be used as a tool to inform future land-management decisions.

Septic tanks have a relatively small effect on P and phytoplankton today, but- they can be improved without major changes to way of life and would become increasingly important if P-losses from the land were reduced.

Data/information that is likely to be important but which we dont have/ havent been able to incorporate

Slurry tank/midden stead condition Yard water /waste arrangements Connectivity between waste storage and water bodies (under normal conditions) Connectivity between waste storage and water bodies (under extreme weather conditions) Locations of animal feeders in relation to water bodies Animal access to water bodies in lake feeder streams

Data limitations, even at this scale

Advantages of working at a local scale with local governance Local engagement with ecological problems

Increased potential to understand the causes of those problems and find solutions (NT/farmers)

Better understanding and integration between local and national actors, in particular farmers and bodies responsible for environmental quality

Better understanding within the community itself (residents/farmers)

Local empowerment

Improved access to potential funding sources HLS, LEADER+

Questions

Is the political system as we know it, with its current processes an structures, ready for more radical approaches to public participation in environmental governance?

Are publics ready to participate having got used to thenotion that the Government will solve things for them?

Other aspects of ecosystem managementEcological Most farmers have diversified Agricultural income ranges from 32-58% of farm income, The remaining % is from the Single Payment Scheme or agri-environment schemes. Total farming profit in the year of the survey was on average 7k. High variability between the 8 farmers in the catchment in terms of ; farm size, field size, stocking rate, boundary types and management, income and labour 6 farmers in the catchment are over 50 yrs old, 3 of those have potential inheritorsEconomic

Ultimately the health of the ecology will impact on productivity as well as on other important ecosystem services Hence the introduction of environmentally related paymentsSPS Cross complianceEntry Level Scheme to replace ESACatchment Sensitive Farming Scheme

*Core research on algal blooms highlighted extraneous research that isnt core but provides a more holistic picture of the catchment includesFish, economic, biodiversity on land etc.t*