STIPERSTONES-CORNDON LANDSCAPE PARTNERSHIP SCHEME

EXCERPT FROM LCAP SUBMISSION

3.9 Consultation

The following sections outline the process and findings of the public consultation which took place during Stage 2 development during 2012

3.9.1 The Consultation process

In Stage 1 community consultation, approximately 175 people were made directly aware of the proposed scheme. Activities included:

  • 6 local organisations responded to an early consultation document
  • Presentations and discussions with Upper Onny Wildlife Group, Churchstoke Community Council, Rea Valley Environmental Network and the Bog Centre Committee.
  • consultation events at Hyssington, Hope and Norbury
  • A heritage bus trip
  • Discussions with about 8 key individuals
  • Consultation survey responses from 12 people

Priorities included:

  • Bronze and iron age archaeology, medieval settlements, farming and mining relics.
  • Stories and legends, the preservation of local communities and their shops, pubs and services, and maintaining the tranquillity and good air quality of the area.
  • Wildlife habitats and plants and natural foods
  • Geology and rock formations
  • Good access and rights of way
  • Cross border development

Concerns for the future included the viability of farming and balancing farming and game keeping with access rights, development of new business initiatives, and issues with increased noise and fly tipping.

Ideas included:

  • reminiscence and recording of archives,
  • protection of wildlife,
  • surveying of historic sites and natural habitats,
  • local employment/ skills development and new product development for local producers;
  • new/ improved cycle and/ or riding routes;
  • tree planting;
  • activities for young people;
  • bracken and vermin control
  • maintenance of stone walls, hedgerows and natural habitats.
  • an access audit and interpretation plan
  • More all ability trails and easier access
  • the development of a leisure track along the disused railway track between Minsterley & Pontesbury
  • a very special area for natural heritage

A recent Shropshire Hills AONB Partnership project focused on farmer engagement showed the importance of one to one engagement with farmers.

Building on the work in Stage1, the consultation strategy for stage 2 aimed to engage all the relevant stakeholder groups with appropriate methods, to ensure that a balance of community and specialist support and opinion effectively informed the development of the Scheme. We planned different approaches to take account of differences in communities and groups.

The consultation followed a phased approach, integrating with the development of project ideas.

There were three main phases, though overlapping:

  • Starting with the results of stage 1 consultations and early discussions with the advisory groups and individuals on the stakeholder list from stage 1, consultation on the first project proposals took place at events organised, others attended and visits to local organisations.
  • From the responses, projects were refined and regrouped with the advisory groups and steering group, informed by consultants as they started work. These revised projects went into the on line and paper survey and the later consultation events.
  • The final phase was feeding back all the responses into the decision-making stage of designing the final programmes and projects. The final Scheme programme was posted up on the website for information and comment, and the contact list circulated with a summary and reference to online full information.

3.9.2 Consultation methods

The table in Appendix 2 summarises the methods used to engage different stakeholder groups.

Consultation activities have covered:

  • Awareness raising and informing, for example talking to local groups, parish councils, local joint committee
  • Inviting or promoting survey responses, distributing postcards, survey forms and leaflets at events or in shops, pubs etc.
  • More detailed discussions in one to one interviews, or group discussions, such as farmer interviews and meetings, events we organised, or phone interviews with interested individuals.
  • Particular focus in the case of residents and partners in the Powys part of our area.

How we used the different levels of engagement and consultation is set out below.

Representation

Partners and other key stakeholders are represented on our Board and Specialist Advisory Groups, detailed in section 1.2.

In addition, a Steering Group drawn from each of the Advisory Groups provided integration of the developing projects across the themes. Representation on all these groups is illustrated in section 1.2.

Mailing list

The database of all those who have expressed a desire to be kept informed of the progress of the project and/ or have offered to get involved, was drawn from:

  • Initial interest from Stage 1
  • Direct contacts as a result of publicity, talks, events held and attended in Stage 2
  • Responses to the online survey.

There are over 500 contacts on this spread sheet, (including 100 in Powys). We have contacted them by email newsletter, or post, to inform them of progress with the Scheme, and of upcoming events.

Online

The online survey at set up in August 2012, was promoted at events, through the contacts database, with press releases etc, and attracted 120 responses.

Press

Local press, parish and special interest newsletters were circulated a few times through the year to invite direct responses, response to the online survey and participation in events.

  • Press release 24.2.12
  • Piece for WI newsletter Sept 12
  • Press release about careers fair, Sept 12
  • Press release with newsletter, Sept 12

Phone email, and letters

Partners and other key stakeholders were contacted by phone early in the year to confirm interest and involvement, and through the year to discuss and refine developing projects, between meetings of the Board, Steering Group and Advisory Groups. Partners have made a substantial contribution in this way to the development of the programme and details of projects.

As many local groups as possible were contacted to introduce the Scheme and offer to visit the group to talk about it.

The training consultants conducted phone interviews with over 30 local businesses, particularly to investigate their potential involvement in apprenticeships, work placements and work experience. In addition two key local businesses Müllers (taking over Minsterley Creamery) and Midland Counties Co-op (taking over Tuffins in Churchstoke), have been contacted recently to arrange a visit to present the scheme.

Interested individuals were also regularly in contact and project ideas and comments on the programme discussed.

Visits

  • Parish council meetings, partners and key organisations, and local groups where requested, were visited to discuss the programme and their actual or potential involvement.
  • Primary school heads were visited, most by a key volunteer, and collaboration projects discussed. One of the schools held a consultation session with pupils.
  • Pupils of all three secondary schools covering the LPS area (and wider) were consulted through the training project, over 200 took part.
  • A team of farmer interviewers made personal contact with 100 farmers and interviewed over 40.

Open events, Consultation stalls and drop-ins

Consultation stalls were set up at a number of local shows and a local produce market. In addition, colleagues distributed the quick-reply postcard, information leaflet or paper survey form at events they were organising or attending. These consultations reached local residents and those from a wider area, including some visitors from the region and further away.

LPS events

Four general consultation events were organised between June and July 2012 in Churchstoke, Chirbury, Stiperstones and Minsterley. These were aimed largely at local residents, to present the Scheme, consult attendees on which projects they supported, which they didn’t and their priorities.

A further open meeting at Wentnor in May 2012 was organised by Cllr Charlotte Barnes of Shropshire Council.

An Interpretation event at the Bog Visitor Centre was held in June 2012, to present and discuss the potential of augmented reality as a tool for interpretation. The Visitor Centre committee followed up by consulting visitors and discussing the possibilities within the committee

During development, we have organised or attending a significant number of meetings and events. The meetings & events totalled 66, involving 483 people, not including many informal conversations around the area, and many phone calls. The meetings included consultation events we organised, agricultural & village shows, WIs, Parish & Community Councils, local voluntary groups and specialist groups, farmers’ markets, partners, community groups, schools, and specialists.

Door to door

Opportunities for door to door consultation was limited, in the time available, to visiting the villages before organised events to leaflet and talk to a few residents, for example at school gates. Leaflets were hand distributed in Minsterley, Pontesbury, Chirbury, Stiperstones, Snailbeach and Churchstoke.

Organised trip

A visit to Wye Valley grazing meadows project, was organised in October 2012 for a mix of professionals and residents.

We have paid particular attention to the cross-border aspect of the area, and put more effort into contacting Welsh communities and residents. The Welsh part of our area has not experienced the same level of community and environmental activity that the Shropshire side has, and residents are therefore taking longer to engage. In the findings below Powys results are highlighted.

We also targeted specific groups which were likely to be under-represented in more general consultation.

  • Two meetings specifically for farmers and smallholders were held, following interviews carried out by a small team of interviewers with a farming background. 32 farmers & smallholders attended these meetings.

More specifically targeted at young people:

  • Attending Chirbury YFC meeting for a discussion with 8 young people .
  • Surveys were collected from participants of the Stiperstones Stomp and the Callow Hill walk.
  • The training consultants spoke to over 200 secondary school students at Mary Webb, Bishops Castle and Welshpool, and in one visit 100 pupils wrote or drew ‘what I will be doing in 5 years time’ .

Businesses

As part of the training consultancy work, nearly 100 businesses were contacted, and over 30 came as exhibitors to the Rural Careers & Skills Fair on 21st September 2012. The report of that event, which was very positively received, is included in the training consultants’ report in Supporting Document 18. They were enthusiastic about passing on their knowledge and work experience to the schoolchildren and we had reports of interesting questions, for example, about how to start up your own business or diversify the family farm

3.9.3 Consultation findings

From the first phase of consultation, at events we organised, 71 people attended, and 40 recorded responses.

  • Wildlife projects generated the most comments (239), almost all positive, with the one exception of the Red Kite feeding station which 51% opposed – other wildlife projects were supported by between 74% & 81%.
  • Community involvement projects also drew a lot of comment (206), mostly positive (81 to 100%) with lower approval for Community Time Team (67%).
  • Training projects were well supported with 158 comments, approval from 73 to 96%,
  • Access and interpretation responses, 135 overall, were more varied from 55 to 100%. The lowest support was for the replica ropeway stanchion; in discussion there was more support for a virtual reality representation of the ropeway than a physical one.
  • Cultural heritage projects attracted the lowest number of responses overall, at 77, probably because there were only three projects in this category, but with good support between 86 & 96%

Through the summer consultation postcards were distributed through events attended and generally in the area, bringing 40 responses; the main themes were:

Typical comments on what people value:

  • The wildlife is really interesting & the views. The peaceful surroundings & the natural beauty (2 schoolchildren)
  • The green spaces & countryside. Less housing, buildings and traffic

And views on priorities:

  • There is a desperate need for all conservation work to be done
  • Helping people to respect and care about their environment has a beneficial effect upon society as a whole.
  • As smallholders on the Welsh side of the border, we are keen to use our land in an environmentally friendly way.
  • Very supportive of the notion of encouraging interest and involvement of young folk, particularly where they may acquire skills leading to work.
  • Preserving the natural environment for future generations. I would like to see new projects and ideas that help communities become self-sustaining without depleting the environment for future generations
  • The things that I feel are most important are the preservation and maintenance of, and access to, the area's countryside and natural, architectural and historical features
  • Preserving the tranquillity of this area is most important.

3.9.4 Summary of responses to the scheme

The analysis below of the 120 responses to the online survey, also including hard copy surveys which were entered online, relate primarily to Phase 2 of the consultation, when the first project ideas had been revised but before the final programme was designed. Therefore, the projects addressed are not lined up exactly with the current final programme, but rather they were used to shape its design.

Age groups and location of respondees

The graph below shows the age ranges of the respondees to the online survey.

Respondees age groups broadly line up with what we know of current audiences, predominantly in the older age groups.

Looking at where respondees live, a large majority are from the area or in nearby communities, with a fairly even split between those two categories. It shows that consultation efforts reached outside the area, for example to Bishops Castle, Shrewsbury and to a lesser extent Welshpool.

Responses to the consultation have been very positive.

The strongest support is for wildlife related projects. This does reflect the kinds of people who were interested to respond, but also reflects our experience of discussions with the public at more general events.

Training projects have also been well supported. This response reflects the very widespread concern locally about livelihoods, especially for young people, and the desire to keep young people in the area.

Cultural heritage projects have been more difficult to get across, attracting more ‘not sure’ responses. The idea of heritage is not well understood by everyone, and is sometimes seen as marginal to more pressing concerns. Education and archives work were both well supported, however, and the least supported (still over 50%) was researching and interpreting the Pontesbury coalfield, probably reflecting how little known or appreciated this aspect of local heritage is.

The Understanding Rural Life programme brought together community involvement projects in natural and cultural heritage. The only project not well supported was the arts project, probably because it was inevitably ill-defined, and reactions seem to reflect associations with controversial public sculpture.

Exploring the Story of the landscape – a programme that included interpretation, archives & access projects recorded lower support for the LiDAR survey, reflecting the difficulty in envisaging it and its potential impact. Although access improvements are clearly more divisive, they still attracted 70% support or higher.

Concerns expressed in comments in surveys and meetings have mostly been around access and increased numbers of visitors.

There is a widespread concern that the rural tranquillity of the area could be damaged by more visitors and inappropriate activity, and should be protected. These issues tend to polarise attitudes, so looking at overall support figures can be misleading.

47 (nearly 50%) want to be kept informed or involved, and the chart below shows their areas of interest. This shows a high level of interest which we can build on in delivery.

Drawing out results from specific groups:

Farmers and smallholders meetings. The main interests and concerns expressed in interviews were used to focus the discussions, on suggested projects:

  • Small grants to fill gaps of Glastir & stewardship for wildlife habitats
  • Water management
  • Products – support new business ventures within rules, promote, maybe co-op
  • Succession, & young people – vocational training, work experience, Freshstart academy approach
  • Understanding rural life
  • Heritage masterclasses - not identified by farmers but could be helpful – adding to livelihoods
  • Support local businesses & services (within the rules)
  • Small grants, local products and water management were particularly supported by smallholders, while more commercial farmers favoured training.

Discussions with young people:

At Chirbury YFC meeting, in discussion people:

  • valued wildlife, scenery, peace, quality of life;
  • were concerned about losing village services; shortage of jobs; lack of affordable housing; fuel price
  • wanted to see local people employed for any jobs carried out through the scheme.

In the training consultants visit to Bishops Castle Community College 100 pupils wrote or drew ‘what I will be doing in 5 years time’ (See Appendix 2)

Popular choices included:

  • Musician
  • Farming
  • Architecture
  • Vet, veterinary nurse
  • Living in the countryside (highest number)
  • Good job, in this area

50% of the school pupils at all three secondary schools interviewed wished to stay in the local area to work.

At the end of the Skills and Careers Fair, the pupils identified their interest in local rural jobs, skills and training. The top three of farming, vet and animal care were consistent with earlier discussions in schools, but there is also interest in a wide range of less familiar skills which were demonstrated that day.