Alison, J.

Garbutt, R.A.

Halfpenney, I.

Maskell, L.C.

Thackray, A.

Wood, C.M.

NERC Open Research Archive

Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52 Historic Features Field Handbook 2021               Halfpenney, I.1, Thackray, A.1, Garbutt, R.A.2, Wood, C.M.2, Maskell, L.C.2 & Alison, J.2  1 CADW, 2 UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology       Client Ref: Welsh Government / Contract C210/2016/2017  Version 1.0 Date: 12th May 2021  ERAMMP Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) Historic Features 2021  Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP)    Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0  Version History Version Updated By Date Changes 1.0 Author Team 12/5/2021 Published                                                  Mae’r adroddiad hwn ar gael yn electronig yma / This report is available electronically at: www.erammp.wales/52 Neu trwy sganio’r cod QR a ddangosir / Or by scanning the QR code shown.    Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0  Series Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP)  Title ERAMMP Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021  Client Welsh Government  Client reference C210/2016/2017   Confidentiality, copyright and reproduction © Crown Copyright 2021. This report is licensed under the Open Government Licence 3.0.   UKCEH contact details Bronwen Williams UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (UKCEH) Environment Centre Wales, Deiniol Road, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2UW 01248 374500 erammp@ceh.ac.uk  Corresponding author Angus Garbutt, UKCEH ag@ceh.ac.uk  Authors Halfpenny, I., Thackray, A.1, Garbutt, R.A.2, Wood, C.M.2 & Alison, J.2  1 CADW, 2 UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology  Contributing authors & reviewers   How to cite (long) Halfpenney, I., Thackray, A., Garbutt, R.A., Wood, C.M., Maskell, L.C. & Alison, J. (2021). Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP). ERAMMP Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021. Report to Welsh Government (Contract C210/2016/2017)(UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology Projects 06297 & 06810)  How to cite (short) Halfpenney, I., Thackray, A. et al. (2021). ERAMMP Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021. Report to Welsh Government (Contract C210/2016/2017)(UKCEH 06297/06810)  Approved by        Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0  Abbreviations Used in this Report ERAMMP Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme FYM Farmyard Manure HEA Historic Environment Assets HEF Historic Environment Feature PRN Primary Record number SAM Scheduled Ancient Monuments UKCEH UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology WAT Welsh Archaeological Trust    Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52 Historic Features Field Handbook 2021 Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 1 of 15 Contents 1 Historic Features ............................................................................................... 2 1.1 Historic feature classes ............................................................................................ 2 1.2 HEA Site Recording ................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Photographs ............................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Information provided to the Surveyor ....................................................................... 4 2 Information to be recorded by the Surveyor .................................................. 5 2.1 Threat Identification Table ....................................................................................... 5 2.2 Severity .................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Threat Identification Table ....................................................................................... 6 2.4 Condition Recording ................................................................................................ 7 3 General Guidance ............................................................................................. 9 3.1 Photographic Examples ........................................................................................... 9 3.2 Background ............................................................................................................ 11  Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 2 of 15 1 HISTORIC FEATURES  1.1 Historic feature classes There are two classes of Historic Environment Assets (HEA’s) that will be recorded as part of the survey work:  Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAM’s) – nationally important with statutory protection (The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Acts, 1979, legislation similar to SSSI legislation). SAM’s will be identified by SAM No. SAM’s are also covered by Cross-Compliance.  Historic Environment Features (HEF’s) – regionally important but no statutory protection. HEF’s will be identified by PRN (Primary Record number). HEF’s are protected from damage under the Glastir regulations.  Recording of both classes of HEA’s should be undertaken in the same format.  1.2 HEA Site Recording  Surveyors will record data electronically, and will be provided with a Fieldnote paper form containing information from the previous survey provided by the relevant Welsh Archaeological Trust (WAT). To open the recording form, click on the HEFs icon in Survey123, and click collect (further instruction on Survey123 is given in the Vegetation Plots Handbook [ERAMMP Document-49]1).                                                      1 www.erammp.wales/49 Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 3 of 15    NB – if you have any queries please contact the named contact at the head of the fieldnote on the phone number provided.   The feature ID number (SAM No or PRN) will be provided on the paper form.  There are approximately 1400 different HEA site types – the relevant site type(s) (e.g. Hut Circle, Hillfort, Cairn, etc.) will be provided to you as an accompanying paper document for each HEA that you survey, along with some basic information to aid your field recording.   Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 4 of 15 1.3 Photographs  Photographs are an invaluable record of condition. General shots of the site are needed along with detailed shots showing any specific condition issues that have been identified (e.g. areas of erosion, bracken infestation, etc.)   1.4 Information provided to the Surveyor  Front page: Brief Description: a brief description of the site will be provided – number of features and type – e.g. small building 7x4m  Management Issues: an assessment by the WATs of likely issues that may be encountered on the site – e.g. heavily overgrown, possible root damage and erosion issues  Survival of remains: the type of feature (e.g. earthwork remains) along with likely survival – e.g. low earthwork banks, with ruined walls  Recording Advice: basic advice from WATs as to what should be – e.g. vegetation mapping, photographs, general walkover to identify issues  Map Extract: a map extract identifying the feature(s) along with an air photo will also be provided.   Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 5 of 15 2 INFORMATION TO BE RECORDED BY THE SURVEYOR  2.1 Threat Identification Table  A list of issues encountered on archaeological sites, along with boxes to record the severity and extent of the ‘threat’.  Extent: record as you would for vegetation mapping – i.e. we need to know how extensive the issue is as an approximation of the percentage of the site that is affected by this issue.  Record as:  localised (1-15%), moderate (15-60%) or extensive (60%+)   2.2 Severity Severity score: Record on a scale of 1 – 6 regarding the severity of the threat:  1 = not a threat to the site, to 6 = very severe threat   1. The threat has occurred in the past but the affected area has fully recovered without intervention – e.g. evidence of stock erosion that has grassed over/self-repaired/regenerated and is no longer active.  2. There has been active deterioration but it is very localised and/or showing signs of self-repair, e.g. minor stock scars where the erosion face is exposed but showing signs that the vegetation cover is regenerating.  3. The threat is active but localised and unlikely to deteriorate further. The ‘threat area’ is defined/contained, essentially stable and not likely to worsen e.g. minor wear along line of footpath, seasonal animal erosion – e.g. lambs within field, poaching around a feeder or gate.  4. The threat is active and likely to deteriorate further, e.g. invasive vegetation that is spreading; vertical erosion of earthworks with exposed soil faces; ploughing; heavily used animal track ways, surface downcutting due to vehicle routes.  5. The threat is active and has partially damaged some of the site and the condition will continue to deteriorate unless there is active intervention e .g. collapsing lintels or corner stones of buildings; large trees growing from masonry; earthworks which require in-filling to repair extensive areas of active erosion.  6. The threat has destroyed this part of the site - Virtually all archaeological features / potential for archaeological remains obliterated, e.g. demolition of a building; cuttings through earthwork remains, deep ploughing of an earthwork, cliff collapse.    Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 6 of 15 2.3 Threat Identification Table  Key to Table: Extent  Record – L, M, E  Localised = 1% – 15%, Moderate = 15% – 60%, Extensive = 60% – 100%  Severity (Sev)  Score 1 – 6  See note below   Threat Type L,M,E Sev Threat Type L,M,E Sev Stock:   Other:   Erosion   Rubbish/flytipping   Poaching   Footpath wear   Stock wear   Vandalism   Stock path wear – surface   Metal detecting   Stock path wear – bare ground   Stone removal   Stock path wear – eroded areas   Coastal erosion   Burrowing animals – rabbits   Water channel erosion   Burrowing animals – moles   Natural decay   Burrowing animals – badgers   Quarrying      Development   Agricultural Operations:   Utility poles   Tyre tracks – surface      Tyre tracks – rutting   Vegetation:   Dumping – FYM, agricultural machinery, agricultural waste/ rubbish etc.   Bracken  N/A Ploughing   Gorse  N/A Ploughing - deep   Bramble  N/A Pasture improvement   rushes  N/A Farm track   Scrub Broadleaf  N/A Drainage   Scrub Conifer  N/A Agricultural buildings   Scrub Mixed  N/A Building deterioration   Windblown tree(s)   Building upgrades   Dead tree(s)   Stone clearance   Dying tree(s)      Windthrow hazard      Afforestation - broadleaf  N/A    Afforestation – conifer  N/A    Afforestation - mixed  N/A L=Localised, M=Moderate, E=Extensive, Sev=Severity  Note: this is a free-text box for the surveyor to record any additional information that they think is relevant but is not covered in the threat identification table. Think in particular about the survival and stability of the remains and site as a whole.  Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 7 of 15        2.4 Condition Recording  This is an assessment of the overall condition of the site. There may be individual threats you have identified as severe but they may be very localised and not adversely impacting upon the overall condition of the site.  Use the following classifications:  • Excellent Condition  • Sound with long standing defects  • Sound with minor defects  • Signs of potential deterioration  • Major signs of deterioration  • Damaged  Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 8 of 15  How to identify the relevant condition:  ‘Excellent Condition’ Stable grass sward (no over or under grazing), no invasive species (bracken, bramble, gorse etc.) or tree/scrub growth, no evidence of erosion or poaching, no fencing or feeders  ‘Sound with long standing defects’ Generally good no erosion or scrub – long standing issues – would be mature tree cover or pre-existing fence, established trackway through the site etc.  ‘Sound with minor defects’ Generally good condition – minor defects would be – localised poaching, surface trample – along stock or footpath routes, small amounts of invasive vegetation/scrub, minor wear around base of standing stones, minor vehicle tracking (not rutting), molehills, small amount of rubbish  ‘Signs of potential deterioration’ Larger areas of trample poaching that may well be persistent (i.e. not seasonally repairing), smaller active erosion scrapes particularly on earthwork banks (active scars are where there does not appear to be any self-repairing taking place), tyre tracks (particularly on slopes) that have developed into established ruts, larger areas of established invasive vegetation and scrub, satellite badger setts, localised rabbit burrowing, dumping/fly tipping  ‘Major signs of deterioration’ Large active badger setts, large rabbit warrens, vehicle ruts along slopes that have developed into water/run-off channels, large areas of active/persistent erosion (includes active and self-repairing areas), extensive bracken, bramble and gorse cover, extensive/established scrub/tree regen, ploughing encroachment, cultivation  ‘Damaged’ Obvious recent damage – will tend to be as a result of human actions – excavation with a machine, quarrying, development over the site, stone robbing, over enthusiastic ditch clearance, ploughing etc. Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52 Historic Features Field Handbook 2021 Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 9 of 15 3 GENERAL GUIDANCE  Many of the condition issues that you are likely to encounter are illustrated in this picture:  The picture illustrates: Afforestation Ploughing Poaching Inappropriate location of feeders Tyre tracking/rutting Stock scrapes/erosion  Invasive vegetation Stock path wear Footpath wear   3.1 Photographic Examples    Active and extensive erosion Windblow damage – resulting in the rootplate destroying archaeological deposits     Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 10 of 15   Multiple issues – tree root damage (long standing) plus badger damage & stock wear Fence through monument (long standing) & feeder to close resulting in wear and poaching       Ploughing encroachment – too close to monument Damage to lime kiln due to vegetation growth – root system forcing out stonework – long standing issue but damage is active and ongoing       Stock erosion (persistent – although evidence of self-repair, problem is clearly longstanding and ongoing) Vehicle Damage     Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 11 of 15   Vehicle damage – Once ruts develop they may then act as a channel for rainfall run-off resulting in significant downcutting of the channel – see above.   3.2 Background  Site Types  There are some 1400 different site type classifications ranging from small discrete readily identifiable features such as standing stones through to complex and extensive multi-period settlement sites and industrial complexes.  Site type information will be provided to aid in identification. However, the photographs below illustrate some of the site/monument types that will be encountered.     Standing Stone Cairn     Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 12 of 15   Hut circle Hut Circle       Neolithic Chambered Tomb Large well-preserved upland Hillfort      Motte     Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 13 of 15  Mine Complex       Dyke Section Pillbox       Settlement and field systems can be extensive and cover a number of hectares Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 14 of 15 Traditional perceptions of a monument may not accord with what is found on the ground particularly in upland Wales.  Upland monuments in particular are not always readily identifiable. The photograph below shows a hut circle – lower right hand side of photo:      Above ground preservation of a monument will also depend on land use – see below the difference on the same monument between improved and unimproved land:      Some sites are extremely important but only actually visible from the air – illustrated by this roman villa complex below, where the ground plan is clearly evident but it is a site for which there is no above ground evidence:   Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme (ERAMMP) ERAMMP Document-52   Document-52:Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) – Historic Features 2021 v1.0 Page 15 of 15              This page intentionally blank.           ERAMMP Programme Office UKCEH Bangor Environment Centre Wales Deiniol Road Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW + 44 (0)1248 374500 erammp@ceh.ac.uk          www.erammp.cymru www.erammp.wales 

Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme - ERAMMP Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) - Historic Features

https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/535969/1/N535969CR.pdf

Environment and Rural Affairs Monitoring & Modelling Programme - ERAMMP Document-52: Field-Survey Handbook (Procedures) - Historic Features

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NERC Open Research Archive