|
We stand by our guidance, English Heritage tells councils |
|
| Cowleaze Cottage, Longparish, where the inspector allowed the change from straw to water reed on the front slope. This was conditional on the patterned ridge being replaced by a flush, wrap-over ridge. English Heritage claims that this at least indicates that consent is required for such changes, despite the assertions made by PART Photograph C Chris Wood |
 |
|
English Heritage has written to local authority chief executives in defence of its guidance on thatch, in the face of criticism by Protection of Ancient Roofing Traditions (PART). This was its letter, sent to chief executives on 1 July 2002 and copied to each council's conservation officer: English Heritage thatch guidance: a response to PART You will probably have received a letter sent to all local authorities by the Protection of Ancient Roofing Traditions (PART). The object of the letter is to persuade authorities not to follow the English Heritage Guidance Note Thatch and Thatching as a guide to the conservation of thatch, on the grounds that the guidance errs in law and would, if used, lead authorities into decisions which could provoke defeat in the courts. PART's main contention is that the guidance 'freezes' thatching and thereby perpetuates inferior materials English Heritage has written to local authority chief executives in defence of its guidance on thatch, in the face of criticism by Protection of Ancient Roofing Traditions (PART). This was its letter, sent to chief executives on 1 July 2002 and copied to each council's conservation officer: English Heritage thatch guidance: a response to PART You will probably have received a letter sent to all local authorities by the Protection of Ancient Roofing Traditions (PART). The object of the letter is to persuade authorities not to follow the English Heritage Guidance Note Thatch and Thatching as a guide to the conservation of thatch, on the grounds that the guidance errs in law and would, if used, lead authorities into decisions which could provoke defeat in the courts. PART's main contention is that the guidance 'freezes' thatching and thereby perpetuates inferior materials English Heritage has written to local authority chief executives in defence of its guidance on thatch, in the face of criticism by Protection of Ancient Roofing Traditions (PART). This was its letter, sent to chief executives on 1 July 2002 and copied to each council's conservation officer: English Heritage thatch guidance: a response to PART You will probably have received a letter sent to all local authorities by the Protection of Ancient Roofing Traditions (PART). The object of the letter is to persuade authorities not to follow the English Heritage Guidance Note Thatch and Thatching as a guide to the conservation of thatch, on the grounds that the guidance errs in law and would, if used, lead authorities into decisions which could provoke defeat in the courts. PART's main contention is that the guidance 'freezes' thatching and thereby perpetuates inferior materials |
|
| The apparent poor Performance of straw roofs is a significant reason why some thatchers and owners prefer to use imported water reed. This issue is hotly disputed and there are many straw roofs which are over 50 years old, such as this one in Cambridgeshire. Photograph © |  |
|
consist solely in its appearance. English Heritage believes that to change the material of a thatched roof between straw and water reed (or veldt grass) is to change the character of that roofthis trend is individually significant for that roof, just as the accumulation of such cases is nationally significant for the industry and the countryside. Even where the surface appearance can be made similar (as we admit in the guidance it can), the profile of dormers and eaves is virtually always different; and the initial colour, a significant feature of all the major thatch counties, is quite distinct. These differences are, we believe, worth an authority taking into account. On ridges, we continue to think that these are an important feature of any thatched roof, and that the local tradition is significant; the inspector in the only cited case to have involved our guidance note (Cowleaze Cottages, Longparish) agreed with this view. We know from the cases on which you have consulted us that cases are indeed considered on their merits, as PART says they should be, and that legitimate exceptions to your policies are allowed, as we have always suggested that they should be. 3. The supply of materials It is notable that two of the cases cited by PART (Taunton, 1995, and Bockhampton, 2001) turned chiefly on the availability and quality of thatching straw. We described the supply of thatching materials in our guidance as the most intractable problem facing the industry. It certainly is not helped by bald assertions, such as PART makes, that listed building controls will result in the use of inferior materials. There is a fierce debate, choked by a severe shortage of objective information, about the quality of both straw and water reed (to say nothing of materials like African veldt grass, which |
|
| Stooking straw, which is labour-intensive and arduous work. Supporters of imported water reed contend that this is an outmoded practice where labour can be difficult to find. Traditional growers contest this. They consider that this ripening and drying process is essential to the production of high-quality thatching straw Photograph © J B Letts |
 |
| presumably are glanced at in PART's reference to 'the use of improved or better thatching materials'). The quality of both materials, and their durability outside their usual climate zones, have been called into question. The debate is bedevilled by the difficulty of assessing how much the quality of material contributes to a roof failure, as opposed to workmanship or siting. Very few cases have been adequately inspected and there is no agreed methodology for so doing. English Heritage is not prepared to smear straw with a general imputation of inferiority. There are encouraging signs of movement on the growing front. The Countryside Agency has agreed, to fund a leaflet, Growing Straw for Thatching, which should help to satisfy the huge interest which has been aroused among farmers whenever this topic has been aired. This document will describe the history of straw growing and the regimes needed to produce good thatching straw. There are growing trials at selected locations of the older wheat varieties which may prove promising in the medium term, and we shall try to keep you informed about these. Also, the Conservation of Historic Thatch |
|
 |
|
| committee (COHT), an independent body, stands ready to provide expert witnesses in defence of traditional thatching, as described by Chris Wood in Context (March 2002). The arguments in favour of traditional materials, and their husbandry, should not lack for advocates in future. We hope this will work to transform the negative image which the traditional materials have been given by PART. Yours faithfully David Brock Historic buildings inspector, South East david. brock@english-heritage. org. uk |
|