Kent landscape that inspired Dickens declared nature reserve
Natural England, which advises the Government on the environment, announced the creation of the North Kent Woods and Downs national nature reserve on Friday.
This means the 800-acre landscape has been marked out as an area of focus for conservation and nature restoration efforts.
The mosaic of different habitats is home to key species including Man and Lady orchids, the Maidstone mining bee, Hazel dormouse and skylarks, around 1,700 ancient and veteran trees, and the Silverhand Estate – one of the UK's largest organic vineyards.
Dickens, who lived in different areas of north Kent during his life in the 19th Century, drew inspiration from the landscape in his writings.
The nature reserve designation also aims to boost the local economy, tourism and access to nature for around 400,000 people who live within five miles of the reserve and an estimated eight million who live within an hour's drive away.
The ancient woodlands have maintained tree cover since the Tudor era, when Henry VIII was said to have given Kent the nickname 'Garden of England'.
Natural England's partners, which include the National Trust, Woodland Trust and Kent County Council, will be working to support conservation efforts beyond the boundary of the reserve to create a joined-up approach to nature recovery for a further 1,100 hectares in the surrounding area.
Tony Juniper, chair of Natural England said: 'Creating bigger, better and more joined-up natural areas is one of the most vital and fundamental steps we must take in meeting our national targets for Nature's recovery.
'This new reserve, with its hundreds of ancient trees set amid extensive chalk grasslands, lays the foundations for multiple partners to work together to improve Nature across a significant area of countryside.'
The reserve comes as the eighth in the King's Series – a programme to establish 25 large-scale national nature reserves across England by 2027 in celebration of Charles' coronation.
Nature minister Mary Creagh said: 'This new National Nature reserve will give people the opportunity to explore Kent's magical landscapes from wildflower meadows to ancient woodlands.
'Reserves like this one, and others in the King's Coronation Series, will deliver on our promise to improve access to nature and protect nature-rich habitats, as well as boosting the local economy in line with our Plan for Change.'
Nick Johannsen, national landscape director at Kent Downs National Landscape, said: 'The North Kent Woods and Downs National Nature Reserve is especially exciting because of the sheer scale, nearly 20 square kilometres of land managed for nature, people, its beauty and history and for scientific research and so close to the urban centres of Gravesend and the Medway Towns.
'Many partners from the public, private, community and charity sectors are working together here, on some of the very best sites for wildlife in England.'
With support from Natural England and Kent Downs National Landscape, the reserve will be managed by a number of partners including the National Trust, Woodland Trust, Kent County Council, Plantlife, Silverhand Estate (Vineyard Farms Ltd) and the West Kent Downs Countryside Trust.
Meanwhile, affiliated partners include Gravesham Borough Council, Birling Estate, Shorne Parish Council, Tarmac and Forestry England.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
The burqa is inconsistent with integration
Churchill once said, 'Nothing can save England, if she will not save herself. If we lose faith in ourselves, in our capacity to guide and govern, if we lose our will to live, then, indeed, our story is told.' Let those words settle – less as a relic of the past than as a stern admonition for the present. As we reopen a debate many in Westminster have long preferred to bury, we must ask: has Britain still the will to save herself? Or will we, through cowardice and confusion, allow our national story to end not with a bang, but a whimper? The question of banning the burqa and niqab is not a trivial sideshow in the culture wars. It is a litmus test of national self-belief. It goes to the heart of whether Britain has a solution to the complex problems caused by rapid population increase and demographic change. Starmer, predictably, has neither the inclination nor the courage to approach this subject. But a new government with spine, conviction, and a willingness to take the slings and arrows of metropolitan outrage might yet do so. And it must – for the issue before us is no longer about fabric and facial coverings. Are we, or are we not, a society confident in our values? And if the answer is yes – if we are to stem the disintegration of national cohesion and restore a shared civic space – then we must start by outlawing one of the most visible symbols of separation: the full-face veil. Libertarian objections, while intellectually consistent, fall short of lived reality. It is true that in a free society, individuals ought generally to wear what they wish. But there are limits to freedom, and always have been – limits defined by the need to preserve what the French, with admirable clarity, call le vivre ensemble: the capacity to live together. France and Belgium, far from authoritarian states, understood this when they enacted bans in 2010. In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights – an institution I criticise more often than not – nevertheless ruled correctly in S.A.S. v France. The court unanimously acknowledged that the ban infringed individual freedoms of religion and private life, but held that the interference was justified in order to protect a broader societal good: the integrity of social life in an open, liberal democracy. Interestingly, the court rejected the public safety rationale, instead identifying the core issue as one of cultural compatibility. In a Western, pluralist society, being able to see and be seen, to look one another in the face without impediment, is not merely a nicety. It is a necessity. It underpins trust, empathy, and the social contract itself. The burqa and niqab are not akin to turbans, yarmulkes, headscarves or motorcycle helmets. They are garments of erasure – of identity, of individualism, and of the mutual recognition that life in community demands. No law compelling British Sikhs to remove their turbans, or Orthodox Jewish women to discard sheitels, has ever been proposed – because those traditions do not negate the possibility of social interaction. Full facial coverings do and any ban could reasonably make exceptions for sporting, health or professional reasons or for riding a motorbike (as in France). There is also a deeper hypocrisy. When I have travelled in Middle Eastern or Catholic countries, I have covered my shoulders, legs, and hair when asked. I have done so not under duress, but in a spirit of respect. I have entered women-only spaces and abstained from alcohol when custom required it. Is it so outlandish to expect that those who come to Britain might return the courtesy? Other nations are unapologetic in defending their ways of life. Why are we so ready to abandon ours at the first hint of discomfort? Our culture – rooted in Judeo-Christian values, Enlightenment reason, and the hard-won principle of sexual equality – has made this country one of the most tolerant and liberal on earth. But tolerance cannot mean indifference. A society that tolerates everything, even its own erosion, will not survive. The answer must now be: no more. Not because we are intolerant – but because we wish to remain a society worth integrating into. A society with the courage to demand participation, not parallelism. A society with the clarity to say: there are lines, and they matter. Churchill warned us that if we lose faith in ourselves, then indeed, our story is told. That warning echoes now more than ever.
Daily Record
3 hours ago
- Daily Record
West Lothian organisation receives funding from Scottish Government to continue climate change actions
Projects range from community growing initiatives and local energy solutions to flood prevention West Lothian Climate Action Network (WLCAN) received funding £170,985 to support local grassroots climate projects this year. The organisation is aiming to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote renewable energy, and educate the public about climate change. Projects range from community growing initiatives and local energy solutions to flood prevention and repair workshops. The investment, which is part of the Scottish Government's commitment to tackling the climate emergency through community-led action, is being used by WLCAN to fund new projects this year, or develop ongoing ones. Among the projects to benefit are, Artlink Boghall, who are developing a community garden at Boghall in Bathgate. Gardening and cooking projects support the aim of growing more food in the community. WLCAN funds are also helping Broxburn and Uphall Growers to trial the use of electro-culture in vegetable beds at Strathbrock Community Garden, they hope to use the science to increase yields. Ruth Plevin and Gordon Leckie from River Almond Action Group also receive funding from WLCAN to distribute water butts, allowing residents to divert rainwater, which relieves pressure on the drainage system and helps combat flooding after heavy rainfall. Donald Stavert, Treasurer and a Director at WLCAN, said: 'We are delighted to have been awarded funding for another year of community climate action in West Lothian. We will be in every area of the district this year talking to the community and working actively with all our 80 member organisations on their development – exciting times.' Angela Constance MSP for Almond Valley, welcomed the funding boost for WLCAN, saying: 'This £170,985 investment is fantastic news for West Lothian and a huge step forward for our communities. "The West Lothian Climate Action Hub is doing outstanding work by bringing people together to tackle the climate emergency in ways that really matter locally – whether that's through food growing, reducing waste, or exploring low-carbon energy solutions. 'It's about recognising that real change happens when people are supported to take action in their own communities. With climate change continuing to be one of the biggest challenges of our time, local leadership is just as important as national ambition—and I'm proud to see the Scottish Government backing both.'
BBC News
10 hours ago
- BBC News
President Trump bans people from some countries from travelling to USA
US President Donald Trump has signed a ban on travel to the United States for citizens from twelve mostly African and Asian by people from seven other countries will be restricted in Trump says the ban, which comes into effect next week, would keep America human rights groups have criticised his plans, calling them "cruel," and some experts say it is likely to be challenged in US is the second time President Trump he has ordered a ban on travel from certain countries - he signed a similar order in 2017, during his first term in office. What has Donald Trump announced? From 9 June, citizens from 12 countries will be blocked from travelling to the countries are Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Nationals from another seven countries - Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela - will face a partial there are a few situations when the new rules won't include some dual citizens - people who are citizens of two countries at the same time - as well as for athletes travelling to America to compete in major sporting tournaments are due to be held in the US over the next few years including the 2026 World Cup and the 2028 Olympics in Los order also says the American government may grant exemptions on a "case-by-case" White House said these were "common sense restrictions" which would "protect Americans" and help keep the country US president made immigration a big issue in last year's election campaign. What has the reaction been to the ban? Sone people and organisations have criticised President Trump's plan and it is expected to be challenged in from President Trump's rival Democratic Party in the US said the ban "betrayed" the ideals of the USA's founders and warned it would "only further isolate" America on the world rights groups have also spoken out against the International USA described it as "discriminatory, racist, and downright cruel." There has also been reaction from some of the countries named in President Trump's promised to work with the United States to address any security Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello warned that "being in the United States is a great risk for anyone, not just for Venezuelans." Has this happened before? President Trump ordered a similar travel ban during his first term in the White House in featured some of the same countries as his latest order, including Iran, Libya and gathered at airports around the US to protest against the ban, including lawyers who offered their services for free to help those 2021, when Joe Biden became US President after Donald Trump, he scrapped the travel ban.
