Appendix 2: Interview with Sara Bowler and Lizzy Masterton from Goonhilly Village Green Project. 28

the 20th Century satellite dishes and 21st Century, wind turbines, creating a multi layered ‘taskscape’ evidencing human agency at the site. (https://happidrome.wordpress.com/2010/09/30/goonhilly-taskscape-2/)

One of the most popular activities that we ran at both events was an archaeological tour of the site with local archaeologist Charlie Johns. I think a little bit of knowledge and an embodied experience helps fire the imagination. Guided walks are a good vehicle for this. Conventional ‘interpretation’ of the site will always be barren and unsatisfying. The SSSI status and rare species on the site could in the future be attractive to bio-cultural heritage visitors in a managed way, as specialised habitats sadly decline elsewhere. I am mindful however of the thoroughly depressing Stonehenge ‘experience’ and would hate to think of Goonhilly becoming an ecological theme park analogous to that. It’s interesting because people perceive Goonhilly as a natural wilderness but are unaware how heavily it is managed to support biodiversity and that without this human intervention, it would revert to scrub. So perhaps that also needs to be part of the story.

Appendix 3: Questionnaire Responses:

1) What do you think conservation heritage means?

● Protecting areas of historical nature ● Conserving old areas/building etc. in a way that suits the time they're from ● Looking after historical sites, maintaining but not altering. ● The conservation of heritage sites. ● Preserving/protecting the environment and conserving wildlife. Planting of trees etc. Reducing waste. Using renewable energy. ● Preservation of previous conservation projects. ● Looking after and upkeep of important sites ● Preserving historical sites?

● i have no idea ● Looking after important sites and preserving them. ● Preservation of all that is significant to our history. ● Like a place in your home like an indoor greenhouse that you have tea and cake with unwanted family members ● Preserving old buildings or historic land sites. ● Preserving anything that is of historical importance or interest ● Not sure ● Preservation of heritage. Buildings etc ● Preserving ways of life, or at least elements of and symbols (like buildings) that are somewhat unique to an area ● the preservation of cultural property for the future ● I think it means helping to preserve things that are historically important. ● History of conservation. ● Conserving heritage. ● Maintaining an asset in a way that keeps the historic value of it. ● The ongoing process of protecting things for future generations ● Keeping past heritage sites preserved ● Maintaining an historic asset sympathetically without detracting from its importance

2) What do you think cultural heritage means?

● History in relation to a specific culture, makes me think of traditions within a culture ● The history and time behind people's heritage (e.g. social customs, behaviours, ideas, art etc.) ● Cultural Heritage is the history of a certain area ● Architecture, objects, intangible (craft, music, oral tradition), communal traditions of a set of people. ● Customs and practices passed on through generations. Buildings, landmarks etc too. ● Historical aspects of our culture. ● Sites that are important to certain communities and their culture ● cultural historic things that go back generations? ● still no idea ● Anything which represents something to a community. ● The same but for cultural reasons such as monuments or books. ● Old ancient family members ● Documenting an area's habits and interests as diverse as language, food, music, games etc ● Preserving anything historical of importance that relates to culture such as buildings and monuments. ● Heritage to do with what culture a family has been bought up with ● Legacy Passed down through generations ie inherited ● Traditions and deep seated ways of life

● Cultural Heritage is an expression of the ways of living developed by a community and passed on from generation to generation, including customs, practices, places, objects, artistic expressions, and values. ● Cultural heritage is anything that is something that historically the local population has done regularly and still does ie the Obby Oss day at Padstow ● Archiving and maintaining cultural artifacts and history. ● Ancestral or historic traditions, arts, foods, stories, language, buildings etc. ● Asset/item/theme which has strong links through the ages to a group of people/location ● The history and customs of your culture ● Heritage that correlates to a particular culture ● Passing on values and traditions from generation to generation

3) What do you think natural heritage means?

● History in relation to nature, makes me think of rocks type thing like stonehenge ● The natural history of a place ● History of an area that is mainly non inhabited ● Maybe unique semi-natural environments created by humans? Like the Lake District is both natural but also manmade, and has a cultural heritage in poetry, painting and national consciousness. ● Habitats, biological and physiological environment? ● The land we inhabit. ● Things that have occurred in nature and are of particular importance or significance and should be protected ● Our geological history? ● nope ● A part of our environment which has resonance for the community. ● THe past ● Trees and bushes and greenery ● No idea! ● Preserving anything of historical interest that relates to the natural world ● Not sure ● Natural habitats of nature, threatened animals/ plants. ● Species and landscapes that are historical to a region ● Natural heritage refers to the sum total of the elements of biodiversity, including flora and fauna, ecosystems and geological structures ● Relates to natural scenery, so in Cornwall that would be something like Kynance Cove ● The nature of the region preserved/maintained. ● Significant areas of animal habitat or geological features. Areas of historic or scientific interest, including some man made landscapes like mines or China clay slag heaps. ● The way land or culture has changed over time for a group of people/location ● Culture gained from your family and surroundings ● Heritage of nature ● Natural environment which may be significant for future generations

4) You are working on the board of directors for a large conservation charity who have been faced with the decision of what to allocate financial resources (money) to. There are two projects under the supervision and management of the charity that are worthy of receiving a new grant of £50,000 that you have recently received. One of the projects is to conserve a nature reserve. The nature reserve is of geological interest and much effort has been made to preserve the indigenous flora and fauna over the years to encourage wildlife and biodiversity. The site is not visited by people and does not make any money. The other project is a site that has an ancient castle which has been discovered on the site and the surrounding area has been excavated to reveal a number of man made objects which are of historical interest.

● I personally would want to allocate the money to the area that does not have any visitors, not everything needs to be about making money. However as director the obvious choice would be the site that has potential to make money and return investment. ● The castle is probably the wiser choice - if you can get the castle to bring in money, then you can reinvest that money both in the preservation of the castle, and also to fund the nature reserve. The nature reserve is probably the right choice though - as ecological variety is slowly declining in this country. I would have to choose the castle, with the idea that profit made can be reinvested in other areas. ● Would need further clarifying information on the decision criteria as both options are equally valid. Personally, i'd say the nature reserve but that is my own bias. ● Nature reserve as biodiversity is more important that a castle ● From a very personal point of view I'd fund the nature reserve, considering the threat of loss of biodiversity and climate change. Without more information on the purpose and objectives of the charity I don't feel like I can make an informed decision, and there might be an option to fund the heritage site but insist on some protections and interpretation of the nature reserve, and use revenue generated from the car park/venue/shop to plough back into the nature reserve. Or vice versa, the funding for the nature reserve could include archaeological excavation to drive interest in the wider nature reserve, increasing visits. ● 2. Because people go there, it would be more worth while and better used ● The ancient castle because much effort has already been put into the conservation of the nature reserve and since nobody visits it, it should naturally continue to flourish. Much can be learned from the way ancient cultures lived so the excavation could prove to be valuable. ● Nature reserve, as it's more important ecologically. ● The nature reserve because it does not make any money so may not be able to get funding otherwise. Efforts have already been put in to preserve the area and if the money is not given to them now it may be too late in the future to restore the site. ● The nature reserve due to the impact on the environment although the castle would be interesting

● the nature reserve assuming it needs to money, the natural environment is under threat now, the archaeology can wait, its not going to go off or anything ● I would go with the castle, on the assumption that it is unique, whereas the flora and fauna are probably not. ● Nature reserve - castles will come and go but when nature is gone - its gone. ● Nature reserve is like madigascar so I’d pick it too see the animals ● It sounds as if the castle site is more recently excavated and is perhaps more in need of funds. It would be important to maintain the first project too even if it's not visited. Both are equally important. ● The castle, as it will make more money which can then be invested into projects such as the nature reserve ● I would personally give the money to the nature reserve because its going to help wildlife ● Conserve a nature reserve.....preserve for future rather than discover more history ● The nature reserve, for that it has less chance of being preserved by some other organisation. The castle is a more glamorous proposition for a museum or a such like and could use it as a tourist attraction to help fund itself, where as the nature reserve is less protected from other development ● both. ● The ancient castle would be where I would send money. The reason being is that if the nature reserve is not visited by people then it should continue to be undisturbed. ● Nature/wildlife because once that's gone it's gone. The ancient castle can wait. ● Partly depends on the goals of the charity, but I would allocate the money to the nature reserve, the loss of biodiversity would potentially be a bigger loss then the man made artifacts, as well are requiring more immediate attention. I would suggest that the money is used to create a visitor centre to generate sustainable income. ● Fund the nature reserve. The nature reserve has huge benefits which cannot be expressly seen or valued - pollinators, local fauna diversity, climate effects. Though the castle would be an obvious choice tdue to the added income the nature reserve benefits a larger amount of creatures and these are often over looked for funding projects ● I personally love history but as much as history is important, and it is important to learn from our predecessors, I'd favour the nature reserve. Without protecting our environment there won't be anything left to protect, especially considering climate change. Also, in Cornwall, so much of our culture has been impacted by nature and our surroundings. ● I would allocate the money to the historical castle as the public can benefit from learning the historical factors about it. ● The natural reserve as it’s important to maintain and secure the environment for future generations

5) With regards to allocating resources, both time and money, put these 4 conservation sites in order of importance and explain the reason for your answer:

Reasons:

● Not really sure to be honest. Importance is subjective, I have rated based on sites I would likely visit in order. ● It's important history is preserved for later generations, but the value of biodiversity and natural land mustn't be overlooked. Castles are cool, but there are a lot of them. Nature reserves and ancient woodlands may house endangered species - whether that be animal, or plant. It's important these are protected. ● Preserving the planet, ecosystem, diversity etc is more important to humans than our history/art. If the former goes then that latter are moot. ● Natural environments are mainly sustainable ● I feel like a 1930s Lido could probably attract private investment to restore it or turn into flats, or office space. The castle will need funding to prevent more expensive costs in the future as it falls apart. Woodland and nature reserves will require less investment to be sustainable, but are key for biodiversity, climate change and public health. ● This is a difficult decision. An ancient woodland should definitely be protected from human destruction. Also, an Art Deco 1930s lido as lidos are a rarity in the UK and part of our modern history (a particular interest of mine). Castles are important too, but we have quite a few of those! ● Ecology should come first, to preserve the planet.

● I think it is important to preserve the natural sites because they may provide a home to wildlife and if they are not maintained it would be hard to recreate them ● I would say all of these are important as they are heritage ● we should where possible preserve good examples of our built environment, but our natural environment is critical and irreplaceable, an ancient woodland is incredibly rare (in a UK context). ● A castle has a huge amount of significance and holds all manner of importance. The woodland is almost as important. ● Nature is important than any history bollox lol ● I’m not sure ● I'm going on the needs of the site to maintain it. The Lido is a 'fragile' site which I think would deteriorate fairly quickly without intervention whilst the 'natural' sites support current wildlife so I wouldn't want to put that at risk. A castle is going to deteriorate too but looks more robust than some of the other options. ● Nature is more important than man made monuments especially because of climate change we need to preserve the natural world ● I've given my top 2 because it's nature related and will have wildlife to also consider, although i absolutely love castles and think they should be reserved as well as possible ● Preference of helping future than preserving history ● The castle is most important in terms of time, to protect the history of the area and properly investigate it's story, and to keep it standing. The nature reserve and woodland are important, but being natural spaces should be managed with little interference. The lido ranks lowest since it is t necessarily so unique, and has other options for its preservation from a business ● all are important ● It’s a tough call, but a castle that has visitors should get money from them. The same as a lido. However you can’t really charge for a nature reserve or woodland, so they will probably need more public money than the others. ● Nature over people. Enough castles already! ● While possibly the most important, the ancient woodland is also the most able to look after itself if Humans left it alone! The lido is of significance, but could be capable of generating income. The lake is probably in need of most management to maintain the habitat. The castle is likely to require the biggest investment to maintain. ● Ancient woodland would take years to replace or rejuvenate. Natural resource are becoming more scarce, a castle is often more historic and the art deco lido is a fad from a specific spot in time ● History and art is crucial for culture but our eco system and environment has been around for centuries before us. So it's our responsibility to look after it for centuries to come. ● They're all landmarks that would be considered amazing to learn about for the historical factors. ● Maintaining historical buildings is important for generations to learn from and the environment should also be protected

10) Any further comments?