To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Northamptonshire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Northamptonshire is a county in the East Midlands of England.[1] It has an area of 236,700 hectares (914 sq mi)[2] and a population estimated in mid-2016 at 733,000.[3] The county is bordered by Warwickshire, Leicestershire, Cambridgeshire, Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Rutland and Lincolnshire.[4] It is governed by Northamptonshire County Council and seven district and borough councils, Corby, Daventry, East Northamptonshire, Kettering, Northampton, South Northamptonshire and Wellingborough.[5] The county flower is the cowslip.[6]

A ridge of low Jurassic hills runs through the county, separating the basins of the Welland and Nene rivers. The county has good transportation connections as it is crossed by two main railway lines and the M1 motorway, and it has many small industrial centres rather than large conurbations.[7]

In England, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) are designated by Natural England, which is responsible for protecting England's natural environment. Designation as an SSSI gives legal protection to the most important wildlife and geological sites.[8] As of July 2017, there are 57 sites designated in Northamptonshire,[9] 48 for their biological interest and 9 for their geological interest. Eight are Geological Conservation Review sites, four are Nature Conservation Review sites, and fourteen are managed by the Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. The largest is Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits, which is a Ramsar internationally important wetland site[10] and a Special Protection Area under the European Union Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds.[11] The smallest is Irchester Old Lodge Pit, which is described in the Geological Conservation Review as a Middle Jurassic site of national importance.[12]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    2 068
    895
    395
  • ✪ Game Over...? "Cripping" The Comic Con 2015 Angela Smith
  • ✪ Zeppelin
  • ✪ History of women in the United States | Wikipedia audio article

Transcription

- Rachael wrote these remarks with some assistance from me, so when it says "My name is Rachael Zubal-Ruggieri," disregard that. Okay. So, are you rolling now, Sean? That's up fortunate. Okay. So welcome, good afternoon. My name is Diane Wiener, not Rachael Zubal-Ruggieri. Rachael Zubal-Ruggieri is right here and she deserves the lion's share of the credit for this symposium. So, I want to welcome you to the third annual "Cripping" the Comic Con, where "Con" stands for conference and comics convention. This third annual symposium provides participants with the opportunity to engage in a broad array of reflective discussions about the representations of disability that exist beneath the surface and explicitly within mainstream popular cultures both nationally and internationally, particularly as we know the popular culture phenomena that are comic books, graphic novels, and manga. This year's main themes are gaming, digital media, and digital effects in film. We are exploring the various ways in which games, gaming, and virtual media reflect and create understandings and interpretations of disability in popular culture. And I'll just insert briefly here, you'll note to my right we have sign language interpretation and also Communication Access Realtime Translation which I assume is giving live captioning every word I'm saying. Which is a little alarming. So, in our two prior "Cripping" the Comic Cons, presenters and participants have examined together numerous disability rights topics and social controversies, such as bioethics debates around assisted suicide and prenatal testing, and the connections between ableism and other forms of oppression. Games, gaming, and virtual media present us with unique opportunities to return to these subjects as well as to highlight other issues. Why gaming, why 'game over'? Mid-way through the film Aliens awesome, 1986, Hudson, played by Bill Paxton, famously says, 'Game over, man! Game over!' Have you seen this movie or are you familiar with it in any other way? He's referring to what he believes will be his imminent demise at the hands of the Xenomorphs (the aliens). Is Hudson disabled by the situation in which he and his peers find themselves, as they persevere despite overwhelming odds? There are casualties, to be sure, and the film does not present a stereotyped narrative of triumph and overcoming. As we often see in representations of ability and disability in films. People with disabilities are often misunderstood by people without disabilities, who at times imagine that people with disabilities do not have lives worth living -- that people with disabilities experience a poor quality of life from which escape or even death is a desirable option. Life, as we know, however, is far more complicated. There is irrefutable evidence that non-disabled people, including health care professionals, significantly underestimate the quality of life lived with a disability. No one is immune to these assumptions. People with disabilities are also professional members of these communities. So what does 'game over' imply when considering beginning- and end-of-life issues, daily quality of life perceptions, family dynamics, et cetera? How are these vital subjects portrayed in games, digital media, and other facets of popular culture? What new imaginings might be possible? From games that include and, in some cases, feature -- characters with disabilities, to gaming organizations and sites coordinated and led by people with disabilities, to new industry initiatives, gaming remains a focal point for establishing connections, as well as for fostering solitude in the lives of people with disabilities and our allies. In what ways do games and gaming counter, deepen, and complicate issues of stigma and isolation? This symposium is, or has the potential to be, about all of us. There will be a place at the registration table where you can leave a note about what topics you may want to discuss with others. And you can leave messages for each other, for the keynote and presenters, the event planners, and so forth. Disability Studies scholar Michael Bérubé tells us that "every representation of disability has the potential to shape the way disability is understood in general culture, and some of these representations can in fact do extraordinary powerful or harmful cultural and political work." These representations encourage audience members to come to an acceptance and understanding of the wide range of differences that exist among us. It is my great pleasure and privilege to introduce our first keynote, Professor Angela M. Smith, Associate Professor of English and Gender Studies at the University of Utah and is author of 'Hideous Progeny: Disability, Eugenics, and Classic Horror Cinema' I'll wait for that screen to do that, responding to my cape. My cape has a D. You can see what that stands for. It's a contest. So, 'Hideous Progeny: Disability, Eugenics, and Classic Horror Cinema,' is the only disability studies text on horror, cinema, and popular culture. Professor Smith's book will be available for purchase in the exhibition/vending area, and we're pretty sure she will be willing to sign one for you. The Syracuse University Press has also a new text on Captain America which is available at the table with many other new materials, but there is a Syracuse University book store representative selling Angela's book. So, you can check that out. In her keynote today, entitled 'Lost Limbs: Disabled Bodies as Digital Effects,' Angela will trace the amputee figure and related physically disabled figures through an array of movies, TV shows, viral images, and news photos, in order to consider how this figure at once titillates with disability spectacle, registers sorrow for the passing of more embodied media, testifies to the increasing potency of special effects, celebrates the possibilities of technological enhancement, and, perhaps most importantly, increasingly displaces actually disabled bodies from their own scene. This displacement, registered in several recent Hollywood superhero blockbusters where able-bodied actors digitally lose their limbs to produce the illusion of an amputee body, both threatens to erase diverse embodiments from our imagined and real futures and makes visible a series of able-bodied errors, of failures to properly enact disabled moves. These errors destabilize ableist visions, calling for the re-presentation (the again-making-present) of diverse and disabled bodies in front of cameras, in digital maneuvers, and in our collective futures. We start Cripcon with the question 'game over'? Perhaps after 'Cripcon' is over we will answer instead 'game on'! Please join us in welcoming Professor Angela M. Smith. [ Applause ] - Can everyone hear me? I want to begin by saying that I'm very excited to be here. I owe a huge thank you to Diane Wiener and Rachael Zubal-Ruggieri for inviting me to be a part of this symposium and for being such gracious hosts, to Radell Roberts for all of his assistance in organizing my visit, and to everyone involved, I know there is huge amount of work that goes into organizing these events so everyone involved in organizing this year's ''Cripping' the Comic Con' conference. I'm very much looking forward to learning a great deal in the next couple of days, especially about gaming which is not my area at all. My own work focuses on disabled bodies are enacted, visualized, and narrated in popular media especially film, so I hope that there will be useful connections between the talk and the many exciting presentations to come. So, to begin. In the fall of 2012, several pop-culture sites declared that TV's 'Hottest Trend' was, and this might surprise you, amputation. Limbs were, in the words of one site, 'flying off the screen' in shows such as 'American Horror Story', 'The Walking Dead,' 'Grey's Anatomy,' and 'Criminal Minds'. While 'Criminal Minds' focused only focused on the shocking act of amputation the others all featured recurring and continuing characters. In the last few years, other popular shows have foregrounded amputee characters, including Once Upon a Time, Game of Thrones, Arrested Development, and Sons of Anarchy. Amputee figures have also recently graced mainstream movie-screens, as in Battleship, The Man with the Iron Fists, Rust and Bone, Snowpiercer, The Fault in Our Stars, Dolphin Tale 2, and fantastical blockbusters like Men in Black 3, Iron Man 3, and The Amazing Spider-Man. Announcing amputation is a 'hot trend' is certainly sensationalistic. But it also usefully suggests a cultural inclination toward mediated amputee figures. And although these articles overlook a long history of amputee images in visual culture to describe this turn as something new, the sense of newness is still instructive. Amputee figures, I believe, are often used to demonstrate new visual technologies and special effects, and images of limb loss are notable in visual media at moments of technical transition. They perhaps mark a perceived cultural loss or trauma, as developments in visual simulations appear to move us further away from more 'real' or embodied representations. But images of limb loss, especially those produced through visual trickery, in the absence of an actual amputee body, also reassure viewers that the new technology renders embodied reality better than past art forms, that these tricks in fact intensify and improve the viewing experience. These technologies thus elide 'actually' disabled bodies so as to wow audiences with new, exciting, visceral simulations. My talk today will proceed in three parts. First, I will lay out four examples of images of limb loss in transitional movie moments, showing how amputee bodies are used to demonstrate new visual technologies. We'll see that actual disabled bodies are increasingly displaced from the scene of their own representation to allow for absolute technological control. Second, I'll suggest that this effort to elide or erase disability from cinema is in part thwarted by the appearance in digital simulations of embodied mistakes. These mistakes lie not with erratic disabled bodies, but instead with able-bodied actors and digital technicians who, together, often fail to credibly reproduce disabled moves. Third, I will turn to recent blockbusters based on superhero comics. In these films, amputee characters function as grotesque, dysfunctional foils to graceful, powerful, posthuman superheros, while digital effects envisage a future in which disability has disappeared. But these movies' DVD extras, which reveal the workings of certain special effects, displace interest in CGI with a preference for stunt acts, actions by real and limited bodies that invest the effects with a sense of reality. This tendency towards the movements of actual bodies in a material realm surprisingly returns us to the trendy amputee body, and the specific significance and effects of the amputee stunt actor. Working against a history of being deleted and disappeared, the non-normative moves of the amputee stunt actor claim space for disability in our cinematic and worldly futures. Before we turn to examples of the amputee body at moments of cinematic transition, I would like to briefly note something that is likely not news to any of us: the fact that the physically disabled body is often understood or viewed as a mistake in form; an aberrance in movement; or, to invoke a cinematic term, a kind of continuity error. Ableist rhetoric has long construed people with disabilities as biological errata or deviations from a norm. This rhetoric supports calls for disability's elimination through euthanasia, segregation, sterilization, genetic manipulation, or pre-natal testing, while also imagining hopefully that acquired conditions, including amputations, might soon be overcome through prosthetic or biological intervention. Alison Kafer calls this mindset the 'curative imaginary.' She writes, 'In our disabled state, we are not part of the dominant narratives of progress, but once rehabilitated, normalized, and hopefully cured, we play a starring role: the sign of progress, the proof of development, the triumph over the mind or body'. I want to suggest that our cultural displays often summon the unusual body precisely so as to imagine its erasure in an improved future. For instance, the 1939 New York World's Fair, whose theme was 'Building the World of Tomorrow,' included both an animal freak show entitled 'Nature's Mistakes' and a human sideshow that featured, among others, a 'fingerless pianist,' 'an armless wonder,' and a 'limbless half-girl.' The fair claimed to "present a new and clearer view of today in preparation for tomorrow," and visitors were thus permitted to gaze at the modern world's flaws, its non-normative bodies, animal and human, in anticipation of their imminent disappearance. A few years later, the same logic framed a re-release of the 1932 film "Freaks." This film featured a cast of actual freak performers, including four congenital amputees. For the 1940s re-release, "Freaks" was renamed "Nature's Mistakes" and sported an appended prologue, which mused, 'Never again will such a story be filmed, as modern science and teratology is rapidly eliminating such blunders of nature from the world.' In today's media, as if to prove such technological advance, amputee figues particularly play the starring role [indistinct]. Our mediascape is dotted with amputee athletes, models, and even popstars, whose normative beauty or stellar athleticism combines with cutting-edge prostheses to render them exemplars of a post-human future. The notion that disabled bodies appear to an ableist world as mistakes to be corrected is also articulated by Lennard Davis, who writes, "Disability is a disruption in the visual, auditory, or perceptual field as it relates to the power of the gaze." The amputee body thus has disruptive potential: it contrasts a more typical body form, it moves in unexpected ways, and it testifies to the body's vulnerability to trauma, to unpredictable material forces. This body thus offers a challenge to cinema, which seeks to exploit its disruptive energies while subordinating it to the continuous and unifying impulses of mainstream film. The amputee figure evokes thrilling, visceral, and potent responses, but cinema also seeks to control its appearance and disappearance, reassuring us that our technologies can overcome the mistakes of the material world through compelling illusion, restoring us to a sense of bodily power, capacity, and wholeness. My first example of how dramatized limb loss appears at a moment of cinematic transition in this case at the cinema's very beginnings, concerns an early short film, Thomas Edison's "The Fake Beggar" from 1898. This film's disability politics are touched on in Martin Norden's Cinema of Isolation, where Norden critiques it as a 'fake beggar' film. Norden tells us that the movie depicts an apparently blind amputee man begging on the street. When a coin misses the beggar's cup and he reaches to pick it up, a police officer suspects his ruse. The beggar stands, revealing that he was merely kneeling, and runs off, chased by the officer. But Ellen Samuels, having viewed a print of the film, points out that this description is incomplete. It fails to mention the beggar's companion, a small boy who seems to be a real bilateral above-the-knee amputee. So this image that I'm showing comes from this Thomas Edison film, "The Fake Beggar," 1898, and I was just talking about that description of the film where it is revealed the man pretending to be blind, pretending to be an amputee is in fact neither. And he runs off chased by a police officer. It is a very, very short film. Ten seconds. So I was citing Ellen Samuels from her excellent recent book "Fantasies of Identification" where she goes to view the print of the film and said the description we've been using of this film is incomplete. It fails to mention the beggar's companion, a small boy who seems to be a real bilateral above-the-knee amputee. So I'm here showing a rather blurred still from the film, that's reproduced in Samuels' book. On the left, we see the faking beggar in a dark suit and hat, kneeling on the sidewalk, bolstering himself on two short crutches, one in each hand, and wearing on his chest a sign that says 'Help the Blind.' On the right, we see the small boy, a bilateral amputee, wearing a hat, white shirt, and dark pants. Samuels states that as the beggar's trick is discovered, the child disappears from the film. "There is a blink in the film then, a cut, and after the cut the child has completely vanished." It is hard to know why this disappearance happens, since such editing cuts were largely unknown at the time. Samuels considers it might be either a 'technical difficulty' or a deliberate pausing and restarting of filming to move the child out of the way of the crowd that chases the beggar. For Samuels, then, the fakery of the film concerns not only the simulated amputee, but also this technological erasure of 'real' disability. The boy's body presents itself as a continuity error in that it is an obstacle to the unfolding of normalized movement, threatening to trip up people in the crowd. But more significantly, we should see his disappearance as a continuity error since in seeking to serve continuity, the film fails to disappear the boy seamlessly, registering a disruption in its own continuous movement. In the decades after this film, America Cinema developed classical continuity editing precisely in order to cover over such amputative cuts to film footage, Such editing produces a normative sense of continuous space and movement by removing discontinuous, or inconvenient movements that don't fit the planned scenario or that draw attention to manipulation. In "The Fake Beggar," the disappearance of the amputee child thus both literalizes this removal of inconvenient moves and registers a an error in the continuity illusion. Another early film illustrates this association between continuity editing and amputation. It's a 1904 French short film, now lost, entitled "The Automobile Accident." The film is described by British writer F.A. Talbot in his 1912 book "Moving Pictures: How They are Made and Worked." In the film, a drunken man falls asleep in the street, where a cab runs over and severs his legs. But a doctor traveling in the cab miraculously reattaches the man's legs, enabling him to walk away. Talbot borrows a behind-the-scenes photo from the film for his book's frontispiece illustration, and that image is my second example. The black-and-white still shows a black cab on a road with an actor at the wheel. In front of the cab, an able-bodied actor and an amputee actor sit on the ground, their legs stretched out before them. They're identically costumed in beret-style hats, light-colored shirts, dark pants, and dark goatee beards. A producer leans over them from behind, pointing, presumably instructing their performance. The men's parallel positions contrast the length of the able-bodied actor's legs with those of the amputee actor, whose residual limbs are separated by a short gap from a prop set of lower legs. This photo lays bare the film's central effect, in which filming was stopped to switch out the original actor for the amputee actor and prop legs, and again to reverse the switch, producing the apparent cure. Talbot views this deception as a wonder of trick cinematography. He asserts, in particular, that it improves markedly on theatrical disappearing tricks, which require clumsy vanishing through trap doors. He marvels that, in contrast, this film reveals, "not the slightest trace of movement." Unlike in the earlier film, where the child's disappearance is an obvious error, this visual effect is a deliberate, controlled use of disability. The conjuring and vanishing of the amputee figure flaunts the new medium's newfound capacity to cut up reality, to segment space, time, and bodies. Narratively, the film enacts the use of disability that David Mitchell and Sharon Snyder have called 'narrative prosthesis,' in which the advent of disability inaugurates a story, and its cure or erasure ensures a satisfying end, without ever attending to disability's social, political, or experiential complexities. At the same time, the film conducts an act of technological prosthesis. The amputee character is rendered immobile and helpless; he signifies an earlier, clumsier, more bodily medium, like that of theater. But once restored to his legs, he confirms cinema's capacity to conjure bodily and spatial continuity where none exists. The film's trick thus summons, then erases, the disabled body to act out its own prosthetic capacities and to affirm the embodied effectivity of the new cinema. Importantly, when Talbot says the trick reveals "not the slightest trace of movement," the movement he rejoices not to see is precisely that of the disabled actor. We're reminded that, when the camera was not rolling, the amputee body did move, in and out of its allocated position. By stopping recording at those moments, the film avoids showing us those disabled moves. Both sets of moves are successfully hidden: the agential moves of the amputee actor, which might disrupt the narrative of incapacity imposed on him, and the film's own ableist maneuvers. My third example illustrates the increasing cinematic marginalization of actual amputee bodies. It comes much later, at another technical turning point, in the groundbreaking digital effects of 1994's "Forrest Gump." I'm going to first describe, and then show, a DVD extra in which visual effects supervisor Ken Ralston discusses the workings of this film's digital amputation. Describing, as Ralston talks in his office, we see film clips in which double below-the-knee amputee Lt. Dan, played by non-amputee Gary Sinise, swings his residual legs near a boat's rigging, a small round table, and the side of a boat. We see again the apartment scene where Dan swivels his legs close to the table, and then we see it as it was filmed, with Sinise's lower legs wrapped in blue tape, moving through empty space. A computer screen shows how that scene was composited together with the table, and Sinise's legs painted out, to produce the amputee illusion. And I don't think I have sound. Just tell me where the sound is on this computer. - So Ralston's comments re-emphasize that mainstream cinema produces the perception of reality through convincing illusions of spatial and bodily continuity. William Brown has argued that when this kind of continuity is achieved digitally, giving unprecedented realism to physically impossible images like live dinosaurs alongside humans or an able-bodied actor missing his lower legs. It is 'post-human.' That is, digital continuity provides credible visions of things that are yet to be realized, propelling us into a future where we've overcome current human limitations. Contemporary digital movies thus enact imagined futures where humans are increasingly able and in control of their bodies and the material world. Notably, the amputation trick no longer requires even the hidden presence of an amputee double; the disabled actor is not necessary at all. The recent documentary "Side by Side" confirms this association of digital cinema with potency and control. In the movie, director Lana Wachowski states: "We're free of the old technology of capturing those images. Digital gives you more control, more choice, more ways to access what you're imagining in your head." Jonathan Fawkner, video effects supervisor, states: "Computers will only get better. We'll be able to produce anything you want, realistically." And Jim Jannard, founder of Red Digital Company, comments, "To me, everything in the world can and will be made better, and the only question is when and by whom." Thus, in a movie like "Forrest Gump," digital effects conjure and control the disabled body for thrilling or melodramatic effect, but also to ensure its erasure through technological advance. By the end of "Forrest Gump," as you all may know, Lt. Dan is upright and walking once more, with 'new legs' made from titanium alloy: "It's what they use on the space shuttle!" he tells a delighted Forrest. As suggested by the Ken Ralston clip, DVD extras play an important role in uncovering amputee tricks in order to assert digital mastery. My fourth example of an amputee effect at a moment of cinematic transition comes from a similar DVD extra, derived from the 2012 French film "Rust and Bone." I'm going to describe this clip as it's playing. In this extra, we see a beach, where tall, muscular Ali lifts double below-the-knee amputee Stephanie, played by non-amputee Marion Cotillard, out of her wheelchair and carries her to the water. He stands near her as she swims, and he carries her out again. The clip alternates between pre-production shots, in which Cotillard's lower legs sport green stockings, and post-production shots, in which her lower legs have vanished. The extra encourages admiration for the filmmaker's prowess, his capacity to repeatedly erase and restore Cotillard's legs. And I'll show that one more time. And that's a clip from a much longer featurette that has many examples of those scenes. As with my earlier examples, Rust and Bone's amputee spectacle is seen as proof of the value of a new kind of cinema. In 2012, New York Times critic A.O. Scott referenced Rust and Bone to argue against Manohla Dargis's critique of digital cinema as shallow and ugly, as complicit with Hollywood dominance, as disconnected from the embodied, material world. To counter Dargis, Scott cited Rust and Bone, declaring: "To my eyes the most amazing bit of digital magic this year is probably the removal of Marion Cotillard's legs including in scenes in which she wears a bathing suit or nothing at all in Jacques Audiard's gritty 'Rust and Bone.'" For Scott, this amputation galvanizes 'gritty,' convincing performances and a profound emotional audience experience, thus proving digital as capable of worthy, realistic cinema. So, digital technologies provide unprecedented control, enabling filmmakers to generate and manipulate disabled bodies with ease, producing a realistic, compelling movie experience, but without the risks or unpredictability associated with actual impairment. However, just as the the early cinema of disability fakery was disrupted by the continuity error of the disappearing amputee boy, so is the digital mastery of amputee simulation compromised by failures and errors. These failures inhere in both the digital trickery and the embodied performances of able-bodied actors as disabled characters. Tobin Siebers labels the pervasive phenomenon of non-disabled actors in disabled roles with the term 'disability drag.' Siebers accurately points out how often a nondisabled actor dons a disability costume, only, of course, to cast it off once done filming, and to be lauded and awarded for a brave descent into a stigmatized form. The term 'disability drag,' I suggest, is also apt because of the broader definition of 'drag': 'to draw with force, effort, or difficulty; pull heavily or slowly along; haul.' So many mainstream representations of disability, especially those carried out by non-disabled actors, narrowly prescribe disabled bodies as degraded and burdensome, and disabled movements as weighted down, limited, strained, and slow. Dragging representations foreclose on other ways of seeing disabled moves, as functional, purposive, or aesthetically compelling or beautiful. They see disability as a drag, and only a drag. Further, the reliance on digital technology to produce a convincing amputee illusion diminishes the extent to which able-bodied actors give thought to the credibility of their own disability simulations. In a 2012 interview, Grey's Anatomy actress Jessica Capshaw, whose character had recently had one leg amputated above the knee, responded to the question, "Has it been a challenge to shoot your scenes this season?" by enthusing, "These special effects guys are amazing. I don't know how they do what they do. Because, obviously, we're filming the scenes with my leg there, and then they have this whole process by which they digitally remove my own leg and then they create something and that's what the residual limb you saw was." Asked about her enactment of an amputee character, Capshaw defers to the special effects team, making no reference to her own efforts to move as if she'd had a leg amputated. This disconnect leads to critique by disabled viewers: one self-identified above-the-knee amputee comments online, "She has no clue what it is to walk with an AK prosthesis." Another commenter, discussing a similar situation on the TV show "Hawthorne," declares, "Any of the activities (movements) performed by the 'amputee' character Bobbie would be impossible for above the knee amputees with the type of prosthesis shown in the series." Thus, the convergence of faith in digital mastery and inattentiveness to disabled moves produces errors. Take this freeze-frame from "Forrest Gump," from the scene in which Dan hoists himself up into his wheelchair. Despite Ralston's claim this scene seems not to hide anything, the reality of what it hides, Sinise's legs, is almost palpable, as the actor uses his invisible legs to push himself up. An actual amputee would have moved differently, required to differently negotiate his 'physiological reality,' gravity, and the unstable chair. Ralston makes clear that the effect aims to be as convincing and real as possible, surpassing old-fashioned theatrical simulations via costume or posture. In this way, the digital trick falls short of its own stated purpose. And, in this case, the error lies not in the limitations of an impaired body, but in the incapacity and mistaken moves of an able body, and in the inadequate mechanics of digital alteration. As another example, the only error currently listed for 'Rust and Bone' on its IMDB 'Goofs' page notes, "When Ali first carries Stephanie to swim in the sea, as he lifts her the actress's real legs cast a shadow." I'm showing the relevant image in which the shadow of Cotillard's dangling erased legs can be spotted in the sand here circled in yellow. Most viewers might not note these errors, although both are included on the IMDB 'Goofs' page and on other sites listing movie mistakes. Certainly films overlook small continuity errors but this overlooking is shaped by our own embodied knowledge or lack thereof. Or, as William Brown suggests, by "how members of a community agree to confront physical reality." With the "Forrest Gump" scene, if we're not amputees, we likely overlook the mistake because we, like the filmmakers, don't know an amputee's physical reality; we don't know how an amputee moves. So, while digital techniques might give filmmakers greater control in depicting what's 'in their heads,' what they know, it diminishes access to what may not be in their heads: the knowledge and navigations of disabled people. This is undoubtedly a loss, as it delimits the 'physical realities' we can know, and precludes non-normative bodies from our present fictions and real futures. We might then view the proliferating amputee bodies in our media today not only as figures for an embodied reality now superseded, but also as markers for the actual non-normative bodies our culture seeks to erase. These ubiquitous simulations, and the continuity errors they produce, suggest both a stubborn return of unpredictable embodiment to the digital scene, and the possibility that despite our ostensible faith in prosthetic magic, we will always need, desire, and seek to connect with disability. In the last section of my talk, I want to consider the disability and amputee dynamics of a few recent blockbuster films featuring comic-book superheroes. At one level, these films advance textbook examples of narrative prosthesis: injured, victimized, or disabled bodies are the abjected grounds from which spring potent, overcoming superhumans. For instance, in the 2012 film "The Amazing Spider-Man," Peter Parker, played by Andrew Garfield, is bitten by a genetically-altered spider and develops extreme strength and agility. He is able to shoot strong webs from his hands, enabling him to swing swiftly across vast distances and upward to great heights. Thus reborn as Spider-Man, Parker faces off against Curt Connors, a scientist with an amputated right arm. Connors is played by Rhys Ifans whose amputation is of course digitally post-produced. Connors seeks to regenerate his arm just like a lizard, and succeeds, but only at the cost of transforming himself into a monstrous, raging lizard. By the movie's end, Spider-Man overcomes Connors, returning him to his human and amputated form. So I'm showing a selection of images from the film: in contrasting these two figures, Connors and Spiderman. On the top, we see first an image of Connors in a white lab coat and glasses, with the end of his amputated limb just visible above the picture's bottom frame; and then we see an image of Connors saturated in sickly greenish yellow hues as he admires his newly grown, lizardy-green arm; and finally an image of the monstrous grey-green Lizard as he uses his now massive arm and claws to menace a trapped Spider-Man. On the bottom, in contrast, we see a poster for the film, in which Spider-Man is seen mid-flight, his legs curled mid-leap, his arms outstretched, high above a night-time cityscape; and then two images of Peter Parker shortly after he acquires his superpowers. In the first, he swings himself on the pole of a subway train, his legs angled up towards the ceiling at an impossible angle as he kicks at an attacker; in the second, he balances on the fingers of one hand, his legs straight up toward the sky, on the precipice of a very tall building. Once more, then, the dragging, limited moves ascribed to disabled bodies enhance the spectacular, transcendent, and super-able moves of our superheroes, conveyed through stunning effects, including dramatic body morphings and kinetic, dynamic, powerful, airborne movements. When the disabled character acts purposefully, his actions are seen as monstrous and destructive, and he learns to meekly accept his inferior, delimited status. Breathtaking flights are reserved for the superhuman, while the pleasures they produce for viewers secure our affirmations of a fantasized future in which disability is overcome, transcended. A similar pattern plays out in the 2013 film "Iron Man 3." In the earlier films, Tony Stark, played by Robert Downey Jr., emerges from a disabling experience as an empowered, prostheticized superhero, Iron Man, capable of flight and great strength. In "Iron Man 3," his graceful moves contrast with those of Guy Pearce's villain, Aldrich Killian, first seen as a stuttering man who uses a walking stick, and later allied with disabled military veterans, including amputees. Killian develops the Extremis technology, which cures his own impairments and regrows the lost limbs of returned soldiers. But at a cost: all the users become addicted to Extremis and, on occasion, overheat and explode. By the film's end, Killian and his henchmen meet violent deaths we perceive as deserved. As others have noted, Iron Man 3's use of disability is somewhat ambiguous, seemingly approving disabled bodies that take up prosthetic enhancements like the Iron Man suit, while condemning efforts to cure disability genetically. In the film's closing moments, Tony Stark opts for surgical cure over both prosthetic and genetic alterations: he oversees the treatment of his love-interest, Pepper Potts, who had been injected with Extremis, while he himself has surgery to remove the grenade shards in his chest and the magnetic device that has been protecting him from the shards, and that also powers his Iron Man suits. Whatever the implications for Iron Man's future, the conclusion caps off the film's technological and narrative prosthesis: we've had the excitement provided by the prosthetics of visual effects, and we conclude, satisfactorily, with cure. Disabled moves do not seem to belong in the future. Nonetheless, we can also glimpse in such films an alternative kind of continuity, a set of embodied and disabled moves that are hidden until we go behind the scenes. The only extra on the "Iron Man 3" DVD concerns a scene in which passengers fall from a besieged Air Force One and Iron Man comes to their rescue. And here are two imagines from that extra. One shot shows Air Force One and six falling passengers from below, and another shot from below, show nine passengers who have formed a human chain by linking hands as they fall, while Iron Man at the center helps to slow their descent. The DVD extra did not as we might expect hype the imagery underpinning the scene. Instead, it dwells on the fact that the scene was shot using the members of a real sky-diving team. The process was labor-intensive: team members wore customized costumes with hidden parachutes and made hundreds of jumps. The movie personnel interviewed on the extra insist that the presence of actual bodies in the stunt translates to a better viewer experience. States an executive producer: "It's visceral. You feel that they are really in mid-air. You can't really achieve that anywhere else." A stunt coordinator declares, "We didn't want to do the CGs. We wanted real people, real water, real sky, we want, you know, real speed. It just makes it that much more epic." And the senior animation supervisor says, "In every shot, the skydivers are real; some of the shots we did have to go with digi-doubles for a few things. But the energy you get from that shot, I don't know that you could've gotten any other way." Having asserted the visceral realism of the shoot, however, the featurette does go on to admit the extensive digital work conducted on the sky-jumping footage, a process that includes those digi-doubles, as well as digital matte paintings, movement of geographic features, additions of waves and clouds, changes to shots' focal lengths and to the skydivers' trajectories, and even a certain kind of amputation. One of the characters, Heather, holds on to Iron Man as she falls. But digital intervention is necessary to replace Iron Man's skyjumping stand-in with an image of the real Iron Man. Comments the senior animation supervisor, "At the beginning, we intended to use [Heather's] real hand, but we found that we just couldn't get it to track right, so we ended up just going with a full CG hand and sleeve." As we already knew, body parts that don't 'track right' risk amputation. This DVD feature does not point specifically to the presence of disabled bodies. But it does suggest an anxious revisiting of the material, moving body as perhaps the best resource for certain kinds of realistic physical action. It also suggests the value of those with the skills and capacity to convincingly perform moments of incapacity. Comments another producer: "We needed to feel like these bodies are just dumping and they don't know what to do." So the extra does suggest a preference, over CGI, for the realism of the vulnerable, unpredictable human body under duress. A behind-the-scenes glimpse of another recent superhero film indicates that, when digital cinema turns to stunt embodiment, it might also discover powerful possibilities in disabled moves. An installment of the earlier Spider Man franchise, 2007's Spider-Man 3, stars Tobey Maguire as the superhero. This time, it's Dylan Baker as Curt Connors who has his right arm digitally erased. But the movie also leans for effect on a 'real' amputee body, in the scene in which Spider-Man punches the Sandman through the chest. I am showing a still from this scene here. Because the Sandman is sandy, Spider-Man's arm penetrates his torso and emerges out the other side. Like the sky-jumping scene in "Iron Man 3," this effect relies on a stunt, and in this case, the stunt double is an amputee, kick-boxer Baxter Humby, whose right arm is amputated just below his elbow. I am here showing a behind-the-scenes image in which we see Humby dressed in the Spider-Man costume, preparing to face off with the Sandman. We see also a publicity image of Humby, from the waist up, shirtless except for a championship belt, holding up both arms, including his residual right arm, in a boxing position. Humby was hired for the scene because his foreshortened arm provided a sense of real, physical contact and penetration that director Sam Raimi preferred to CGI. So, in Spider Man 3, the amputee body is not where it appears to be, in the disabled character of Connors. But it is where appears not to be, its atypical moves enabling the superhuman body. Again, the absent presence of the disabled body registers as a kind of glitch or mistake. A writer for a pop-culture website comments: "Given the notoriously high levels of SFX special effects, inherent to the rest of Spider-Man 3, this moment just seems sort of insane.' That is, the effort to include this particular disabled body seems eccentric when the film already makes extensive use of CGI elsewhere. Indeed, digital effects are used in the scene to regenerate Humby's missing hand so that Spiderman's hand seems to emerge on the other side of the Sandman's body. Still, the inclusion of the amputee body, as an odd choice, a kind of continuity error, suggests a reluctance to surrender the disabled body, to envisage a future in which disability with all its visceral, unexpected effects has been erased as neatly as a character's limbs. If most of my talk has been about the absence of 'actual' amputee bodies from their own cinematic scene, the Humby example alerts us to the presence of amputee and other disabled bodies where they have not seemed to be. In this instance, the amputee actor does perform and move before the camera; his recorded maneuvers are inscribed in, not erased from, the final movie product; and his body acts in a purposeful way. Certainly, there are many instances in which amputee stand-ins are called on to help make on-screen amputation credible, as in war movies such as "Saving Private Ryan," horror films and TV shows like "The Walking Dead," and the recent Western remake "True Grit." These stand-in actors, however, like the amputee in 1904's The Automobile Accident, are co-opted for realist effect but shuttled in and out of the scene when we are not looking. Further, they are called on almost exclusively to embody loss or lack or trauma. In the case of Baxter Humby, however, the disabled body is required because of its ability, its capacity to enable another kind of body and register a specific kind of bodily encounter. This emphasis on capacity rewrites the politics of disability drag and suggests disabled moves as sources of creative and transformative potential. At the same time, the effect does not simply recuperate the amputee figure as a prosthetically enhanced cyborg. Humby-as-Spiderman combines powerful action with an unexpected collision with intractable materiality. He conducts a potent punch that concludes in surprise and struggle, with Spider-Man's arm appearing literally stuck inside the Sandman's body. The effect needs the disabled body to register the inevitable and exciting persistence, even in our fantasies and imagined futures, of embodied vulnerability, and of unpredictable encounters with diverse bodies and matter. In seeing this effect, we perhaps glimpse a future that cannot imagine itself without disability. By way of conclusion, I want to make clear that, while I am not insisting, reductively, that amputee actors play all amputee roles, I am suggesting we ask why disabled actors are not more often called on to play disabled characters. And I do think we should contemplate the important effects of having amputee actors play amputee characters, from Freaks' actors Johnny Eck, Prince Randian, Martha Morris and Frances O'Connor, and from Harold Russell in 1946's "The Best Years of Our Lives," to more recent performers such as Jim Byrnes of Highlander and Wiseguy, Robert David Hall of CSI, Curt Yaeger of Sons of Anarchy, Greg Gadson in Battleship, Aimee Mullins in Cremaster 3 and Quid Pro Quo, and Rose Siggins in American Horror Story: Freak Show. But as important as at least sometimes having amputee actors play amputee characters is the participation of amputee actors and indeed, a wide array of disabled actors in diverse cinematic roles. Disability is also digital in our cinema in that it is understood as either present or absent, either one or zero. One is either disabled or not, either abjected from the future or incorporated in it. Relatedly, one is either a disabled actor, restricted to increasingly limited representations of disabled characters, or one is an able-bodied actor, granted the capacity to move in and out of disability with ease. Accordingly, we desperately need the inclusion of diversely disabled actors in our cultural imaginings, in ways not strictly tied to the performance of their disability, and certainly not subordinated to the logic of disability drag. Rosemarie Garland-Thomson has argued we should think in terms of conserving, rather than erasing disability, to resist producing narrow futures. In her view, disability preserves, "flexibility and openness to forces outside of our will as a form of creative and flexible dialectical engagement with the world." Ultimately, then, disabled moves matter because they counter assumptions that our future should be envisaged in eugenic terms of physical potency and absolute control. The incorporation of disabled actors in all kinds of roles would constitute vital acknowledgment of the intricate, inevitable, analog ways in which impairment, limitation, and non-normalcy impinge on us, are responded to by us, undergird our philosophical, artistic, and scientific creations, and make us human. I want to point to two recent examples of performances that confirm disabled moves as emblems of this openness and flexibility. The 2013 documentary film "Fixed: The Science/Fiction of Human Enhancement" features Gregor Wolbring: biochemist, disability advocate, and congenital amputee. Wolbring declares, and he has this great German accent that I can't emulate. "Crawling is in. Walking is out. A lot of people use crawling as the ultimate of undignified living, that you have to crawl somewhere. I obviously love crawling. I crawl whenever I can, at home and at people's houses. You can see that as a variation or you can see it as impairment. People buy into ableism when they say crawling is bad." As we hear Wolbring speak these words, we see him move around his kitchen, maneuver in and out of a wheeled office chair, and scoot across the floor. Wolbring refuses the logic of disability drag, resignifying crawling as purposive, pleasurable, functional movement. My second example of disabled moves as openness to an often intransigent material world comes from a disabled, although non-amputee, actor. In a 2013 interview, Michael J. Fox discussed how his Parkinson's had altered his acting. "I used to be really nervous and sit in my dressing room and fret about a scene that was coming up and sweat it out and say, 'What am I going to do? You say "Action," and I have to do something. What am I going to do? And what's that actor going to do? And how do I respond to that?' And now it's just like, 'OK, what's happening?' And if something happens, I react to it and if nothing happens, I don't react. I don't worry about that bit I was going to do or the look I was gonna give because when I get there, I may not be able to give that look or do that thing or move that glass." It's clear that disability usually appears as a drag on anticipated futures, a leaden counterweight that secures the swiftly soaring arcs of superhumans. But we can and should witness both the mistakes of able bodies and digital tricks, in their efforts to reproduce disability, and the particular moves of disabled stunt bodies that underwrite potent visual effects. These discontinuities suggest the necessary inclusion of disabled bodies in our present and futures, and the transformative possibilities we may miss if they are erased. In 1998, when digital was still new, Danish director Thomas Vinterberg made his movie "The Celebration" on a handheld digital camera." He recalls, "With that camera, I suddenly saw these moves, these possible movements, that I didn't know in my cinema." Digital cinema thus might honor and allow for the arrival of unanticipated, alternative moves through disabled actors. Thus, amputee moves are freed from being understood only in terms of drag and discomfort or, when 'cured' through prosthetics, as gestures toward a superhuman future. Instead, amputee moves appear as adaptive, resourceful, creative responses to material constraints. The movies might yet teach us, in the words of playwright and performer Neil Marcus, that "Disability is an art. It is an ingenious way to live." Thank you. [ Applause ] - So We have a few minutes for Q and A, questions and answers or responses. And if I could have another acknowledgment of applause for Professor Smith, please. [ Applause ] - I don't know if there is another microphone that we can go around the room. Is there? Anyone have any questions that they want to ask? We'll bring you a microphone. Any comments? Audience Member: Hello. I would love to know your thoughts on -- you mentioned "Once Upon a Time, and I would love to know your thoughts on the concept that Captain Hook is better having had his hand amputated. You know, spoiler alert, gets it back for maybe like one or two episodes and turns pretty evil, so it is almost like a reframing of that, if you become disabled, you also become evil? It is actually the opposite in that case. And I would love to know what you think. - Sure, yeah. Yeah, and I think part of my argument for all of this is that the longer a show has a recurring character with a disability, the more complicated that representation becomes. Inevitably, right? That character gains a certain amount of depth, it is not just a stereotype and so in that case you kind of move past this assumption of the disabled avenger, someone who is just vengeful and hateful because they have been disabled. And you actually get someone who becomes more nuanced and likeable because they have been disabled, and again I think it is because characters who have been disabled register that kind of openness. You know, they know that life can be difficult, they deal with certain inaccessibilities or ill treatments, and it tends to actually make them more sensitive, complex characters. And so, yeah, I guess I would just say that that very fact that he persists as a character and becomes likeable, at least in inverts our normative assumption of Captain Hook as the one dimensional evil character, and in fact, suggests that disability might be a part of a complex whole personality that is valuable in some way, that has certain -- without diminishing the problems that arise from contact with a normative world, there is a certain value to and resourcefulness to characters who are disabled and I think that he's a really good example of that. Audience Member: Hi, thank you. What a wonderful talk. Really. Spectacular. Thank you so much. - Thank you. - I avoid any kind of reality TV In fact most TV, so I'm kind loath to mention it. But I have seen recently because someone mentioned it to me that on the dancing program -- help me here if I get it wrong. But the dancing program. "Dancing for the Stars." - "Dancing With the Stars." - That there have been one woman who now has written a book on her experience, as an amputee on that show, and now a man who is an amputee with his arm and his leg. And I was wondering if you can provide an analysis of now this inspiring new movement of inspiration that's being derived from amputees on live TV. - Thank you. Yeah, and I have not seen those particular performances. I remember when Heather Mills was on "Dancing with the Stars" too, so that had now quite a few amputee dancers on. And "The Amazing Race" is another example of a reality show that has had multiple contestants who are amputees. And, this is part of the struggle that I have with this figure of the amputee because on the one hand it fits in terms of disability drag, showing drag is limiting and awful and so on, and yet, especially in today's media, and given prosthetic technologies today, amputees are increasingly being held up as this example of a potent kind of future person, right. We're all going to be cyborgs in the future, we're all going have these amazing prosthetic implements to make us incredibly smart, incredibly fast and strong and be able to do things that we can't imagine. And it is almost as if amputee figures on those shows and ones like I mentioned, Amy Mullins who is an amputee model and athlete, there are several now amputee models and athletes, and they are always models and athletes. So they are like this super person, they are beautiful, they are incredibly physically capable, and they appear to have overcome often with the use of cutting edge very expensive high-tech prostheses. And so I think that this figure is interesting because you have both of those pulls, the dragging view of disability and then, oh, look, the amputee can become this cyborg. And I think that -- I really want to counter that and imagine amputees that appear as amputees rather than as enhanced super humans because I think there is a real danger in that kind of representation. Now especially and if in the future everybody will overcome disability, we won't have it any more and everyone will be better off. I think that's a very limited representation, and it is almost as if amputees are more, or less threatening image of disability in some ways. I think they are more visible than people with a lot of other kinds disabilities, that must be less visible or less easily understood. It appears like, oh, they are like a regular person but they are missing a bit, and we can supplement that and now they are normal or super human. So, yeah, I think that's definitely something that is going on with the amputee figure and I think we need to trouble that and contest it with an embrace a disability that accepts it on its own terms. Audience Member: Hello, Professor Angela. Thank you so much for your time today. You actually answered a little bit of my question in that answer that you just provided. But, when you were talking about this example in Spiderman, how it was kind of atypical from what you usually see with someone, an actor who does not have an amputation being provided an amputation, this is a situation where they have an actor who is an amputee being provided a limb. What are your thoughts whether positive or negative, so alternate universe time, moving forward, we see a lot more of this where we do see actors or amputees being provided limbs perhaps again or in places where they perhaps never had a limb. Now, like you said in your answer previously, there are some things that are dangerous about that and I wanted to ask you about your thoughts. - Yeah, I mean, I think the Baxter Humby example is the only one of its kind that I have found. And I kind of thought that I would find more. There are a lot of disability stunt actors who appear often in horror or science fiction-type films. And there is amputee actor agencies that provide these bodies that will provide that trick effect of an amputation happening on the screen. So, you know, those bodies are still present but in ways that cover over their presence. And you know, Humby is present in a way but that covers over his presence too. But, you know, we don't know we're looking at an amputee in that image, and I think that that -- again, it inverts that logic of able-bodied actors being given amputations. I think that what I imagine and kind of hope going forward is that, non-normative bodies won't just appear as kind of trick effects, right, and won't just appear in these kinds of fantastical films to shore up dramatic spectacular body effects. You know, it would be great if disability was just ordinary, right? You know, if it just appeared in a variety of ways and a variety of forms and all kinds of characters, where sometimes it wasn't even commented on, other times it was a more important part of the character. You know, there's a lot of talk now about blind casting, disability term there, of in terms of gender. Geena Davis is very active in saying 'let's take every script and like, half the male characters let's make them female and see what happens' and then you're going to get more presence of women in front of the camera in significant roles. I think it would be great if we could do something similar with disability. Whatever the script, you know, whatever kind of embodiment it calls for, imagine casting someone with a disability, visible, invisible and work with it whatever ways that needs to be accommodated into with the story and go with it. So I guess the focus here is on the spectacular and these kinds of trick effects, but it would be great if disability appeared as a part of human experience and embodiment as part of the story, but not in these very caricature-limited ways that we're used to seeing it. Audience Member: Hi. It was a really great talk. So listening to you and you talking about the cinematography or whatever effects combined with the embodied effects of amputation as how they relate, I started thinking about "Star Wars" and the recutting of those films with George Lucas, and it brings me to this moment, very, very end, and spoiler alert, Darth Vader is Luke's father, also Lei's, they are twins. - No! [laughter] - But, so, the end in the original films, they had, you know, Darth Vader shows up at the end to Luke as this physically whole person, as this emotionally and morally whole person without the quadruple amputations that he has. And most recently it was recut so Hayden Christensen could appear as that person. I'm wondering, are there similar moments of revision with -- I know another moment is in "Star Trek," the original series when they enhanced, when they came out with high definition, they put in Scotty's finger that he was missing as well. So I'm wondering, is there similar moves to either ameliorate disability specifically like amputation or to create it better? - Right. Yeah, that's a great question. And the short answer is, I can't think of any particular ones right now. Although those are both really interesting examples and they suggest this -- they suggest that kind of desire as technology proceeds to reassure us, right, putting the finger back is a great thing. I mean, it is like, why? What is the point? To make us feel better? I mean, it really does feel like this narrative in future everyone will be better like in future we'll all be whole and disabilities will be fixed easily or it won't happen in first place. And it feels so fake, which it is. These are very constructed illusions. At the same time, I think that the desire for generating disability on screen suggests that we're not ready to let it go. It is like we're being dishonest with ourselves, and we imagine that we desire this perfect future, but we imagine that future as being really boring and we would actually like a more complex, you know, set of possibilities for our future that includes all kinds of embodiment and experiences. And it reminds me of the way in which these contemporary films go to such lengths to generate these illusions, including amputee illusions and the DVD extras undo it all. They are like, this is how we did it. You know, it is all completely fake. And that's both meant to be a reassuring example of how powerful the technology is, that it can turn Gary Sinise into an amputee. But I think that it suggests that, at some level, we want something that is real, that feels more honest, and I think that's why that turn to stunt effects is happening. So yeah, that doesn't get at specific examples but think it is part of this very ambivalent dynamic of representation of disability. We want it done away with and yet we really love it. We're really drawn to it in lots of ways. Audience Member: Okay, I have two very specific examples and I wanted your thoughts. You brought up very quickly at the beginning "The Walking Dead." What are your thoughts of the stories where these characters, Herschel in "The Walking Dead" and also an example in "World War Z." There was an example as well of these individuals who are getting their limbs chopped off to save their lives. What's your thinking of that? - Okay, so, in part, I'm interested in "The Walking Dead" because again you don't just do away with those characters and I know that, William Peace spoke last year about "The Walking Dead" and this idea of putting people down who are not useful anymore and can't function and I think that there is an ablest thing going on there. But, you have characters who become amputees and then, they stick around, Herschel was around for a season and a half after he had his leg chopped off. And so, the show has to acknowledge that. It has to occasionally at least show us his embodiment, acknowledge it in the way he walks. And I think that it is inevitably a good thing that the longer a disabled body is present in the story, and on our screens, the more work it can do to dismantle very limited views of what bodies should look like, and what bodies can do. There is a super Crip thing happening because amputees are some how -- we can hold on to them in this world, in this world the apocalyptic world for a little bit whereas, other kinds of weak bodies or disabled bodies just have to be dispensed with. They can't function, and so again, an amputee seems to be a special category that can be recuperated in some way. So, you know, I think there's an ambivalence there, but I think the very fact that character is there, that character is someone we like, that character has shown as having a life that continues past the amputation, that continues as themselves, they have to adapt in certain ways so they change a little. They are still likeable and understandable and complex. I think that does a lot of important work in contesting disability stereotypes. - Can we have another round for Angela, Professor Smith. - Thank you. Thank you all. [ Applause ]

Key

Map all coordinates using: OpenStreetMap 
Download coordinates as: KML · GPX

Sites

Site name Photograph B G Area[a] Public
access
Location[a] Other
classifications
Map[b] Citation[c] Description
Alder Wood and Meadow
Alder Wood
Green tickY 13.2 hectares
(33 acres)
[13]
YES Corby
52°27′11″N 0°46′08″W / 52.453°N 0.769°W / 52.453; -0.769 (Alder Wood and Meadow)
SP 837 846
[13]
Map Citation This semi-natural ancient broadleaved wood is a surviving fragment of the medieval Royal Forest of Rockingham. It is mainly ash, and the ground flora on base rich soil includes tufted hair-grass, dog's mercury and enchanter's nightshade. The meadow is agriculturally unimproved, and it has surviving medieval ridge and furrow.[14]
Aldwincle Marsh
Aldwincle Marsh
Green tickY 2.0 hectares
(4.9 acres)
[15]
NO Aldwincle
52°24′58″N 0°31′30″W / 52.416°N 0.525°W / 52.416; -0.525 (Aldwincle Marsh)
TL 004 807
[15]
Map Citation This marsh and fen on shallow peat is formed by seepage from the boundary between clay and limestone. Plants in wet areas include blunt-flowered rush, marsh pennywort, wild angelica and Menyanthes trifoliata, a rare species of bogbean. Drier areas have grasses and herbs which attract butterflies and dragonflies. The site includes a stretch of Harpers Brook.[16]
Ashton Wold
Ashton Wold
Green tickY 54.0 hectares
(133 acres)
[17]
YES Oundle
52°28′30″N 0°23′38″W / 52.475°N 0.394°W / 52.475; -0.394 (Ashton Wold)
TL 091 875
[17]
RHPG[18] Map Citation Ashton Wold was owned by Charles Rothschild, the founder of The Wildlife Trusts. It is ancient secondary woodland with mature oak, ash and birch trees. The thick shrub layer includes hawthorn and buckthorn.[19]
Badby Wood
Badby Wood
Green tickY 47.2 hectares
(117 acres)
[20]
YES Badby
52°13′12″N 1°10′37″W / 52.220°N 1.177°W / 52.220; -1.177 (Badby Wood)
SP 563 582
[20]
Map Citation This is ancient semi-natural woodland on acidic soils, and it has been forested for over 700 years. It is mainly pedunculate oak, with varied ground flora including creeping soft-grass, wood anemone, yellow archangel and bluebell. There is also small marsh with very diverse herbs.[21]
Badsaddle, Withmale Park and Bush Walk Woods
Withmale Park Wood
Green tickY 25.2 hectares
(62 acres)
[22]
YES Wellingborough
52°20′24″N 0°46′44″W / 52.340°N 0.779°W / 52.340; -0.779 (Badsaddle, Withmale Park and Bush Walk Woods)
SP 832 720
[22]
Map Citation This is ancient coppice woodland with oak and ash on wet calcareous soils. Ground flora include herb paris, goldilocks buttercup and four species of orchid.[23]
Banhaw, Spring and Blackthorn's Woods
Banhaw Wood
Green tickY 123.4 hectares
(305 acres)
[24]
PP Corby
52°28′48″N 0°34′16″W / 52.480°N 0.571°W / 52.480; -0.571 (Banhaw, Spring and Blackthorn's Woods)
SP 971 878
[24]
Map Citation These woods are one of the largest remnants of the medieval Royal Forest of Rockingham. They are mainly ash and pedunculate oak on wet calcareous clay soils. The ground flora is diverse, and there are grasses such as tufted hair-grass, rough meadow-grass and wood melick.[25]
Birch Spinney and Mawsley Marsh
Mawsley Marsh
Green tickY 12.3 hectares
(30 acres)
[26]
NO Broughton
52°22′55″N 0°48′43″W / 52.382°N 0.812°W / 52.382; -0.812 (Birch Spinney and Mawsley Marsh)
SP 809 766
[26]
Map Citation Birch Spinney is a rare type of ash-maple woodland partly on peat. Mawsley Marsh is described by Natural England as "one of the finest remaining Northamptonshire marshes", with flora including blunt-flowered rush, jinted rush and water horsetail. There is also a stretch of a dismantled railway line.[27]
Blisworth Rectory Farm Quarry
Blisworth Rectory Farm Quarry
Green tickY 1.0 hectare
(2.5 acres)
[28]
NO Blisworth
52°10′16″N 0°57′14″W / 52.171°N 0.954°W / 52.171; -0.954 (Blisworth Rectory Farm Quarry)
SP 716 530
[28]
GCR[29] Map Citation This site exposes White Limestone dating to the Middle Jurassic Bathonian stage, around 168 to 166 million years ago. Common fossils are brachiopods, corals and gastropods, and there are also nautiloids and vertebrate teeth.[30]
Bosworth Mill Meadow
Bosworth Mill Meadow
Green tickY 5.7 hectares
(14 acres)
[31]
YES Welford
52°26′06″N 1°04′37″W / 52.435°N 1.077°W / 52.435; -1.077 (Bosworth Mill Meadow)
SP 628 822
[31]
Map Citation This hay meadow is traditionally managed. The main flora are crested dog's-tail and common knapweed, with meadow foxtail and great burnet in wet areas. Springs produce seepages which are rich in mosses and sedges. Dry upper slopes are species poor.[32]
Bozeat Meadow
Bozeat Meadow
Green tickY 2.6 hectares
(6.4 acres)
[33]
NO Bozeat
52°13′19″N 0°40′55″W / 52.222°N 0.682°W / 52.222; -0.682 (Bozeat Meadow)
SP 901 590
[33]
Map Citation This is unimproved grassland on well-drained clay and loam soils. It has medieval ridge and furrow and diverse flora, including crested dog's-tail, downy oat-grass, quaking grass and dwarf thistle. There are also mature hedgerows and a spring.[34]
Bucknell Wood Meadows
Bucknell Wood Meadows
Green tickY 9.2 hectares
(23 acres)
[35]
YES Silverstone
52°05′56″N 1°03′54″W / 52.099°N 1.065°W / 52.099; -1.065 (Bucknell Wood Meadows)
SP 641 449
[35]
Map Citation This site consists of agriculturally unimproved fields on seasonally waterlogged soils. The flora is diverse with many herbs, including bird's-foot-trefoil, meadow buttercup and devil's-bit scabious. Variations in the types of flora are partly due to different soils and partly to previous management practices.[36]
Bugbrooke Meadows
Bugbrooke Meadows
Green tickY 10.1 hectares
(25 acres)
[37]
YES Nether Heyford
52°13′23″N 1°01′05″W / 52.223°N 1.018°W / 52.223; -1.018 (Bugbrooke Meadows)
SP 671 587
[37]
WTBCN[38] Map Citation These meadows on the bank of the River Nene which have not been treated with fertilisers, and they often flood in winter. They are probably unique in the county, and they have very diverse damp grassland flora such as jointed rush and greater pond sedge. There are ancient hedges which are important both historically and as a habitat for wildlife.[39]
Bulwick Meadows
Bulwick Meadows
Green tickY 1.2 hectares
(3.0 acres)
[40]
PP Bulwick
52°32′20″N 0°35′02″W / 52.539°N 0.584°W / 52.539; -0.584 (Bulwick Meadows)
SP 961 943
[40]
Map Citation These marshy meadows are in the flood plain of the Willow Brook. There are diverse wetland flora, including rare species, and it is the only known locality in the county for the flat-sedge blysmus compressus and common bistort. It is also one of the very few sites in the county where snipe breed.[41]
Calender Meadows
Calender Meadows
Green tickY 3.1 hectares
(7.7 acres)
[42]
NO Guilsborough
52°22′05″N 0°59′42″W / 52.368°N 0.995°W / 52.368; -0.995 (Calender Meadows)
SP 685 749
[42]
Map Citation This is described by Natural England as "a nationally important site for its lowland unimproved neutral grassland". It has a wide variety of native herbs and grasses. There are herbs such as lady's bedstraw, meadow vetchling and common bird's-foot trefoil, and grasses include red fescue, sweet vernal-grass and false oat-grass.[43]
Collyweston Great Wood and Easton Hornstocks
Collyweston Great Wood
Green tickY 151.5 hectares
(374 acres)
[44]
NO Easton on the Hill
52°35′38″N 0°30′25″W / 52.594°N 0.507°W / 52.594; -0.507 (Collyweston Great Wood and Easton Hornstocks)
TF 012 006
[44]
NCR,[45] NNR[46] Map Citation These woods have ash, lime and sessile oak, together with wild service-trees, which is an indicator of ancient woodland. The ground flora is very rich, including locally unusual plants such as lily-of-the-valley, wood spurge, great wood-rush, violet helleborine and columbine.[47]
Collyweston Quarries
Collyweston Quarries
Green tickY 6.6 hectares
(16 acres)
[48]
YES Easton on the Hill
52°37′23″N 0°31′08″W / 52.623°N 0.519°W / 52.623; -0.519 (Collyweston Quarries)
TF 003 038
[48]
WTBCN[49] Map Citation This former limestone quarry is now rough grassland on Jurassic limestone. The flora is diverse, and more than a hundred flowering plants have been recorded, including wild thyme, dropwort, dyer's greenweed and clustered bellflower. There is a substantial butterfly population.[50]
Collyweston Slate Mine
Collyweston Slate Mine
Green tickY 0.9 hectares
(2.2 acres)
[51]
NO Easton on the Hill
52°36′58″N 0°31′26″W / 52.616°N 0.524°W / 52.616; -0.524 (Collyweston Slate Mine)
TF 000 030
[51]
GCR[52] Map Citation This slate mine was operated until 1963, quarrying Collyweston slate, which dates to the Jurassic. The shaft exposes a section described by Natural England as "stratigraphically important", and it is the type locality for the slate.[53]
Coombe Hill Hollow
Coombe Hill Hollow
Green tickY 4.3 hectares
(11 acres)
[54]
NO Welford
52°26′46″N 1°00′11″W / 52.446°N 1.003°W / 52.446; -1.003 (Coombe Hill Hollow)
SP 678 835
[54]
Map Citation This steep narrow valley has neutral grassland which has never been subject to fertilisers or herbicides, and it has diverse flora. Grasses include brown bent, red fescue, Yorkshire fog and crested dog's-tail. Lime-rich areas have harebell and mouse-ear hawkweed, and there are locally important butterfly populations.[55]
Cowthick Quarry
Cowthick Quarry
Green tickY 1.4 hectares
(3.5 acres)
[56]
NO Corby
52°28′55″N 0°38′20″W / 52.482°N 0.639°W / 52.482; -0.639 (Cowthick Quarry)
SP 925 879
[56]
Map Citation This site exposes Middle Jurassic rocks dating to 174 to 163 million years ago, and in the view of Natural England it has "the best and most instructive sections" of the period in the Midlands. A fault during the Pleistocene has caused the juxtaposition of six Jurassic formations.[57]
Cranford St John
Cranford St John
Green tickY 2.8 hectares
(6.9 acres)
[58]
NO Kettering
52°22′41″N 0°38′42″W / 52.378°N 0.645°W / 52.378; -0.645 (Cranford St John)
SP 923 764
[58]
GCR[59] Map Citation This former quarry exposes rocks from the Rutland Formation and up to nearly the top of the White Limestone Formation, dating to the Middle Jurassic Bathonian stage, 168 to 166 million years ago. The site is the type section for a freshwater clay bed which is thought to result from a widespread storm deposit.[60]
Dungee Corner Meadow
Dungee Corner Meadow
Green tickY 5.1 hectares
(13 acres)
[61]
NO Bozeat
52°13′52″N 0°38′35″W / 52.231°N 0.643°W / 52.231; -0.643 (Dungee Corner Meadow)
SP 927 600
[61]
Map Citation This well-drained hay meadow on boulder clay is traditionally managed, and no artificial fertilisers or herbicides have been used, so it has a diverse flora. More than twenty grass species have been recorded, including sweet vernal, Yorkshire fog, sheep's fescue, quaking grass and crested dog's-tail. There is also a population of the locally rare green-winged orchid.[62]
Everdon Stubbs
Everdon Stubbs
Green tickY 29.5 hectares
(73 acres)
[63]
YES Farthingstone
52°12′18″N 1°06′54″W / 52.205°N 1.115°W / 52.205; -1.115 (Everdon Stubbs)
SP 605 566
[63]
WT[64] Map Citation This woodland site has areas of acidic free-draining soil, and other damper areas. It is described by Natural England as an important site for fungi, and there is a diverse range of breeding birds. There are locally uncommon plants such as wild daffodil, orpine and bitter vetch.[65]
Finedon Top Lodge Quarry
Finedon Top Lodge Quarry
Green tickY 0.9 hectares
(2.2 acres)
[66]
FP Finedon
52°19′12″N 0°38′31″W / 52.320°N 0.642°W / 52.320; -0.642 (Finedon Top Lodge Quarry)
SP 926 699
[66]
GCR[67] Map Citation This site shows a complete section dating to the Rutland Formation of the Bathonian stage of the Middle Jurassic, 168 to 166 million years ago. It is the type section for the Wellingborough Member, and contains fossils of oysters and Rhynchonellida.[68]
Geddington Chase
Geddington Chase
Green tickY 39.1 hectares
(97 acres)
[69]
NO Corby
52°27′11″N 0°40′12″W / 52.453°N 0.670°W / 52.453; -0.670 (Geddington Chase)
SP 904 847
[69]
Map Citation Geddington Chase is a surviving fragment of the medieval Royal Forest of Rockingham. Most of the Chase is commercially managed, and the SSSI is an area of semi-natural wet ash-maple woodland on Midland boulder clay. The ground flora is diverse, with plants including bluebell, dog's mercury, tufted hair-grass, and a few wild daffodils.[70]
Glapthorn Cow Pasture
Glapthorn Cow Pasture
Green tickY 28.2 hectares
(70 acres)
[71]
YES Oundle
52°30′14″N 0°31′30″W / 52.504°N 0.525°W / 52.504; -0.525 (Glapthorn Cow Pasture)
TL 002 905
[71]
WTBCN[72] Map Citation This site has ash-maple woodland, and dense blackthorn scrub. It is described by Natural England as one of the most important sites in Britain for the black hairstreak butterfly, which requires a habitat of prunus species such as blackthorn. The scrub also provides nesting sites for nightingales.[73]
Hardwick Lodge Meadow
Hardwick Lodge Meadow
Green tickY 10.0 hectares
(25 acres)
[74]
YES Wellingborough
52°19′26″N 0°46′37″W / 52.324°N 0.777°W / 52.324; -0.777 (Hardwick Lodge Meadow)
SP 834 702
[74]
Map Citation This unimproved grassland on boulder clay has a rich variety of flora, including many rare in the county. Crested hair-grass and salad burnet are found in drier parts, and a marshy area next to a stream has common spotted-orchid and the only population in Northamptonshire of heath spotted-orchid.[75]
Helmdon Disused Railway
Helmdon Disused Railway
Green tickY 16.6 hectares
(41 acres)
[76]
YES Brackley
52°04′01″N 1°08′35″W / 52.067°N 1.143°W / 52.067; -1.143 (Helmdon Disused Railway)
SP 588 412
[76]
Map Citation This is Jurassic grassland, and it also has limestone spoil heaps have a very diverse floral community. Butterflies include the nationally scarce wood white and five nationally declining species. It is the only location in the county for the small blue butterfly.[77]
High Wood and Meadow
High Meadow
Green tickY 16.5 hectares
(41 acres)
[78]
YES Daventry
52°11′17″N 1°08′10″W / 52.188°N 1.136°W / 52.188; -1.136 (High Wood and Meadow)
SP 591 547
[78]
WTBCN[79] Map Citation The wood is ancient and semi-natural on acid soils. It has diverse ground flora, including yellow pimpernel, hairy wood-rush and broad-leaved helleborine. The meadow is acid grassland of a type which is now uncommon, and there are also areas of neutral grassland and marsh on silty peat. There are many ant hills of the yellow meadow ant.[80]
Irchester Old Lodge Pit
Irchester Old Lodge Pit
Green tickY 0.4 hectares
(0.99 acres)
[81]
NO Irchester
52°16′30″N 0°39′40″W / 52.275°N 0.661°W / 52.275; -0.661 (Irchester Old Lodge Pit)
SP 914 649
[81]
GCR[82] Map Citation This is described by Natural England as "a key Middle Jurassic locality important for the information it yields on both Bathonian environments and stratigraphy", 168 to 166 million years ago. It exposes White Limestone which has many fossils, especially molluscs.[12]
King's Cliffe Banks
King's Cliffe Banks
Green tickY 7.7 hectares
(19 acres)
[83]
YES King's Cliffe
52°33′50″N 0°30′18″W / 52.564°N 0.505°W / 52.564; -0.505 (King's Cliffe Banks)
TL 014 972
[83]
Map Citation

This former quarry has undulating calcareous grassland which is grazed by rabbits and cattle. It has a rich variety of flora, including sheep's fescue, dwarf thistle, mouse-ear hawkweed, wild thyme and common rock-rose. There are many bryophytes and lichens.[84]

Mantles Heath
Mantles Heath
Green tickY 13.7 hectares
(34 acres)
[85]
YES Daventry
52°11′31″N 1°07′37″W / 52.192°N 1.127°W / 52.192; -1.127 (Mantles Heath)
SP 597 552
[85]
Map Citation Most of this woodland site is on acid soil, but the western part is on calcareous and poorly drained clay, and has a diverse flora. Locally uncommon plants include wood vetch, opposite-leaved golden-saxifrage and slender St John’s wort.[86]
Mill Crook
Mill Crook
Green tickY 5.9 hectares
(15 acres)
[87]
YES Towcester
52°06′36″N 0°52′19″W / 52.110°N 0.872°W / 52.110; -0.872 (Mill Crook)
SP 773 463
[87]
WTBCN[88] Map Citation Signs of medieval ridge and furrow still survive on this traditionally managed hay meadow on the bank of the River Tove. It has diverse flora, with grasses such as meadow foxtail and sweet vernal-grass, and herbs including great burnet and ribwort plantain.[88][89]
Old Sulehay Forest
Old Sulehay Forest
Green tickY 34.8 hectares
(86 acres)
[90]
YES King's Cliffe
52°34′26″N 0°26′02″W / 52.574°N 0.434°W / 52.574; -0.434 (Old Sulehay Forest)
TL 062 985
[90]
WTBCN[91] Map Citation This ancient forest has a number of different soil conditions and coppice types, and the ground flora is diverse. Abundant herbs include dog’s mercury, bracken, bramble, ramsons, wood anemone and bluebells.[92]
Pipewell Woods
Pipewell Woods
Green tickY 85.3 hectares
(211 acres)
[93]
YES Corby
52°28′01″N 0°46′30″W / 52.467°N 0.775°W / 52.467; -0.775 (Pipewell Woods)
SP 833 861
[93]
NCR[94] Map Citation The woods are an example of wet ash-maple woodland, some parts in a nationally rare form. It has diverse flora including the locally rare giant bellflower, herb paris and wood speedwell. Open grassy areas provide additional habitats for birds and insects.[95]
Pitsford Reservoir
Pitsford Reservoir
Green tickY 413.1 hectares
(1,021 acres)
[96]
YES Brixworth
52°19′26″N 0°52′01″W / 52.324°N 0.867°W / 52.324; -0.867 (Pitsford Reservoir)
SP 773 701
[96]
WTBCN[97] Map Citation This is the largest body of water in the county, and is used by wintering wildfowl, including the northern shoveler in nationally important numbers. Over 60 species of birds breed on the site, such as the great crested grebe, little grebe, teal, kingfisher and reed warbler.[97][98]
Plumpton Pasture
Plumpton Pasture
Green tickY 3.6 hectares
(8.9 acres)
[99]
NO Towcester
52°07′41″N 1°07′59″W / 52.128°N 1.133°W / 52.128; -1.133 (Plumpton Pasture)
SP 594 480
[99]
Map Citation There are medieval ridge and furrows on this unimproved meadow on clay. The drier ridge tops have many herbs, while the damp furrows are dominated by creeping bent and Yorkshire fog grasses. There are also mature hedges and a small pond.[100]
Racecourse Farm Fields
Racecourse Farm Fields
Green tickY 5.0 hectares
(12 acres)
[101]
NO Easton on the Hill
52°37′34″N 0°29′53″W / 52.626°N 0.498°W / 52.626; -0.498 (Racecourse Farm Fields)
TF 017 042
[101]
Map Citation This former quarry is grassland on Jurassic limestone. The flora is diverse, with over thirty flowering plant species in each square metre. There are several locally rare plants, such as dodder, autumn gentian, clustered bellflower and small scabious. The sward is kept short by grazing by sheep and cattle.[102]
Ramsden Corner Plantation
Ramsden Corner Plantation
Green tickY 3.2 hectares
(7.9 acres)
[103]
YES Northampton
52°12′11″N 1°05′20″W / 52.203°N 1.089°W / 52.203; -1.089 (Ramsden Corner Plantation)
SP 623 564
[103]
WTBCN[104] Map Citation A stream runs through this valley site, which also has acidic grassland, woodland and scrub on clay and sand. Plants such as wood millet, wood-sorrel and wood vetch are indicators of ancient woodland. Opposite-leaved golden-saxifrage is found on wet slopes.[105]
River Ise and Meadows
River Ise
Green tickY 13.5 hectares
(33 acres)
[106]
PP Geddington
52°26′17″N 0°43′08″W / 52.438°N 0.719°W / 52.438; -0.719 (River Ise and Meadows)
SP 871 830
[106]
WTBCN[107] Map Citation The river is described by Natural England as "the best example in the county of a lowland river on clay, fed by base-rich water". The banks have tall fen, woodland and grassland, and there is also a species rich flood meadow. The river has many bends and loops, with silty pools and gravel shoals. The invertebrates are diverse, and there is a population of the nationally declining freshwater crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes.[108]
Roade Cutting
Roade Cutting
Green tickY 15.2 hectares
(38 acres)
[109]
NO Roade
52°09′58″N 0°54′22″W / 52.166°N 0.906°W / 52.166; -0.906 (Roade Cutting)
SP 749 525
[109]
GCR[110] Map Citation The cutting exposes rocks dating to the Middle Jurassic Bathonian stage, between 168 and 166 million years ago. It is described by Natural England as important for reconstructing the environment of deposition during the period, and correlating the White Limestone Formation in Oxfordshire with that of the East Midlands.[111]
Salcey Forest
Salcey Forest
Green tickY 159.6 hectares
(394 acres)
[112]
YES Hartwell
52°09′07″N 0°49′05″W / 52.152°N 0.818°W / 52.152; -0.818 (Salcey Forest)
SP 809 510
[112]
Map Citation This large forest has many mature oak trees. The diverse ground flora includes bluebells, false brome, pendulous sedge and enchanter's nightshade. There are many breeding birds and nationally notable moth species.[113]
Short Wood
Short Wood
Green tickY 25.3 hectares
(63 acres)
[114]
YES Oundle
52°30′40″N 0°30′18″W / 52.511°N 0.505°W / 52.511; -0.505 (Short Wood)
TL 015 913
[114]
WTBCN[115] Map Citation Short Wood is a small remnant of the medieval royal hunting Royal Forest of Rockingham. It is ancient semi-natural woodland with the dominant trees being ash and pedunculate oak. Flora include several local rarities such as wood speedwell, bird's nest orchid and greater butterfly orchid.[116]
Southfield Farm Marsh
Southfield Farm Marsh
Green tickY 8.6 hectares
(21 acres)
[117]
PP Kettering
52°22′26″N 0°42′07″W / 52.374°N 0.702°W / 52.374; -0.702 (Southfield Farm Marsh)
SP 884 758
[117]
WTBCN[118] Map Citation This wetland site has tall plants such as lesser pond-sedge and slender tufted-sedge, which provides cover for reed buntings and sedge warblers. Mammals include otters, and there are birds such as red kites and buzzards. Purple loosestrife is found in grassland areas.[118]
Stoke and Bowd Lane Woods
Stoke Wood
Green tickY 36.4 hectares
(90 acres)
[119]
PP Corby
52°28′12″N 0°49′12″W / 52.470°N 0.820°W / 52.470; -0.820 (Stoke and Bowd Lane Woods)
SP 802 864
[119]
WTBCN[120] Map Citation These ancient semi-natural woods were formerly part of the medieval Royal Forest of Rockingham. The main tree species is pedunculate oak, with other species such as ash and birch. Ground flora include herb paris, wood sorrel, yellow archangel, early-purple orchid and greater butterfly-orchid.[121]
Sudborough Green Lodge Meadows
Sudborough Green Lodge Meadows
Green tickY 13.6 hectares
(34 acres)
[122]
NO Sudborough
52°26′49″N 0°34′23″W / 52.447°N 0.573°W / 52.447; -0.573 (Sudborough Green Lodge Meadows)
SP 970 841
[122]
NCR[123] Map Citation This site consists of two hay meadows, one of which is agriculturally unimproved and has large areas of medieval ridge and furrow. An experiment in trying to create attractive grasslands in the other field has potential for scientific research. Ponds, scrub, willow trees, hedgerows and wild pear trees add to the ecological value.[123]
Syresham Marshy Meadows
Syresham Marshy Meadows
Green tickY 17.8 hectares
(44 acres)
[124]
PP Silverstone
52°04′41″N 1°04′01″W / 52.078°N 1.067°W / 52.078; -1.067 (Syresham Marshy Meadows)
SP 640 425
[124]
Map Citation This site consists of two nearby areas of wetland in valleys which drain into the River Great Ouse. The northern one is a mire on shallow peat, and the southern one is agriculturally unimproved grassland and marsh on diverse soils, which has over a hundred flowering plant species.[125]
Thrapston Station Quarry
Thrapston Station Quarry
Green tickY 4.5 hectares
(11 acres)
[126]
NO Thrapston
52°23′17″N 0°31′59″W / 52.388°N 0.533°W / 52.388; -0.533 (Thrapston Station Quarry)
SP 999 776
[126]
GCR[127] Map Citation This site has the most important remaining Middle Jurassic Cornbrash geological section in the Midlands. It is the type site for the Bathonian Blisworth Clay section, dating to 168 to 166 million years ago, and it has the only complete exposure of this section. Diagnostic ammonites have helped to date the site, which has also yielded important Bryozoan fossils.[128][129]
Titchmarsh Meadow
Titchmarsh Meadow
Green tickY 2.2 hectares
(5.4 acres)
[130]
NO Titchmarsh
52°24′18″N 0°29′13″W / 52.405°N 0.487°W / 52.405; -0.487 (Titchmarsh Meadow)
TL 030 796
[130]
Map Citation This poorly drained field has a rich variety of plant species, including greater bird’s-foot-trefoil, southern marsh-orchid and pepper saxifrage. A medieval fish pond, which has been drained, has marsh vegetation. Hedges, streams and ditches provide a valuable habitat for invertebrates and small mammals.[131]
Twywell Gullet
Twywell Gullet
Green tickY 17.1 hectares
(42 acres)
[132]
PP Kettering
52°23′17″N 0°36′50″W / 52.388°N 0.614°W / 52.388; -0.614 (Twywell Gullet)
SP 944 775
[132]
WTBCN[133] Map Citation Twywell Gullet is a former ironstone quarry which has deep cuttings with steeply sloping banks. It has species-rich limestone grassland on the slopes and ponds and scrub in the bottoms. There are a number of uncommon ground nesting bees and wasps, and beetles include the nationally rare ruddy darter.[134]
Upper Cherwell at Trafford House
Upper Cherwell at Trafford House
Green tickY 18.6 hectares
(46 acres)
[135]
YES Eydon
52°08′06″N 1°13′44″W / 52.135°N 1.229°W / 52.135; -1.229 (Upper Cherwell At Trafford House)
SP 528 488
[135]
GCR[136] Map Citation This site is at the confluence of the River Cherwell and Eydon Brook. They are underfit streams, which have channels which are small for the size of their valleys. According to Natural England, the site has played an important role in the development of the theory of underfit streams. Deposits in a paleochannel could enable reconstruction of the environmental history.[137]
Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits
Stanwick Lakes
Green tickY 1,382.4 hectares
(3,416 acres)
[138]
PP Rushden
52°18′50″N 0°38′20″W / 52.314°N 0.639°W / 52.314; -0.639 (Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits)
SP 928 693
[138]
LNR,[139][140] Ramsar,[10] SPA,[11] WTBCN[138][141][142] Map Citation This site is described by Natural England as "a nationally important site for its breeding bird assemblage of lowland open waters and their margins". There are at least 21 breeding bird species, including mute swans, tufted ducks, little grebes, great crested grebes, little ringed plovers and redshanks.[143]
Wadenhoe Marsh and Achurch Meadow
Wadenhoe Marsh and Achurch Meadow
Green tickY 47.5 hectares
(117 acres)
[144]
PP Oundle
52°25′59″N 0°31′01″W / 52.433°N 0.517°W / 52.433; -0.517 (Wadenhoe Marsh and Achurch Meadow)
TL 009 826
[144]
Map Citation This complex site on both sides of the River Nene has a variety of habitats and a diverse range of fauna and flora. The west of the river is alder woodland and marshy grassland. On the east there is the largest example in the county of unimproved grassland on alluvium and gravel, with over 100 flowering plant species. An oxbow in the river is a site for rare plants.[145]
Wakerley Spinney
Wakerley Spinney
Green tickY 4.4 hectares
(11 acres)
[146]
NO King's Cliffe
52°34′37″N 0°34′37″W / 52.577°N 0.577°W / 52.577; -0.577 (Wakerley Spinney)
SP 965 986
[146]
Map Citation This is a remnant of the medieval Royal Forest of Rockingham, and it has broadleaved woodland and semi-natural grassland. The most common trees are pedunculate oak, ash, sycamore and downy birch. Locally uncommon flowering plants include woodruff, violet helleborine and fly orchid.[147]
Weldon Park
Weldon Park
Green tickY 51.7 hectares
(128 acres)
[148]
NO Weldon
52°30′00″N 0°36′25″W / 52.500°N 0.607°W / 52.500; -0.607 (Weldon Park)
SP 946 900
[148]
Map Citation This ancient woodland is mainly ash trees, maple and hazel. It has diverse flora, especially on grassland rides, and unusual plants on the wettest soils. Insects include the uncommon purple emperor butterfly.[149]
Whittlewood Forest
Whittlewood Forest
Green tickY 400.1 hectares
(989 acres)
[150]
PP Silverstone
52°04′52″N 0°56′56″W / 52.081°N 0.949°W / 52.081; -0.949 (Whittlewood Forest)
SP 721 430
[150]
NCR[94] Map Citation This is ancient semi-natural woodlands with many trees which are mature or over-mature, especially pedunculate oaks. There are also many ash trees and a scattering of silver birches and aspens. The oaks have nationally rare and nationally uncommon beetles, and there are locally rare lichens.[151]
Wollaston Meadows
Wollaston Meadows
Green tickY 14.3 hectares
(35 acres)
[152]
NO Wellingborough
52°16′26″N 0°41′10″W / 52.274°N 0.686°W / 52.274; -0.686 (Wollaston Meadows)
SP 897 648
[152]
Map Citation This site on the banks of the River Nene is composed of two species-rich hay fields. Flora include meadow foxtail, crested dog's-tail and red fescue. Overgrown hedges and ditches provide habitats for birds, small mammals and invertebrates.[153]
Yardley Chase
Yardley Chase
Green tickY 357.6 hectares
(884 acres)
[154]
PP Yardley Hastings
52°10′52″N 0°45′47″W / 52.181°N 0.763°W / 52.181; -0.763 (Yardley Chase)
SP 846 543
[154]
Map Citation The Chase has diverse semi-natural habitats, and its value for invertebrates has been enhanced by military use of the site, which has resulted in a long absence of intensive agriculture. There is woodland and unimproved grassland, and 30 breeding butterfly species have been recorded.[155]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ a b The area and grid reference are taken from the "Details" page for each site on the Natural England database.[9]
  2. ^ The maps are provided by Natural England on the Magic Map website.
  3. ^ Citations are provided for each site by Natural England.

References

  1. ^ "List of all the places in East Midlands". Ordnance Survey. Archived from the original on 21 September 2017. Retrieved 21 September 2017.
  2. ^ "Standard Area Measurements (2016) for Administrative Areas in the United Kingdom". Office for National Statistics. Archived from the original on 10 April 2017. Retrieved 3 May 2017.
  3. ^ "Population Estimates for UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland". Office for National Statistics. Archived from the original on 15 February 2017. Retrieved 31 July 2017.
  4. ^ "GB Counties — Past and present". Ordnance Survey. Archived from the original on 11 July 2017. Retrieved 21 September 2017.
  5. ^ "District and borough councils". Northamptonshire County Council. Archived from the original on 21 September 2017. Retrieved 21 September 2017.
  6. ^ "Plant and fungi species: Cowslip". Plantlife. Archived from the original on 2 January 2017. Retrieved 3 May 2017.
  7. ^ "Northamptonshire". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 22 April 2016. Retrieved 3 May 2017.
  8. ^ "Sites of Special Scientific Interest: Designation". Natural England. Archived from the original on 6 March 2016. Retrieved 19 April 2016.
  9. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Northamptonshire". Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 31 July 2017.
  10. ^ a b "Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS): Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits" (PDF). Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived (PDF) from the original on 11 October 2012. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  11. ^ a b "Special Protection Areas under the EC Birds Directive. Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits" (PDF). Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  12. ^ a b "Irchester Old Lodge Pit citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 March 2017. Retrieved 27 March 2017.
  13. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Alder Wood and Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 7 February 2017. Retrieved 6 February 2017.
  14. ^ "Alder Wood and Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 6 February 2017.
  15. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Aldwincle Marsh". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 February 2017. Retrieved 19 February 2017.
  16. ^ "Aldwincle Marsh citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 19 February 2017.
  17. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Ashton Wold". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  18. ^ "Ashton Wold". Historic England. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  19. ^ "Ashton Wold citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  20. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Badby Wood". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 26 February 2017.
  21. ^ "Badby Wood citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 26 February 2017.
  22. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Badsaddle, Withmale Park and Bush Walk Woods". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  23. ^ "Badsaddle, Withmale Park and Bush Walk Woods citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  24. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Banhaw, Spring and Blackthorn's Woods". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  25. ^ "Banhaw, Spring and Blackthorn's Woods citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  26. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Birch Spinney and Mawsley Marsh". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 13 March 2017.
  27. ^ "Birch Spinney and Mawsley Marsh citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 13 March 2017.
  28. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Blisworth Rectory Farm Quarry". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 March 2017. Retrieved 19 March 2017.
  29. ^ "Blisworth Rectory Farm (Bathonian)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  30. ^ "Blisworth Rectory Farm Quarry citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 March 2017. Retrieved 19 March 2017.
  31. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Bosworth Mill Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 6 March 2017. Retrieved 5 February 2017.
  32. ^ "Bosworth Mill Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 5 February 2017.
  33. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Bozeat Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 27 March 2017. Retrieved 26 March 2017.
  34. ^ "Bozeat Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 March 2017. Retrieved 26 March 2017.
  35. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Bucknell Wood Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 11 April 2017. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
  36. ^ "Bucknell Wood Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 April 2017. Retrieved 10 April 2017.
  37. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Bugbrooke Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 March 2017. Retrieved 19 March 2017.
  38. ^ "Bugbrooke Meadow". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-04-09. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  39. ^ "Bugbrooke Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-03-20. Retrieved 19 March 2017.
  40. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Bulwick Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 3 April 2017. Retrieved 2 April 2017.
  41. ^ "Bulwick Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 April 2017. Retrieved 2 April 2017.
  42. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Calender Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 14 March 2017. Retrieved 13 March 2017.
  43. ^ "Calender Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 13 March 2017.
  44. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Collyweston Great Wood and Easton Hornstocks". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  45. ^ Ratcliffe, A Nature Conservation Review, p. 57.
  46. ^ "Northamptonshire's National Nature Reserves". Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  47. ^ "Collyweston Great Wood and Easton Hornstocks citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  48. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Collyweston Quarries". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 3 April 2017. Retrieved 2 April 2017.
  49. ^ "Collyweston Quarries". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2015-09-05. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  50. ^ "Collyweston Quarries citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 April 2017. Retrieved 2 April 2017.
  51. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Collyweston Slate Mine". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 4 April 2017. Retrieved 3 April 2017.
  52. ^ "Collyweston (Aalenian - Bajocian)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  53. ^ "Collyweston Slate Mine citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 April 2017. Retrieved 3 April 2017.
  54. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Coombe Hill Hollow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 6 March 2017. Retrieved 5 February 2017.
  55. ^ "Coombe Hill Hollow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 5 February 2017.
  56. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Cowthick Quarry". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 13 February 2017. Retrieved 12 February 2017.
  57. ^ "Cowthick Quarry citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 12 February 2017.
  58. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Cranford St John". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 18 April 2017. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  59. ^ "Cranford St John (Bathonian)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  60. ^ "Cranford St John citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  61. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Dungee Corner Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 27 March 2017. Retrieved 26 March 2017.
  62. ^ "Dungee Corner Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 26 March 2017.
  63. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Everdon Stubbs". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  64. ^ "Everdon Stubbs". Woodland Trust. Archived from the original on 30 August 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  65. ^ "Everdon Stubbs citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  66. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Finedon Top Lodge Quarry". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 28 March 2017. Retrieved 27 March 2017.
  67. ^ "Wellingborough (Bathonian)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  68. ^ "Finedon Top Lodge Quarry citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 March 2017. Retrieved 27 March 2017.
  69. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Geddington Chase". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 8 February 2017. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
  70. ^ "Geddington Chase citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
  71. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Glapthorn Cow Pasture". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 24 April 2017. Retrieved 23 April 2017.
  72. ^ "Glapthorn Cow Pastures". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-04-07. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  73. ^ "Glapthorn Cow Pasture citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 23 April 2017.
  74. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Hardwick Lodge Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 18 April 2017. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  75. ^ "Hardwick Lodge Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  76. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Helmdon Disused Railway". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  77. ^ "Helmdon Disused Railway citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  78. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: High Wood and Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 27 February 2017. Retrieved 26 February 2017.
  79. ^ "High Wood and Meadow". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-04-07. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  80. ^ "High Wood and Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 26 February 2017.
  81. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Irchester Old Lodge Pit". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 28 March 2017. Retrieved 27 March 2017.
  82. ^ "Irchester Old Lodge Pit (Bathonian)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  83. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: King's Cliffe Banks". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 4 April 2017. Retrieved 4 April 2017.
  84. ^ "King's Cliffe Banks citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 April 2017. Retrieved 4 April 2017.
  85. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Mantles Heath". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  86. ^ "Mantles Heath citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  87. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Mill Crook". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 21 December 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  88. ^ a b "Mill Crook and Grafton Regis Meadow". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2017-06-30. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  89. ^ "Mill Crook citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  90. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Old Sulehay Forest". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  91. ^ "Old Sulehay". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-04-04. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  92. ^ "Old Sulehay Forest citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  93. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Pipewell Woods". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  94. ^ a b Ratcliffe, A Nature Conservation Review, p. 85.
  95. ^ "Pipewell Woods citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  96. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Pitsford Reservoir". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  97. ^ a b "Pitsford Water Nature Reserve". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-11-14. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  98. ^ "Pitsford Reservoir citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  99. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Plumpton Pasture". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 12 April 2017. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  100. ^ "Plumpton Pasture citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  101. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Racecourse Farm Fields". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017. Retrieved 4 April 2017.
  102. ^ "Racecourse Farm Fields citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 April 2017. Retrieved 4 April 2017.
  103. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Ramsden Corner Plantation". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 2016-12-25. Retrieved 24 December 2016.
  104. ^ "Ramsden Corner". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-03-14. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  105. ^ "Ramsden Corner Plantation citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 24 December 2016.
  106. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: River Ise and Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 8 February 2017. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
  107. ^ "Barford Wood and Meadows". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-12-23. Retrieved 22 December 2016.
  108. ^ "River Ise and Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
  109. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Roade Cutting". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  110. ^ "Roade Railway Cutting (Bathonian)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  111. ^ "Roade Cutting citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  112. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Salcey Forest". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 17 March 2017.
  113. ^ "Salcey Forest citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 17 March 2017.
  114. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Short Wood". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 24 April 2017. Retrieved 23 April 2017.
  115. ^ "Short Wood and Southwick Wood". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-12-20. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  116. ^ "Short Wood citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 23 April 2017.
  117. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Southfield Farm Marsh". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 18 April 2017. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  118. ^ a b "Southfield Farm Marsh". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-04-09. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  119. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Stoke and Bowd Lane Woods". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 8 February 2017. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
  120. ^ "Stoke Wood End Quarter". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 2016-03-13. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  121. ^ "Stoke and Bowd Lane Woods citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2017.
  122. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Sudborough Green Lodge Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 February 2017. Retrieved 19 February 2017.
  123. ^ a b "Sudborough Green Lodge Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 February 2017. Retrieved 19 February 2017.
  124. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Syresham Marshy Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 11 April 2017. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  125. ^ "Syresham Marshy Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 April 2017. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  126. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Thrapston Station Quarry". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 20 February 2017.
  127. ^ "Thrapston (Bathonian)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  128. ^ "Thrapston Station Quarry citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 20 February 2017.
  129. ^ "Blisworth Clay Formation". The BGS Lexicon of Named Rock Units — Result Details. British Geological Survey. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 20 August 2017.
  130. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Titchmarsh Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
  131. ^ "Titchmarsh Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
  132. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Twywell Gullet". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  133. ^ "Twywell Hills and Dales". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  134. ^ "Twywell Gullet citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  135. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Upper Cherwell at Trafford House". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 12 April 2017. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  136. ^ "Upper Cherwell at Trafford House (Fluvial Geomorphology of England)". Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  137. ^ "Upper Cherwell at Trafford House citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 April 2012. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  138. ^ a b c "Designated Sites View: Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 10 May 2017. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  139. ^ "Kinewell Lake". Local Nature Reserves. Natural England. 25 March 2013. Archived from the original on 22 December 2016. Retrieved 17 April 2017.
  140. ^ "Summer Leys". Local Nature Reserves. Natural England. 25 March 2013. Archived from the original on 19 December 2013. Retrieved 22 December 2016.
  141. ^ "Summer Leys". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 20 November 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  142. ^ "Titchmarsh". Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire. Archived from the original on 24 February 2017. Retrieved 21 December 2016.
  143. ^ "Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  144. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Wadenhoe Marsh and Achurch Meadow". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
  145. ^ "Wadenhoe Marsh and Achurch Meadow citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
  146. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Wakerley Spinney". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 5 April 2017. Retrieved 4 April 2017.
  147. ^ "Wakerley Spinney citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 April 2017. Retrieved 4 April 2017.
  148. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Weldon Park". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  149. ^ "Weldon Park citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 19 December 2016.
  150. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Whittlewood Forest". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  151. ^ "Whittlewood Forest citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 March 2014. Retrieved 11 April 2017.
  152. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Wollaston Meadows". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 28 March 2017. Retrieved 27 March 2017.
  153. ^ "Wollaston Meadows citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 March 2017. Retrieved 27 March 2017.
  154. ^ a b "Designated Sites View: Yardley Chase". Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived from the original on 20 August 2017. Retrieved 20 December 2016.
  155. ^ "Yardley Chase citation" (PDF). Sites of Special Scientific Interest. Natural England. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 30 June 2016.

Sources

  • Ratcliffe, Derek, ed. (1977). A Nature Conservation Review. 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521 21403 3.


This page was last edited on 20 September 2019, at 13:17
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.