A coalition of conservationists and academics has called for the Lake District to be stripped of its UNESCO World Heritage status, arguing that the designation perpetuates environmentally harmful practices and hinders ecological restoration efforts.
In a letter addressed to UNESCO, ecologist Lee Schofield contends that the World Heritage status promotes a misleading perception of sustainable farming, particularly emphasizing sheep farming, which he describes as both ecologically damaging and economically unsustainable. Schofield’s concerns are detailed in a report co-authored with Dr. Karen Lloyd of Lancaster University and Professor Ian Convery of the University of Cumbria, and published by World Heritage Watch.
The report highlights that sheep farming dominates the Lake District’s agricultural landscape, with 673,000 sheep accounting for 90% of the region’s medium-sized mammal biomass, while wild mammals represent a mere 3%. This imbalance, the authors argue, suppresses biodiversity, impedes natural regeneration, and contributes to soil erosion and compaction. Only 20.7% of the Lake District’s Sites of Special Scientific Interest are currently in favorable condition, a statistic linked to intensive sheep grazing.
Critics also point to the UNESCO designation’s role in exacerbating overtourism, which has led to rising property prices and strained local infrastructure. Visitor numbers have increased from 16.4 million in 2015 to over 18 million annually, with projections reaching 22 million by 2040. This surge in tourism is said to be driving housing costs beyond the reach of local families and overwhelming the region’s infrastructure.
David Morris of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) supports the campaign, stating that the heritage status has been misused to block conservation initiatives. He cites instances where efforts to replace sheep with cattle and ponies for ecological restoration faced opposition, with opponents invoking the World Heritage designation to resist change.
However, not all stakeholders agree with the call to revoke the status. Jane Barker, a farmer and former deputy chair of the Lake District National Park Authority, argues that traditional farming and environmental goals can coexist. She emphasizes that policy shortcomings, rather than the UNESCO status, are the primary barriers to ecological schemes.
Professor Julia Aglionby of the University of Cumbria and executive director of the Foundation for Common Land also defends the designation, asserting that it protects traditional practices essential to the region’s cultural heritage. She contends that the main issue lies in the lack of effective public funding for environmental schemes, not the World Heritage status itself.
The Lake District National Park Authority acknowledges the challenges of balancing cultural heritage with climate and biodiversity goals. Steve Ratcliffe, the authority’s director of sustainable development, emphasizes the need for changes in land management to support nature recovery and climate resilience, while also considering the area’s cultural significance.
If successful, this campaign would mark the second instance of the UK losing a UNESCO World Heritage designation, following Liverpool’s waterfront being stripped of its status in 2021. UNESCO has yet to comment on the matter.
