C O N T E X T 1 0 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 8 45 as catastrophic as the picture painted in the national press. What about the rest of the country? English Heritage recently commissioned a quick telephone survey of wheat growers and dealers to get an idea of the national picture. In East Anglia they had hardly been affected, while in the south west a reduced yield has been exacerbated by growers selling their reed to the midlands, where the harvest was exceptionally poor, and consequently the price of combed wheat reed is sky high. Again the results of this investigation suggested a very different picture to that portrayed in the media. What should a conservation officer do when faced with an owner insisting on a change of thatching material? First it makes sense to consider whether the roof really needs thatching this year. Could it be patched or protected with a tarpaulin? Some thatchers favour patching to extend the life of a roof and to help eke out supplies of combed wheat reed, while others feel that the cost of scaffolding adds so much to the price of a patching job as to render it unviable. As with so many aspects of thatching, to patch or not to patch seems to be a matter of preference for individual thatchers. A similar dichotomy was revealed when the possibility of using triticale (a wheat/rye hybrid) as an alternative to traditional wheat was discussed. Some thatchers are happy to use it for coat work, while others would use it only for ridging. Some think it lasts just as long as combed wheat reed, while others think it is less durable. If the thatchers can not agree among themselves about such things, it is little wonder that conservation officers are sometimes confused. It is important that conservation officers get impartial advice on specific cases. This probably means asking several thatchers or thatching consultants in order to get a range of opinion. The problem is that if you ask the same question of five different thatchers you are likely to receive five different answers, such is the idiosyncratic nature of the industry. In some circumstances a change of thatcher would appear to offer a solution. In two cases that I am aware of (one in Dorset and one in Somerset) owners approached the planning authority claiming that their thatcher could not obtain good quality combed wheat reed this year, and requesting that the listed building legislation be relaxed to allow them to re-thatch in water reed. In both cases a change of thatcher solved the problem, and both roofs will be re-thatched in combed wheat reed later this summer. It is no secret that some thatchers specialise in water reed, so it is not surprising that they would be ill-placed to source good quality combed wheat reed in time of shortage. It was made clear to the thatchers attending the Somerset meeting that there was no question of ‘relaxing’ the legislation this year to allow water reed to be used instead of combed wheat reed. There may be genuine cases where a change of material from combed wheat reed to water reed might be justified in the best interests of the building, but owners will still need to submit an application for listed building consent and provide the necessary justification. Based on the overall view of the Somerset thatchers at the meeting, we expect very few such applications. Surprisingly, among the Somerset thatchers there was a good level of support for listed building legislation. One thatcher said that if it were not for conservation officers, most thatchers would be out of work, as the majority of thatched buildings would have been tiled or slated by now. Others felt that firm guidance and legislation was essential in maintaining and increasing demand for good-quality, home-grown combed wheat reed. Here we come to the crux of the thatchers’ problems. At the Somerset meeting the concern about this year’s supply almost faded into insignificance when compared with concern about the long-term production of good quality combed wheat reed. One grower and reed comber said that in the 1970s and 80s he used to comb for about 20 reed growers within a 25-mile
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=