1.  INTRODUCTION

  The National Stone Centre (NSC) is an independent educational registered charity, operated as a company limited by guarantee. It is located in the Derbyshire Dales on the Peak District fringe area, abutting the Derwent Mills World Heritage Site. The NSC is governed by a Council of Management, members of which are drawn from various levels of government, different sectors of industry and academia. The Centre's prime aim can be summarised as "Telling the Story of Stone in the UK"—in all its aspects—scientific (especially geological), historical, technological and its influence on art and the natural and built environment. The NSC was incorporated in 1984, opened in 1990 and acquired the freehold of its dramatic 50 acre site in 2000. Half of the latter comprises a Site of Special Scientific Interest designated both for its unique fossilised tropical seascapes and shark fossil assemblages. It is based on six derelict quarries containing 120 former mine shafts. The site is also home to a fascinating cross-section of industrial history and important ecologies.

2.  MAIN ACTIVITIES

  Our main activities include:

(a)  Visitor Services—for the public and schools—we operate a Discovery Centre which houses the Story of Stone Exhibition (in considerable need of refurbishment). This draws c10,000 people annually. In addition a whole range of science curriculum-related activities are offered to schools (particularly for key stages 2 and 3), plus trails over our own site and to a very large operational quarry nearby. Modest charges are made for these services; we receive much positive feedback. The efforts of our education manager (part time) are heavily supplemented by a small team of volunteers. We draw school visitors from as far away as Hull, Norfolk, Buckinghamshire, Manchester and Leeds (over 50% of the population lives of England and Wales lives within 80 miles). They include many groups from deprived inner city areas.

(b)  The site itself has benefited in recent years from improvements to walk-ways and interpretation panels (all designed by ourselves to professional standards) with some financial assistant via the former Countryside Agency (administrating Heritage Lottery Fund) and the Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund (via Derbyshire County Council). Another important feature is the Millennium Wall. This displays nineteen different full sized sections of dry stone walls in styles and stone from Caithness to South Wales and for which virtually no official funding was forthcoming! Much to the maintenance is carried out by Youth Justice and similar schemes.

(c)  Conducting commissioned work mainly relating to disseminating information about stone, generates most of our income. Our main clients in this respect include Communities and Local Government, Welsh Assembly Government, many of the major companies in the industry, trade federations, English Heritage, British Geological Survey, local government, and organisations such as British Waterways. Tasks involve for example strategic mineral planning (eg for the whole of Wales, and for the Milton Keynes South Midlands Growth Zone), designing interpretive panels for quarries, stone sourcing/matching, industrial historical research, researching, writing and designing educational materials. Much of this work is supported in some degree by the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund (ALSF). A new trading subsidency is being established to manage this work.

(d)  Training. In addition to running our own dry stone walling short courses for c14 years, we partner with two other organisations to run a whole spectrum of conservation courses relating to stone—carving, masonry, lime rendering, lime mortars, geological conservation (occasional) etc. These include first accredited dry stone walling courses in the UK.

(e)  We have important collections of rocks, fossils, building stones, books, periodicals, maps etc broadly relating to Earth science, the extractive industries, minerals resource management, building, and science education. At the moment these (and our offices) are accommodated in substandard temporary buildings. Our collections are currently being assessed and are about to be catalogued professionally.

3.  STAFFING

  We have a very small staff (2 FT; 3 PT plus 10 active volunteers; two additional freelance staff—designer and a mineral planner, are engaged on a as required basis). Our shop and entry to our exhibition is operated on a franchise basis.

4.  INCOME

  About 80% of our income is drawn from commissioned and grant aided work. This in effect subsides many of our other activities and maintenance. The remainder is drawn from visitor revenue (including via the franchise), rents for office space, rooms and activities on site.

  Apart from relatively modest support (mainly via ALSF in Landfill Tax Credits) to purchase and improve the site, we have received no direct government funding for capital works or to underpin our educational activities in the last 10 years.

  We have made a number of attempts to gain Lottery Funding support but have achieved very little success.

  We did however receive generous support from the East Midlands Development Agency for feasibility work in respect of substantial redevelopment of the NSC, in partnership with Derbyshire Wildlife Trust. This formed an important component in making a bid for the BIG Lottery Living Landmarks Fund (£16 million) for which we were unsuccessful. Similarly, earlier proposals to the Heritage Lottery Fund progressed falteringly, dependent as we are an such a small team.

5.  ASSETS AND SHORTCOMINGS

  Our main assets are the tremendous site—scientifically, visually, historically and ecologically, in a superb location, together with our ideas and enthusiasm for its better use to the benefit of all.

  Our biggest shortcoming is the lack of finance, people and connections, together with the challenge of marketing such a multifaceted concept which proves difficult for any single official entity to appreciate or engage with.

  Perhaps our main hurdle is the lack of capacity to be able to "take time out" from day to day work to progress such bids more aggressively and sustained over long periods. In this context we feel that without the active championing (or at least firm "seal of approval") by say local government, we will always fall behind other "pet" schemes and, as a result do not have capacity or strength to engage adequately the appropriate funding sources. Incidentally our hearts fell on the day we heard that the UK had won the Olympic bid—and our search for support since has borne out this initial dispair.

  We also feel that "politically", at virtually every level of government and for every European scheme, we are simply "in the wrong area"—yet we cannot move to a more conductive area as our most priceless asset is our stunning but highly accessible site. Even our subject, "stone"—which incidentally forms quite literally the foundation to our economy and both our built and natural heritage, does not appear to be as sexy, romantic or as cuddly any other topics.

6.  OTHER COMMENTS

  We have observed that (a) almost all "science and discovery" centres focus upon physics and (b) probably well over 70% of them are urban based. Nature reserves and country parks cover ecology, but very only rarely, Earth science. Very few if any Science Centres cover chemistry or Earth science—both vital ingredients to any appreciation of such critical issues as climate change, environmental conflict, global resource management etc. We also feel that there is a need to integrate science, art, history and design by adopting more holistic approaches.

  The first major round of Science and Discovery Centres almost entirely fell into this "physics/urban based" category and their position was further entrenched with the second round of funding (Rediscover) a few years ago. Funding squeezes, health and safety issues, transport and insurance cost rises have all also constrained the potential for school visits.

  There is a common cry is —well surely "industry" should/will help—in our case, all the major concerns are now controlled by foreign companies (where international agendas tends to override) and they logically point to their feeling that they now "do their bit for the environment etc" via the Aggregate Levy (Tax). But neither the ALSF nor the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme can be tapped for funding to support the capital investment of the type relevant to the NSC.

  Many of the income streams are now delivered or focussed upon specific regions or local authority areas. In appealing particularly to a broad area of the N.Midlands (involving four regions and numerous authority areas), liaison with government agencies becomes a minefield.

7.  SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS

  In summary our key points are.

(a)  In funding regimes, there is a need to recognise intermediate scale projects covering unusual, but important themes which cross authority and regional boundaries and particularly those not sponsored by local authorities.

(b)  It is important for bodies such as LSC, DfES, English Heritage, Natural England, HLF to work together to champion such initiatives jointly.

(c)  Funders need to recognise the potential of those engaged in projects "day to day", to cover the full costs of taking time out to progress new proposals.

(d)  In our area, special factors have minimised the willingness of one of the most obvious sources of support—industry—to contribute.

(e)  There is very poor coverage of Earth science at existing (mainly urban based) science and discovery centres. Filling this void is now critical to a better understanding of climate change, environmental conflict and global resource issues.

June 2007