I have just been reading about the Labour Party’s discussion on the possibility of RIGHT TO ROAM in England. If you ferret around on the Internet there is much to read and I must admit to not having studied that in great depth. I emphasise that I am not taking any political stance whatsoever at this point. I think the whole question including Right to Roam, national trails and public footpaths and rights of way needs looking at as a whole
As most of my readers know I have done many long distance walks in England, some on national trails and others of my own devising linking together existing public rights of way. One example of many was walking from Blackpool across to the East Coast on a straight line. There are occasions when it is not possible to continue a section on pubic rights of way and one is forced to walk on hazardous roads. See the map below:
As well as road by-pass links there are many examples where construction of crossings for rivers, railway lines and motorways could make the devising of personsl routes much more practical.
It would be beneficial if more permissive paths could be negotiated with landowners to link such examples with footpaths and/or cycleways. Ideally we would need an organised quango with people experienced in negotiating and with outdoor interests supplied with relevant examples for negotiation fed to them by walkers and their various organisations such as the Ramblers Club and the Long Distance Walkers Association.
My own opinion is that it would be better spending that way than trying to create new designated national trails or going for the wholesale Right to Roam.
Creation of more designated national trails is not (in my opinion) such a good thing;Take the example of the Scottish North 500. If you read the last couple of posts on Ruth's ongoing walk round our coast that would seem to have developed into some kind of rat-run, even more so because as well as cyclists it includes car drivers and motor cyclists, and some of them now treat it as a record speed challenge.
Better to leave walkers and cyclists to devise their own long distance walks to suit their individual preferences thereby taking pressure off existing designated routes. Having said that I do like the idea of a continuous right of way being established round the whole of our coastline - I know much progress has been made on that one. I believe the final section of a Land's End John o' Groats walk that would include plodding up the A9 in peril has now been blessed with a coastal alternative, an excellent example of what I am advocating here.
I'm afraid that considering the bankrupt state of the UK, both economically and socially little will be done on these matters.
ReplyDeleteThe CRoW act although wildly praised was a poor compromise on access. Landowners, often powerful politically or financially, blocked a great deal o the proposed access. As you know, one has the farcical open access 'islands' with no access point, which shows the rush to get an agreement and the lack of proper consultation.
If the matter of open access is taken up again it will be more of the same with landowners blocking and delaying proposals at great cost.
Permissive paths always have a stench of corruption to me - the landowner extracting grants in exchange. But some do work from the walker's point of view.
If individuals want to independently open up new LDWs then good for them, and perhaps the footpaths involved will get more use. We have done our share but without publicity.
In the end I think we will even struggle to maintain the status quo of Rights of Way. Who do you meet out on walks? - mainly old folks like us. Where is the next generation of Benny Rothmans coming from?
And on a more positive note, as I keep going on about the John O'Groats trail is one of the finest on the island - but of course it is in Scotland who have their own laws of access. But it does show how with a bit more will negotiations between dedicated ramblers groups and landowners could be improved. Which is where you came in.