Natural England

Minutes

PRESENT:

Members:            

Pam Warhurst (Chair), Countryside Agency (CA)

Jon Avison, Association of National Park Authorities (ANPA)

Caroline Bedell, Country Land and Business Association (CLA)

Stephanie Wheeler, British Horse Society (BHS)

Iain McMorrin, British Mountaineering Council (BMC)

Tim Stevens, Central Council for Physical Recreation (CCPR)

Gwyn Williams, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB)

Richard Brown, Local Government Association (LGA)

Jerry Pearlman, Ramblers’ Association (RA)

Pam Ashton, Cyclists Touring Club (CTC)

Jo Burgon, National Trust (NT)

Observers:            

Ceri Daugherty, Ministry of Defence (MOD)

Graham Bathe, English Nature (EN)

Jonathan Tweney, Defra

Ruth Howard, Defra

Guests:            

Alice Elliott, Defra Horse Industry Team

Clive Weake, Lancashire County Council

Countryside Agency Staff:    

Jeremy Worth

Paul Mutch

Simon Blake

David Gear (Secretary)

Paula Holt

(approx. 15 members of the public attended the meeting)

1.             CHAIR’S INTRODUCTION

PW welcomed everyone to the meeting, including Jon Avison, representing ANPA, and Tim Stevens, representing CCPR.   She also welcomed forum observers Jonathan Tweney and Ruth Howard (Defra), and Paul Mutch, Simon Blake, and Paula Holt (CA).

2.             APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE  were received from members Andrew Sutcliffe MA, Henry Aubrey-Fletcher CLA, Andrew Clark NFU, Barry Leathwood TGWU, Sarah Tunnicliffe EH, and William Bird independent (who had recently resigned).

3.             MINUTES OF THE 18TH MEETING (3RD MARCH 2004)

These were agreed to be a correct record, with the exception of 4.6 which should be amended to read: “The population served by Bradford City Primary Care Trust comprised 61% non-white people, the overwhelming majority of whom were south Asian, and amongst whom there was an extremely high incidence of type 2 diabetes”.

4.          NCAF 19/1 POINTS ACTIONED FROM 18TH MEETING

4.6.      (NCAF 17/1) Your countryside – Your Health The Chair said that although it would not be feasible to get the whole of NCAF on a visit, she would very much like to see the excellent, cutting edge work in Bradford, together with any members and observers who would like to join her on a visit, which should be arranged.  (Action SB). 

4.7.            (NCAF 17/2) Relationship between NCAF and LAFs                

Main points made in discussion:

• Work of the Yorkshire Dales LAF was praised.
• Very worthwhile for some NCAF members to attend one of its meetings.
• Might be useful to link that with the proposed Bradford visit (see 4.6), as YDNP Authority worked with minority groups in Keithley as well.  

4.10.        (NCAF 17/5) CROW Act s2, 1(t): commercial activities             BMC paper and Defra’s subsequent draft guidelines had been circulated.  (Action: NCAF members to relay their views on both to IMc).   

5.                  (NCAF 18/2) Open Access: Managing Access             

Main points made in discussion:

• Minister had agreed that the AMG (Access Management Grant) Scheme should run for three years rather than one.
• In first year the real issues had been the capacity of access authority staff to do the work on the ground, and the weather.
• Funding had not been the primary constraint – CA was finding it sufficient.
• There was £2m for mapping areas 1 to 5.
• Accepted that southern authorities had been a bit slower to respond  to AMG Scheme.
• Some authorities had not sought AMG funding because it was less relevant to them, eg they encompassed no access land.
• In its new Higher Level Environmental Stewardship Scheme update, Defra used loose wording, referring to ‘higher rights’. (Action: DG to check with Defra and advise JP).  
• How would Defra be able to continue paying for permissive rights of access if legal rights applied?  (Action: JT to check up on the point and circulate the answer for everybody’s information).
• NCAF might look at the whole payments issue, as it would be useful to have a better overview of how this was all going to work in the longer term.  (Action: JW to consider including it as an agenda item at a future meeting.)   

5.         NCAF 19/2 MODERNISING RURAL DELIVERY: FUTURE ROLE OF NCAF

Main points made in discussion about MRD:

• CA’s functions would be split three ways:       

(i)                 a small policy advisory agency with a rural advocate, and a more international perspective to offer advice to Government; (effective from April 2005);

(ii)               CA work on pilot grant schemes such as vital villages, transport, and communities, would transfer to those who deliver regionally, eg RDAs; (effective from April 2005); and

(iii)             work most important from NCAF’s perspective, CA’s LAR (Landscape, Access and Recreation) Division would transfer to a new agency, along with the work of EN and Defra’s RDS (Rural Development Service); (expected to be effective from Jan 2007) 

Main points made in presentation and discussion about future role of NCAF:

• Consensus that there was no particular need to change NCAF’s broadly worded remit, which was ‘fit for the purpose’.
• On membership, three options were proposed:  

(i)                 given the broader agenda, there would be merit in extending membership to a further representative of CCPR, to allow the extension of representation to water recreation interests (otherwise absent from NCAF);

(ii)               invite Visit Britain to send an observer so that tourism concerns could be represented; and 

(iii)             consider how to best represent the broader constituency identified in the Rural White Paper’s section on diversity.

• As for the style of meetings:  

(i)                 a U shaped table in which everyone spoke ‘through’ the chair was very effective for dealing with different sorts of formal business;

(ii)               where nature of the business needed a more   informal workshop style of discussion, NCAF should aim to do that in the first part of the   day,   and then report back in a subsequent plenary session, so public could hear the morning’s distillations.

• NCAF might be invited to advise on the development of the new integrated agency’s agenda.
• The integrated agency would be a new organisation with a new chairman and new chief executive, and would want to look at how it received advice on all aspects of its remit.   

Summing up, the Chair said that the main conclusions she drew from the discussion were that NCAF should be prepared to advise on the recreation and access agenda for the integrated agency.   NCAF should also have opportunities to discuss matters in informal workshop sessions, but report back to the main meeting.   On membership, there was agreement to having observer status for tourism, and to ensuring water sports were properly represented.   

Main points made in presentation and discussion:

·        CA’s guidance for land managers on improving and increasing access to the countryside for disabled people was scheduled for publication in spring 2005.  

·        Disability was a broad term encompassing all sorts of people with all sorts of different disabilities; only about 5% actually used wheelchairs.  

·        The Guidance would cover issues beyond physical access (eg surfacing of paths or the provision of gates instead of styles); it would also deal with intellectual access, eg methods and mechanics of information, interpretation, and learning opportunities.

·        CA had produced AccessAbility  (2000), and Paths without Prejudice (2001), to explore how to extend the BT guidance Countryside for All  (1997), to provide standards for access to the wider countryside. 

·        Guidance needed to encourage people involved in the provision of facilities to think about the practicalities, and try to look at things through the eyes of a typical life cycle, as at various times most people were incapacitated in one way or another.

·        Central Law Training’s recent course on highway law had included a paper on DDA, which could provide useful information for CA.  (Action: SB)

·        CA should liaise with the Countryside Management Association, the largest professional association for countryside and urban green space managers.  (Action: SB) 

7.             LOCAL ISSUES, LANCASHIRE

Main points made in presentation:

• The implementation of open access had commenced in Lancashire on 19th September, with the grand opening on Bowland.  
• The launch event was successful because of tremendous co-operation between staff, land owners, contractors, user groups, and LAF members.  
• To date there had been no significant problems related to the new access provided under CROW.   Lancs would keep things under review to see how they developed over the next year, following more promotion of the new opportunities.
• Lancs LAF was a partnership of three LHAs.   It would have a primary role in driving forward the ROWIP, and in ensuring that Lancs CC delivered it; Lanc’s ROWIP was out and available for consultation.
• The ROWIP would drive the work of the entire Countryside Service   for the next ten years, and it was about improving access for the whole of the public of Lancashire, not just specific groups of people.  
• The LAF considered that CA’s Lost Ways project was extremely important because in its view the discovery of unrecorded rights remained the best way of improving access for those groups that did not benefit from the CROW Act.    

Main points made in discussion:

• Access ‘road shows’ for the Bowland project had made a big difference to how farmers took on board access.
• Lancs was fortunate in being well resourced and having a history of working with the landowning community, which might be different in other areas.
• Although in Lancs there were significant areas of open access, they were areas which existed pre-CROW, so the CC was already aware of potential problems.
• If waterside access issues could be resolved, that would be a tremendous benefit both to the public and to land managers.
• Lancs LAF recognized the importance of getting the balance of membership between land managers and users right and were aiming to improve this.   

Summing up, the Chair thanked Clive Weake for meeting NCAF, and for his excellent presentation.  

8.             LOCAL ACCESS FORUMS ISSUES

Main points made in presentation:

• CA would be carrying out research to gather better information about LAFs and the issues affecting their success.   LGA, ANPA, and Defra were involved in steering the research, which would involve contacting all LAF members and secretaries.
• Bearing in mind NCAF members’ long-standing concerns about improving links with LAFs, CA and LGA had established a system of contacts in each region between CA regional offices and LAFs in those regions.    

Main points made in discussion:

• It would be good to see NCAF passing on policy views to LAFs.  

Hopefully, under the new standing agenda item,   NCAF would hear more about what various LAFs were doing, including the highlighting of good examples, so that information from one was passed to others. 

• Some LAF member felt that there was little point sitting on LAFs because nothing was happening owing to the lack of funding, but reports received from really successful LAFs might inspire them a bit.
• CA would include on each NCAF meeting agenda, a standing item on LAF issues.  (Action: DG)  

Summing up, the Chair commented that advice on improving the effectiveness of LAFs (based on LAF members’ views) should be provided by CA’s research project, which it would aim to expedite.  (Action DG)

9.          NCAF 19/4 RECREATION AND ACCESS PRIORITIES FOR THE INTEGRATED AGENCY

Main points made in discussion:

• The planning system needed to give better consideration of recreational space.
• CAand EN shared an interest in sustainable land management, appropriate regeneration of countryside, and economic opportunity.
• Care should be taken to avoid falling into the trap of thinking that just because a person didn’t visit the countryside that was a bad thing.   It was important that there was no corporate self-criticism, because a lot of people simply weren’t interested.
• BMC was actively looking into ways in which its members could contribute to the rural communities where they practiced their sport.
• Outdoor education was valuable for young people, particularly those who come from urban backgrounds.  
• Design standards for new communities should build in green space from the start, as it was more difficult to add once site development was complete.
• Creation of more large scale habitat could deliver on all sorts of objectives, including helping the farming community, and delivering more access for people.  

Summing up, the Chair said that the integrated agency’s priorities for outdoor recreation should include addressing planning concerns, the design standards around green recreational space, and how to get that balance right.   Above all, it was important to optimise people’s engagement.   

10.             HORSE INDUSTRY STRATEGY

Main points made in presentation:

• Defra’s Horse Industry Team worked in partnership with the industry to encourage its sustainable contribution to local economies and communities, particularly in rural England.
• Research commissioned by Defra and BHIC (British Horse Industry Confederation) had found that the horse industry’s gross output was approximately £3.4 billion, it employed up to 250,000 people, and at least 5m people had an active interest in the horse industry.
• Defra and the BHIC were developing their Strategy around six horse industry issues, ie encouraging sporting activities, promoting a better industry image, improving skills, training and standards, improving the standard of British bred horses, improving the economic performance of equine businesses and improving access to off road riding and PROW.
• Following research completed by the Henley Centre, the greatest number of comments seemed to be about access, which was obviously a very important part of the industry.
• Defra was confident that the Strategy would have many benefits, including continued improvement of off road riding opportunities, and uniting and strengthening the industry’s efforts behind a lead organization.
• The Defra/BHIC Strategy would be published for consultation early in the new year, and anyone who wanted to be part of the consultation process should forward their details to Alice Elliott.  

Action points arising from the discussion:

·        Contact details for Margaret Linnington-Payne (who was writing the Strategy chapter on improving access to off-road riding/PROW) would be forwarded to CA.   (Action:   AE)

·        CA would advise SW   how long it would take the Discovering Lost Ways contractors to cover the first two counties, ie Cheshire and Wiltshire.  (Action: DG)

11.             FUTURE NCAF AGENDA ITEMS

Main points made in discussion:

·        Forum members and observers were encouraged to put forward papers to stimulate discussion.

·        There was a request for a future discussion paper on access to coastal areas.

·        IMc offered to contribute to an item on outdoor education.  (Action: DG)

·        PA offered to contribute to an item on the Walking and Cycling Strategy Action Plan,  and CA’s involvement in its implementation.  (Action: DG)

·        Although in future there might be a wider agenda, NCAF needed to keep monitoring the delivery of CROW Act access.

·        NCAF’s discussion on coastal access should cover the loss of PROW and access land resulting from erosion.  (Action: DG)

Summing up, the Chair thanked members for these suggestions.

12.             QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE

i.          Cllr. Jill Bolton asked NCAF members how they would feel if, before being allowed to walk the nearby 70 mile Ribble Way, they were required to buy a national licence as well as a ticket restricting walkers, and prominently display the licence on their rucksacks.   This was analogous to the scenario that could face canoeists who wished to paddle down rivers like the Ribble, if EA (Environment Agency) adopted suggestions from the Brighton Report.   This was despite EA having a statutory duty to promote recreation alongside rivers, which it had not progressed so far, owing to opposition from angling interests.

JW responded that the study on extending access for canoeing, carried out by CA at Defra’s request, recommended that there was scope and potential to increase the number of voluntary access agreements, where these were supported by strategic planning to ensure efforts were focused where they would be most useful and effective.   The Study was based on four pilot projects.   It     had identified that on different waterways there would be major differences in the costs and type of negotiations needed to reach voluntary agreements.   The Defra Minister had agreed with CA’s advice to take forward two of the pilots (on the Mersey and Waveney) and see them through to completion, in order to learn the full lessons from the work stated.

ii.         Steve Byrne asked for clarification of whether access is paid for, eg as part of an agri-environment scheme, as it necessarily implied provision of a service and therefore brought into effect the DDA.  

SB responded that such a consideration would become redundant with the new legislation, which would apply irrespective of whether something was regarded as a service or a function.   If there are ‘reasonable adjustments’ to be made and they aren’t made, then someone can be seen to be discriminating and therefore fairly litigated against. So that would be the easiest way to resolve that question.   The other point to make was that there might be agri-environment cases where the grounds on which they were provided meant that many people with mobility problems might not be able to take advantage of them anyway.   It was important not to assume that DDA meant exactly the same provision had to be made for everybody else.   PW said CA would provide a definitive response to the question, (Action SB).

iii            Christine Peat said that walkers already had an extensive footpath network when access land, costing millions, came on stream, and asked when similar legislation and money would be used to open PROW for other users.   She felt that the Discovering Lost Ways (DLW) project was under-funded, had few professionals, and has no structure in place to establish the true status of routes.

iv         Michael Helen asked   why NCAF had so studiously and obviously avoided consideration of horse riders given the huge equine contribution to the rural economy, for example in CA’s slow progress with DLW.

Responding to iii  and iv  JW agreed that it had taken a long while to get DLW off the ground.   However, that had been because CA was determined that for a project lasting possibly ten years, the right arrangements were in force to ensure that it was conducted properly and efficiently and that an effective system could be created that actually worked.   CA was pleased that it now had a very professional contracting organisation, Land Aspects, which was well used to exploring issues of rights over land.   It had already begun to collect data from the National Archives, and CA believed that one of the many benefits from DLW would indeed be the discovery of higher rights.   DLW was a major part of CA’s forward work programme, working with Defra.   JW also mentioned that now CA was well advanced with its access mapping, it would see if there were places with new open access rights where it would be appropriate to see if agreement to allow higher rights (eg horse-riding) could be exercised over that land.

PW added that there had very much been a focus on the implementation of CROW, which had caused a degree of frustration to CA colleagues who wanted to go further in discussing cycling and horse-riding.   In the future, whilst not taking its eyes off the need to still advise on CROW, there would be a shift to engage on a broader spectrum.   NCAF had always been clear that its remit extended to the broader access agenda.

13.             CLOSE

The Chair thanked everybody for contributing, both from the floor and round the forum, and wished them a safe journey back from Preston.