This paper considers what support and investment may be required to facilitate and manage open access on the ground. It follows research which identified significant gaps in the current framework of grants and incentives supporting the management of...
Recreation

Breadcrumbs

NCAF 15/3 Support and Investment to Help Facilitate and Manage Open Access on the Ground

1. This paper considers what support and investment may be required to facilitate and manage open access on the ground. 2. The paper follows research which identified significant gaps in the current framework of grants and incentives supporting the management of open access. 3. The paper highlights specific questions on which we would particularly like the Forum’s advice.

Background research on the use of grants and incentives

1.  Following advice from the Forum in September 2000, a government working group[1] chaired by the Countryside Agency commissioned research to look into the role existing grants and incentives could play in facilitating the new right of open access on foot.

2.  The research recommended four essential types of access infrastructure and management tools as priorities for government support:

a.   advice for farmers and others on planning for open access and on appropriate management techniques;

b.   the provision of infrastructure to facilitate and manage the new access arrangements;

c.   links to and between inaccessible islands of access land;

d.   systems for the ongoing management of visitor use on access land.

3.  The research considered existing grants and incentives for countryside recreation, such as Countryside Stewardship, the Woodland Grant Scheme and Lottery funds.   It identified some funding opportunities, for example:

a.   the Countryside Stewardship Scheme may target links to and between islands of access land following its current review;

b.   the Woodland Grant Scheme may be able to support a range of access infrastructure and management tools in dedicated woodlands; and

c.   the Heritage Lottery Fund recently made policy changes to enable land owners to apply for grants of up to £50,000 to enable access to heritage land in private ownership. 

4.  But the research concluded that there are significant gaps between the support likely to be available through these schemes, and the range of essential infrastructure and management tools identified as priorities for open access.

5.  In response to these conclusions, the Agency is considering how local services and investment can deliver the infrastructure and management tools for open access which the research has recommended, and what national support may be required.

Options for facilitating and managing open access

1.   The research also showed that the options for facilitating and managing open access will depend on patterns of visitor use and on the sensitivities of the land.   The options can be summarised as:

a.  continue as before;
Where visitor demand is low, or does not change substantially following commencement of the new rights, a laissez-faire approach will often suffice.

b.  improve infrastructure;
Infrastructure (such as gates and bridges) may be needed to facilitate access, as may new routes to reach, cross or link areas of access land.   Information points, notices and way-markers may also be beneficial to show where access land is and encourage visitors to act considerately.

c.  use informal techniques to manage visitor use;
Informal techniques can be used to steer visitors along enjoyable routes, avoiding hazards and areas which are sensitive for wildlife, heritage and land management reasons.  

d.  use formal restrictions;
Statutory restrictions may be necessary where informal techniques are inadequate to safeguard public safety or areas which are sensitive for wildlife, heritage or other land management reasons.  

2.  The Agency sees the need for a network of local advisers to encourage the judicious use of these options and to identify circumstances where further support should be considered.

Advice on the management of open access

1.  Our analysis of existing land management advisory services suggests that many lack sufficient expertise in access management or in the business opportunities that visitors can bring.   Some access authorities already offer advice on access management, which is good in some areas, but not all.   These services could be expanded and improved, to cope with any new demand generated by the commencement of open access and to encourage a consistent national approach to access management.

2.  One way to encourage consistency of advice is through guidance.   The CRoW Act grants new powers to access authorities which enable them to facilitate and manage access on the ground (see Annex A).   The Agency is helping Defra to prepare a circular to access authorities on the discharge of these powers.

Questions for the Forum on local access advice

1)   How important is it to establish a network of local advisers to advise on open access management?   Which areas of the country would most benefit from local access advice?

2)   How can the Agency encourage access authorities to make good, consistent advice on access available locally before the new rights commence?

3)   How can we encourage other land management advisory services to adopt an integrated approach to access management, so that good, basic advice on access is available more widely in the long term?

     

New infrastructure and positive management of open access

1.  The Agency sees the main responsibility for delivering infrastructure and management on access land resting with local interests.   Local highway authorities and National Park authorities are appointed as access authorities under the new legislation.   Access authorities’ new powers are summarised in Annex A.   These powers should enable access authorities to deliver the infrastructure and management tools on access land which the research has recommended.   But they will require investment and support to make it work on the ground.  

2.  The Agency can help to stimulate local investment in open access through its network of regional offices. We can influence local decision makers by gathering evidence to demonstrate the benefits from countryside recreation to local economies, health and quality of life.

3.  The need for investment on access land may initially be high, for example:

a.   on land where levels of use are likely to increase substantially, or where patterns of use change significantly;

b.   on land where there are sensitive nature conservation or other interests; and

c.   for land owners with limited experience of managing access and limited access to alternative means of support.

d.   land where access brings additional benefits, for example by tackling ill health or social disadvantage (e.g. close to major towns and cities). 

4.  The Agency proposes to investigate the scale of initial demand for support and the likely costs associated with it.   This will support the case for local investment in open access and put plans for commencement on a firm footing.

5.  Where the initial demand for investment in open access is high, some national support could form part of the solution in the short term.   This could help attract local and regional investment in open access and address gaps in local frameworks of support.

6.  However, our background research showed the scope for existing grants and incentives to support new infrastructure and management on access land is very limited. In many cases this is because access is not the principal objective of the scheme, or because it is one of a number of objectives such as landscape and nature conservation.

7.  Government should consider the case for adapting an existing scheme to support open access, or creating a new scheme.   The Agency will gather evidence with which to advise Government on the scale and nature of any national support.

Questions for the Forum on investment in infrastructure and management

1)   How can the Agency best use its influence to ensure investment in open access at a local and regional level?   Who else can help us with this influencing work?

2)   What role should there be for local access forums in targeting investment in open access?

3)   Is open access management an appropriate objective for a dedicated scheme funded by one of the major Lottery distributors?

4)   Is there a role for a national scheme to support open access?   How could this be targeted to top up local investment, rather than being seen as an alternative?

5)   What steps can be taken to ensure that the new access arrangements are adequately managed and resourced in the long term?

6)   How can investment in open access be made to contribute to wider social, environmental and economic objectives?

     

Next steps

1.  Following advice from the Forum, the Agency intends to:

a.   use its influence to secure local and regional investment and resources for open access in advance of commencement;

b.   gather evidence on the likely demand for advice, infrastructure and management for open access;

c.   advise local and national government on any “hotspots” where significant new investment may be required; and

d.   investigate alternative sources of funding, such as Lottery funds, which might help in these instances.

            

Andrew Chester
Wider Welcome team

3.              January 2003

4.              


ANNEX A

 

POWERS OF THE ACCESS AUTHORITIES UNDER

PART I OF THE CROW ACT

 

Part I of the CROW Act gives access authorities powers to:

 

i.           make byelaws (under section 17), for 

            

Ÿ  preservation of order;

Ÿ  prevention of damage; and

Ÿ  ensuring that people exercising CROW access rights do not unduly interfere with the enjoyment of the land by others.

            

ii       appoint wardens(under section 18), for example to

            

Ÿ  secure compliance with byelaws; 

Ÿ  enforce any exclusion of the public or other restriction on the new rights; and

Ÿ  give advice and assistance to the public and land managers in relation to the new rights.

            

i            erect and maintain notices (under section 19), to 

            

Ÿ  indicate boundaries of access land and excepted land;

Ÿ  inform the public of national and local restrictions on CROW access; and 

Ÿ  publicise any other relevant information.

            

i            improve means of access (under sections 35 to 39), by entering into agreements with the occupier about works to install, improve, maintain or repair means of access (gates, stiles, steps, bridges etc.), and remove obstructions; and

            

ii           enter access land (under section 40), for the purpose of:

            

Ÿ undertaking their powers at iii and iv above; and

Ÿ ascertaining whether a misleading notice has been displayed (section 14).

            

 


[1] The Government working group consists of the Countryside Agency, the Countryside Council for Wales, Defra, English Nature and the Forestry Commission.