Breadcrumbs
NCAF 16/3 Access Management
2. This paper covers very similar ground to the previous one, but is amended it to reflect members’ comments and represents a draft NCAF position statement for agreement or amendment. Beneath each section is a short commentary in italics, indicating whether the position expressed represents the unanimous view of members, and where views differ. Where the stated position received broad support, the commentary invites the Forum to endorse it at the meeting. Where views differ, the commentary invites the Forum to agree or amend the stated position at the meeting.
3. Following the May meeting, the Agency will present an amended version of this paper to our Board, as a summary of NCAF’s advice on roles and responsibilities for access management to the Countryside Agency, and through the Agency to Defra. If requested to do so, we will record and acknowledge any dissenting views from members of the Forum.
Guiding principles
1. The following set of guiding principles should underpin the allocation of responsibilities and resources for open access management:
a. Except where the Act provides otherwise[1], the role of central government (including its agencies) should be to introduce the new right of access at national level, providing a clear and consistent framework and creating circumstances in which ongoing local management can operate effectively. This role should include producing guidance, supporting and promoting pilots and demonstrations of good practice, and administering grant aid to help set up the new arrangements, but it should not extend to managing open access locally.
Commentary
There was broad consensus among members on this principle. Several members made reference to other statutory duties of government agencies with a direct or indirect bearing on local management of open access and we have included a footnote to this effect. Members were unanimous on the importance of centrally administered grant aid to help set up the new arrangements and we have amended the text to this effect.
The Forum is invited to endorse this principle at the meeting.
b. Local access management arrangements can only be effectively coordinated by organisations with a local presence and a detailed understanding of local land management interests, recreational pressures and demands.
Commentary
There was broad consensus on this principle. Several members pointed out that local management arrangements would require the advice and expertise of various organizations and individuals, including local access forums. We have amended the text to focus on the responsibility for leading on local access management in coordination with others.
The Forum is invited to endorse this principle at the meeting.
c. Where the Act results in new access to significant areas of previously inaccessible land, it is reasonable to anticipate some increase in tourism in the local area, and consequential benefits to the local economy. (While the extent of such increases and benefits may be difficult to predict at this stage, the recent outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease illustrated clearly the link s between countryside access, tourism and local economies.) It follows that local businesses with an economic interest in the success of open access - and appropriate local and regional organisations with an economic, recreational or health remit - should in principle be expected to make some contribution to the facilitation and management of the new right, although the extent and means of any contribution would need to be subject to discussion and negotiation.
Commentary
Members agreed that those with an economic interest in open access should contribute to the costs of management, but were cautious about the link between open access and farm incomes. We have amended the text to indicate local businesses, which can signify both tourism-based companies and land managers whose businesses benefit directly from visitor spending. Members also suggested that local and regional organizations with social (e.g. health) objectives could contribute to, and benefit from, open access arrangements. We have amended the text to reflect this.
The Forum is invited to endorse this principle at the meeting.
Who should be responsible for coordinating management of open access at a local level?
1. Access authorities are uniquely placed to take a lead on the local management of open access, having:
a. a range of powers which, if properly resourced, would enable them to facilitate and manage the new rights;
b. a complementary role, in most instances, for managing and improving the local rights of way network;
c. extensive experience of managing existing recreational access alongside nature conservation, heritage preservation, sporting and commercial interests;
d. in many instances, integrated and complementary responsibilities including transport, leisure, economic development, public safety, nature and heritage conservation;
e. experience, in many instances, of advising other public and private interests on facilitating and managing recreational access in the countryside; and
f. a local presence and local knowledge.
2. Government should confirm the expectation that access authorities adopt a lead role in managing the new access arrangements locally, publish detailed guidance on their functions and allocate resources commensurate with the task.
Commentary
There was unanimous agreement that access authorities should coordinate access management at a local level. Several members cited the integrated remit of local government in support of this conclusion and the text reflects this. Members also stressed the importance of adequate resources for access authorities to execute their functions and the new text emphasizes this.
The Forum is invited to endorse this position at the meeting.
How should access authorities approach their role?
1. Part of access authorities’ role should be strategic; they should identify areas of access land most in need of planning and support. This strategic role fits well with local highway authorities’ new duty to prepare Rights of Way Improvement Plans and with broader community planning functions.
2. Local access forums should assist their appointing authorities to identify their strategic objectives for open access and priorities for management. They should also provide regular and timely feedback on progress towards meeting these objectives.
3. The other part of access authorities’ role should be to advise and support individual land managers, based on their strategic assessment of local access priorities, and to devise management solutions where appropriate. Access authorities will need to involve other experts too, to devise management solutions on land with special wildlife considerations for example. Some authorities will have to adapt their existing structure in order to accommodate this expanded role on private land.
4. In areas subject to the greatest increase in visitor pressure following the introduction of the new right, access authorities will need to organise and resource warden or ranger services, in order both to provide a service to the visiting public, and to enable land managers to pursue their commercial activities without having to spend an unreasonable amount of time managing access. Such arrangements might involve both professional ranger services and voluntary help from interested members of the community. New funding will be required to ensure that access authorities meet these challenges.
5. Where resources cannot be found for informal management solutions, or where informal arrangements are deemed inadequate, it may be necessary to impose formal restrictions on access, in order to protect other land management interests (including nature conservation and heritage) or public safety.
6. The public will need to be notified of local access restrictions, for example, on the Countryside Agency’s website and through notices at entry points to the land. Where the land manager originates a formal restriction (using his discretionary powers for example) he should in principle be responsible for erecting notices on site to let the public know. The access authority should be prepared to help with this task, where it would place an unreasonable burden on the land manager. Central government should provide guidance on the use of notices, and funding to help cover the cost of materials.
7. Land managers should not in principle be expected to notify the public of restrictions originated by the relevant authority, for example for nature conservation purposes. Nature conservation restrictions should be notified locally by English Nature or by the access authority, on agreement with English Nature.
8. To clarify the extent to which access authorities are expected to act in accordance with their CRoW Act powers, each access authority should adopt the local equivalent of a PSA target for open access and rights of way objectives. This commitment should form, in effect, a contract between the access authority and its local access forum(s).
Commentary
There was broad consensus on the strategic, advisory and practical roles suggested for access authorities and agreement that local access forums should provide strategic advice on open access to their appointing authorities. Members stressed the importance of new funding to implement management solutions for open access.
Members endorsed the principle of a local target for access work agreed between the access authority and local access forum.
The Forum is invited to endorse these positions at the meeting.
Members asked for clarification on responsibilities for notifying the public of local restrictions, so we have added a position on this issue.
The Forum is invited to agree or amend this position at the meeting.
What support can central government provide for open access management?
1. Central government (including its agencies) should stimulate local management arrangements by:
a. clarifying expectations of access authorities and the roles of others involved;
b. piloting solutions, producing guidance[2] and promoting best practice; and
c. providing grant aid to support introductory, one-off measures in high-pressure areas as part of the initial implementation of the new right.
2. To this end, the Countryside Agency should develop guidance for land managers on:
a. using informal techniques and statutory restrictions to manage visitors (including risk assessment techniques and advice on liability);
b. notifying the public of local restrictions and other temporary local access arrangements.
3. The Agency should also take steps to demonstrate best practice, in partnership with access authorities and others with experience of managing open access.
Commentary
Members supported the role of central government defined in the paper and stressed the importance of a national grant aid programme to support the introduction of the new right.
The Forum is invited to endorse this position at the meeting.
How should open access management be financed?
1. Local people and visitors must be able to enjoy the new rights in ways that respect other interests on the land. Other prospects include better mental and physical well-being for local residents and income opportunities arising from open access as a visitor attraction.
2. For this to happen, local communities must recognize these benefits and demand local investment in management arrangements, which will secure them in the long-term. Local government must be persuaded through local democratic processes to allocate sufficient funds for the core services, which access authorities will need to provide. Local access forums should take a lead in lobbying for resources.
3. Government should help with this, by producing guidance setting out its expectations for access authorities clearly and by publishing its allocations to local government for open access work. Defra should also work with the Local Government Association to monitor access authorities’ performance at a national level.
4. Other public and private organizations should be persuaded to further their own interests and objectives by investing and/or encouraging investment in access improvements. These include, for example:
a. rural enterprise forums, as a means of developing rural business and services;
b. Local Strategic Partnerships, as a means of tackling cross-cutting issues such as health inequality and disadvantage;
c. regional decision-making committees of the Heritage Lottery Fund, as a means of promoting greater access to our natural and cultural heritage; and
d. individual landowners and businesses operating commercial enterprises, which can benefit from people visiting access land in the area.
5. Local access forums, access authorities and government agencies can all help to influence these wider agendas.
Commentary
Members recognized the potential benefits of open access to local communities and businesses but were divided over how access authorities should be resourced. Most members agreed that access authorities should secure funding for their role through local democratic processes and suggested that allocations to local government for access work should be published.
Members are invited to endorse this position at the meeting.
What role is there for a national grant aid scheme?
1. In some places patterns of visitor use will change significantly once the new rights commence. These areas may need some initial investment, especially in access infrastructure. Some infrastructure could be put in place before the new rights commence, but some will need to wait until patterns of use become clearer on the ground. The bedding-in period might last up to five years.
2. Independent research has identified limited opportunities to support open access through existing national schemes. A new national programme of grant aid is therefore required to help access authorities to tackle the peak in demand for investment during this period. This should be carefully targeted to encourage and complement local investment by:
a. providing capital grants for infrastructure in areas where patterns of use change significantly following commencement;
b. making grants conditional on some match funding from the access authority, or from local or regional investors;
c. making grants conditional on a plan, endorsed by the local access forum, for the long-term management of open access in the area;
d. having a clear exit strategy following commencement of the new rights with a maximum operating period in any area of 5 years, subject to a review after 4 years to assess future demand.
3. Grant aid should also be used on a strictly time-limited basis to help set up ongoing management arrangements, but only with a clear commitment by local interests, in particular access authorities to sustain these activities in the longer term. This would help access authorities to create or expand access advisory services and to set up management systems (such as ranger services) that demonstrate innovation or best practice.
Commentary
Members gave unanimous support for a new national programme of grant aid to support the introduction of the new arrangements. Most agreed that this should be predominantly for capital investment, with some support also to set up local arrangements for ongoing management, on a strictly time-limited basis. Most members supported the principle of making grants conditional on some match funding.
The Forum is invited to endorse these positions at the meeting.
Most members agreed that this programme should be time-limited, but that the period should be longer than the 2-3 years suggested in the original paper. We have extended the period to 5 years accordingly. Some members argued for a smaller, more permanent scheme to be retained after this period. We have introduced a proposal for a 4-year review, to examine the case for extending the scheme in some form.
The Forum is invited to agree or amend these positions at the meeting.
Andrew Chester
Wider Welcome team
March 2003
[1] For example, both the Forestry Commission and the Countryside Agency have a duty as relevant authorities to administer local access restrictions, in woodlands and outside National Parks respectively. This includes a duty to restrict access where necessary in order to protect nature conservation and heritage interests. The Countryside Agency also has a duty to provide both visitors and land managers with information on the nature and extent of their new rights and responsibilities. This has an indirect bearing on local access management, but is not addressed in this paper.
[2] Including guidance on access authorities’ use of their new powers, on funding sources, and on promoting the social and economic benefits of countryside access.
