Why fully opening up land access is the simplest way to protect the countryside

[Paul Mobbs]

A day out yesterday left me with the will to rant... enjoy!
(go to the web site for links and the pretty photos)

P.



http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/journal/index.html#20130826

The spectacle of the tourist honey-pot

Monday 26th August -- Brill, Buckinghamshire


Out for a day trip yesterday, off to see one of the local farms where
the food for our weekly food box is produced. On the way back we called
at Brill so the kid's could see my wife's ancestral home. We didn't get
out for a walk... not a lot of point really, it was rammed with cars and
people looking at the view.  Brill has a large common, open to all under
"right to roam" rules -- and which gives a view over a wide area if you
walk around it. Even so, nearly all the trippers were clustered around
the car park.

Irrespective of the "right to roam" in identified spots (all too rare in
lowland England in any case!), many people I talk to outdoors still have
the perspective that they're "not allowed" to stray from the path on
access land. Even around here on the hilly boundary between the
south-east and the east/west Midlands, I see very few people out
enjoying the countryside, even though there's ample space and paths for
them to do so.

The symptom was all to clearly seen yesterday on Snowdon, where people
queued for more than two hours to stand on the summit! --
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23848008

As Chris Bonnington said in this interview on the BBC, to use the BBC's
oft-used anti-promotional line, "other mountains are available". Even
so, it's only a very few peaks, and a very few areas, that people use.
And as he indicates, if you go just a little way-aways from the hubbub
you'll find a completely different kind of outdoor experience. People
like Chris Bonnington and I have a mindset which does not have
boundaries which deter access -- "we don't have fences in our minds".
Most people have been inculcated with the idea that 'the land is not
theirs' -- and that seeing a few small spots is the only option for
them if they wish to experience the outdoors.

We have to question why it is only a very few peaks/areas are being
hammered to destruction by the level of footfall on them. Otherwise
people's engagement with the natural world isn't simply damaging the
natural environment, it's creating an experience which is wholly
degraded and false. Many national parks and tourist spots are not
"countryside" -- they more like "urban lite".

The 'brown sign economy' has made certain spots honey-pots for tourists,
and it's damaging the very fabric of the natural resource which they're
trying to enjoy. That's not only because it's only a few spots are
perceived/marketed to have "value" -- it's because the tourist industry
can only extract money from the public by concentrating visitors in a
few places.

For me the great bugbear of issue is camping outdoors. Because people
feel that they can't dare camp on open land because they believe they'll
get in trouble, this restricts their range of access to those areas
where camping is readily available -- which brings us back to the
car-based 'brown sign economy' once more.

Far more areas of upland England/Wales would become accessible if people
could camp in the open. At the same time, the imperatives of backpacking
-- to take as little as possible -- then make public transport a far
more practical option 

England must adopt the same kind of access laws as Scotland, where not
just walking but also camping are freely permitted on open land. Only
then will we be able to change the public mind-set towards one which
believes that "the land is ours", and access it in a way which not only
respects its value, but enables them to really appreciate what that
value is.

-- 

"We are not for names, nor men, nor titles of Government,
nor are we for this party nor against the other but we are
for justice and mercy and truth and peace and true freedom,
that these may be exalted in our nation, and that goodness,
righteousness, meekness, temperance, peace and unity with
God, and with one another, that these things may abound."
(Edward Burrough, 1659 - from 'Quaker Faith and Practice')

Paul Mobbs, Mobbs' Environmental Investigations
3 Grosvenor Road, Banbury OX16 5HN, England
tel./fax (+44/0)1295 261864
email - mobbsey at gn.apc.org
website - http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/index.shtml
public key - http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/mobbsey_public_key-2013-2.asc

-- 

"We are not for names, nor men, nor titles of Government,
nor are we for this party nor against the other but we are
for justice and mercy and truth and peace and true freedom,
that these may be exalted in our nation, and that goodness,
righteousness, meekness, temperance, peace and unity with
God, and with one another, that these things may abound."
(Edward Burrough, 1659 - from 'Quaker Faith and Practice')

Paul Mobbs, Mobbs' Environmental Investigations
3 Grosvenor Road, Banbury OX16 5HN, England
tel./fax (+44/0)1295 261864
email - mobbsey at gn.apc.org
website - http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/index.shtml
public key - http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/mobbsey_public_key-2013-2.asc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/x-ygp-stripped
Size: 155 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://mailman.gn.apc.org/mailman/private/diggers350/attachments/20130827/8c118eb5/attachment.bin>