Countryside access curbs in England ‘cost six times’ Scots
| Malcolm Blackmore |
👍
1
Fri 7 Jun, 19:10 Countryside access curbs in England ‘cost six times’ Scotland’s right to roam URL REFUSE TO PASTE INTO CORRECT AREA - WHY? SEE END OF PASTED ARTICLE FOR URL ========================================================== Countryside access curbs in England ‘cost six times’ Scotland’s right to roam Exclusive: Data shows implementing policy that closes 92% of English countryside cost £69m over five years Helena Horton Hills around a lake. The Lake District national park in Cumbria. People in England are granted access only to certain landscape types, such as mountains. Photograph: David Lyons/Alamy England’s model for countryside access cost six times more to implement than Scotland’s right to roam policy, new figures reveal. In England, only 8% of the countryside is open for walking, picnicking and other outdoor activities. This includes footpaths, the coastal path, mountains, moors, heaths and downs. In Scotland, all of the countryside is open for access as long as guidelines are followed such as leaving no trace and not harming farmland. Official figures analysed by the Right to Roam campaign reveal that implementing the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (Crow) cost about £69m over the course of a five-year parliament. By comparison, statistics published by the Scottish government show that implementing the access provisions in the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 cost only £11m over the same length of time. The reason Crow cost so much to put in place was because it granted people access only to certain landscape types: mountains, moorland, heaths, downs and commons. This meant civil servants had to spend five years and millions of pounds mapping those landscapes, and then responding to thousands of appeals from landowners disputing the maps. It was much cheaper to implement the Scottish laws, which exempted only private gardens and fields where crops were growing. Guy Shrubsole from the Right to Roam campaign, who uncovered the figures, said: “When Labour was last in power in both England and Scotland, it expanded the public’s access to nature in both nations – but it chose a more sensible and cost-effective approach in Scotland. Not only do Scots enjoy a far better system of access rights than we do in England, it was also cheaper to implement. “Rather than spend millions of pounds on a piecemeal extension of the Crow Act, the next government should learn from Scotland’s experience and legislate for a right of responsible access to the majority of England’s countryside. The money saved can be spent instead on public education campaigns and local access rangers to ensure roaming is done responsibly.” Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. No major political party is expected to have a right to roam policy in its manifesto. Labour initially committed to a Scottish-style right to roam but made a U-turn after pressure from landowners. |