OSS Home page

 NATIONAL NEWS 

National News 2007 and 2008
(excluding CROW Act news)
  
Older National News 1999 to 2006 inclusive

CROW Act and Local News stories
 

Index to National News stories 2007 & 2008:

CREATING A POLITICAL VOICE FOR THE COMMONS - 22 July 2008

FIRST EVER GIANT WIND TURBINE IN A NATIONAL PARK IS TO BE BUILT - 22 July 2008

REPEALING THE CUT-OFF DATE TO SAVE OUR HISTORIC PATHS - 14 July 2008

INSPIRING PEOPLE TO ENJOY THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - 14 July 2008

SURVEY OF STRUCTURES ON PATHS - 2 July 2008

GREEN ALERT! CAMPAIGN - 2 May 2008

GO GRAB A GREEN FOR CHRISTMAS - 21 December 2007

NEW POWER FOR PUBLIC TO PROTECT WELSH COMMONS - 11 October 2007

NEW LAW TO PROTECT COMMONS - 10 October 2007

ACCESS FOR EQUESTRIANS - 28 September 2007

THE LEAST-RESTRICTIVE OPTION - 12 September 2007

UNFAIR PROPOSALS FOR PUBLIC PATHS - 12 September 2007

NEW LAW FOR GREENS COMMENCES IN WALES - 6 September 2007

NATIONAL TRUST'S FOUNDER CELEBRATES CENTENARY FOR COMMON LAND - 29 August 2007

HOUSE OF LORDS RULING: VICTORY FOR PATH USERS - 25 June 2007

COASTAL ACCESS CONSULTATION LAUNCHED - 25 June 2007

WE CORRECT COCK-UP AT PM'S COUNTRY HOME - 11 May 2007

TOUGHER PROTECTION FOR COMMON LAND - 16 April 2007

NEW LAW OPENS DOOR TO SAVING GREEN SPACES - 6 April 2007

KINDER 75 - 21 February 2007

CALL FOR COASTAL ACCESS-CORRIDOR - 20 February 2007

FOOTPATH FIGHT IN CROSSRAIL BILL - 1 February 2007

CALL FOR UNIVERSAL SPEED-LIMIT WHERE UNFENCED ROADS CROSS COMMONS - 3 January 2007

to: Earlier National news

2008

CREATING A POLITICAL VOICE FOR THE COMMONS
22 July 2008
top of page

Policy panel at the 12th bi-annual conference of the
International Association for the Study of Commons

Contribution from Kate Ashbrook, General Secretary of the Open Spaces Society

To read the text of the contribution

CLICK HERE

FIRST EVER GIANT WIND TURBINE IN A NATIONAL PARK IS TO BE BUILT
22 July 2008
 top of page

National and regional environmental groups have criticized the government’s decision today to grant permission for a giant wind turbine at Glyndebourne in the South Downs. The turbine will be the first industrial-scale turbine ever to be built in a designated national park.

Ruth Chambers of the Campaign for National Parks, a member of the South Downs Environmental Protection Consortium, said “We are hugely disappointed by the government’s decision in this case which our view fails to appreciate the national importance of the South Downs landscape. However, we are heartened by the government’s acknowledgement that the Glyndebourne turbine is a special case because it is a unique enterprise in a unique location. This sends a very clear message to would be turbine developers that in general nationally important landscapes such as the South Downs will be protected from large wind schemes.”

She continued: “It is encouraging that the Secretary of State, in recognising the importance of protecting our finest landscapes, has reiterated the government’s commitment to their protection. However, in his report, the inquiry Inspector has acknowledged the development would have significant adverse impacts on the local countryside and on walkers. Added to this, the Inspector notes that the development will generate low levels of energy. So on many counts, we find the government’s decision very puzzling.”

Hazel Blears, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, has imposed several conditions which must be met before the wind turbine is built, including the closure of Glyndebourne’s helipad, and a programme of measures to encourage the use of non-car modes of transport. The Consortium welcomes the Secretary of State’s recognition that the carbon footprint of Glyndebourne’s visitors should be tackled, a point which we argued during the public inquiry which took place earlier in 2008.

Tom Oliver of the Campaign to Protect Rural England said: “Although it is good that the government is taking the issue of climate change more seriously, in our view this huge wind turbine at Glyndebourne is the wrong development in the wrong place. Skyscraper-sized machines should be built out at sea or in otherwise industrialised landscapes, not high up in our most valued landscapes.”

Jacquetta Fewster of the South Downs Society said: “We renew our offer to help Glyndebourne to find better ways of reducing its impact on the environment. Transport is the biggest element of Glyndebourne’s carbon emissions. We are pleased the government has said the helipad must close before a wind turbine is built, but we again urge Glyndebourne to close their helipad and draw up a travel plan immediately. It is vital that increasing numbers of Glyndebourne’s visitors are encouraged to use more sustainable means of transport than cars and helicopters.”

Malcolm McDonnell of the Ramblers’ Association said: “Climate change is a key environmental issue facing us today. But there are so many ways we could be reducing our carbon emissions which would have a negligible impact on our last-remaining areas of unspoilt and beautiful countryside.”

The South Downs Environmental Protection Consortium will be studying the decision in detail over the next few days to ensure no errors in law have been made which would allow it to be challenged in the High Court.

The South Downs Environmental Protection Consortium was set up to discourage industrial-scale development on the South Downs and comprises the Campaign to Protect Rural England, the Campaign for National Parks, the Open Spaces Society, the Ramblers’ Association and the South Downs Society. It will continue to oppose turbines across the downs if they are inappropriate in scale or location.

The planning application was submitted to Lewes District Council in January 2007. In July 2007, Councillors agreed they wished to approve the scheme despite advice from their own officers they should not do so. However, the government felt the scheme might conflict with national policies on important matters so they ordered a public inquiry. The inquiry took place in February and March 2008. Objectors to the scheme included the South Downs Environmental Protection Consortium, the government’s advisory body on the countryside Natural England, the South Downs Joint Committee, parish councils and local residents.
 

REPEALING THE CUT-OFF DATE TO SAVE OUR HISTORIC PATHS
14 July 2008
top of page
 

The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 introduced a provision whereby from 1 January 2026, it will no longer be possible to add to the definitive map of public rights of way routes whose existence depends on historical evidence. Natural England and the Countryside Council for Wales were supposed to undertake a project, Discovering Lost Ways, to ensure that all those routes were claimed before 2026, but that project has foundered and it is highly unlikely that many routes will be claimed before then.

To help to safeguard our historic paths, the Ramblers’ Association has put a petition on the No 10 website, calling for the repeal of the 2026 cut-off date.

The address is:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/repeal2026/

Sign up today!

INSPIRING PEOPLE TO ENJOY THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
 – A NEW VISION FOR OUR GREEN SPACES
14 July 2008
top of page

Speech delivered by Guy Thompson, Executive Director, External Affairs for Natural England at our annual general meeting on 1 July 2008. To view a transcript of the speech, click the link below.

Click Here

SURVEY OF STRUCTURES ON PATHS
2 July 2008
top of page
 

In response to a resolution at our 2007 annual general meeting, we have sent out a survey form to all highway authorities and other local authorities in England, to ascertain their policies and practices in relation to structures on public paths. To view the survey, click the link below.
 

Survey

GREEN ALERT! CAMPAIGN
2 May 2008
top of page
 

Our Green Alert! campaign draws planning authorities’ attention to the need to look out for registered commons and village greens when considering and determining planning applications.

Planning applications are sometimes granted which adversely affect commons and greens, and the applicant is ignorant of the law governing these precious places.

So we have written to every planning authority in England and Wales, asking that, where it appears that a planning application might affect a registered common or village green, the authority checks whether it does, and takes account of the relevant laws governing these areas.

For commons, this will mean that the applicant may need, in addition to planning consent, the permission of the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, or of the National Assembly for Wales, for works on the common.

For village greens, works will be unlawful unless they are for the better enjoyment of the green by local people.

Our letters to the planning authorities can be found here

Letter to English Planning Authorities                   Letter to Welsh Planning Authorities

We suggest that you write a similar letter to your borough, district or unitary councillor, urging him or her to support our campaign.
 

2007

Go grab a green for christmas
21 December 2007 top of page
 

‘There are hidden town and village greens everywhere,’ says our general secretary, Kate Ashbrook.  ‘Greens are those pieces of land which people have used for years to kick a ball about, walk the dog or go blackberrying—anything from a few square yards to something bigger.  What matters is to get them registered: once registered, greens are protected from development and become ours to enjoy for ever.⁽¹⁾

‘Twenty years of informal recreation, without let or hindrance, is all the evidence you need. There are thousands of pieces of land that qualify. And to all the thousands who will be taking a digestive walk this Christmas, we say go grab a green. You could make this Christmas one that people enjoying the green will remember for years to come.’

The society publishes a handy guide, Getting Greens Registered, to help people through the process.’

Kate continues: ‘This year alone, we know that greens have been registered at

‘These successes are due to the persistence and energy of members of the Open Spaces Society. And there are probably many others of which we are unaware,’ says Kate.

‘In some cases, registration as a green has saved the land from development.

‘In 2007 we dealt with nearly 200 queries about registering land as greens.  The society was among those campaigning for these provisions to be included in the Commons Bill 2006. They have now been introduced in England and Wales, and they make it easier for land to be registered as a green.

‘To find out if land has been registered, ask your county or unitary council commons registration authority.

‘So don’t sit around this Christmas—get out there and enjoy your local open space, but also ensure that it is protected for ever,’ Kate declares.


⁽¹⁾ Land can be registered as a town or village green if it has been used by local people for ‘lawful sports and pastimes’ (ie informal recreation) for 20 years, freely and openly. The registration authority is the county or unitary council.

Any person may apply to the registration authority to register land as a green. Once registered, it is protected from encroachment and development by section 12 of the Inclosure Act 1845 and section 29 of the Commons Act 1876. Local people have a right to enjoy the land for recreation

Section 15 of the Commons Act 2006 clarifies and updates the law on registering land as a green.
 

New power for public to protect Welsh commons
11 October 2007  top of page

The public has a new power to take court action against unlawful works on many Welsh commons. ⁽¹⁾

Says Nicola Hodgson, our case officer: ‘We have long campaigned for this law. Too many of our commons are abused, by unlawful fencing, buildings and car parks, erected without the consent of the National Assembly for Wales. Yet the public has been powerless to act. Until now, we have had to rely on local authorities to take action but they have been unwilling to do so because for them it is only a power and not a duty.

‘Now, members of the public, including our society, may apply to the county court for the removal of unlawful works erected on many commons in Wales since 28 June 2005.   While this is a great step forward, we are sorry that the powers are limited to encroachments since that date. Our list of examples of unlawful works precede that date. But we shall now be on the look out for new works erected without consent, so that we can take swift action,’ Nicola continues.

‘We have published an information sheet telling people how to take action, and we shall be pleased to encourage our members and others who want to exercise their new power.

‘Unfortunately the new provisions probably cannot be used against unauthorised fencing on Whitelye Moor Common at Chepstow, and Lower Common near Gilwern in Monmouthshire, nor against the fencing and fir trees on the common at Penybont in Powys or the car park on Clyne Common at Mumbles.  These are some glaring examples of common-land abuse, but we suspect that they were all erected before 28 June 2005. They illustrate the type of problems which, if they were to occur now, would be actionable by the public.

‘We hope people will make good use of their new powers, which will help to restore our commons to their former, unspoilt state,’ Nicola concludes.


^(1). Paragraph 6 of schedule 4 of the Commons Act 2006, which came into force on 6 September 2007, enables any person to enforce against unlawful works constructed on common land in Wales after 28 June 2005. The common land must have been subject to common rights on 1 January 1926 to be eligible.
 

New law to protect commons
10 October 2007   top of page

From 1 October the public has a new power to take court action against unlawful works on any English common. To be lawful, works need the consent of the Secretary of State for Environment. The new law is section 38 of the Commons Act 2006 which replaces section 194 of the Law of Property Act 1925.⁽¹⁾

Says Kate Ashbrook, our general secretary: ‘At last we have the right to go to court for the removal of unlawful works on any common in England. The new law clarifies which works are unlawful: previously this was unclear.

‘Now we know that fencing, buildings, structures, ditches, trenches, embankments and any other works which prevent or impede access to the common must have the consent of the Secretary of State for Environment, otherwise they are unlawful. Furthermore, new solid surfaces on the common, such as a car-park or access road, also need consent.  This should be a safeguard against the suburbanisation of, and insidious encroachment on, our commons. Too many of them are degraded by fencing or hard surfacing which has no permission.  And mineral workings, such as quarries, on commons are no longer exempt from these rules, they too need ministerial consent.

‘We are urging the public to identify good examples of recent unlawful works, so that we can test this new law in the courts.  We should have preferred the new measures to be retrospective, as they will not help to clear existing encroachments. But from now on we shall be vigilant and swift to act against any new excrescences on our precious commons—in court if necessary,’ Kate concludes.

Further information is contained in our information sheets C1 and C2


⁽¹⁾ Sections 38 to 44 of the Commons Act 2006, which come into force on 1 October, replace section 194 of the Law of Property Act 1925. They cover the consent procedure for works on common land. Such works are known as ‘restricted works’ and include fencing, buildings, structures, ditches, trenches, embankments and other works which prevent or impede access, as well as new solid surfaces such as for a car park or access road. These works are unlawful without the consent of the Secretary of State for Environment. The Open Spaces Society is consulted on all applications. In giving consent, the environment secretary will take account of the interests of the neighbourhood and the public interest, among other things.

Section 41 gives the public the right to go to the county court to seek the removal of works erected since 1 October on any common in England. The new law has not yet taken effect in Wales.
 

Access for equestrians
28 September 2007 top of page

Petition the Prime Minister to include access for equestrians in all new access legislation, including the current proposals for access to the English Coast.   (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/equestrianaccess)

The least-restrictive option
12 September 2007 top of page

We have issued guidance on how to reduce unnecessary and undesirable structures, such as gates and stiles, on public paths.

Says Chris Beney, who has long campaigned in Hertfordshire for paths free from clutter:

‘For many people who are walking for pleasure, stiles and gates across public paths are a barrier. If you are arthritic, you may find it impossible to climb a stile, or to open a stiff gate. Many of these structures are unnecessary and should be removed.

 

‘The Open Spaces Society has published an information sheet, Removing and Improving Path-paraphernalia, setting out clearly how to go about identifying the structures, establishing their status and, where appropriate, getting them removed or altered. Some of these structures are lawful, but many are unlawful, having been erected without the consent of the highway authority.⁽¹⁾

‘Government is committed to the rule of using the least-restrictive option on paths, but this is not often followed in practice, despite there being a British Standard⁽²⁾ which gives clear guidance on how to achieve it. The society is urging anyone who enjoys walking in the countryside to report to the highway authority [county or unitary council] structures which they find inconvenient, and to campaign for their removal,’ says Chris.

1. The highway authority (county or unitary council) may authorise gates or stiles on a public right of way for the efficient use of the land for agriculture, which includes horseyculture. Clearly, though, the growing of crops does not require gates or stiles across a path.

2. The British Standard is BS5709:2006 ISBN 0 48107 7580.

Unfair proposals for public paths
12 September 2007 top of page

We have deplored proposals from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to require local authorities to give greater priority to moving paths to suit landowners, and less priority to getting paths opened up as required by law.

The society has responded to Defra’s consultation on the implementation of new measures which direct local authorities to consider applications for path changes from landowners and managers within a tight timetable⁽¹⁾. At present authorities may use their discretion as to the priority they give this.

Says Kate Ashbrook, our general secretary: ‘We oppose the introduction of this new law and have called on Defra to revoke it.  Local authorities do not have the resources now to carry out their legal duties of getting all paths in good order and the official record of public paths up to date. If they are given a new duty, of having to determine, within a specified time, proposals from landowners to alter paths, they will find it even harder to fulfil their vital existing duties of maintaining and improving the network. Yet those duties should have priority over altering routes to suit landowners and land managers.

‘There is no need to change the law. If landowners and occupiers wish to move or close paths, they may apply to do so now. However, some authorities rightly give low priority to this, preferring to concentrate on their legal duties.  These proposals are heavily biased towards landowners and occupiers. There is no equivalent right for the public to apply for the creation of paths in the public interest.

‘Moreover, authorities will incur significant extra costs, only part of which they can recoup from the applicant.  It is wrong to impose on hard-pressed local authorities a set of complex new duties for altering paths, when the existing network needs a large amount of work done on it. These proposals are against the public interest and we shall continue to fight them,’ Kate concludes.

(View the society's response to the consultation).

⁽¹⁾ The measures are contained in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which inserted new provisions into the Highways Act 1980. The consultation is Public rights of way – consultation on implementation of the right to apply for orders to extinguish and divert public rights of way, and associated rights of appeal.

If someone wants to close or move a public right of way at present, they apply to the local authority who normally consults interested parties. If it decides to go ahead with the change, it makes an order, which is published in the press. If there are objections, the matter is referred to the Secretary of State for Environment to determine. The authority has a discretion as to whether it considers and makes orders, this is a mere power.

The new law would enable owners, lessees and occupiers of land used for agriculture, forestry or for the breeding or keeping of horses, and school proprietors, to apply to a local authority or national park authority for a public path order permanently to extinguish or divert a public right of way. The right of appeal would enable applicants to appeal to the Secretary of State (a) if the authority refuses to make the order applied for, or fails to consider it within four months, and (b) if the authority makes an order but refuses to confirm it, or submit it to the Secretary of State, within two months.
 

New law for greens commences in Wales
6 September 2007 top of page

The new law for registering village greens has commenced in Wales.⁽¹⁾  This law replaces and clarifies the previous law on registering land as a town or village green,⁽²⁾ where it has been used by local people, as of right,⁽³⁾ for recreation for 20 years.

Says our case officer, Nicola Hodgson: ‘This clarification of the law will make it easier for people to apply to register land as a town or village green, thereby saving it from development and securing its enjoyment by the local population.⁽⁴⁾

‘The new provisions limit the ways in which a landowner can defeat an application. They provide a period of grace after the use of land, as of right, has been ended by a landowner, during which an application can be made. Before now, the use had to continue right up to the date of registration, which meant that landowners could thwart an application by erecting a notice saying “keep out”.  The provisions ensure that a landowner granting permission for use of the land when there has already been 20 years use as of right cannot defeat an application.

‘Any period of statutory closure of land, for example during foot-and-mouth disease, is now disregarded when calculating the 20-year period of use.

‘Furthermore, thanks to the Open Spaces Society’s proposed amendments to the Commons Bill, for the first time landowners will be able to dedicate land as a village green. We shall encourage them to do so,’ concludes Nicola.

⁽¹⁾ Land can be registered as a town or village green if it has been used by local people for ‘lawful sports and pastimes’ (ie informal recreation) for 20 years, freely and openly. The registration authority is the unitary council.

⁽²⁾ The law is contained in section 15 of the Commons Act 2006, which comes into effect on 6 September 2007. It took effect in England on 6 April 2007.

⁽³⁾ Use as of right, means that the use was without being secret, without force and without permission from the landowner.

⁽⁴⁾ Any person may apply to the registration authority to register land as a green. Once registered, it is protected from encroachment and development by section 12 of the Inclosure Act 1845 and section 29 of the Commons Act 1876. Local people have a right to enjoy the land for recreation.
 

National Trust's founder celebrates centenary for common land
29 August 2007 top of page

To celebrate the centenary of the National Trust Act 1907 on 21 August, the trust’s founder, the Open Spaces Society, is calling on the trust to raise the profile of its common land. This forms a quarter of the trust’s 620,000-acre property portfolio.

The Act introduced an important provision requiring the trust ‘at all times’ to keep its common land ‘unenclosed and unbuilt on as open spaces for the recreation and enjoyment of the public’ (section 29).
Says our chairman, Rodney Legg, who is also its appointee on the National Trust council: ‘It was largely to save commons that the trust was founded, and many of them are still Cinderella cases.  We call for more projects to keep commons accessible and unenclosed, as vital buffer-zones between town and country.

‘The 1907 Act was an important milestone for the trust because it enabled it to declare its land inalienable, which means that it cannot be taken from the trust without parliamentary approval. It also enabled it to make by-laws on its land,’ Rodney explains. ‘But for the Open Spaces Society, the key section is section 29 which dictates how the trust must care for its common land and provide access to it.

‘The 1907 Act was drafted by the then solicitor to both the trust and the Open Spaces Society, Sir Robert Hunter. We believe that Sir Robert’s experience on Hindhead Common in Surrey inspired him to include section 29. The society, with assistance from its secretary Lawrence Chubb (who had been the trust’s first salaried secretary) had just concluded its purchase, thereby saving it from the threat of gravel digging; Sir Robert was chairman of its local committee.  Members of the society went on to launch appeals with the result that more than 5,000 acres of land were donated to the trust.

‘On the centenary of the 1907 Act, we should remember in particular the Act’s important contribution to securing our commons, for landscapes, history, wildlife and public enjoyment,’ Rodney concludes.

 

House of Lords ruling: victory for path users
25 June 2007 top of page

The House of Lords has today ruled that landowners cannot use secret evidence to prevent a path being claimed as a public highway. The Ramblers’ Association appealed to the House of Lords against an earlier ruling (known as ‘the Dorset case’) which allowed landowners to use evidence, which had not been made public, to imply they intended paths to be private. Countless path claims were lost because of this, but now the doors have been reopened by the Law lords. The judgment in R (on the application of Godmanchester Town Council) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and R (on the application of Drain) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, may be read at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldjudgmt/jd070620/godman-1.htm
 

Coastal access consultation launched
25 June 2007 top of page

The Open Spaces Society welcomes the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ consultation on coastal access in England, and is supporting the option of a coastal-access corridor around the entire coast.

The consultation paper and other documents are on the Defra website at http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/coast-access/index.htm
 

We correct cock-up at pm’s country home
11 May 2007 top of page

Beacon Hill - access land

We have corrected a cock-up by the Home Office which is implementing the new law to make trespass a criminal offence at the Prime Minister’s country home, Chequers in Buckinghamshire.  On 23 March, the Home Office laid before Parliament an order which defines the land around Chequers, and other royal, parliamentary and government sites, as areas where the new offence of criminal trespass will take effect, from 1 June 2007.⁽¹⁾

When the legislation was going through parliament, the Home Office Minister Baroness Scotland said ‘It is very unlikely that member of the public will be denied access to any land which they currently enjoy.’⁽²⁾  When the order was published, we were dismayed to discover that some public access-land had been included in the new criminal trespass zone.⁽³⁾  This was part of Beacon Hill—a bold, grassy promontory on the Chiltern escarpment—which had been mapped as access land under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.⁽⁴⁾  Beacon Hill is half a mile north-west of Chequers.

We immediately drew this error to the attention of the Home Office. The Home Office admitted its

 mistake and, on 4 May, laid a further order before parliament to amend the boundary so that no public - access land will be included within the designated site.⁽⁵⁾

Says our general secretary Kate Ashbrook: ‘Fortunately we spotted this error in time and the Home Office has admitted it got it wrong and has been able to rectify its mistake. This new law of criminal trespass on designated sites is deeply worrying and we shall have to watch it closely.’


⁽¹⁾ The new offence of criminal trespass is created by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. Trespass is normally only a civil offence.

⁽²⁾ Baroness Scotland was responding to Lord (Alan) Haworth who, supported by the Open Spaces Society and the Ramblers’ Association, was opposing the criminal trespass provisions of the bill.

⁽³⁾ This was despite a statement in the letter accompanying the order that ‘Members of the public have not been denied any access rights that they previously enjoyed at any site designated by this order.’

⁽⁴⁾ Since October 2005 the public has had a right to walk on most of Beacon Hill, under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

⁽⁵⁾ The correction is contained in Statutory Instrument 2007 no 1387, The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (Designated Sites under Section 128) (Amendment) Order 2007 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/20071387.htm
 

Tougher protection for common land
16 April 2007 top of page

We have called on government to give tougher protection to common land when it implements the new Commons Act 2006. The society has responded to a consultation from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs about the new consent procedure for works on commons in England.⁽¹⁾

Says Kate Ashbrook, general secretary of the Open Spaces Society: ‘The aim must be for our beautiful, historic commons to remain open and unenclosed, as they have done for centuries. Works should only be permitted where there is a clear public benefit.  The society is notified of all applications for works on common land and we object unless there is an overriding need for the proposals, and no alternative means of achieving the outcome—which must be in the public interest.

‘We urge anyone contemplating works on common land to consult widely at an early stage, in accordance with the recommendations in A Common Purpose, a guide to managing commons which was published jointly by the society, Defra, Natural England and the National Trust in September 2005.

‘The society is concerned that the Commons Act allows for some works to be exempt from the need to obtain consent. Defra has consulted on the list of exempt works.  We want the list of exemptions to be very limited. We value the safeguard of the Secretary of State’s investigation of proposed works. It is crucial that proper regard is had to the public interest in commons, for their access and recreation benefit, as well as for their landscape, wildlife, habitats and archaeology.

‘Commons are very special places and should be subject to special safeguards,’ Kate concludes.


(1). Part 3 of the Commons Act 2006 sets out a new procedure for granting consent for works on common land. Defra has consulted the public on how this will work. Restricted works on commons require the consent of the Secretary of State for Environment in England. These are works which prevent or impede access to, or over, common land, including fencing, buildings and other structures, ditches and embankments and roads or tracks. In granting consent, the Secretary of State must have regard to the public interest, among other interests, and this includes nature conservation, landscape, archaeology and public access. The Open Spaces Society, as the leading organisation concerned with the protection of common land, is notified of all applications.
 

New law opens door to saving green spaces
6 April 2007   top of page

The Orchard, Worle, Weston-super-Mare, North Somerset, registered in 2005.  Photo:  Steve Morgan

On Good Friday a new law for registering village greens came into effect.⁽¹⁾  This law replaces and clarifies the previous law on registering land as a town or village green,⁽²⁾ where it has been used by local people, as of right,⁽³⁾ for recreation for 20 years.

Says Nicola Hodgson, our case officer: 'This clarification of the law will make it easier for people to apply to register land as a town or village green, thereby saving it from development and securing its enjoyment by the local population.⁽⁴⁾

‘The new provisions limit the ways in which a landowner can defeat an application. They provide a period of grace after the use of land, as of right, has been ended by a landowner, during which an application can be made. Before now, the use had to continue right up to the date of registration, which meant that landowners could thwart an application by erecting a notice saying “keep out”.

The Chase, King's Lynn, Norfolk, registered in 2005  Photo:  Steve Morgan

‘The provisions ensure that a landowner granting permission for use of the land when there has already been 20 years use as of right cannot defeat an application.

‘Any period of statutory closure of land, for example during foot-and-mouth disease, is now disregarded when calculating the 20-year period of use.

‘Furthermore, thanks to the Open Spaces Society’s proposed amendments to the Commons Bill, for the first time landowners will be able to dedicate land as a village green. We shall encourage them to do so,’ concludes Nicola.
 

⁽¹⁾ Land can be registered as a town or village green if it has been used by local people for ‘lawful sports and pastimes’ (ie informal recreation) for 20 years, freely and openly. The registration authority is the county or unitary council.

⁽²⁾ The law is contained in section 15 of the Commons Act 2006, which comes into effect on 6 April 2007. Full details can be found at http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/issues/common/town-villagegreens/index.htm

⁽³⁾ Use as of right, means that the use was without being secret, without force and without permission from the landowner.

⁽⁴⁾ Any person may apply to the registration authority to register land as a green. Once registered, it is protected from encroachment and development by section 12 of the Inclosure Act 1845 and section 29 of the Commons Act 1876. Local people have a right to enjoy the land for recreation
 

Kinder 75
21 February 2007  top of page

This year is the 75th anniversary of the Kinder Scout mass trespass. There will be celebrations at New Mills town hall on the evening of Saturday 21 April, and our general secretary is among the speakers. There is also a whole programme of events. Kinder website www.kindertrespass75.com

Call for coastal access-corridor
20 February 2007  top of page

A coalition of Britain’s leading outdoor organisations is calling for Natural England to recommend ministers to introduce a permanent, multi-user, right of access around England’s beautiful coastline. The Natural England board meets in Sheffield on 21 February to thrash out its policy on coastal access.

The Ramblers’ Association (RA), British Canoe Union, British Mountaineering Council, British Caving Association, CTC, Central Council of Physical Recreation, Equestrian Access Forum, International Mountain Biking Association UK and the Open Spaces Society have joined forces to lobby for inclusive access rights along the coast on behalf of the public.

The group is calling for a coastal zone - where informal and responsible recreation rights are guaranteed - which will promote people’s health and wellbeing and generate income for local communities. In protecting the coast for access we also make it more able to withstand the impact of climate change and rising sea-levels.

Within the zone, a code of practice should define the new access and set out rights and responsibilities. It is important that access can be regulated to protect wildlife, and legitimate privacy issues and to take account of coastal developments. New grant schemes should improve the management of coastal land and increase the benefits for wildlife, landowners and the public. And there should be new planning guidance for the coast.

Link to  an opinion, entitled 'Coast for the most', from our general secretary, Kate Ashbrook, which appeared in our Spring 2007 edition of Open Space
 

Footpath fight in Crossrail Bill
1 February 2007  top of page

Footpath over Dog Kennel Bridge.  Photo:  Paul Graham

The society and the Ramblers’ Association petitioned against the Crossrail Bill because of our concerns for certain paths and open spaces along the route, which runs between Maidenhead and Heathrow airport in the west, and Shenfield and Greenwich in the east. In particular, we objected to Crossrail’s proposal to stop up the footpath over Dog Kennel Bridge which crosses the railway at Iver in Bucks, without providing a suitable alternative.

Eugene Suggett from the Ramblers’ Association, Paul Graham, a local resident and footpath secretary of the Iver and District Countryside Association, and Glenda Collins, clerk of Iver Parish Council, appeared on behalf of our two organisations before the House of Commons parliamentary committee on the bill in January. Eugene and Paul had previously appeared last July, when the committee asked them to go away and discuss a solution with Crossrail.

Stile on the footpath over Dog Kennel Bridge.  Photo: Paul Graham

Although the footpath over Dog Kennel Bridge is not on the definitive map, we argued that it serves a useful purpose and that, if it is stopped up, it will leave culs de sac on existing rights of way and require a 1.5 km detour on busy roads. It is a pleasant path, offering views south to Windsor Castle. Crossrail claimed that people did not use it, but we disputed this, pointing to a stile next to the gate which encourages use. Crossrail claims that it needs to remove the bridge in order to expand the railway and that its replacement would be too expensive.

Since last July, Crossrail had come up with a proposed alternative route, but we considered this to be inferior, involving a walk on the road to the Bison industrial site, alongside the railway line. We argued instead for a path which directly links the Grand Union Canal and the paths which lead from it, and Iver station. We argued strongly for this at the hearing, without prejudice to our preferred position of retaining Dog Kennel Bridge. The decision of the committee is awaited.

Link to the petition (no 91) and evidence from the society and the Ramblers' Association.

Call for universal speed-limit where unfenced roads cross commons
3 January 2007 top of page

We have called for speed restrictions where unfenced roads cross common land.  We have written to transport ministers in England and Wales advocating a universal speed-limit of no more than 40 miles an hour for unfenced roads across common land. Where the commons are close to towns or villages, an existing speed-limit zone should be extended to include the common.

Explains Kate Ashbrook, general secretary of the society: ‘Commons are important for their history, wildlife and opportunities for quiet recreation. Too many are now crossed by busy roads.  In order to reintroduce grazing animals to benefit the habitat for wildlife and public access, the owners or managers (often a conservation body such as the National Trust or a wildlife trust) have to erect fencing to separate the stock from the speeding traffic.  We should much prefer the traffic to be slowed than the common to be fenced—fencing is an eyesore and a physical and psychological barrier to public access. People should be able to enter the common at any point from the road, in accordance with their right under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and other legislation which gives the public the right to roam on commons. Even if gates and stiles are provided, the fencing is still a severe barrier to access,’ Kate declares.

‘Commons are traditionally open and unenclosed, and fencing destroys that historic concept.  Fencing on a common requires the consent of the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in England, and the National Assembly for Wales in Wales, under section 194 of the Law of Property Act 1925. The Open Spaces Society is informed of every application. We object unless there is an overriding need for the fencing which cannot be met by alternative means.

‘Recently we have been consulted about many applications for fencing of roads across commons. In some cases we objected, in others we had, reluctantly, to accept that there was currently no alternative solution⁽¹⁾.  However, if there was a universal, speed-limit of, say, 40mph where unfenced roads cross commons, there would be much less need for fencing. Of course such a speed limit would have to be enforced,’ argues Kate.

‘Excellent examples have been set in the New Forest and in the Dartmoor National Park where there are 40 mile-per-hour speed limit on the unfenced roads across the commons. Recently, the Dartmoor Livestock Protection Society and Devon County Council have supported the Dartmoor National Park Authority in providing flashing signs to remind the speeding motorist to slow down.  If this works on Dartmoor, it should work on other commons too.

‘A recent Department for Transport circular, 01/2006, recommends traffic authorities to set a 40 mile per hour speed limit in rural areas “where there is a strong environmental or landscape reason…”. This shouldn’t be left to the traffic authorities, the department should set such a speed limit for roads across all commons because there is a strong environmental and landscape reason to do so.  A universal speed-limit would tell people that commons are special—historic, unaltered landscapes where animals may graze and the public may wander in peace,’ Kate concludes.


⁽¹⁾   Examples of applications for fencing of commons crossed by roads are as follows: