DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS
 
ENGLAND RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME AGRI-ENVIRONMENT SCHEMES – ACCESS REVIEW CONSULTATION PAPER, JULY 2002
 
RESPONSE FROM THE OPEN SPACES SOCIETY, SEPTEMBER 2002
 
Introduction
 
1.

The Open Spaces Society, founded in 1865, is Britain’s oldest national conservation body. A registered charity, we campaign to create and conserve common land, village greens, open spaces and rights of public access, in town and country, in England and Wales.

   
2.  Since many farmers and landowners are committing criminal offences by blocking, cropping and ploughing public paths, to the extent that one in four of the public paths in England is difficult to use, it is imperative that no grant is paid out of public funds to an owner or occupier when any path on his land is blocked or otherwise abused. DEFRA must set up a procedure whereby (a) all paths and access land on an applicant’s land are checked before grant is paid, and (b) they are regularly checked thereafter. DEFRA could either do this itself or pay local authorities or volunteers ring-fenced funds for this purpose.
   
3. Grants under Countryside Stewardship must not be for access per se, but provision of useful new access must be a requirement when grant is paid for another purpose.
   
4  Any access provided when grant is paid must be new, permanent, definitive access, not permissive access which is uncertain and which gives the public no protection. So paths must be created by creation agreements under s25 of the Highways Act 1980 and access by dedication under section 16 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.
   
  Countryside Stewardship access objectives
   
  Q1. Are the proposed updated objectives for Countryside Stewardship, which include a new objective relating to links with CRoW land, about right?
   
5. We agree with this, provided the new access is by definitive rights of way, not merely permissive access.
   
  Targeting agri-environment access
   
  Q2. How can the Countryside Stewardship consultation process be improved to ensure that access objectives, which reflect local needs, are included in county target statements?
   
6. Targeting can be carried out by using the local authorities’ access strategy and rights of way improvement plans. All the statutory consultees on public rights of way should also be consulted.
   
  Site selection and application appraisal
   
  Q3. Is the proposed addition to the selection criteria about right, or do they need further adjustment to reflect the relationship between access provided by agri-environment schemes and access land designated under the CRoW Act?
   
7.

We agree with this, provided the government does not pay for paths which are already highways but have not yet been shown on the definitive map. And all new access must be definitive not permissive.
   
  Q4. Is the scoring system about right or does it need to change to reflect the objectives and site selection criteria most closely?
   
8.  No comment
   
 

Q5. Have we got the balance right between access-only and multi-objective agreements?
   
9. No. The government must never pay for access per se, but it should be an automatic requirement for any countryside stewardship schemes relating to other issues.
   
  Publicising agri-environment access
   
  Q6. Can you suggest appropriate local and national access publicity channels that DEFRA might link up with to secure better publicity for its sites?
   
10. The only way that such access can be adequately publicised is by having a National Access Database, which will show how countryside stewardship access relates to other access.
   
  Educational access
   
  Q7. How could we improve the effectiveness of Countryside Stewardship educational access to better reflect local and national needs?
   
11. No comment.
   
  Q8. What other incentives might be offered to support educational access?
   
12.  No comment
   
  Payment structures and rates
   
  Q9. Could the payment structure be improved to help deliver the different types of access more effectively?
   
13. We submit that there must be no payment for access per se but that access provision must be an automatic requirement when payments are made for other reasons.
   
  Access options in ESAs
   
 

Q10. In the light of what is proposed for Countyrside Stewardship, is there scope for enhancing the access provisions within the ESA Scheme?
   
14. Before any grants are given for land in ESAs, all rights of way and access land on the applicant’s land must be in good order.
   
 

No payment should be made for access per se but access provision must be an automatic requirement when grants are paid for another purpose.