WILTSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
NO. 24
ENVIRONMENT ADVISORY PANEL
13th MARCH 2002
PROPOSALS FOR GUIDANCE FROM COUNTRYSIDE AGENCY
ON LOCAL ACCESS MANAGEMENT, EXCLUSIONS
AND RESTRICTIONS
1. To
advise the Panel of proposed guidance from the Countryside Agency (CA) on
managing Access Land, including Restrictions and Exclusions.
2. The
Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has produced Draft
Regulations for the management of Access Land, Restrictions and Exclusions for
Consultation, which is the subject of a separate Paper to be considered by the
Panel and this Paper is part of the Countryside Agency's consultation on the
same subject.
3. There
are twenty-four Proposals made by the CA within the document. The full consultation document is available
for inspection in the Members' Room. The Proposals and Comments are set out in
the attached Appendix.
4. The
Proposals are predominantly aimed at National Parks Authorities and the CA who
will manage the Access Land, when that has been established. The County Council's involvement will be
minimal.
5. That the Countryside Agency be informed
of the County Council's response, as set out in the attached Appendix.
6. To comply with the Countryside Agency's request for
comments.
The following unpublished documents have been relied
on in the preparation of this Report:
None
Environmental impact of the Proposal contained in
this Report:
None
PROPOSALS FOR GUIDANCE FROM COUNTRYSIDE AGENCY
ON
LOCAL ACCESS MANAGEMENT, EXCLUSIONS
AND
RESTRICTIONS
THE COUNTRYSIDE AGENCY'S PROPOSALS FOR COMMENT
2.2 Our guidance to land managers and relevant authorities should explain clearly the standard limitations laid down in the Act, in order to set the legal context for considering locally what access management is required.
Comment
The
County Council would support this approach.
The role of informal access management
3.3 Our guidance to relevant authorities and land managers should identify informal access management as the simplest means of limiting problems from access - involving no requirement to notify or seek approval from the "relevant authority" that oversees the imposition of statutory restrictions. Relevant authorities should therefore encourage land managers to assess fully the best use of these techniques, and opt for the least restrictive option that will meet their needs. The criteria referred to at paragraph 1.8 above should include detailed advice about the potential role of informal access management in different circumstances - see Annexes 1 and 2.
Comment
Whilst the County Council will always support a simple approach to management, there are concerns that an informal approach to statutory Restrictions could lead to disputes and bad "custom and practice" becoming established.
Detailed
guidance on techniques
3.4 Our guidance to land managers should incorporate detailed
advice on tried and tested techniques of informal access management such as:-
(a) planning the timing and location of operations which do not coexist well with access in a way that minimises any potential conflict;
(b) providing selective visitor information
at main entry points;
(c) managing paths and vegetation to avoid
pressure on sensitive areas;
(d) seeking visitors' co-operation while
works etc. are underway; and
(e) siting any parking areas with care.
In compiling this material, we should draw on best practice from around the country.
Comment
The County Council would support this approach.
The role of
restrictions at the land manager's discretion
4.9 Our guidance to relevant authorities and
land managers should identify discretionary restrictions under Section 22 and
exclusion of dogs under Section 23, where available, as the normal way to
impose any statutory restrictions that are required to complement informal
access management. It should encourage
use of the least restrictive option that will meet the land manager's needs.
4.10 Our guidance to land managers should
encourage careful planning in the use of discretionary restrictions, and
discourage subsequent withdrawal of notifications unless unforeseeable
circumstances arise. Our guidance to
relevant authorities would encourage them to monitor cases where notifications
are withdrawn in case of possible abuse of this facility (see paragraph 6.5
(e)).
4.11 The criteria referred to at paragraph 1.8 above should include detailed advice about the relative role of discretionary restrictions in different circumstances - see Annexes 1 and 2 for our emerging thoughts on these criteria.
Comment
The County
Council would broadly support this proposal but would reiterate the concerns
raised regarding paragraph 3.3.
Pre-registration of entitled persons and restriction
parcels
4.12 To help "entitled persons" to notify discretionary restrictions easily, our guidance to land managers should encourage them to "pre-register" with the relevant authority the details of the access land they manage, their legal interest in it and the number of discretionary days to which they are entitled.
4.13 It should also encourage them to
pre-register the boundaries of any subdivisions of a mapped unit of access land
that they plan to use for the purpose of imposing restrictions - perhaps
identifying smaller management units such as grouse drives, or paths across the
land to which access may from time to time be limited.
4.14 The guidance should explain the advantages
to the entitled person of taking these one‑off steps, which would allow
him to:-
(a) notify
the relevant authority of all future restrictions without repeating the core
facts in each individual notification; and
(b) notify discretionary restrictions by telephone rather than in writing, should he wish to do so.
Comment
The County Council would support this approach.
The role of
additional restrictions
5.12 Our guidance to relevant authorities and land managers should identify additional restrictions as a means of imposing statutory controls that are shown to be necessary in situations where discretionary restrictions are unavailable or unsuitable. The criteria referred to at paragraph 1.8 above should include detailed advice about the relative role of additional restrictions in different circumstances. Annexes 1 and 2 give our emerging thoughts on these criteria.
The need to plan ahead for any additional restrictions
5.13 Our guidance to land managers should encourage potential applicants to plan their activities carefully to ensure that, should a need for additional restrictions arise, there will be sufficient time for the process of application, consultation (where required by the Act or regulations), determination by the relevant authority and (if the applicant so decides) appeal. It should stress that in practice the timing may vary and encourage land managers to allow as much time as possible for consideration of their applications.
Cases where exact timing of an additional restriction is determined later
5.14 Our guidance for relevant authorities and land managers should illustrate the types of situation in which it would normally be impracticable for the applicant to give more than a few hours' notice of the exact timing of an additional restriction, for example:-
§
land management operations
which are largely weather dependent;
§
where their timing is
dependent on external factors, eg where timber is ordered at short notice; or
§
where the land manager needs
to give an event organiser early agreement in principle that his land will be
available for a specific purpose (eg filming), and the exact date of the event
will be agreed subsequently.
5.15 The guidance for relevant authorities and
land managers should say that in such cases, where earlier notification is
simply impracticable, the relevant authority should be prepared in its
discretion to approve a necessary restriction in advance, subject to later
notification of the date(s) and time(s) affected as envisaged by Section
24(2)(b) etc. The direction would set a
minimum period of notice consistent with the circumstances.
5.16 The guidance for relevant authorities and land managers should also explain the scope (in appropriate cases) for detailed management plans such as forest plans to provide the basis for such advance approval of necessary additional restrictions by the relevant authority. We would welcome comments on the circumstances in which this approach would be most appropriate, and on how management plans could be used to reduce the need for repeated applications and to help provide reliable advance notification of restrictions to the public.
Processing of non-application casework
5.17 Our guidance for relevant authorities should outline the special processes and criteria that will be used to decide what additional restrictions are required for nature conservation and heritage purposes, and to determine whether any restrictions related to fire prevention or public safety should be imposed without application.
Linking
discretionary and additional restrictions
6.5 Our guidance to relevant authorities and land managers should state that relevant authorities:-
(a) should, before considering use of formal restrictions, be satisfied that informal management techniques are inadequate or inappropriate to manage the situation: it should be for the applicant to make this case;
(b) should
allow any entitled person to keep up to three "contingency days" from
his discretionary allowance for possible use in unforeseen circumstances later
in the year, without this affecting his ability to secure additional
restrictions in the meantime;
(c) should
normally expect him to use up the remainder of his discretionary allowance
(excluding the three "contingency days" recommended at (b) above) -
or show how it is to be used within the calendar year - before seeking any
additional restrictions on days when discretionary restrictions would be
available;
(d) should
NOT expect him to use discretionary days to address naturally occurring risks
on the land (eg potholes, landslip, subsidence, exceptional fire risk), or long
term man-made risks (eg old mineral workings, old tipping areas);
(e) should
take into account any apparent abuse of the proposed power to withdraw notifications
of discretionary restrictions; and
(f) should normally refuse any application for additional restrictions where it is clear the need could be met by use of the discretionary power at a time when it is available to the applicant, in accordance with the principles above and the criteria to be annexed to the guidance.
The role of
general public information and behavioural guidance
7.6 We have already issued summary guidance (in our leaflet "New Rights, New Responsibilities", enclosed with this consultation paper) about the new access rights that will in due course be available under Part 1 of the Act, the national limitations on and exceptions to these rights (as outlined in Chapter 2 above) and the scope for access to be managed and restricted at the local level.
7.7 We will supplement this with a range of
other public information material as the new access arrangements are
implemented. The following will be
especially relevant to this consultation paper:-
(a) in
2002, we will consult separately about the content of a new Country Code to
meet the need for guidance referred to in paragraph 7.2 above; and
(b) before the new access rights are commenced, we will publish basic advice to the public on safety issues on access land, and about the kinds of local access management and restriction they may encounter on different types of access land at different times of year.
The role of
site-related information
7.8 Our guidance materials for relevant authorities, for land managers and for the public should all state that advance information about local restrictions will normally be available through a national website operated by the Agency, so long as we receive adequate notice to permit this.
7.9 We believe that a central hotline
facility, publicised in our public guidance, would provide a useful complement
to this website information. This would
allow members of the public to call ahead for advice on whether a particular
area of land was likely to be affected by restrictions at a particular
time. We will consider how such a
service could best be provided.
7.10 Site level notices (eg at key access
points) will also have an important role to play in disseminating information
to visitors about any local access management or restrictions. Our guidance to land managers and relevant
authorities should provide advice on the use, siting, design, content and style
of such notices, including model forms of wording. It should also indicate who should normally take responsibility
for displaying information on notices about different types of
restriction. For land management
restrictions, for example, the guidance should say that this will normally be a
matter for the entitled person or applicant who initiates the restriction. We would welcome views on the role of
on-site notices in conveying this local management and restriction information
to the public, and on the part that should be played by land managers, relevant
authorities and access authorities in this respect.
7.11 We would also welcome views on the role that our guidance to relevant authorities should propose for local outlets like tourist information offices, visitor centres, local newspapers, hotels, pubs, shops etc. in helping visitors to find out where access land is located, and what restrictions are currently in force, or where they can find this information.
Appeals relating to additional restrictions
8.4 Our guidance to land managers should explain the initial steps they should take if they wish to appeal against the relevant authority's decision. It should give an outline of the stages which the process will follow and say where detailed information and help with the appeals process can be obtained.
8.5 The length of time that appeals take to be concluded may vary from case to case. Our guidance should encourage land managers to leave sufficient time when applying for additional restrictions to allow any appeal to be concluded well before the date when the restriction is required.
Comment
The County Council would support the proposals given above in 5, 6, 7
and 8.