UKC

No one was taking any notice of this with its previous title - it IS important that people read this and understand the implications.

Climbers and walkers may have heard rumours about the future ownership of the Peak District National Park’s Eastern Moors – which includes Froggatt, Curbar, Big Moor, and Birchen.

The facts are that the National Park Authority is very properly conducting an internal reappraisal of all its assets. As a multipurpose body it has to ensure none of its purposes (conservation, recreation, economic) is compromised by any future arrangement, but because of financial pressures it has to be prepared to consider innovative approaches to land management.

The RSPB has raised the prospect with the Authority of further developing a partnership established through the Peak Birds Project into a leasing arrangement for the Eastern Moors. Separate but similar suggestions are believed to have been made in respect of Burbage, Higgar Tor and Millstone; Stanage North Lees; and possibly Longshaw. No firm proposals have yet been made, so in one sense there is as yet nothing to discuss.

Nevertheless, given an increase in recent years in restrictions on climbing (which the BMC has yet to be convinced are ecologically necessary or have had any impact on the size of breeding populations), the BMC has lost no time in registering extreme concern at even the hint of anything which has potentially disastrous consequences – despite some absolute assurances to the contrary – for core climbing areas and the local economy. The BMC has also received assurance that if matters are taken further, any process will be entirely open. This note will be updated as soon as there is more to report.

Graham Lynch, BMC Access & Conservation Officer

11/3/05

In reply to john horscroft: keep us posted and let us know where to oppose any land management changes which may affect access. I am listening

In reply to john horscroft:

Let me check I'm getting this. Are the RSPB essentially proposing that they start managing the sites you mention and, hence, are able to control access to them?
If that's the case then you're damn right we should all be listening very carefully

In reply to Alex@home:

Yet paranoid style replies like that dont exactly foster cooperation. If they havent already I'd suggest the BMC get an officer to join RSPB to get their literature, stay aware of thier concerns and make an input where required: whether we like it or not the cliffs are not exclusively climbers.

Offwidth@home

In reply to Offwidth:

Many climbers, including officers of the BMC, already are members of the RSPB. Climbers all over the country have negotiated restrictions with the RSPB. In the Peak district, local volunteer access officers such as Henry Folkard negotiate on a regular basis with conservationists of every type.

Now, Offwidth me old china, I reckon YOUR response is the slightly paranoid one. Do you honestly believe that the BMC Access Team, both volunteers and professionals, isn't FULLY aware of the RSPB's priorities and policies? Can you come up with one occasion when they haven't bent over backwards to accomodate the conservation lobby?

Nobody is suggesting that the crags are solely the preserve of climbers. If that were the case, why would climbers have received plaudits from the Peak Park for the way they reacted to Ring Ouzel bans at Stanage last year?

Please don't patronise people who do this kind of work on a daily basis. Climbers are instinctive allies of the conservation lobby but we won't be fall guys.

In reply to john horscroft:

Surely it wouldn't hurt to let these overused crags recover for a century or two?

99.99999% of the world's climbable rock would be uneffected.

In reply to john horscroft:

Would the CROW act (strangely appropriate acronym in this instance)not provide protection for access to climb?

I am in the BMC and RSPB and I am concerned with the needs of both climbers and birds. I know nothing has happened yet over any proposals but as far as I can tell, climbers stay to a very narrow corridor (i.e. the crag and the walk on/off) and don't go wandering off because they are there with the prime purpose of climbing. Given this, I would say the threat from climbers to breeding birds is very minimal, unlike the potential threat from walkers under the provisions of the CRoW Act (and yobbos who let their dogs run amok through the heather - I have seen this so often in the countryside). In fact, I would say that most climbers respect the countryside and wildlife and respect bans due to birds nesting.

The RSPB are a very powerful lobbying force and I hope they would realise the minimal disturbance that climbers cause and the positive role that they can actually play in protecting the countryside, not least through the national bodies and websites like this one.

In reply to tobyfk:

You jest, of course.

In reply to tobyfk:

Oh, and in what way recover??

In reply to EarlyBird:

While CROW does provide a large degree of protection for access, in certain circumstances, (Grouse murdering for instance), land-owners can impose 28 day bans. However, if there is an overwhelming conservation issue, bans can be indefinite. Much of the Eastern Moors is a SSSI and that obviously has a large influence too.

In reply to John Howard:

I've just been chatting to the oracle, ie Henry Folkard, Peak Access Volunteer, and he agrees with much of your post. However, walkers actually fall into much the same category as climbers in that their habits are generally linear in nature. The areas affected by both climbers and walkers are relatively small.

Dogs are a different story and a big issue for the well-being of moorland birds. The advice from Henry, unpalatable as it may be, is that dogs should be kept on a lead during the breeding season.

As for your final paragraph, I think we'd all echo those sentiments.

In reply to john horscroft:


Not entirely. Personally I find the image of a quiet, chalk-free, re-foliating Froggatt quite attractive. Like a Japanese zen moss garden. But I don't live in Sheffield and am accustomed to driving for more than 10 miles to reach a crag.

In reply to john horscroft:

...not that I object to the CRoW Act, John; I think that most walkers, most of the time, will stick to footpaths anyway, (depending on the area and the visitor load). For example, it's neither easy nor all that pleasant to negotiate boggy areas or thick heather growth over any distance and so people will stick to paths anyway. Areas with less ground cover are a different matter of course since it is easier to go wherever you want. The limestone pavement areas of the Yorkshire Dales are an example of this and some of the physical rock surfaces there are very fragile and easily damaged by the passage of boots.

Speaking as an archaeologist I am particularly concerned about unwitting damage to easily destroyed archaeological features when open access comes to the Dales - they are the sort of thing that only the expert eye can tell apart from the surrounding landscape and are very fragile. In truth, things probably won't be that bad, especially with our lovely climate! What has this got to do with climbing? Nothing much, but it helps to show that there are a lot of different people with diverse interests in the countryside (mostly ending in "ologist").

I don't think that putting dogs on a lead should be an unpalatable request during the breeding system - I would say that was just a reasonable and responsible way to behave.

In reply to John Howard:

Thanks for your interest John, and the crucial point you make is that there is a diverse range of people for whom the moors are a magnet. While I'm sure we all agree that the RSPB do a great job on whole, it is only fair that the rest of us treat with suspicion the notion that a single interest group should gain undue influence over the Eastern Moors.

It's worth remembering that since 1990, bird populations in the Peak have either held their own or increased (with the exception of Twite and Wheatear). While I'm sure that there is more we can do to encourage an increase in overall bird populations, I suspect that it will revolve around grazing regimes and the encouragement of flower rich meadows rather than banning climbers.

In reply to john horscroft:
Maybe its worth remembering that, despite the fact that the Peak Park owns the East Moor, before CROW there wasn't public access over the whole area by any means. Large tracts were designated reserves of one kind or another; for example all the area between White Edge and the track along the Bar Brook and all of Leash Fen were out of bounds without a permit. I sort of understand why they did this, in view of the rich archaeology and wildlife of these areas, but as John Howard says the areas protect themselves to some extent; it's not really much fun thrashing through the deep heather and I just don't think any but the most dedicated are going to leave the paths.

In reply to Richard J:

See what you're both saying. I tend to agree that CROW will have little effect on where people go, they'll tend to stick to footpaths as they always did. Is that in itself, damaging. Don't reckon so...........

In reply to john horscroft:
I don't think it's damaging at all. I've got a long list pinned up in my kitchen of all the places in the Peak I mean to get to now that CROW means that access to them is permitted. I've hardly been to any of them yet, but in some small way it makes me feel better to know that I can.

In reply to Richard J:

Yeah, it's as though CROW is enough in that we CAN go there if we want to, even if we don't! At least the land grabbing classes can't tell us to get orf their land now..........

In reply to john horscroft:

Just to point out that the Peak Birds project isn't just the the RSPB - its a joint project between English Nature, The RSPB and Defra and EN and Defra have committments to public access as part of their working practices. The project is run through a steering group composed of these parties.

Do you have any details of the leasing arranements? eg Will it be via direct leasing from the Park to the project or via agri-environment schems asuch as Environmental Stewardship?

In reply to Yorkspud:

I'll have to get back to you on some of the details, but as far as leasing arrangements go, nothing's agreed yet. The Peak Park have been playing their cards v close to there collective chest. If i'm reading you right, you're assuming that this is an extension of the Peak birds project. I'm pretty sure, but will check with Henry, that this is an entirely seperate initiative designed to provide much-needed finance for the Peak Park and a membership focus for the RSPB. I'll get back to you.............

In reply to Anonymous:

Oops, forgot. Last post from JH.......

In reply to Yorkspud:

Just spoken to Henry Folkard and as I thought, this is an entirely seperate initiative form the Peak Birds Project. No details yet on lease, but Henry was keen that we alert people to the possibility of this alliance as early as possible.

In reply to john horscroft:

If, some project say, provided bird boxes on the crags would the birds shit in them instead, or is there anything else that could be done to encourage our avian friends to defacate else where? It'd be protecting birds from the spread of disease wouldn't it, so it might even come under the RSPBs remit?

P.S. Reread the above with birds replaced by climbers and the RSPB replaced by the BMC.

In reply to Paz:

Your point?

In reply to john horscroft:

I'll let you know when I think of it.

In reply to Paz:

I'm all ears.............

In reply to john horscroft:

I wouldn't say that exactly - they're a bit on the big side, but don't do yourself down!

In reply to john horscroft:

Does anyone have accurate information about the CRoW act, since people seem to have the impression that it allows them to walk literally anywhere they want to in the countryside.
I seem to remember hearing that it's not this liberal in reality.

In reply to jimbo g:
Best bet is to go to this 'ere website and have yourself a look.

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/20000037.htm

Suffice to say, only those areas that fall within the somewhat contentious definition, Mountain, Moor and Open Country are covered by the act.

As you rightly say, it's a lot less draconian than the land-owing fraternity would have you believe!!

In reply to john horscroft:

bump

Update on the situation -

The BMC are to meet the RSPB on the 8th of April. There will be a full report on this meeting at the Peak Area Meeting on 14th April.

In reply to tobyfk:

They use to believe that if you left a quarry alone the rock would grow back....and that they could turn Lead into Gold...