UKC

Making Conservation/Recreation pay

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 scoobydougan 15 Aug 2018

We've had lots of posts about burning moors and shooting and we are always having posts about parking charges in National parks. Personally I think the damaging management of massive tracts of moors for such a tiny percentage of the population is unacceptable but understand that it generates a lot of income. I think its time that mass recreation funds the sustainable management of the uplands. Our moors, The West pennines, are surrounded by large urban populations. If we are unhappy with the current state of these habitats then we should be prepared to replace the current funding streams with ones more palatable. 

 john arran 16 Aug 2018
In reply to scoobydougan:

>  If we are unhappy with the current state of these habitats then we should be prepared to replace the current funding streams with ones more palatable. 

What would a more palatable funding stream look like to you?

 summo 16 Aug 2018
In reply to scoobydougan:

The land isn't providing any revenue now, just bare minimal employment. It doesn't need an alternate source of funding. With a change of use away from grouse and sheep, it could easily provide more employment, more varied recreational activities and in turn generate more revenue/tax for the treasury. It would add to species diversity and trap more carbon.

The only loss is the so called iconic view of barren open falls which many hold dear to their hearts. 

Post edited at 07:28
1
In reply to scoobydougan:

> If we are unhappy with the current state of these habitats then we should be prepared to replace the current funding streams with ones more palatable. 

There isn't actually any reason for the taxpayer to look after the interests of landowners by giving them a new funding stream.  They wouldn't do it for other types of business.

Charge them business rates, stop giving them subsidies, strengthen the access laws, close any loopholes on inheritance tax and wait.  Charities or local councils can pick up the land when they start going bust.

1
J1234 16 Aug 2018
In reply to scoobydougan:

I look forward to your appearance at the next BMC area meeting and you suggesting that we pay £5 to walk up Winter Hill. Could be even more exciting than the Great Lester Mill debate. Would you prefer to be burnt or lynched?

PS, agree with your sentiments

Post edited at 11:32
OP scoobydougan 16 Aug 2018
In reply to john arran:

Mountain bike tracks? Barriers at entrances to National parks 5 quid to enter? Car park charges ? 

OP scoobydougan 16 Aug 2018
In reply to J1234:

Not to walk up the hill,, to park at the bottom. 

Lusk 16 Aug 2018
In reply to scoobydougan:

People who make their living in the outdoors should maybe pay in some way.  They're effectively getting their workplace for free.
I mean Climbing instructors and like.  They are some of the people who actively encourage more people to the outdoors.

1
OP scoobydougan 16 Aug 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Personally I would like to apply the French model! But it isn't going to happen so we need realistic options, rewinding, tourism........... 

OP scoobydougan 16 Aug 2018
In reply to Lusk:

That's the spirit! Those big races that charge a fortune for starters

In reply to scoobydougan:

> Personally I would like to apply the French model! But it isn't going to happen so we need realistic options, rewinding, tourism........... 

The French model would be great for tourism.  The TV rights would be worth a fortune.

 bouldery bits 16 Aug 2018
In reply to john arran:

> What would a more palatable funding stream look like to you?

Great question.

I think we need to be careful what we wish for...

 richprideaux 17 Aug 2018
In reply to scoobydougan:

> That's the spirit! Those big races that charge a fortune for starters

That's a salient point actually - a huge proportion of adventure races/ultras/off road-tris etc in England and Wales only work on the basis that footpaths and PROWs can be used without the permission of the landowner... If that loophole was closed it would shut down a lot of races (possibly not a bad thing given the collection of abandoned race markers I have in the office)

 Bulls Crack 17 Aug 2018
In reply to scoobydougan:

Taking the Pennine moors as an example, as landscape and places to recreate, they  will only generate  a certain  amount of potential income since I suspects only a relatively small percentage of visitors will want to experience actual moorland as opposed to  more easily accessible countryside and places. You could increase the recreation quotient of the moors up to a point but I don't think it wold look that much different to  current levels.

The whole current protection and management system needs to be reassessed in terms of what we are trying to preserve/value, The effects of climate change are  beginning to make a nonsense out of  our current fixed protected areas (and perhaps the rationale behind them) but  pretending that grouse industry is a credible conservation management agency is transparently specious. 

 

 

OP scoobydougan 17 Aug 2018
In reply to Bulls Crack:

I think that increasing the diversity of the moors, the west pennines particularly, would increase not only the recreational potential but actual usage. Introducing features  like bogs tarns and natural woodlands would alleviate some of the monotony of vast tracts of tussock grass and attract wildlife and visitors.  And it would be a start! 


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...