I wrote earlier in the week regarding a video made by Paul Whitewick which looked at the problem of open access land which is inaccessible. As I mentioned in my post, this wasn’t something that I had given much thought to, but it’s a serious issue that I’m pleased someone has brought attention to.
Paul was kind enough to answer some of my questions about his video and about the issues that he raised.
Q. What first led you to investigate areas of open access land that the public is legally entitled to use but cannot lawfully reach, and when did you realise that this was more than an isolated mapping anomaly?
A. I first came across this issue about four years ago, when a friend alerted me to the rather bizarre spectacle of land that the public has a legal right to access, but no legal way of reaching. We made a video about it at the time, but what we hadn’t appreciated was just how many of these places existed. Four years later, I wanted to revisit the subject and see whether anything had changed. Has access improved? Has anything been done to address the problem? And, perhaps more importantly, was this a peculiarity confined to a few places in Wiltshire, or something much more widespread?
Q. You identified substantial areas of inaccessible access land in Wiltshire and later found similar examples elsewhere. How widespread do you now believe the problem is across England and Wales, and is there enough national information to establish its true scale?
A. I think the problem is far more widespread than we originally thought. It may be less prevalent in the north of England and Wales, where there are much larger expanses of open moorland and mountain, but that’s only a suspicion. I’m no GIS expert, and it would take someone with the right skills to properly assess the scale of the problem nationally. I’m not currently aware of anyone who has undertaken that work. But there’s another complication, which I raised in the video. Mapping alone won’t give us the full picture. Ideally, you’d need to visit each location to establish whether there is any permissive access that isn’t shown on the maps. Equally, even where a public right of way runs alongside access land, you’d need to establish whether there’s actually a practical way of getting onto it. So I think the problem is considerably bigger than we’ve identified so far, but establishing its true scale would require both a national mapping exercise and some investigation on the ground.
Q. At White Hill, the information boards encourage people to appreciate the wildlife while the missing stile and locked gates make reaching it difficult. Do you think this resulted from neglect, conflicting responsibilities or a deliberate attempt to discourage access?
A. White Hill was particularly frustrating. You have information boards encouraging people to visit and appreciate the wildlife, yet the stile that once provided access has disappeared and the gates are locked. I’ve since learnt that archery events are held on the land, although I don’t know what arrangements are in place for those or how they interact with its open access status. As for why access has become so difficult, I genuinely don’t know. I’m reluctant to point the finger at individual landowners without knowing the full circumstances. It could be neglect, a misunderstanding of responsibilities or something else entirely. But ultimately, the reason matters less than the outcome. We have land that has been designated for public access, yet the practical means of getting onto it appear to have been lost. Surely that’s something worth investigating and, hopefully, putting right.
Q. Have you been pleased with the response to the videos and have you received any responses from landowners, local authorities, access organisations or Government bodies since publishing them?
A. I’ve been really pleased with the interest the videos have generated, particularly from people who have started looking at maps themselves and identifying similar places. It’s encouraging to see that people care about the issue. Unfortunately, the response from the authorities has been rather less encouraging. I’ve submitted eight reports concerning access problems in various locations over the past couple of years, and so far I’ve seen no evidence of anything being done about them. I appreciate these things can take time, and there may be work going on behind the scenes that I’m unaware of. But from my perspective, very little appears to have changed. I’m not holding my breath!
Q. Has investigating this subject changed your wider view of the right to roam and the way countryside access is managed in England and Wales, compared to somewhere such as Scotland?
A. If anything, it’s reinforced my belief that the right to roam can, and does, work. Scotland demonstrates that a much broader approach to countryside access is perfectly possible. I think one of the problems is that, particularly over the last decade, almost every issue in society seems to have become divisive, and countryside access has been dragged into that too. In my opinion, extending responsible access should be a relatively straightforward ambition, but the discussion so often becomes about something else entirely. Those opposed to greater access frequently raise concerns about litter, damage and irresponsible behaviour. And of course those are legitimate concerns. But as I highlighted in the video, that’s not really the argument. Nobody is suggesting people should be allowed to damage property, disturb wildlife or behave irresponsibly. We’re talking about giving people the opportunity to enjoy the countryside responsibly. I don’t see why that should be such a controversial idea.
Q. LDWA members and local groups possess considerable knowledge of paths, access points and changing conditions across the country. Although we’re not a campaigning organisation, do you think that there is a useful role that LDWA members could play in identifying inaccessible access land or working with authorities and landowners to secure practical solutions?
A. Absolutely. In fact, I think LDWA members could play a really useful role here. One of the biggest problems with my investigation is that I can identify potentially inaccessible land using maps, but I can’t possibly visit every location myself. That’s where people who regularly walk these areas could be invaluable. They may know of access points that aren’t marked on maps, permissive routes that exist in practice, or places where access has disappeared over time. Even simply recording these examples, with photographs and locations, could help build a much clearer picture of the problem. That information could then be passed to the relevant authorities or used to start conversations with landowners. I don’t think this needs to be about campaigning or confrontation. It’s about identifying a problem, understanding why it exists and hopefully finding some practical solutions.
