Horseytalk.net/Hoofbeat EXCLUSIVE
RIDER RIGHTS

click here to read more

The Governement should sycamore rider-friendly policy !

Yateley Common, Hampshire

Bob Milton writes to Jim White, Footprint-Ecology

- Your consultation did not connect with a major user base of the common especially as your consultation report shows a very low use by equestrians which is not the case.

- You will also note that I wrote to you with the BHS concerns but there seems no recognition of the BHS response in your report

- It is my belief you, the H&IWWT and Natural England had already decided what would happen before the consultation as that is the end game from Natural England in making Stewardship Agreements so as always the consultation is a sham PR exercise

Says Bob Milton

Says Bob MiltonI have been contacted by a number of our members who for what ever reason seem to have only just heard of the proposals by Hampshire CC and MoD / DE through Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust and yourselves to fence and graze under Higher Level Stewardship the common. This only goes to show that your consultation did not connect with a major user base of the common especially as your consultation report shows a very low use by equestrians which is not the case.

You will also note that I wrote to you with the BHS concerns but there seems no recognition of the BHS response in your report. There are other aspects which seem to have a great similarity with the Chobham common consultation process where the objections are ignored and no alternative scheme or method other than extensive grazing with attendant fencing and self closing gates is promoted by you under the guidance of Natural England.

It is my belief you, the H&IWWT and Natural England had already decided what would happen before the consultation as that is the end game from Natural England in making Stewardship Agreements so as always the consultation is a sham PR exercise. The e mail from Laura Willing is an example. As it sent before March this year

You have misled the equestrians through your leaflet and consultation process which claims the common is only subject to CROW rights. This is incorrect and no reference is made despite my telling you that the common is subject to s193 LPA 1925 which includes equestrian access.

Below is the HLS agreement reference with the Trust on the MoD part of the common which is covered by the S193 deed when the MoD took it over for WWII. The Trust is getting paid for MoD statutory duty despite only having a grazing licence which does not meet the criteria of being in control of the land.

Agreement Reference

Customer Name

Town

Scheme

Total Cost of Agreement (£)

Amount Paid to Date
(£)

Total Area Under Agreement (ha)

Does Agreement Provide Access?

Detail

AG00289369

Hampshire Wildlife Trust

Basingstoke

Higher Level Stewardship

240897.3

62145.30

111.72

No

For years HCC and the commons management team have lied to riders and have only allowed access via a couple of permissive routes or bridleways. The management of the rights of way across the common has allowed even those to fall into disrepair and be blocked by vegetation. No wonder equestrians give a low figure as to objections. Likewise you do not explain to dog walkers that the effect of the grazing scheme is to require by law for all dogs to be kept on leads that is except when chased by cattle or ponies.

Again like Chobham you imply that cycling is lawful on the common which is incorrect it is only lawful on bridleways it is a criminal offence to cycle on common land. No attempt at enforcement is envisaged.

Neither you nor the landowners have made any attempt to complete an Equality or Access impact assessment as required by law or an Environmental Impact assessment in terms of the Thames Basin Heaths SPA to include displacement of user onto other parts of the SSSI, the SPA as a whole or any SANGS in this local authority or the adjacent.

The BHS contends that all the commercially available gates tested do not meet H&S requirements or that they meet the overriding British Standard for gates being that they are unsafe and dangerous to users.

http://www.bhs.org.uk/Riding/Riding_Off_Road/Self_closing_gates/Self_closing_gates.aspx

The Health and Safety Executive has recently advised the National Trust to separate its grazing animals from the public on Petersham Meadows yet that is exactly what you have advised and with Natural England through its Stewardship Agreement is promoting. We continue to get reports of accidents due to both self closing gates and cattle on bridleways. The latest in Surrey on NT land resulted in hospitalisation as a result of Belted Galloway cattle and a number of displacements from a livery yard.

Hampshire CC have over the last two years been trying to move the rights of way to make way for this scheme with to no avail yet HCC consistently ignore the rights of way issues such as Welsh Drive which crosses Yateley common west, the 134 acres of still enclosed Blackbushe common which is adjacent and contiguous with Yateley common and forms a large area of the SSSI and is subject to an outstanding court order [1988], other blocked rights of way as well as seeking to facilitate Sims Metals in their misuse of the common rather than look to their own duties and liabilities. The HCC part of the common is held for public recreation so that is the dominant duty; any duty implied by s28 G Crow is subsidiary. No attempt has been made to implement a scheme that meets both in the rush to access Environmental Stewardship money from the Common Agricultural policy pillar II modulation

I pine for a more sensible approach to saving our forests

Read more here


Email this to a friend !!

Enter recipient's e-mail: