Prime Time Debate

The recent debate on countryside access on the RTE current affairs programme Prime Time shed rather more heat than light on the issue. While predictably disappointing it was still very encouraging that it took place at all. It surely reflects the fact that as an issue, countryside access is rising up the political agenda in the Republic of Ireland.

Memo to KIO: stay positive and don't allow yourselves to be painted as some appallingly radical group. As this programme showed, some landowners/farmers like to portray themselves as the victims, and there is a risk that those proposing progressive and sensible access reforms for the benefit of all, come across as urban bully boys who want nothing but to trample all over crops, damage fences and walk through farmhouse kitchens (while sacrificing their first born to boot). I'm not saying this happened here, but you get my drift...

Define what access actually means and then keep the message simple. After that hit the 3 main points:

1 Countryside access legislation does not mean the end of days and works perfectly well the world over. Rights of private landowners cannot trump wider society requirements and landowners are well compensated by the taxpayer via EU grants.

2 Countryside access legislation will fully unlock the potential of the countryside. It will bring massive economic benefits to local rural economy, something which will allow local people to get better jobs and give them an opportunity to live in the area they were brought up in. Farmers sons and daughters will be among those to benefit.

3 Countryside access will be of massive benefit to local communities, giving people access to their own  as it reduces car usage , allows rural people, including children, to walk safely between destinations, and improves health outcomes - which again leads to savings for society in terms of coping with obesity and associated illness etc.

Also, keep lots of stats and examples handy to backup the argument.

A powerful ally?

It was good to see the Belfast Telegraph giving countryside access issues a bit of coverage. First it covered the welcome ruling by the court to force a landowner to open the King John's Highway in Holywood County Down.

Next it covered another piece of good news on the local countryside access front.

Finally it had a more general piece on the poor countryside access legislation Northern Ireland is currently lumbered with. Once again, kudos goes to Ulster Federation of Rambling Clubs.

This could indicate a growing interest by the press in this issue . The Telegraph has a long history of campaigning on progressive issues, and it would be a powerful ally in any campaign to pressurise our politicians into reshaping our countryside access laws for the better.

Cliffs of Moher path development

Congrats to all involved in the development of the new cliff path along the sensational Cliffs of Moher in County Clare.

Despite being a seemingly obvious thing, (remember that Wales has a path around its entire coastline which is reaping huge benefits for local economies) familiar Irish style access issues had been bedevilling the word famous Clare coastline for years. Of course, given the cliffs iconic status, the sheer weight of tourist numbers made it practically impossible for objecting landowners to do much about people walking their length, except to erect unwelcoming GOML type signs - not a very constructive thing for an area whose economy depends on tourism to such a large extent.

Now everyone concerned seems to have recognised that embracing the potential of the cliffs is the best approach for both landowners and the local economy as a whole. It has taken much work and negotiation, something which better countryside access laws might have negated the need for. But we are where we are and it is good to see a bottom up community approach bear such fruit. Landowners will hopefully come to see that no threat is posed by countryside access, but can be to the benefit of everyone in the local community. Walkers do not wish to trample over the countryside, but instead wish well defined routes to enable them to traverse it without fear of upsetting anyone.

Landscapes such as the Cliff of Moher deserve to be accessible to all, and such enlightened development deserves to be rewarded and lauded as an example to all. Here's hoping it can be sustained and that the model can not only be repeated, but can eventually inspire much needed change in the countryside access laws of the Republic of Ireland.

Re-Using old railway lines

I came across this excellent blog site while casually browsing the Interweb recently. As both a walker and a cyclist, I think that this is a great idea that should be heartily supported. These old lines could form an important building block in the countryside network infrastructure that needs to be developed in Northern Ireland. They could be used  as paths and trails for recreational users, and also by local people and children travelling safely between towns and villages - well away from dangerous country roads. Politicians take note.

Wild Nephin

Amidst the depressing lack of progress on countryside access legislation, both north and south, sometimes you hear about something that just brightens your day up a little. The Wild Nephin project is a brilliant idea, and will hopefully become a model that can be repeated across the island and beyond.

Shooting yourself in the foot, Part 1...

The recent decision by the Environment Minister, Mark H Durkan, to shelve National Parks legislation is as disheartening as it was inevitable. Given the whipped up hysteria against the legislation, mainly by the UFU, it was only a matter of time before our politicians pandered to the least common denominator and pulled the rug from underneath the one progressive and potentially massively beneficial piece of legislation that the Executive had come up with.

The UFU were predictable in their reaction. Yet such a response is again a startlingly self-defeating one. A wilful refusal to explore or recognise any benefit in National Parks, and the potential diverse economic opportunities such legislation could bring to farmers and land owners, is in the long run a complete dis-service to the people they purport to represent.

It again underlines the fact that the UFU still have to recognise that the rural economy can only thrive if non-farming sectors are given the space to do so. Rural communities are in the main made up of people who do not own land. Sustainable job creation in such areas, which would enable young people to stay and raise families where they were born, rather than move away, can only occur if our legislators create the conditions whereby investment can be made in sustainable rural sectors of employment. National Parks would provide a framework of protections for our most beautiful countryside areas, and also the access frameworks required to encourage much needed investment into them.

Saying all that, advocates of national parks and progressive countryside legislation in general, including those in the tourism sector, need to up their game and start to be more politically savvy. Things won't change all by themselves and the message needs to be better communicated. Those who oppose national parks may be misguided, but once again they have shown that they are better organised and more motivated in their campaign of opposition and lobbying. Dismantling their arguments and getting across a positive vision for the Northern Irish countryside is the challenge before us all.

Media Interest

It's been a while since I last posted. I'm going to get back at it again, but I thought I should make a quick comment on a little article on countryside access that ran on Radio Ulster the other morning. It was about a right of way being blocked off by developers in the village of Broughshane, a village located outside Ballymena, and the fact that local people had cried foul and were attempting to have it reinstated. Good for them, hopefully it'll be open again before too long.

However, the second half of the article featured an interview with representatives. While the interviewer appeared clueless about the wider issues involved, the Ulster Ramblers rep (Alan McFarland I think, but I could be wrong - Update: turns out it was David Flinn - see comment below) did a nice job, with the limited time available, of drawing a contrast between the situation in GB and in Northern Ireland, especially in relation to activity tourism and the economic benefits that countryside access is bringing there.

By contrast, the Ulster Farmers representative didn't even attempt to engage at that level, instead listing the risks that farmers would face if people got access to their land. It was a rather depressing contribution. In an economic environment that is downright awful, especially in rural areas, the UFU guy displayed a complete lack of imagination or willingness to see any positive benefit to greater countryside access. This highlights the job of work that countryside activity advocates have to do in order to make progress with the farming and landowner types.

Again, David did nice job of arguing how a structured countryside access framework could actually minimise risk to landowners by making it clear where people can and cannot go (PRoWs do this very nicely). He also covered the recent unsuccessful attempt to reform the landowners liability legislation.