GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF OUR NATIONAL PARKS
In May 2018 the UK Government asked for an independent review into whether the protections for National Parks and Area's of Outstanding Natural Beauty are still fit for purpose. In particular, what might be done better, what changes will help and whether the definitions and systems in place are still valid.
The review’s final report was published on 21 September 2019. It was led by Julian Glover and supported by an experienced advisory group: Lord Cameron of Dillington, Jim Dixon, Sarah Mukherjee, Dame Fiona Reynolds and Jake Fiennes.
It is a very in-depth report and I encourage you to read and digest. Snowdonia is an area where we operate and although the advisory group did not visit this particular area, much of the final report remains valid.
FULL REPORT HERE
"There can be few national purposes which, at so modest a cost, offer so large a prospect of health‐giving happiness for the people"
John Dower argued this in the closing words of the report which led to the system we have today. He wrote those words on 12 April 1945, as Allied forces closed in on Berlin. But Dower pushed on, arguing that the Britain which would follow the war would be happier and healthier if our finest landscapes were kept safe for everyone and for all time.
What needs to change?
National Parks were created in part to provide a healing space, both mentally and physically, for the many who had given so much to protect our country during the Second World War. THEY WERE MEANT FOR EVERYBODY
Much has changed in the 70 years since. Modern Britain is a very different place socially and demographically. Today we recognise diversity as the mark of a healthy and resilient society. However, many landscape bodies have not moved smartly enough to reflect this changing society, and in some cases show little desire to do so.
Of the almost 1,000 people on National Park and AONB boards today, the great majority are male, many are of retirement age and a tiny fraction are of black, Asian or minority ethnicities. This is wrong for organisations which are funded by the nation to serve everyone.
We are all paying for national landscapes through our taxes, and yet sometimes on our visits it has felt as if National Parks are an exclusive, mainly white, mainly middle‐class club, with rules only members understand and much too little done to encourage first time visitors.
OUR NATIONAL LANDSCAPES ARE NATIONAL AND THAT MEANS THEY SHOULD BE PLACES FOR EVERYONE
We want our nation’s most cherished landscapes to fulfill their original mission for people, providing unrivalled opportunities for enjoyment, spiritual refreshment and in turn supporting the nation’s health and wellbeing. In turn, we want to see our national landscape bodies doing much more to reach out and welcome people in. An important way of getting interest across all of society is of course to inspire our younger generations. This is why we set out a proposal for every child to spend at least one night in
a national landscape. We think that seeing and knowing our country is the best way to respect and save it.
Lastly, we make recommendations which aim to maximise the most of what we have, strengthening links with other designations, bringing National Trails into the national landscapes family, and considering further open access rights in our national landscapes.
LANDSCAPES FOR ALL
Some will always want the solitude of the wild fells, drawn to the joy of tramping up Eskdale past Hardknott on a frosty March morning, or taking a pony across Exmoor in the long daylight of June. These are pleasures people have enjoyed since the Romantic poets first popularised them, and which were a founding part of the movement which led to the creation of our National Parks.
Many others do different things and the way we visit and use the countryside is changing: mass all‐night walks for charities; volunteering; mountain biking; music festivals; scuba diving; glamping; arts trails; cycle racing and more.
But we also know that there are large parts of society that have no relationship with them at all. Their overall popularity masks big differences in the types of people who enjoy them. Some remain excluded. We have tried to reach some of those groups during the review. Their views and experiences have heavily shaped our thinking.
The founding mission is even more important today. Changing demographics, physical and mental health and technology mean there are new challenges. We want to see our landscapes reaching out and welcoming everyone.
Concerns were also raised about what are perceived to be restrictive laws, or restrictive interpretations of them. We heard, for instance, how cavers face restrictions on what is otherwise designated as open access land once they move beyond an unspecified distance from cave entrances, perhaps the limit of daylight.
We heard from canoeists how access is restricted to a tiny percentage of waterways which increases the pressure on ‘uncontested’ rivers. There is a lack of consistency between National Parks with some considered to be promoting shared and fair access, others less so. And there seems little logic across the country to the nature of rights of way at the moment. Cumbria and Shropshire are rich in bridlepaths. In some other places, almost all routes are only open to walkers not horse riders or cyclists. As even rural roads become busier and more dangerous, it is all the more important that fair access is given to all.
Our national landscapes should be alive for people, places where everyone is actively welcomed in and there are unrivalled opportunities to enjoy their natural beauty and all it offers: LANDSCAPES FOR ALL.