I wasn’t going to wade into the debate about Right To Roam planning mass trespasses in woodlands around Britain in March/April. People far more eloquent than me have already said what needed to be said and I have nothing of value to add to that. But…..It’s been a couple of days now, and I can’t shake the irritation I feel about this. And actually there is something I can add – woodlands are my thing. My entire life has revolved around trees and I’d put my knowledge and passion of them up against anybody. So, this is my twopenny worth.
Arrogance or ignorance?
First let’s get the glaring problem with this out of the way; planning a trespass in woodlands across the country at the most critical time of the year for wildlife is just stupid. For a movement that purports to care so much about nature as well as access, this seems extraordinary. Right To Roam is a who’s who of talking head conservationists – you’d think that they could have grasped something as obvious as this. It makes you wonder what the thought processes here were doesn’t it?
Perhaps tellingly if you have a quick glance at Right To Roam’s website – an organization established in 2020 – amongst a lot of hyperbole you can read about what they’re campaigning for and why they need access to all of the countryside, is a very short section called Policy & Briefings. There you will find full and short briefings and a dog policy, but their nature policy is ‘forthcoming’. So doesn’t exist then.
It also makes me wonder what mitigations they have in place for these events. I have, rightly, any number of hoops to jump through at this time of year; Environmental Impact Assessments to adhere to, wildlife constraints to be aware of, risk assessments and method statements to write. And I do. As do the landowners and Forest Managers I work for. Mostly because we care, but also none of us want to get prosecuted. I’d like to see their paperwork. I’d like to know if the standards and consequences are the same as mine. I’d like to be reassured that they are taking the same precautions I do. Will I be reassured? Not on your life.
What R2R really looks like.
I know what right to roam really means for nature. Here in the Dean, Forestry England manage most of the woodlands and they have an open access policy over all of their land nationwide. People come from miles around to walk, cycle or climb around the trees at Go Ape. At this time of the year, especially on the first sunny weekend, the car parks are rammed full. FE have spent millions on facilities, cycle trails (both for families and the lunatics who throw themselves off the downhill tracks) and cafeterias to entice people into the forest. Whatever your thoughts on that, it’s here and it’s staying. Recreation is a part of the countryside, but as with everything there are consequences.
Any given Saturday
Normally I walk my dog well away from the tourist spots and as soon as it’s light enough to see what the silly bugger is about to do. In his defense he is only nine months old so still learning and he is usually pretty good on and off the lead. But occasionally he won’t be able to resist a deer and if I’m not concentrating enough, he might give chase. This is called training. He comes to work with me so I need him to understand what he can and can’t do. Training him where it’s quiet is easier and more productive for both of us.
Last Saturday I was not on the ball so it was mid-morning before I went out. Wife and smallest child wanted to come so, for some reason I still can’t fathom, we decided to park up at New Fancy and stroll down to Mallards Pike, one of the busier places. It was packed with walkers, cyclists and the Parkrun which is held every Saturday morning I think. I saw;
- Hundreds of people, none of whom were quiet.
- Litter. Loads of it. Including the little black dog bag of brushcutters surprise.
- A fully grown man cyclist doing a rear wheel drift 12-year-old me would have been proud of, cheered on loudly by his mates.
- Many dogs off their leads and into everything. Given that I just admitted I run my dog off the lead you may think I’m being a bit hypocritical, but the difference is I am training mine, I know the signs to look out for and I know how to train a dog. And in this instance, taking everything into consideration I kept him on the lead. I saw no attempt to control dogs whatsoever.
Other than the litter, which is disgusting, I find it hard to criticise people for just being people. Of course they’re going to make a racket, they’re here to relax and have fun! If you’ve been presented with the opportunity to hoon about on a bike, or go for a run with 100 other people, or take your dog for a walk, why should you be expected to do it in silence?
If none of those activities are for you, no problem at all, there are some great places to go for a peaceful stroll. The Woodland Trust, for example, manage Cadora Woods which has well signposted walks of various lengths for all abilities. Tip; not far from Tintern where you can buy a teacake the size of a plate. It’s amazing.
I’m working here!
I mentioned about the hoops I have to go through to ensure we are adhering to best practices for safety, the environment and wildlife. The problem with open access is that these hoops don’t apply. Anyone who has ever worked in the woods can tell you stories about how they almost felled a tree on a member of the public, or had to take evasive action to avoid a cyclist getting squished under a forwarder for example. We sometimes have to work on sites which were felled due to disease such as P. Ramorum in larch where cleanliness is of paramount importance. I’ve often been disinfecting kit and boots at the end of the day while watching someone merrily walk their dog through the site. It doesn’t matter how many signs you put up, at some point someone is going to ignore them. Sometimes because they’re away with the fairies and sometimes because they have a ‘right’ to do so.
But that’s open access for you. That’s what we’ve signed up for.
Not like it used to be.
The Dean has changed immeasurably since I was a kid. I could play in the woods for hours – days – and see hardly anyone. Now you can’t move for people. When I passed my driving test in 1999 you could get to your destination in reasonable time, now you’ll be stuck in a convoy of people looking for a car park with spaces.
The wildlife has gone really. Oh we have deer, muntjac, boar and squirrels which we don’t want too much of. We do have goshawks and dormice and other species we want but not in the numbers we used to. When I do go out into the quieter places they’re very quiet places. More people has meant less nature. Even though this is historically a working wood, it was worked with knowledge and sympathy.
People do need nature….
…..But nature doesn’t need people. And this is the fundamental flaw with the Right To Roam movement; it is selfish. It says people are more important than nature and that everyone should have the right to trample all over it. It ignores what nature actually needs to thrive as well as the hard work done by people working the countryside, tirelessly and mostly under the radar, to achieve this.
I often hear ‘Well people just need to be educated about how nature works and how to act around it’ as if that will solve everything. Tell me then, is that the guy chucking his empty can of monster into the verge? Or the guy going as fast as he can on his bike? Or the kid screaming their head off halfway across a rope bridge strung 30 feet up between two conifers planted for their timber? I don’t think they’re interested. The people who might be interested already know, even if they only have a little bit of awareness. It’s like me with this laptop I’m writing on right now; I need it but I couldn’t care less how it works.
When you think about it, there is huge access to outdoor spaces for pretty well everyone. To the vast majority of people is there any difference between walking on a purpose built trail in Forestry England woods and a hike across Dartmoor? Up Pen Y Fan or a similar hill on a private estate? Not really. Take a holiday anywhere in the country and you won’t be far from a green space of some description or another.
Most people just need their fix. That being the case – and I still lament the loss of nature in the Dean – shouldn’t we just take one for the team? Along with the rest of Forestry England, the Woodland Trust, National Parks et al? The public will still get to be in the trees and it’ll be one less pressure for wildlife. If that’s the price to keep precious habitats intact I think it might be worth paying.
Unfortunately wildlife doesn’t get to make a reasoned argument about what is right or wrong about access for people, we have to do that. Guy Shrubsole appears to be the mouthpiece for Right To Roam, it was he that gave the quotes in the Guardian article in which this issue came to light.
For transparency I neither know or have even spoken to Mr Shrubsole, but I have read some of his output on social media and interviews such as this one. I would suspect we actually agree (we all do) that nature needs a helping hand, where we differ is the methods we think should be implemented to do that.
For all that he comes across to me as an intelligent man, albeit one blinded by his own prejudices and unwilling to see there is more than one way to achieve the outcomes we all want to see. Which is what makes this stunt all the more baffling, there is no way he doesn’t know the harm this may cause to wildlife. The sad thing is he also comes across as a man unwilling to accept he’s wrong, swallow his pride and knock this on the head. Of all the barriers to nature recovery, this attitude is the biggest of them all.
