Douglas Chalmers: Rights of way that are out of step with the real needs of Britain’s countryside

Even to call rights of way a “system” suggests an order and logic not apparent in reality. Many thousands of pounds of public money can be spent pursuing claims for paths which have not been used for centuries while present-day users struggle along overgrown paths because there is not enough money for maintenance.

This cannot be right.

People fully understand the concept of owning a house – indeed, this is often the yardstick by which we measure our own success. Yet this attitude often changes when it comes to other people owning or managing rural land, when it seems that everybody should have the right of access and use.

To our members, their land is a business. It is where they earn their living, and it is also their home. It is where they grow crops and raise livestock to feed us all, and where they manage the environment for all our benefit.

Their economic activities are major contributors towards local jobs and the sustainability of rural communities. They should also be entitled to the same degrees of privacy and enjoyment as any other property owner. Yet these facts are continually ignored by many highly vocal, self-interest factions who continue to demand increasing access to this land for their own enjoyment.

As the sole membership organisation for the owners of rural land, property and businesses, we at the CLA are finding ourselves increasingly busy advising members of their rights and responsibilities and the complex legal aspects of allowing access on their land.

Interest in the countryside is to be welcomed, but being interested is not the same as having an interest. There has to be recognition of the property rights of private individuals.

Much of our coastline and land, and many of our rivers are already available for leisure. Many landowners have provided, and often encourage, permissive access. They would willingly provide more to help establish a rights of way network suitable for modern society, but there needs to be give and take.

It can take many years to process a rights of way claim, resulting in enormous cost and ongoing uncertainty for all. Even once fought and won, cases can be reopened and examined all over again – hardly a sensible use of resources.

We do not want more legislation. We should look at the public access we already have and determine where it needs to be improved for the benefit of the majority.

We should consider where people actually want to go and their safety. If that means opening new paths or cycle ways, and closing those now historic and redundant, then that is good use of public money.

Leisure is not the be all and end all. Our land owners and managers need to be allowed to use their land, to feed the nation and to provide environmental and economic benefits for us all.

For an example of skewed Government priorities in this arena, we need look no further than the plan for an all-England coastal path.

Although local authorities have seen their budgets cut, the grand plan for a coastal path, complete with “spreading room”, remains a key objective of Natural England. Yorkshire is already served by well- used coastal paths and our concern is that public money will be used to pay for what largely already exists.

Natural England’s own figures state that more than four-fifths of the coast is already accessible to the public. Of the remaining 16 per cent, only half could be accessed because ports, harbours, military bases or sites of crucial conservation cover the other half.

In these straitened times when the Government is trying to cut public expenditure, it is misguided to spend millions of pounds replicating access that already exists.

If the Government wants to spend money on the coast, then it would be better spent on improving the facilities already on the established coastal paths such as maintenance, signs, toilets and car parks.

In the end, we have to accept that this is a relatively small, densely populated country. Everyone would like the space to live, work or play where they want, but in England we do not have that luxury.

We have to ensure that land can be used for its primary purpose of growing food – and with a rapidly growing world population now in excess of seven billion it has never been more important to ensure that we maintain our ability to keep food on plates.