APPENDIX V A Flawed Consultation Process

Access to the foreshores for horse riders,(widely considered to be public places) has not been properly addressed.

This is because the consultation included the foreshores in the area to be known as the coastal margin, much of which is privately owned land, & includes areas which are more environmentally complex. This blanket approach has resulted in heightened concerns about possible damage and disturbance to the more environmentally sensitive areas.

Result: the question of whether our existing access to the foreshores should be given the same statutory protection as access for those on foot, was never asked.
Excluding us is an arbitrary decision made by government without justification.

Summary of Written Evidence submitted to the Select Committee on the Marine Bill 2008

In Favour:The respondents in favour were characteristically Local Authorities, Local Access Forums and representatives of charitable organisations with an interest in promoting countryside access.

19 respondents in favour.

7 expressed concern that Natural England had not recognized existing traditional recreational use.

4 of those made specific reference to preserving access to beaches for horse riders.

General Comment:

It should also be noted that 3 out of 4 Coastal Access Stakeholder Working Groups who carried out pilot studies on coastal access for Natural England also recommended that horse riders should be included.

Against:

The respondents against were mainly landowners, occupiers or their advisory bodies, + the CPRE and two independent people who expressed walkers perspective.
16 were against the inclusion of higher rights.

(14 if the 2 bodies representing church properties whose only comments were concerned with burial grounds are discounted as not relevant)

7 specifically mentioned being against the inclusion of higher rights on the coastal trail and spreading room.

2 were not in favour of increased use of beaches by horse riders.

General comment:

Those against expressed more concern about disturbance to wildlife and erosion. It was not always clear to whether they were referring to the coastal paths, the coastal margin or the foreshore. Only 2 out of a total of 35 respondents were specifically concerned about horse riders’ current use of the foreshore.