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.
Friday, 27 March 2009
APPENDIX IV: Addressing Environmental Concerns
Access to the Foreshore: Addressing Environmental Concerns:
Horse riders & carriage drivers have traditionally enjoyed access to the foreshores for ‘air and exercise’ comparable with the way that our urban commons are now used. This recognised activity is capable of being regulated by byelaws where it is considered necessary.
While government has acknowledged our traditional use of the foreshore, it has stopped short of giving our access statutory protection under the Marine Bill. Despite assurances that existing rights will not be affected, the Bill offers no guarantee that our access will be allowed to continue in a transparent and equitable manner.
Horse riders feel strongly that without formal recognition, it will be all too easy for the Marine Management Authorities and others, to engage in speculation as to the extent of damage horses might cause and to act prematurely to prevent it. The Bill contains no mechanism by which their existing access can be protected from restrictions being imposed in a haphazard fashion around the coast.
Horse riding: evaluation of environmental impact on the foreshore areas:
1. Trampling and erosion:
the Foreshore characteristically comprises a perfectly sustainable, firm sandy surface. Any impact made by horses hooves is repaired twice daily by the natural ebb and flow of the tides.
2. Disturbance of Birds:
the foreshore is obviously unsuitable as a habitat for ground nesting birds, therefore this is unlikely to be an issue[i]. The English Nature, Cumbrian Team (1997) noted that horse riding may disturb migratory and wading birds[ii], however, the UK Marine website states that:
“Disturbance to birds may result from many activities (not just horse riders). The evidence of the impact of these short term events on wider population levels is not conclusive.”
3. Seals:
The UK Marine website also evaluates the possible disturbance of seals by horse riders, which it regards as ‘minimal’[iii].
4. Horse riders feel that it is the experience of people who actually ride horses, that they encounter many more birds and animals on horseback than they do when on foot and it is possible to see species of wildlife at close proximity without startling them. It is widely believed that this is because animals and birds only perceive the closeness of an animal rather than a human threat. An American study tends to bear out that theory.[iv]
“For example, the rapid movement of people in the refuge caused the birds to flush to adjacent ponds. Despite their rapid movements, birds were tolerant of horse riders and only flushed when horses were close enough to trample them.”
5. Horse manure:
In some coastal areas there are byelaws or guidance notes urging horse riders to remove any manure deposited by their horses. Although regarded by many as unpleasant, studies have found that horse manure does not pose a health threat to humans. A study carried out on behalf of the BHS investigated all published written evidence on the subject and concluded that:[v]
“Conclusion:
No evidence in the medical literature that horse manure would pose any significant risk to human health when deposited on public rights of way”
6. One submission of written evidence to the Select Committee the Marine Bill was particularly concerned about water quality and saw horse manure as a health hazard[vi]. It should be noted that the example given to illustrate this was Holkham beach, in Norfolk, where the Household Cavalry hold their summer camp, so it is fair to say that is an exceptional case.
7. As horse riders generally gain access to the foreshore from inland, by means of established linear routes, they feel strongly that they are unlikely to cause any environmental damage that cannot be minimized by good path management. Robust, sustainable paths to the seashore, which help to prevent erosion and disturbance to wildlife, should be an essential provision for all types of visitor to English beaches, therefore, we do not perceive a problem with the status quo.
Conclusion:
We do not believe that there is any evidence that horse riders pose a significant threat to the foreshore areas that cannot be managed by raising awareness of the needs of wildlife or by the existing byelaws.
For these reasons we believe that a statutory right of access to the foreshore for horse riders is appropriate. The Land Reform Act Scotland 2003 has already established such a right. This has enabled the authorities in Scotland to develop a uniform code of conduct for responsible access. It also provides for appeal if access is restricted needlessly, for example, without evidence that actual environmental damage has occurred.
[i] UK Marine: Summary of environmental impacts
http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/activities/recreation/r06_11_2.htm
[ii] English Nature - Cumbrian Team 1997
Access and recreation can result in disturbance to wintering and passage waders and wildfowl on their feeding grounds and at high water roosting sites as well as breeding birds such as terns. This can include disturbance by walkers and particularly their dogs, vehicles, horse riding, microlights, bait digging and wildfowling. These areas, especially the roosting sites, can be limited in extent, and exhaustion and death of birds can result from frequent disturbance of these refuges, especially during cold weather.
http://www.english-nature.org.uk/science/natural/profiles%5CnaProfile119.pdf
[iii] UK Marine. Summary of impacts. Seals
http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/activities/recreation/r06_11_2.htm
[iv] Wildlife tourism
By David Newsome, Ross Kingston Dowling, Susan A. Moore (2005)
Pages 42- 45
“For example, the rapid movement of people in the refuge caused the birds to flush to adjacent ponds. Despite their rapid movements, birds were tolerant of
Horse riders and only flushed when horses were close enough to trample them.”
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ral_pGRWutsC&pg=PA180&dq=1990+%22duffus+and+dearden%22&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES#PPA45,M1
[v] Jane Greatorex November 2006.
Conclusion:
No evidence in the medical literature that horse manure would pose any significant risk to human health when deposited on public rights of way
http://www.bhs.org.uk/_Attachments/Resources/2473_S4.doc
[vi] Memorandum submitted by Jean Perraton (DMB 28)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmenvfru/656/656we25.htm
Horse riders & carriage drivers have traditionally enjoyed access to the foreshores for ‘air and exercise’ comparable with the way that our urban commons are now used. This recognised activity is capable of being regulated by byelaws where it is considered necessary.
While government has acknowledged our traditional use of the foreshore, it has stopped short of giving our access statutory protection under the Marine Bill. Despite assurances that existing rights will not be affected, the Bill offers no guarantee that our access will be allowed to continue in a transparent and equitable manner.
Horse riders feel strongly that without formal recognition, it will be all too easy for the Marine Management Authorities and others, to engage in speculation as to the extent of damage horses might cause and to act prematurely to prevent it. The Bill contains no mechanism by which their existing access can be protected from restrictions being imposed in a haphazard fashion around the coast.
Horse riding: evaluation of environmental impact on the foreshore areas:
1. Trampling and erosion:
the Foreshore characteristically comprises a perfectly sustainable, firm sandy surface. Any impact made by horses hooves is repaired twice daily by the natural ebb and flow of the tides.
2. Disturbance of Birds:
the foreshore is obviously unsuitable as a habitat for ground nesting birds, therefore this is unlikely to be an issue[i]. The English Nature, Cumbrian Team (1997) noted that horse riding may disturb migratory and wading birds[ii], however, the UK Marine website states that:
“Disturbance to birds may result from many activities (not just horse riders). The evidence of the impact of these short term events on wider population levels is not conclusive.”
3. Seals:
The UK Marine website also evaluates the possible disturbance of seals by horse riders, which it regards as ‘minimal’[iii].
4. Horse riders feel that it is the experience of people who actually ride horses, that they encounter many more birds and animals on horseback than they do when on foot and it is possible to see species of wildlife at close proximity without startling them. It is widely believed that this is because animals and birds only perceive the closeness of an animal rather than a human threat. An American study tends to bear out that theory.[iv]
“For example, the rapid movement of people in the refuge caused the birds to flush to adjacent ponds. Despite their rapid movements, birds were tolerant of horse riders and only flushed when horses were close enough to trample them.”
5. Horse manure:
In some coastal areas there are byelaws or guidance notes urging horse riders to remove any manure deposited by their horses. Although regarded by many as unpleasant, studies have found that horse manure does not pose a health threat to humans. A study carried out on behalf of the BHS investigated all published written evidence on the subject and concluded that:[v]
“Conclusion:
No evidence in the medical literature that horse manure would pose any significant risk to human health when deposited on public rights of way”
6. One submission of written evidence to the Select Committee the Marine Bill was particularly concerned about water quality and saw horse manure as a health hazard[vi]. It should be noted that the example given to illustrate this was Holkham beach, in Norfolk, where the Household Cavalry hold their summer camp, so it is fair to say that is an exceptional case.
7. As horse riders generally gain access to the foreshore from inland, by means of established linear routes, they feel strongly that they are unlikely to cause any environmental damage that cannot be minimized by good path management. Robust, sustainable paths to the seashore, which help to prevent erosion and disturbance to wildlife, should be an essential provision for all types of visitor to English beaches, therefore, we do not perceive a problem with the status quo.
Conclusion:
We do not believe that there is any evidence that horse riders pose a significant threat to the foreshore areas that cannot be managed by raising awareness of the needs of wildlife or by the existing byelaws.
For these reasons we believe that a statutory right of access to the foreshore for horse riders is appropriate. The Land Reform Act Scotland 2003 has already established such a right. This has enabled the authorities in Scotland to develop a uniform code of conduct for responsible access. It also provides for appeal if access is restricted needlessly, for example, without evidence that actual environmental damage has occurred.
[i] UK Marine: Summary of environmental impacts
http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/activities/recreation/r06_11_2.htm
[ii] English Nature - Cumbrian Team 1997
Access and recreation can result in disturbance to wintering and passage waders and wildfowl on their feeding grounds and at high water roosting sites as well as breeding birds such as terns. This can include disturbance by walkers and particularly their dogs, vehicles, horse riding, microlights, bait digging and wildfowling. These areas, especially the roosting sites, can be limited in extent, and exhaustion and death of birds can result from frequent disturbance of these refuges, especially during cold weather.
http://www.english-nature.org.uk/science/natural/profiles%5CnaProfile119.pdf
[iii] UK Marine. Summary of impacts. Seals
http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/activities/recreation/r06_11_2.htm
[iv] Wildlife tourism
By David Newsome, Ross Kingston Dowling, Susan A. Moore (2005)
Pages 42- 45
“For example, the rapid movement of people in the refuge caused the birds to flush to adjacent ponds. Despite their rapid movements, birds were tolerant of
Horse riders and only flushed when horses were close enough to trample them.”
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ral_pGRWutsC&pg=PA180&dq=1990+%22duffus+and+dearden%22&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES#PPA45,M1
[v] Jane Greatorex November 2006.
Conclusion:
No evidence in the medical literature that horse manure would pose any significant risk to human health when deposited on public rights of way
http://www.bhs.org.uk/_Attachments/Resources/2473_S4.doc
[vi] Memorandum submitted by Jean Perraton (DMB 28)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmenvfru/656/656we25.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
