Public Rights of Way >> Consultations >> Cross Compliance (Defra)
Forestry Commission Scotland's Ae Line Trail at 7Stanes
We wish to respond to paragraphs 70 & 71 regarding Public Rights of Way only.
There are a number of inaccuracies which we would like to note.
With these two sections corrected we would agree with the Possible Measures.
70. Bridleways, Restricted Byways and Byways open to all Traffic are also valuable - and in fact more so as they can be used by equestrian and wheeled users.
71. We agree with this statement providing it is amended to include bridleways and byways as above.
Question 23
Yes, we fully endorse this proposal, particularly in light of the value to the rural economy emphasised during the F & M crisis.
In fact we would like the proposal to be more positive.
A lot of the disquiet from landowners about Rights of Way, reflects the view that they are a negative influence on their business.
We would like to see CAP reform attempt to change this view by offering extra payments for undertaking surface vegetation clearance (the responsibility of the Highways Authority).
This proposal would then mean that rights of way would be regarded more positively by farmers, as they would become a part of the farm's income stream.
Question 24
We consider these proposals to be perfectly workable.
Currently both Highway Authority staff and users monitor the network, and all that would be required would be to have a standard report back process via the Highway Authority, plus the provision of links through to Defra in situations of non compliance.
There are plenty of regulations already existing for users and HA's to utilise in cases of non compliance.
All that would be required would be an extra link to Defra to trigger non payment in such cases.
Colin Palmer
July 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|