ARNSIDE and SILVERDALE AREA OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY

AONB Management Plan 2014-19 (Final Draft) Public & Partner Consultation Record Document Ref. Draft Plan Text Amendment Suggestions/Feedback Identity AONB Action / Comment No. Part I – Management Plan

1 Introduction Although the plan is understandably concentrating on land and coastal J Trotman - Comment noted and welcomed 2 What is special about & Silverdale AONB management, I was very pleased to see the Furness Line mentioned early CRP on (pp 13 and 17). Overall I think it is a clear, usable, fit for purpose document. R Oaks The Government Forestry Policy Statement was included within the I was surprised though that in your update of what was new since the review of plans, policies etc., forming previous plan, there was no mention of the ‘Independent Panel on Forestry: part of the overall Management Plan final report’ 4th July 2012 or the government response ‘Government review process. A summary of the Forestry Policy Statement’ 31 Jan 13. The issues highlighted in these objectives and requirements of each of documents are the key ones that you do touch on in the management plan; the documents reviewed and how these integrating public benefit, nature and the green economy. With a third of the may be taken on board within the terrestrial AONB being woodlands, these concerns could have been given a Management Plan is included in an higher profile. appendix to the Environmental Report which has been prepared alongside the final Draft of the Management Plan. Objectives and actions are included within the Management Plan which will help meet the objectives within the Policy Statement of protecting, improving and expanding the woodland resource and improving the contribution to economic growth, people’s lives and nature.

The issues included in ‘What’s new’ in the Management Plan are over arching issues affecting the overall management of the AONB rather than specific aspects such as woodland management. 5 What we want to achieve and why Transport and tourism matters are well covered in section 5. J Trotman - Comment noted and welcomed CRP 5.1 An outstanding landscape, rich in wildlife and cultural heritage I am writing to complain about the siting of 2 memorial benches in the Name with- Comments noted. Siting and design of grassland on the public footpath south of White Creek and the New Barns held memorial benches has not been a major caravan park and ask if anything can be done to relocate them. issue in the past within the AONB. However, this recent incident will be The benches and mountings plus trampling occupy a significant area of this looked into and we will ensure that small patch of rare limestone grassland, are visually intrusive, utilitarian appropriate guidance is incorporated in design and unsympathetically installed. They look inappropriate in this under action 1.17 which has been natural setting and are in use as shrines. When I was there yesterday, one amended: of the benches was strewn with carnations and the other has a memorial urn beside it, hardly an invitation for anyone other than the family to use Develop guidance on management of them. I am upset by the destruction of the grassland (of a type that is rural roads, highway improvement subject to considerable effort to conserve in this area) and feel excluded schemes, signage and street/outdoor from what is also one of my favourite places. furniture appropriate to the AONB landscape I am not against memorial benches but the siting and appearance of these is very inappropriate in this high quality landscape and habitat. The design and use is more appropriate to a cemetery or settlement setting.

I see from your website that the AONB Management Plan is currently being reviewed. I couldn't find anything there about memorials so request that you include some guidance on appropriate siting and design to prevent a proliferation of poorly designed and sited objects having an adverse effect on the landscape, habitats and visitor enjoyment of the AONB. Personally, I find memorial plaques on benches off-putting and experience the addition of other mementoes/flowers as territory marking.

Inclusion of new paragraph on fracking: I think it would be worth flagging up D Porter - Paragraph added : alongside other potential development concerns. As with other LCiC The winning of shale gas by hydraulic development pressures identified in the plan, my approach would be to say fracturing (fracking) is currently under that the winning of shale gas by hydraulic fracturing (fracking) is currently consideration for potential development under consideration for potential development in the region, but that the in the northwest of . Any current geological evidence indicates that the area for search for this development would be subject to material will be in the Bowland area, well to the south of the AONB. You consent from the relevant County could continue to say: any development will be subject to consent from the Council as Minerals and Waste relevant county minerals authority, and subject to stringent checks and authority, and subject to stringent regulation through the HSE, EA and DECC. checks and regulation through the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the Environment Agency and the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). The AONB designation would be considered in this process as appropriate

Inclusion of new paragraph on fracking: I was a bit in two minds, fracking is L Woodend - See above very current, which could be an argument for or against including reference SLDC to it. To be honest, I haven’t yet delved into the topic in any detail. I would support David’s suggestion, although rather than referring specifically to where it looks like it might take place, it might keep things more on an even keel if we just say that the current geological evidence does not identify the AONB or its immediate surrounds as a likely area of search. Perhaps we should also say north west of England rather than ‘region’?

Regards, the wording on fracking. I have stuck to a statement on the E Lorimer - See above potential for the development in or close to the AONB, but I have not gone LCC on to make any judgement on how likely exploration and exploitation is, as it really is hard to know. Discussions held with Sue Brett, CCC Minerals & Waste Senior Policy S Brett - See above Officer regarding inclusion of paragraph on fracking. Her concluding CCC comment : I think the new wording is fine, not too detailed, but not ignoring the issue 5.1.1 Landscape and seascape a) A6/M6 Corridor A Dobson - Amendments made to wording in LCiC sections on Commercial scale Projects such as the North West Coastal Connections project have amply renewable energy and Power demonstrated that a challenge is created in North and infrastructure. Additional paragraph by the significant land mass designated as special landscape. The two included in section 5.2.1.1. National Parks and three AONB's sitting alongside this major north south transport and communications corridor means that inevitably development precluded from the special landscapes will be concentrated in the corridor. Dissent is now evident in communities within the corridor about the location of developments such as wind turbines, power lines and housing without appreciating that the value attached to protected landscapes exacerbates this.

Much new infrastructure is essential if more remote communities and towns in the north of England are to enjoy communications and energy security in the same way as the large conurbations do. We will also continue to loose young people to the large cities if they cannot gain access to broadband and communications networks to meet their needs which may be different from those of older settled populations. I think that the AONB Management Plan should be carefully phrased to avoid the accusation that it not only seeks the high level of protection justified within the AONB, but also seeks to impose a similar level of protection outside its boundaries in the very areas where its restrictive development policies push development towards. Only is exceptional circumstances where demonstrable harm would be created to the AONB should a restrictive approach be advocated.

The AONB is a relatively small area and the importance of the setting of the L Woodend - See above AONB is recognised. Nonetheless, as with National Parks, the high level of SLDC protection afforded to nationally protected landscapes can focus development pressure on surrounding areas. Although the AONB fringe is predominantly rural in character, areas close to M6 Junctions 35 and 36 and larger settlements such as and may well need to accommodate significant development. There is also some pressure for renewable energy development around the AONB.

We would welcome if the AONB Management Plan should include a statement to the effect that;

‘Given its strategic location adjacent to the M6 Corridor, built and renewable energy development may be necessary in areas close to the AONB boundary. The AONB unit and local planning authorities will work together to support appropriate development, whilst ensuring that through design, siting and mitigating measures, such development respects the importance of the area as the setting of nationally important landscape’

5.1.2.1 Priority habitats and species and wildlife designations Include reference to inclusion of the Mosaic Approach (integrating the S Hunter – Additional text included in 4 th paragraph: requirements of species into habitat management) as promoted by Natural AONB team England Over 100 species included on the list of England’s priority species are known to occur regularly within the AONB. Of particular note are the Bittern and the Lady’s-slipper orchid. Maintaining and enhancing habitats and improving ecological networks are the core means to conserve species and integrating the requirements of species into habitat management (the Mosaic Approach) will be crucial. However, specifically tailored and targeted action is required for some species for example, the High Brown Fritillary butterfly 5.1.2.1 Woodland management We welcome the Plan’s intentions to protect and promote biodiversity. In B Cartwright Grey squirrels added as a threat to The damage caused by deer in preventing natural woodland regeneration particular we welcome the intention to secure active woodland - WRSS woodland as suggested. remains an issue (particularly for commercial interests) and, although the management. We believe that grey squirrel control is an essential long-term lack of management of traditional boundary walls has been partly component of effective management if serious tree damage is to be addressed through Environmental Stewardship and the AONB Limestone minimised or prevented. We suggest grey squirrels are added to deer as Heritage Project, there is still much work to be done to address the poor threats to woodland in paragraph 5.1.2.1 in the Facts and Challenges condition of walls around woodland. As woodlands are brought into more section at the top of page 30. active management, account should also be taken of the needs of particular species dependent on the retention of dead wood and mature trees within woodland. 5.1.2.2 Invasive non-native species and plant diseases We welcome reference in paragraph 5.1.2.2 on page 32 to the adverse B Cartwright Additional text included in ‘opportunities’ . Opportunities impact of grey squirrels as a non-native invasive species. We suggest you - WRSS section • The Cumbria Freshwater Invasive Non-Native Species (CFINNS) also add a paragraph in the Opportunities section of this paragraph along Initiative launched in April 2010 with the appointment of a county the lines of, “Work with the Red Squirrel Northern England Project and the coordinator. The initiative aims to provide a strategic approach to the Westmorland Red Squirrel Society to develop and implement a squirrel coordination and eradication of INNS within Cumbria. A Biosecurity management strategy.” Plan has been developed for the county to address freshwater non- native species • Funding has been secured to produce an INNS Rapid Response Plan • Funding has been secured through the H2H programme to implement a programme to eradicate cotoneaster and buddleia on coastal margins 5.2.1 Development Management b) Sustainable and Diverse Communities A Dobson - Comments noted. LCiC It is interesting that the Draft Management Plan acknowledges the need to Reference made to LCC’s Strategic attract young people to stay and live within the AONB. The demographic Housing Market Assessment 2013 as and economic arguments for that align well with the findings of Lancaster suggested, and also SLDC’s 2011 City Council's recent Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2013 and for Strategic Housing Market Assessment this reason a cross reference might be useful. It is evident from preparatory work for the City Council's Local Development Document for Land Additional wording included in paragraph Allocations that there appears to be a significant conflict between the aims on ‘Provision of affordable housing to of the Management Plan to support affordable housing and the wishes meet local need’ : of different age groups within local communities who appear to oppose any Opposition to new housing in some form of new housing development. These issues may have to be dealt with communities is a challenge to meeting in detail in the emerging DPD but should be acknowledged clearly as an housing needs and therefore close area of unresolved conflict in the AONB Management Plan to show an working with local communities will be accurate picture. an important element in the development of the DPD for the AONB We welcome the identification in the Management Plan of the challenge of L Woodend - Noted. See above. delivering more affordable housing in a way that does not compromise the SLDC qualities or purpose of the AONB. Vocal opposition to new housing in some communities is a major challenge to meeting local housing needs.

5.1.2.4 Key recent activity and successes p.33 – 34. 5.1.2.4 Shellfishing - Key recent activity and successes M Knott - Comment noted and sentence removed. • Application made by the North Western Inshore Fisheries and NWIFCA Conservation Authority, (NWIFCA) to Defra for a Hybrid Fishery The information about the application for a Hybrid Fishery Order is correct, Order for Bay (covering cockles and mussels), which which if or when granted, will replace the permit scheme. However the allows for restriction of the number of fishing licences. There has sentence stating ‘There has previously been no restriction on the number of previously been no restriction on the number of permits issued. permits issued’ is now out of date. • Project Inshore underway to support scientific research into inshore fisheries. Under the MACA 2009 IFCAs were granted additional powers which the NWIFCA used to introduce a new Cockle and Mussel permitting byelaw (Byelaw 3) in August 2012. This imposed new conditions and a fee for hand-gatherers resulting in a large reduction in the number of permits issued (from just under 500 to 130). Ten new entrants to the fishery will be accepted each year. 5.2.3.1 Sustainable tourism You may want to consider mentioning the Furness Line CRP website in the J Trotman - Thank you for the suggestion. There is Facts and challenges Marketing and Promotion section on p 44 as the use of this site has CRP already a link on the AONB website and Marketing and promotion of the AONB continued to rise; 20,000 unique visits in 2012 to 27,590 in 2013 and we will consider working with CRP on For the economic sustainability of the tourism industry within the AONB, 169,000 hits in 2012 to 234,238 in 2013. Regular news stories from the future promotions. marketing and promotion of the area, its special qualities and accessibility, RSPB at Leighton Moss feature on the News page. both locally and more widely is vital. Close working is needed with organisations responsible for carrying out pre-arrival marketing to send out appropriate, accurate and positive messages about the tourism offer in the AONB and wider area. In the recent Morecambe Bay Visitor Survey, 77% of visitors were aware of the AONB and 71% had visited. 5.2.3.2 Recreational pressure 5.2.3.2 Recreational pressure M Knott - Recreational fishing is acknowledged as Facts and challenges NWIFCA an activity engaged in within the AONB Managing impacts of tourism growth There is a certain amount of recreational fishing activity that occurs within (section 5.2.3.1) and recreational Visitor numbers are expected to rise in the AONB over the coming years. the AONB, particularly around Arnside. Some of this will be carried out by pressures are considered in general The potential impacts of large numbers of visitors include physical and noise local people, and some by tourists. There are benefits to the local economy terms in section 5.2.3.2. Particular disturbance of wildlife by people and dogs, erosion and trampling, damage to from this activity, but there will also be resultant pressures. Would it be pressures leading to detrimental impacts roadside verges due to car parking, litter and dog fouling, creating potential possible to incorporate recreational angling (mainly from shore) within the are identified but we do not consider that adverse impacts on the tranquillity of the area. Plan? this is currently the case with angling.

The growth of tourism brings pressures for the development of new facilities such as car parks and the expansion of caravan sites and can lead to increased traffic and parking on rural roads and in villages. Such growth needs careful management to minimise impacts on landscape character and tranquillity. Parking is already an issue at key sites and the limited nature of official parking within the whole AONB needs to be addressed.

There are some changes occurring in the types of recreational activity people engage in within the AONB. Jet skis are occasionally used on the estuary on a high tide, motorbikes are sometimes used on the foreshore and mountain bikes are sometimes used on footpaths. The level of such activity is not being monitored but disturbance to wildlife, damage to habitats and impacts on tranquillity can result if levels increase and are not carefully managed.

It is important to recognise the essential role that tourism plays in the local economy and to ensure that recreational pressure is managed effectively at a strategic level to ensure pressures are minimised. Development and management of sustainable forms of tourism and the promotion of quiet recreation should remain a priority. 5.2.4.2 Sustainable and integrated transport In the transport section, 5.2.4.2, I was very pleased to see support for the J Trotman - Comment noted and welcomed CRP's aspiration for the Furness Line to be electrified between Carnforth CRP and Barrow. We're pressing for an economic case to be made for the high level of investment needed to achieve this aim of having a regular, high quality electric train service along the line and through to Manchester. We're starting to develop the Hub station projects and other infrastructure developments along the line and additional publicity for 2014. 5.3.2.1 Community involvement We welcome the encouragement of community engagement in the B Cartwright It is felt that community involvement in Key recent activity and successes implementation of the Management Plan as described in paragraph 5.3.2.1 - WRSS the conservation of the many aspects of • Running of a successful AONB Volunteer Programme providing on page 56. We suggest you explicitly include our engagement with your the AONB is reflected throughout the opportunities to engage in practical conservation management tasks, team in the key recent activity and successes section on page 56. text of Part 1 of the Management Plan. monitoring, administration and event support amounting to thousands The engagement of WRSS, specifically, of hours of volunteer time every year dedicated to achieving AONB is now acknowledged by inclusion as a objectives partner in delivery of action 6.6 • Successful volunteer programmes delivered by partner organisations • AONB Landscape Trust Reserve Management Group established • Successful delivery of BCCIC projects such as the AONB Atlases and Guides to the flora of the AONB, and installation of solar panels at School and the Leeds Children Holiday Centre under the Low Carbon initiative • NIA Community Engagement officer carrying out a programme of coordinated volunteering tasks to involve new and existing volunteers • Successful delivery of Arnside Big Volunteer Day and Arnside Bioblitz • Good participation in consultation of AONB Outline Plan Proposals

Part II – Delivery Plan re Delivery Plan: when using initials for an organisation it is usual to I Stewart - We will ensure this list is included within provide the full names somewhere in the document. CCC the Delivery Plan document in the final version.

for some of the activities you relegate the role that principle authorities play. Please see individual responses below

c) Delivering the Plan. A Dobson - Comment noted. A review of priorities LCiC within the Delivery Plan has been The Management Plan requires considerable investment by public bodies undertaken and some revisions made. and the taxpayer to deliver its objectives. There is not statement in the The Delivery Plan is now considered to delivery plan which recognises the current unprecedented period of be realistic. The following additional austerity affecting the public finances. Not do do so could generate the paragraph has also been included within feeling that the Management Plan exists in a utopian business environment section 6.1 and the Delivery Plan: and that some of its delivery objectives are over ambitious at the current time. I am certainly concerned that there are a lot of actions in the Action It is acknowledged that considerable Plan which are Priority 1 when, in the current financial environment they financial resources will be required for might be lower priority. I can also see some advantage in down grading successful implementation of the some priorities as funding bids could use the counter argument that an Delivery Plan. In the context of the action rises up the priority list if it is funded. current period of austerity, priorities for actions have been carefully assessed and the Plan is considered to be realistic. However, it may be that over the five year period of the Management Plan, some flexibility is required to accommodate changes in funding and financial circumstances and this will be done through the annual review.

The delivery plan should indicate the financial resources necessary for L Woodend - See above implementation, how these will be sourced and what flexibility and SLDC contingencies exist in the event of changes in financial circumstances. We would support the addition of a reference to how economic circumstances and budget/other financial expectations have been taken into account in setting the Delivery Plan and how in principle the Delivery Plan would adapt to changes in funding/financial circumstances.

5.8 5.8 Establish a project to encourage the sensitive management of roadside Objective 5, Action 5.8 : Suggest that the ASAONB are the lead partner, R Pearse - Amended as suggested trees and vegetation to enhance the wildlife and landscape value of verges with ‘LA’ as supporting partner. I am not aware that Cumbria County CCC and highway margins Council has committed to establishing any such project, but as Highways Authority in Cumbria, the County Council would be closely involved in the implementation of any such work. 5.17 5.17 Deliver the Morecambe Bay European Marine Site Management p. 11 5.17 – ‘fishing orders’ should read ‘fishery orders’. M Knott - Amended as suggested Scheme Action Plan (2012-2015) and successor plans and implement NWIFCA relevant fishing orders to effectively manage shellfishing activity in Morecambe Bay and ensure potential impacts on the AONB are minimised. 5.32 5.32 Develop and deliver bee roads project to provide connectivity of It would be great if you could include the B-Lines Initiative in your AONB P Evans - B-Lines Initiative included as an action pollination habitat Management plan BUGLIFE with Buglife identified as lead partner

I would prefer it was mentioned as the delivering ‘Buglife’s B-Lines Initiative’ in your plan rather than Bee Roads – as the Bee Roads is one project within this wider (hopefully eventually UK-wide) B-Lines network. Happy to check any wording you might come up with.

6 Objective 6: Prevent introduction of, halt the spread of and where appropriate We welcome Objective 6 in the Delivery Plan and its references to halting B Cartwright WRSS now included as a partner in eradicate, invasive non-native species and plant diseases the spread of non-native invasive species and, where possible, their - WRSS action 6.6. eradication. We particularly welcome Action 6.6 and its intention to 6.1 Develop programmes of activity to encourage eradication of Himalayan contribute to grey squirrel control. We would welcome the inclusion of the Whilst we recognise the importance of Balsam, Japanese Knotweed, Giant Hogweed and other INNS within the Westmorland Red Squirrel Society (WRSS) as a partner (or as a lead this action, difficult decisions have had AONB as part of wider initiatives partner with RSNE). And we would also suggest this action is afforded a to be made on prioritising actions within higher priority; our experience suggests that given the relatively recent last the Delivery Plan and it is considered 6.2 Establish a rapid response plan and programme of activity to report, red sighting in 2009, re-colonisation by reds could succeed if there is urgent that action 6.6 has been prioritised monitor and raise awareness of INNS within the AONB attention to grey control. appropriately The management plan looks great, the only comments I have are on the B Corrie- Comments noted. Biosecurity is now 6.6 Contribute to grey squirrel control in accordance with recognised red delivery plan and these are as below in red. We work on the three elements Close - included within action 6.2: squirrel conservation strategy and guidance from the Red Squirrels Northern of the Invasive Non-Native Species Framework Strategy for GB which is: SCRT England partnership Establish a rapid response plan and · Prevention, programme of activity to report, monitor and raise awareness of biosecurity and · Early detection, surveillance, monitoring and rapid response, INNS within the AONB

· Mitigation, control and eradication

Objective 6: Prevent introduction of, halt the spread of and where appropriate eradicate, invasive non-native species and plant diseases

· Develop biosecurity and awareness programme to prevent the introduction or spread of new INNS

· Develop programmes of activity and training (Set up Local Action Groups ) to encourage control / eradication of Himalayan balsam, Japanese knotweed, Giant hogweed and other INNS within the AONB as part of wider initiatives

· Establish a rapid response plan and programme of activity to report, monitor and raise awareness of INNS within the AONB

9.2 9.2 Develop and implement Conservation Area Management Plans and re Objective 9 I Stewart - Text amended and specific reference to research and designate new Conservation Areas, with Arnside as a priority the designation of Arnside as a priority for a Conservation Area CCC Arnside removed Management Plan is not acceptable (I appreciate that this is an SLDC issue rather than CCC, but it is not for CCC to endorse) 9.3 9.3 Safeguard the long-term future of industrial archaeology and industrial Objective 9, Action 9.3 : Suggest that the ASAONB are also included as a R Pearse - Amended as suggested heritage sites and features within the AONB through environmental land lead partner, since conservation of heritage features through the CCC management schemes and development management and develop development management process is a statutory responsibility of planning interpretation of the AONB’s industrial archaeology authorities, but the development of interpretation of these features is not. 10.1 10.1 As a companion document to the AONB Management Plan, prepare re Objective 10 I Stewart - Text amended to read ‘ properly reflects and adopt a dedicated Development Plan Document for the Arnside & the Local Plan to be developed can fully recognise the AONB designation CCC the purposes of AONB designation.’ Silverdale AONB that has the AONB designation and purpose at its heart and purpose, but this can not be "at it's heart". and that fulfils the obligations relating to AONBs as set out in the National For consistency, similar text also Planning Policy Framework (see Management Plan section 1.9 for more amended in sections detail of what the DPD will seek to achieve) (see also Action 1.2) 12.5 12.5 Promote local Morecambe Bay fishery once the new Hybrid Fishery p.21 Objective 12 - Support and encourage sustainable production and use M Knott - Comment noted. Wording of action 12.5 Order is in place of local products, especially those linked to natural beauty NWIFCA amended:

‘12.5 Promote local Morecambe Bay fishery once the new Hybrid Fishery Promote locally sourced and sustainable Order is in place’ Morecambe Bay fishery products, including cockles once the new Hybrid I am assuming this refers purely to cockles and understand why the AONB Fishery Order is in place might want to wait until the Fishery Order is in place before actively promoting this fishery. However, I would suggest that there are other fishery products from Morecambe Bay, such as mussels and shrimps, that the AONB could consider to promote immediately as locally sourced and sustainable foods.

17 Objective 17: Coordinate action to minimise both terrestrial and marine litter p.26 Objective 17: Coordinate action to minimise both terrestrial and marine M Knott - Comment noted and action 17.2 litter NWIFCA amended:

Would it be possible to include a clause along the lines of: ‘Identify local Identify local sources of marine litter and sources of marine litter and seek to raise awareness and act where seek to raise awareness and act where possible to remove these sources’. possible to remove these sources through the Love my Beach programme and carrying out regular beach cleans

19.1 19.1 Promote public transport, and link events and activities to public re Objective 19 I Stewart - The local authorities, Cumbria Tourism 19.2 transport wherever possible clearly the ASAONB is not the "Lead Partner" in areas which are the CCC and Marketing Lancashire have been responsibility of Principal Authorities, such as public transport, cycling and included as lead partners 19.2 Promote cycling and walking as alternatives to using private cars walking activities. wherever possible

20.5 20.5 Support the improvement of facilities including disabled access, re Objective 20 I Stewart - Local authorities have been included as interpretation and linkages at Arnside, Silverdale and Carnforth stations in all of the actions in this section are flawed in the role of the various CCC a partner in 20.5 order to develop these stations as visitor arrival and information hubs partners...... there is implication that "disabled access" at Arnside station may be the responsibility of CCC

21.1 21.1 Encourage community participation in decision making by ensuring re Objective 21 I Stewart - Local authorities included as a lead effective and inclusive consultation is carried out on all major AONB plans the lead partner to "encourage community participation" with regard to the CCC partner and strategies, in particular the AONB Development Plan Document and the Local Plan lies with the Planning Authorities, whose Plan it will be next AONB Management Plan

24.1 24.1 Develop the Arnside viaduct as a strategic cycle/walkway link between re Objective 24 I Stewart - Wording of action 24.4 has been 24.4 Arnside and Grange, securing funding for and carrying out a General Rail as the Local Highways Authority the role of CCC re the Arnside viaduct CCC amended for clarification 24.5 Infrastructure Project (GRIP) study as a first step project can not be underestimated and the responsibility for the development of "new cycle routes" lies elsewhere than the ASAONB, as CCC and LCC included as partners 24.4 Develop new cycle routes and promote as downloadable routecards does that for Coastal Path and the bridleway network under action 24.5

24.5 Deliver the England Coast Path within the AONB, working with owners CCC and LCC included as partners and partner organisations to plan and implement a route which does not under action 24.8 have significant detrimental impacts on key historic, geological and biodiversity assets

24.8 Explore possibilities to expand the bridleway network in a sensitive way to enhance the horse riding and off-road cycling experience within the AONB

25.2 25.2 Facilitate roll out of 20mph speed limits within villages whilst ensuring re Objective 25 I Stewart - Noted signage is appropriate to its setting the signage re 20mph areas is prescribed and it is for the respective CCC Highway Authority to enact General comments The team are to be congratulated for a wide ranging and very thorough A Dobson - Comment noted and welcomed. review. The final draft just leaves me with small concerns about three LCiC issues.

These relate to :- Issues addressed under individual sections above a) The approach to the A6/M6 Corridor.

b) The approach to Sustainable and Diverse Communities.

c) The Delivery Plan.

I am very impressed with the amount of detail contained within the Plan and M Knott - Comment noted and welcomed the work of the AONB, and wish you continued success. NWIFCA We would like to commend the AONB Management Team for their work in L Woodend - Comment noted and welcomed producing this clear and comprehensive plan. SLDC We have reviewed your Arnside & Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural D Sherratt - Comment noted. Beauty Management Plan 2014-2019 (Final Draft) and we have no UU comments to make at this stage, but wish to be included in further consultations and where necessary, the development of your Management Plan and any supporting polices. I have not received any comments on the final draft from any of my LCC E Lorimer - Comment noted and welcomed colleagues and I have no further comments to make on the Management LCC Plan. I will be recommending in a report to LCC cabinet member to approve/adopt the plan.

BUGLIFE – Buglife – The Invertebrate Conservation Trust CRP – Community Rail Partnership, Furness & Lakes Lines CCC – Cumbria County Council LCC – Lancashire County Council LCiC – Lancaster City Council NWIFCA – North Western Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority SCRT – South Cumbria Rivers Trust SLDC – South Lakeland District Council WRSS – Westmorland Red Squirrel Society UU – United Utilities