Hampshire Downs

Countryside Access Plan for the Hampshire Downs 2008-2013

NORTH WESSEX DOWNS AONB TA D LE Y

A33 WILTSHIRE A340 A34 A339 A343 A30

BASINGSTOKE

OAKLEY A342

ANDOVER

A303 SURREY 012340.5 M3 Miles A339

Legend ALTON Hampshire Downs CAP Area Motorway ARoad FOUR MARKS Rivers A31 Built up areas NEW Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty ALRESFORD WINCHESTER Loddon & Eversley Heritage Area WEST SUSSEX EAST HAMPSHIRE County Boundary AONB © Crown copyright. All rights reserved, HCC 100019180 2008 The Hampshire Downs area

Hampshire County Council would like to thank the many people – local residents, landowners and land managers, user-group representatives, local authority officers, elected members and a host of others – who were involved in the work to produce this plan.

The product of their efforts and support is a framework which will enable the County Council and others to work together to improve countryside access across Hampshire and to make it available for the widest possible range of people to enjoy. Hampshire Downs

Contents

Introduction………………………….……………………… 2

The Hampshire Downs area….…….…………………..... 3

Vision …………………………………….………………...... 5

Summary of findings …………………...…………….….... 6

Main issues ……………………………….…………………. 7

Guide to the action tables …………….……………..…... 8

Issues and proposed actions ………………………..10 - 25

Appendix 1 – Extent of rights of way network

Appendix 2 – Overview of access

ȱ 1 Countryside Access Plan

Introduction

This Countryside Access Plan (CAP) for Each area CAP should be read in the Hampshire Downs area is one of conjunction with the County Overview seven area plans which, together with an CAP, which reports on the research done eighth ‘County Overview’ CAP, form the to produce the plans, identifies the Rights of Way Improvement Plan County Council’s main, county-wide aims (ROWIP) for the county of Hampshire. for improving access to Hampshire’s countryside and explains how these plans The duty for local highway authorities to are influencing the way the County produce a ROWIP was established Council delivers its services. through the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. A ROWIP is intended to The area CAPs explore in greater detail provide the means by which the highway the specific issues affecting enjoyment of authority will manage and improve its the countryside in a particular part of the rights of way network to meet the county and propose actions to address Government’s aim of better provision for them. These actions are intentionally walkers, cyclists, equestrians and people broadly-defined and aspirational. They do with mobility problems. ROWIPs are not necessarily relate to increasing public closely linked with Local Transport Plans, access to the countryside; many of them with the aim of delivering a more are about enhancing and improving the integrated approach to sustainable existing network. transport in rural and urban areas; where The area covered by each CAP has been the two plans share common aims this determined broadly by landscape also creates further opportunities for the character, as this reflects factors such as funding of rights of way improvements. land use, demography, soil type and Hampshire County Council’s ‘Countryside topography, which closely affect rights of Access Plans’ relate not just to the rights way, countryside sites and other access to of way network but to the whole range of the countryside. opportunities for people to enjoy The CAPs were initially published as drafts Hampshire’s countryside. These include for consultation, with a minimum of 3 areas designated as Open Access under months allowed for comment and CROW, sites managed by the County feedback from the public, user groups, Council, by other local authorities and by local authorities, government agencies and organisations such as the National Trust other organisations. Comments on the and Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Hampshire Downs draft were received Trust, together with Forestry Commission from 21 respondents; more than a third of woodlands, MoD land and permissive these were from users (mainly walkers access provided by farmers and other and horse riders), and a similar number private landowners. were from parish or town councils. This document is a revision of that consultation draft, which has taken into account all the comments and feedback received.

2 ȱ Hampshire Downs

The Hampshire Downs area

This Countryside Access Plan for the The provision of rights of way across the Hampshire Downs covers an area of area is generally good in terms of quantity; approximately 89,000 hectares, extending overall network density is 19% greater from the county boundary with Berkshire than the average for Hampshire as a in the north to the boundary of the A32 whole and there is a particularly high and the A272 in the south; and from the density of byways open to all traffic county boundary with Wiltshire in the (BOATs) and restricted byways (RBs). west to , Alton and the county However, these figures are purely boundary with Surrey in the east. The area quantitative and do not reflect the includes most of connectivity or ‘usability’ of the public Borough and small parts of Test Valley rights of way network. Several rights of Borough, Hart District, East Hampshire way pass through (and therefore provide a District and Winchester City District. certain amount of access to) heritage sites such as The Grange, Manor, The main conurbations within the area are Hackwood Park and Park. Basingstoke, Alton and . The towns There is some unevenness in the rights of of Andover and Whitchurch lie just way distribution and a number of outside the boundary to the west, and substantial gaps in the network, for just to the east. The city of example at Micheldever, Airfield Winchester lies just to the south west of and Litchfield. the boundary. The main areas of open access are found The Hampshire Downs CAP area is along the downs to the south and west of characterised by rolling chalk , and at Tadley Common. There and open valleys, punctuated by blocks of are few publicly- owned sites in the area woodland. There are many large, privately that provide significant off-road public owned estates in the area and much of the access and no local authority country land is under arable crops or improved parks or other sites with visitor facilities. pasture. It is arguably an anomaly that a The northern part of the area includes a conurbation as large as Basingstoke substantial part of the North Wessex (population of over 80,000, and growing) Downs Area of Outstanding Natural has no publicly-owned country park Beauty (NWDAONB) and of the Loddon nearby. and Eversley Heritage Area. There are a Hampshire County Council promotes number of Sites of Special Scientific several long distance walking routes within Interest (SSSIs); these are mainly and across the area: the Wayfarers Walk concentrated in the northern part of the long distance trail (70 miles Portsmouth - area and include Forest and Inkpen Beacon), St. Swithuns long distance Woods. As in much of trail (34 miles Winchester-Farnham), the Hampshire, there are many Sites of Oxdrove Way loop (which links from the Importance for Nature Conservation Wayfarers Walk), the millennium trail (SINCs); there is also a National Nature near Alresford (for those with less Reserve (Ashford Hill Meadows) within mobility), and part of the Test Way. In the Hampshire Downs. Overall, a addition, a number of parishes have relatively low proportion of the area is produced maps of local walks and several designated as important for nature local walking guides are available on parish conservation. websites.

ȱ 3 Countryside Access Plan

Hampshire County Council also promotes organisations as well as local authorities a number of cycling routes in the area provide walking routes (for example, (including off-road trails around Alton, wildlife walks) at their sites. Oxdrove Way, Watership Down and There is a significant amount of permissive Basingstoke) and National Cycle Network access in the Hampshire Downs, which routes (e.g. route 23 Basingstoke – Alton comes a close second behind the Test and and Alresford). Itchen in terms of the total number of Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Countryside Stewardship Schemes and owns and manages woodland sites Higher Level Environmental Stewardship (including Beggarwood and Old Down schemes (HLS) in the area. There are also Woodland Parks, Binfields Woodland Park a number of estates and farm businesses and Daneshill Park Woods Local Nature which regularly arrange farm walks, open Reserve) and local parks (Black Dam days and other public events. These Ponds Nature Reserve, Park private businesses can often offer more and Park) which are open visitor facilities than publicly-owned sites to the public for recreation. which are generally too small for such facilities to be appropriate. There is also public access to sites managed by the Hampshire and Isle of The Hampshire Downs is thus a working Wight Wildlife Trust (e.g. Pamber Forest), rural landscape which also provides many the National Trust (The Chase and the opportunities for quiet enjoyment of the Vyne Estate) and the Forestry countryside. Commission (Micheldever Wood). These

4 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Vision

The Vision for this Countryside Access Plan for the Hampshire Downs is: To provide local people and visitors with a high quality, sustainable network of rights of way and other access to the countryside, aiming to ensure that access within the area: x meets the needs of walkers, cyclists and equestrian users, including people with limited mobility, for a safe and coherent system of routes x makes the most of existing access x seeks to create new routes that will improve the utility and enjoyment of the network x invites exploration and appreciation of the landscape and its cultural, ecological and historic heritage x encourages responsible enjoyment of the countryside, that takes account of the needs of those who live and work there x is developed and managed in a way that balances the needs of local people and visitors with the protection of the environment, biodiversity and working landscape of the area x is managed and promoted in a coordinated way by the various organisations, agencies and authorities involved x supports the development of a wider range of transport options within the area.

This plan supports the overall vision for the Hampshire Local Transport Plan of a strategy that enhances quality of life and economic prosperity by connecting people, communities, employment, goods, services and amenities.

ȱ 5 Countryside Access Plan

Summary of Findings

The main local issues in the Hampshire Downs area relate to the difficulties in Landowners are concerned about connecting those who live in the towns increased workload, risk and financial and villages with a predominantly rural burden involved in providing access. area that is managed mainly for farming Although most would be willing to discuss and forestry. With only a few publicly- improvements and potential permissive owned sites offering significant areas of routes, many are reluctant to provide public access, the linear network of rights public access due to problems of way and other paths is a particularly experienced with littering, trespass, burnt important part of the countryside access out cars, vandalism etc. resource in the area. Local people The following pages provide a rationale for consulted for this plan were concerned each of the 8 issues identified within the about the safety, connectivity and Hampshire Downs area and propose condition of this network; about the need actions that could be undertaken to help to improve links and create more circular to resolve them. The order in which these routes for all users; and about the need are set out is not indicative of priority. for better information about the access that is available.

6 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Main issues

The Hampshire Downs is a large and predominantly rural part of Hampshire which offers many opportunities for quiet enjoyment of the countryside. However:

1. Local people are relatively 5. There is a need for more links in dependent on the car for transport the network, to create a range of between the main conurbations, off-road, circular routes for all rural settlements and the users (page 18) countryside (page 10) 6. Better information is needed to 2. Countryside users are forced to facilitate and promote enjoyment use or cross busy roads to link up of the countryside for all and rights of way and other off-road encourage responsible use access (page 12) (page 20)

3. Good maintenance of routes is a 7. Effective, coordinated access priority for countryside users management within the area (page 14) requires good communication and understanding between and among 4. There is a strong demand for users, landowners and access improved physical accessibility and managers (page 22) usability of existing countryside access, particularly for those who 8. Public access can create difficulties are less mobile (page 16) for land managers, landowners and farmers (page 24)

ȱ 7 Countryside Access Plan

Guide to the Action Tables

The action tables in the following pages propose a range of actions to address the issues affecting enjoyment of the countryside in the Hampshire Downs CAP area. The actions relate to a series of main aims. They provide examples of how these aims could be achieved in this part of Hampshire, but should not be regarded as an exhaustive list of all the possible ways of achieving those aims.

Estimated Costs The following symbols are used to indicate the estimated costs: b Use of existing staff b Extra staff requirements Costs could be met within current budgets for £ management and maintenance (e.g. projects up to £5,000) Action would require planned investment/capital bid (e.g. ££ costs between £5,000 – £50,000) Action would require substantial investment from other £££ sources such as Local Transport Plan, joint funding with partner organisations, grant aid (e.g. projects costing more than £50,000)

Timescales Columns in the tables indicate whether the proposed actions are: x Current, on-going work or projects x Medium term (aim to achieve in the next 2-5 years) x Long term, aspirational schemes

8 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Lead Bodies and Potential Partners The lead body is shown in bold, where it is known. The following acronyms are used in this column: CLA Country Land and Business Association Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs FC Forestry Commission HA Highways Agency HCAF Hampshire Countryside Access Forum HCC(CS) Hampshire County Council (Countryside Service) HCC(HH) Hampshire County Council (Hampshire Highways) HCL Hampshire Country Learning HWT Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust Landowners Includes private and public landowners, including organisations such as National Trust and Forestry Commission NE Natural NFU National Farmers’ Union NT National Trust Parish For conciseness, where parish councils are referred to this also includes councils town councils User groups Organisations such as CTC (Cyclists’ Touring Club), BHS (British Horse Society), Ramblers Association, BDS (British Driving Society) Users People who walk, ride, cycle or drive on countryside access routes WT Woodland Trust

NB: Lead bodies and potential partners are suggested as appropriate. Inclusion in this part of the table, however, does not automatically indicate that these organisations have undertaken to deliver the actions.

ȱ 9 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 1 – Local people are relatively dependent on the car for transport between the main conurbations, rural settlements and the countryside

The Countryside Agency’s rights of way Basingstoke and Deane owning 2 or more use and demand survey (2001) found that cars, so the demand for suitable parking in only 4% of households undertaking the countryside is also high. The majority activities in the countryside use public of users consulted in the research for this transport to get to the start of their plan reported that the availability of route. suitable secure parking (e.g. cycle parking, There is limited provision of evening and disabled spaces, parking for horseboxes weekend public transport, particularly bus and trailers for horse-drawn carriages) services, within the Hampshire Downs greatly influenced their choice of where to area. Only half of the settlements in the go in the countryside. area have a bus service1; those which are Local people consulted for this plan also available are geared to weekday peak expressed a desire for new links in the commuter times and usually stop before network to enable safe ‘car-free’ exit 6pm. There is little active promotion of from, and links between, urban areas. Part the limited weekend and evening services of the problem is that busy roads around that are available: and out of the towns are unappealing and unattractive to non-motorised users, in “Sunday bus services have just about some places representing an active abandoned the countryside.” deterrent to use. Councils in the area are Although there are frequent mainline rail keen to develop a safe, convenient, services on both weekends and weekdays efficient and attractive transport to stations within the area, a lack of infrastructure, that encourages and walking and cycling routes between facilitates the use of public transport, railway stations and the wider cycling and walking as alternatives to car countryside, coupled with limited carrying use. In the future, Basingstoke and Deane capacity for cycles, means that public Borough Council aims to grant planning transport is not a favoured option for permission only to developments where getting out into the countryside for those cycling and walking infrastructure is who have access to a car. integrated with the development and “Micheldever, one of the only Hampshire linked to the surrounding networks. Downs country stations on the mainline, has hopeless links to the path network, and no pedestrian link to the nearby, very large access area of Black Wood.” Access to the countryside by public transport is even more difficult for disabled users who require special arrangements and assistance, and the use of ramps at railway stations. Car use is high in this area, with over 52% of households in the Borough of

1 Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Rural Strategy 10 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Provide, maintain and promote good quality routes that link town and countryside. HD Identify, develop and promote HCC(CS) / 1.1 walking and cycling routes that b HCAF / link towns and villages to the ££ district & parish countryside, e.g. the Surrey and councils / local Hampshire Canal Society’s ‘Last residents / user 5 Miles’ project2; work with local groups / people to identify priority links. landowners HD Work with Hampshire Highways HCC(CS) / 1.2 and Highways Agency to ensure b HCC(HH) / project appraisal for new road HA / user schemes includes needs of groups walkers, cyclists, riders, carriage drivers and disabled users. AIM: Encourage and support car-free travel. HD Develop and promote walking HCC(CS) / 1.3 and cycle routes that connect b Transport with public transport links. ££ providers / users HD Improve and promote existing  HCC(CS) / 1.4 bus and train services to b transport countryside sites, and where £££ providers / FC they link with promoted routes, / NT / WT / whenever the opportunity HWT / user arises. groups AIM: Optimise the provision and management of parking. HD Evaluate the need for more  b HCC(CS) / 1.5 parking, including provision for district & horseboxes, at key locations: if £ parish required, investigate councils / user opportunities to increase groups provision (e.g. ‘mini’ car parks, use of village schools after hours) in priority areas.

2 The Last 5 Miles project aims to establish a footpath along the course of the 5-mile stretch of Basingstoke Canal from the village of Greywell into Basingstoke town centre. This would enable walkers to follow all 37 miles of the canal between the Wey Navigation and Basingstoke. ȱ 11 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 2 - Countryside users are forced to use or cross busy roads to link up rights of way and other off-road access

In a survey of parish councils, 92% of to access the countryside have found that, parishes were concerned about road as they are not legally allowed to use safety. The Hampshire Downs area is them, these lanes force them further into dissected by several major roads (e.g. M3, the stream of traffic, which is potentially A303, A31, A34, A33, A339, A343). High dangerous. In addition, while traffic levels of car dependency in the area mean calming measures such as road humps fulfil that even rural road networks experience their use in reducing traffic speed, they increasingly high traffic levels (traffic flows often mimic kerbs and are very difficult for in Hampshire overall are growing by 1-2% both cyclists and mobility vehicles to get per annum3), especially where new over, unless well designed. development takes place on greenfield User groups also suggested that safer road sites. As roads often form important links crossings are needed to improve access to between sections of the rights of way and between countryside routes. More network, having to negotiate these busy bridges and tunnels would be welcomed, roads can be dangerous. as would off-road paths to improve “Any carriage driving, riding, walking or cycling staggered crossings which can be a barrier now would be hazardous and would certainly for all users. need to avoid the ‘commuter races’ and the ‘school runs’.” Carriage drivers and horse riders have problems when crossing or joining roads. Both carriage drivers and horse riders Lines of sight at road crossings are reported that road safety issues influence particularly important for equestrian their choice of where to go in the users, as riders sit some distance back countryside. from their horses’ heads and carriage “4x4s and motorbikes have the roads now and it drivers sit further back still. Road has become unsafe to carriage drive on the crossings can only be negotiated safely average country lane ..... even if your horse is where there is a wide arc of vision in both traffic-proof.” directions. Both of these groups have Carriage drivers tend to avoid narrow expressed high levels of concern about roads with high hedges because of the road safety, to the extent that more than difficulty of passing other vehicles. Cyclists, 63% percent of BHS, 64% of ‘casual’ (i.e. pedestrians and disabled users using non-affiliated) equestrians and 65% of BDS 4 mobility vehicles also indicated that road members in Hampshire would be safety affected their enjoyment of the prepared to pay for safe access. countryside and that they often felt Local users would welcome access vulnerable using busy roads. managers working with those responsible “There is potentially a good walking route through for the road network (i.e. Highways Hackwood Park, but at the moment people need Agency, Hampshire Highways) to improve to negotiate a nasty 400m stretch along the the layout and design of road crossings for A339.” non-motorised users. Designated cycle lanes are available on some roads in the area. Whilst this sometimes improves safety for cyclists, disabled users requiring mobility vehicles

3 Department for Transport National Road Traffic 4 Assessment of Use and Demand for Equestrian Survey, 1995-2005 Access to the Countryside, HCC 2004 12 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Seek alternatives to road use for non-motorised users. HD Identify and prioritise the HCC(CS) / 2.1 management of existing and b Defra / creation of new routes that ££ Landowners / avoid roads. users HD Identify road verges that could HCC(CS) / 2.2 be managed to provide safer b HCC(HH) / links in the access network and ££ parish councils agree standard of maintenance / users required. HD Seek creation of off-road routes HCC(CS) / 2.3 for non-motorised users within b district new development ££ councils / users / residents / landowners AIM: Raise awareness of non-motorised users’ needs in management and modification of the road network and in new road schemes. HD Develop and sustain contacts HCC(CS) / 2.4 between rights of way teams, b HCC(HH) / users, Hampshire Highways and HA / users Highways Agency to encourage timely consultation about road maintenance and new road schemes. HD Identify and consult on traffic HCC(CS) / 2.5 management schemes to reduce b HCAF / police traffic density and speed on £££ / SDJC / parish minor roads. councils / local residents / users AIM: Improve safety where the on- and off-road networks intersect. HD Identify key crossing points and HCC(CS) / 2.6 prioritise for improvement (e.g. b HCC(HH) / traffic management, better sight ££ users / lines, refuges, controlled landowners crossings, etc).

ȱ 13 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 3 - Good maintenance of routes is a priority for countryside users

In a survey of parishes, the majority “Surface damage by 4x4s and motorbikes ranked maintenance of existing routes as makes paths unusable for walkers, cyclists the highest priority over the next five and equestrians.” years. Nearly 60% of parishes consulted “Due to the nature of the ground, several said that they were quite concerned about bridleways in our parish have become lack of maintenance; 10% said that they impassable by walkers due to 4x4 vehicle were very concerned. Local people in the activity.” Hampshire Downs area cited surface conditions as an important factor in Cyclist groups have commented that more determining which routes they use. Route bike and horse friendly surfaces are surface strongly influences path choice by needed; they also suggested segregating equestrian users, who avoid both muddy, horse and cycle access on fragile surfaces slippery and heavily rutted surfaces and were possible and working with stables to those which are hard and stony or flinty, avoid damage to ‘pinch points’ where because of the risk of injury to the horse. there is heavy use. Cyclists tend to avoid areas with excessive “The section of the Wayfarers Walk which mud, vehicle ruts and poaching by horses. goes through is badly Walkers also tend to avoid paths that are damaged and dangerous to ride on.” muddy and wet after rain or due to poor It was also clear from the research that drainage. Mobility vehicle users avoid local users’ enjoyment of the countryside paths that are ‘soft’, too muddy, too is significantly affected by other factors uneven, badly rutted or significantly such as overgrowth of hedges, brambles eroded. and nettles, issues of littering, fly-tipping, Carriage drivers said that their enjoyment dog fouling; also the presence of broken of driving is affected by byways not being stiles and gates and poorly maintained maintained to a suitable standard for waymarking and signage. carriages and feel that the amount of “The condition of stiles and gates will affect usable off-road driving network has the accessibility of the network for all users significantly reduced in recent years due to (especially those with mobility problems).” deterioration of surfaces. This means that carriage drivers often choose to load their Furthermore, there is a mis-match horses and carriages into lorries and between people’s expectations for trailers to travel further afield (e.g. to the management and maintenance of the rights New Forest). of way network and the budget available. Repair and maintenance costs for a single “I have been carriage driving in these lanes project can often exceed the budget for fifty years and they are getting worse and allocated for any one year; for example, worse – the only difference is that now 4x4s repair of Wayfarers Walk is estimated at and motorbikes are allowed to use them – £110,000 but the capital available for this does this not tell us something!” work in 2007/08 is only £25,000. Access These sentiments are echoed by other managers feel strongly that there needs to users; there is concern over the effect of be a balance between maintenance of motorised vehicles causing the existing routes and the creation of new deterioration and rutting of path surfaces. routes.

14 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Apply best practice in the maintenance of access routes and sites. HD Seek innovative approaches to HCC(CS) / 3.1 managing surfaces in areas of  b parish high use. ££ councils / landowners / managers / users / HCAF AIM: Encourage wider involvement in the improvement and management of access. HD Encourage, extend and support HCC(CS) / 3.2 existing parish council and b parish volunteer involvement with ££ councils / access improvements. HCAF / users HD Continue to work with Planning HCC(CS) / 3.3 Departments and developers to b district maximise development gain and £££ councils / ensure access provision keeps developers pace with increases in demand. AIM: Raise awareness of statutory duties in regard to rights of way and other access. HD Work with landowners, farmers HCC(CS) / 3.4 and access managers to promote b NFU / CLA / compliance with statutory duties local and grant conditions (e.g. landowners cropping, forestry operations, land drainage) AIM: Target resources to meet local needs. HD Continue to work with users HCC(CS) / 3.5 and parish councils to identify b parish councils and prioritise routes for repair. ££ / users

ȱ 15 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 4 - There is a strong demand for improved physical accessibility and usability of existing countryside access, particularly for those who are less mobile

Disabled people in the Hampshire Downs A substantial amount of the network is area outlined a number of improvements potentially suitable for disabled users, but that would enable more people to use the cannot currently be used due to a range of network. Replacing stiles with kissing gates obstacles such as stiles, steep inclines, lack is welcomed, provided they are wide of dropped curbs to allow access from the enough for mobility vehicles and have road and ditches at car parks which have suitable catches. Surfaces around gates gaps to allow access but which are often should ideally be hard-wearing and level, too narrow for mobility vehicles. as unevenness can cause problems for “ The Basingstoke Canal would be an ideal both disabled walkers and those using route for disabled ramblers, but at the mobility vehicles. Level ground is desirable moment there is a single stile blocking the at disabled car parking spaces; path way so that the full length is not accessible, surfaces should be relatively even and free only sections.” of potholes, ruts and steep inclines. “There is a good section of the Wayfarers Similarly, easily-opened gates and Walk ( area) which is a bridleway, mounting blocks at key locations on which is good for disabled ramblers. However, bridleways and byways would benefit up towards stiles and other older and less mobile equestrian users, for barriers prevent any further use.” whom riding and driving provides a means to continue enjoying the wider Disabled users suggested additional countryside. improvements including removal of barriers, accessible dog bins, seating and Both local users and landowners indicated resting points along popular pathways and that they would also like to see improved disabled toilets in car parks at the start of signage. For example, the Forestry popular routes. Many of these Commission noted that the archaeological improvements would also benefit other trail in Micheldever Wood needs users such as parents with small children refurbishing – 15 years ago it was a in buggies. waymarked trail with interpretation boards, but these have now disappeared. Parish councils, landowners and local The Forestry Commission is currently authorities are working to improve access improving sections of the trail and to the existing network. Hampshire Hampshire County Council have supplied County Council has put kissing gates at some new interpretation boards. White Hill and cut scrub on the barrows at Seven Barrows. The Council also plans Users suggested that finger posts should to improve access to open access land at display both destination and distance and Beacon Hill and to put in kissing gates at possibly an ‘accessibility’ grading for Herbert Plantation. There is new individual user groups. For example, a provision in Morgaston Wood for disabled grading system for mobility vehicle users access and the National Trust (NT) would based on difficulty of terrain, gate type, like to do more across the north parkland surface quality, path width, etc, would be of the Vyne Estate. welcomed. Some disabled users have also suggested special waymarking for ‘stile- free’ routes.

16 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Improve physical accessibility of routes and sites. HD Work with local people, Users / 4.1 landowners and access managers b HCC(CS) / to identify existing and potential ££ parish councils accessible routes; carry out improvements and promote (see also HD 4.4). HD Encourage landowners to HCC(CS) / 4.2 remove stiles and replace with b parish kissing gates. Ensure new kissing £ councils / gates will accommodate mobility landowners / vehicles, where appropriate. users HD Work with users and Hampshire  District 4.3 Highways to identify locations b Councils / where dropped kerbs would HCC(CS) / improve access. Users / HCC(HH) AIM: Target information appropriately to promote wider participation in countryside recreation. HD Develop a comprehensive HCC(CS) / 4.4 ‘accessible countryside’ guide b users / district based on an agreed range of £ councils / other features and criteria e.g. access distances, surface conditions, managers gradients, frequency of rest points, extent of accessible facilities (car parking, toilets, refreshments etc). Publish and promote guide in a range of formats including websites. AIM: Ensure information is easy for all to find and understand. HD Pilot destination and distance  HCC(CS) / 4.5 signs on priority/popular routes b parish (see also (Hants) £££ councils / CAP, Action SD 9.3). users

ȱ 17 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 5 – There is a need for more links in the network, to create a range of off-road, circular routes for all users

Responses from some of the parish There was significant demand from councils in the Hampshire Downs equestrians and cyclists to make more of indicated a good level of satisfaction with the off-road network available to them. their local network: “In Highclere and the surrounding area, “This is an unspoilt rural area, well served by access is broken up with no circular routes footpaths and RUPPs (sic) throughout – no and hardly any decent off-road riding.” additional access is needed.” “Unless there is more off-road riding, the “We are entirely happy with the networks in roads on which we ride at the moment will be our parishes.” so busy that people will give up riding However, the majority of parish councils completely.” consulted indicated a need for new links However, both parish councils and non- to improve the network. There is a motorised users are concerned that significant demand among both local upgrading routes would encourage use by people and visitors for more rights of way motorised vehicles, rendering them (RoW) linkage to create circular off-road unusable by others (Issue 3). routes: “It is undesirable to upgrade footpaths to “Circular walks, or extended walks between bridleways unless vehicles (other than public transport links, are difficult because the motorised mobility vehicles) can be excluded.” RoW network is fragmented, and very long Some horse riders suggested making road walks are necessary to link paths.” disused railways available as riding and Sixty-seven percent of horse riders and cycling routes. 52% of carriage drivers in Hampshire Carriage drivers tend to avoid areas expressed a preference for circular where there is no off-road driving routes5 . Cyclists said that their enjoyment available. Many landowners are reluctant of the area was affected by the lack of to offer permissive routes to carriage options for short circular routes. Some drivers for fear that they will be used by users would also like more access to the motorised vehicles. Where permissive waterways that exist in the area. access does exist, there is a risk that it Most users felt that more links are needed may be withdrawn if there are problems to connect urban areas to the countryside or a change of ownership: network. Cyclists recommended a “Permissive access from Pott Bottom Cottage network of ‘feeder’ routes to connect to Turill Hill Farm and Southington and back towns with the countryside: linkages via park was removed due to a between Alton and Beech, Farringdon, change in ownership, which was a big and Four Marks are disappointment.” considered priorities. Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council supports this However, it was felt that Hampshire through its Greenspace Strategy, which County Council could work with aims to create a network in which landowners, the CLA and local carriage different green spaces are linked by safe drivers to help identify suitable routes pedestrian and cycle routes through green under HLS Environmental Stewardship corridors. Schemes.

5 Assessment of Use and Demand for Equestrian Access to the Countryside, HCC 2004 18 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Identify and secure new access that will provide high quality, useful ‘missing links’ in the network. HD Develop and promote a range of HCC(CS) / 5.1 ‘quality’, off-road circular routes b district, & for all users, using both printed ££ parish councils and web-based formats, with / HCAF / user links from towns and villages and groups / from public transport links landowners where possible. Include desirable and attractive elements, e.g. views, woods and riverside paths, where feasible. HD Seek opportunities (e.g. through  Users / NE / 5.2 the Discovering Hampshire’s b HCC(CS) / Lost Ways project6) to upgrade ££ landowners / footpaths to bridleways or parish councils restricted byways where they provide practical additions to the rights of way network for cyclists and equestrians. HD Seek opportunities to develop Users / parish 5.3 new routes and paths in those b councils / parts of the area where access is £ HCC(CS) / particularly sparse. landowners & land managers HD Look for new opportunities to  HCC(CS) / 5.4 develop circular routes from b Users / parish long distance and promoted £ councils / paths such as the Wayfarers landowners Walk, St. Swithuns, Oxdrove Way etc. HD Explore utilising disused railway  HCC(CS) / 5.5 lines to improve and extend the b users cycle and equestrian networks. HD Continue work to link areas of HCC(CS) / 5.6 Open Access with the rights of b landowners way network £

6 This initiative by HCAF is looking for evidence of historic routes to provide ‘missing links’ that users have identified as desirable additions to the rights of way network. ȱ 19 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 6 - Better information is needed to facilitate and promote enjoyment of the countryside for all and encourage responsible use

Although 80% of parishes consulted felt through a local access directory. The that information currently available about NWDAONB is looking at new ways of access routes is adequate, local users felt promoting walks e.g. downloads to mobile that provision was lacking. Many parishes phones. in the area have map boards and leaflets People also asked if information could be showing walking routes within the parish; provided about events and activities that it was suggested that these should extend might disrupt their enjoyment of the beyond the parish boundary and identify countryside, for example game shoots. links to neighbouring parishes. However, some landowners would be Walkers, cyclists and horse riders would cautious about making that information all like to know more about routes, and in widely available, for fear it would attract particular about permissive access. Some disruptive intervention from protest suggested this should be included on the groups. Hampshire County Council website or on Both users and landowners felt that as Ordnance Survey maps. Permissive access well as promoting enjoyment of the as part of an agri-environmental countryside, education and encouraging agreement can be identified via the Defra responsible use should be a priority. website and by on-site signage. However, Ignorance of legal rights and some landowners prefer to give responsibilities, and lack of understanding permission on an informal basis to local of farming and other rural land use people only, feeling that wider promotion operations often lead to unintentional and would invite over-use (and misuse), and sometimes hazardous disruption (e.g. make it difficult to withdraw permission. people trespassing on paths that are not Users stressed the importance of keeping rights of way and walking into an area information up to date and providing where there is shooting). Some land sufficient detail about on-route facilities managers also feel that the public need to (refreshments, farm shops and other rural be more aware of the impact of recreation businesses and attractions). Disabled or on wildlife and landscape conservation. elderly people and parents with small There was a strong desire among children would benefit in particular from ‘established’ users to encourage more more detailed information about surface young people to get out into the conditions, gradients, potential obstacles, countryside more. Landowners felt that location of disabled car parking, seating, there are not enough opportunities for toilets and accessible tea rooms and pubs. school children (rural and urban) to learn “Disabled users would visit the countryside about the countryside; a number of more if there was better information available landowners in the Hampshire Downs are – currently few disabled users access the helping to address this by running school countryside because of lack of information.” events and activities. Cyclists also suggested that more “We organize a farm day in the village to information about the nature of the explain what we do as I feel people are routes available (e.g. some sort of becoming less informed about agriculture.” ‘difficulty’ grading) would encourage more “Education, education, education – that’s people to use them. what’s needed!” East Hampshire District is aiming to publicise local access opportunities

20 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Target information appropriately to promote wider participation in countryside recreation. HD Develop a comprehensive HCC(CS) / 6.1 ‘accessible countryside’ guide b users / district based on an agreed range of £ councils / other features and criteria, e.g. access distances, surface conditions, managers gradients, frequency of rest points, accessible car parking, toilets, refreshments etc. Publish in a range of formats. HD Identify and promote a variety of Parish 6.2 routes for all users (and ‘non- b councils / users’), using a range of media, £ HCC(CS) / parish guides and schemes such user groups / as the Small Grants Scheme7. local press Include details of local facilities and attractions as appropriate. HD Make use of new technology to  District 6.3 assist with special needs e.g. b councils / MP3 players, ‘palm top’ ££ user groups / computers, tactile maps for HCC(CS) people with impaired vision. HD Investigate feasibility of  User groups / 6.4 establishing a ‘hazard warning’ b parish website or hotline for shooting councils / and other events that may affect landowners / access. HCC(CS) / district councils AIM: Ensure information is easy for all to find and understand. HD Investigate ways to improve  User groups / 6.5 information about permissive b HCC(CS) access for all users. HD Seek ways to coordinate HCC(CS) / 6.6 information provision to a b district & consistent standard across the  parish area, e.g. through departmental councils / liaison groups or Hampshire HWT / NT Action Teams8 (HATs).

7 The HCAF Small Grants Scheme offers up to 50% funding to parish councils and landowners towards work to improve access to their local countryside. 8 HATs are groups of County Councillors who work to ensure that the County is listening to and taking account of local needs in their areas. ȱ 21 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 7 – Effective, coordinated access management within the area requires good communication and understanding between and among users, landowners and access managers

Local people consulted for this plan felt groups in the Hampshire Downs are that substantial benefits would result from already participating in maintenance and better communication between users, improvement of countryside access and landowners and access managers. Users there is evidence that more users would from all categories commented that there like to be involved; 29% of carriage drivers should be more consideration of their in Hampshire and over one third of BHS needs, especially when new routes are members said they’d be prepared to help planned or existing routes changed. research RoW, give time to working Disabled users in particular felt that they parties or even contribute financially. should be consulted more and indicated Better liaison with landowners would also that they would be willing to audit improve opportunities for developing the usability of routes and provide ideas for network in a way that delivers mutual signage and information. benefit, for example combining the There is a clear desire among access diversion of a footpath away from a busy providers to make changes and take a farmyard with a dedication of higher rights more consultative approach. East or some form of ‘qualitative’ benefit along Hampshire District aims to encourage the alternative route. improvements in public access by working Hampshire County Council is developing with Hampshire Countryside Access stronger links with parishes through Forum. The NWDAONB aims to develop initiatives like the Small Grants Scheme a communication strategy and an access and also has a system where parishes and interpretation plan, and is keen to identify priority routes for maintenance. work with Local Access Forums (LAFs) This is reported to be working well, and through ROWIPs in order to raise its although some parishes in the Hampshire profile. ‘Partnership’ is very much one of Downs area felt they should receive more Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council’s response to complaints. core values and the Council recognises the importance of involving communities Better coordination among information in planning and management of green providers would also contribute to a more spaces to ensure high quality provision to consistent standard and approach to meet local needs. information provision. Closer liaison would benefit all concerned, There needs to be a flexible, practical and providing users with better understanding pragmatic approach to managing and of land and access management issues; it improving the network, which takes would also help identify further account of the views and needs of all opportunities for working together. Many concerned. parish councils and a number of user

22 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Encourage cooperation and understanding among users and between users and land managers. HD Encourage more joint working HCC(CS) /  7.1 between access providers and b landowners / users to assist in developing HCAF / FC / projects and identifying HWT / NT / priorities. WT user groups / parish councils HD Promote responsibilities to both HCC(CS) /  7.2 access providers and users. b landowners ; HCAF / FC / HWT / NT / WT / user groups / parish councils HD Continue to work with parishes, HCC(CS) /  7.3 other local people (including b HCAF / district ‘non-users’) and organisations to & parish improve communication. councils / users / community groups / landowners HD Develop better liaison between HCC(CS) /  7.4 local authorities and other b district information providers to councils / coordinate information HWT / NT provision to an agreed, consistent standard across the area, e.g. through Recreation and Heritage liaison groups or Hampshire action teams (HATs) (see HD 6.5) HD Develop opportunities for local Landowners / 7.5 people to learn about farming b HCC(CS) / and countryside management by £ HCAF / FC / providing on-site interpretation, HWT / NT / farm walks etc WT / district & parish councils

ȱ 23 Countryside Access Plan

Issue 8 – Public access can create difficulties for land managers, landowners and farmers

A survey of farmers and landowners landowners than providing access. They across Hampshire9 found that many are are concerned about the physical and happy for people to use rights of way if biological threat to their livestock and they do so considerately and within the crops where the public have access. They law. However, most do not feel that the also worry about their liability for public public have a good understanding of how safety and the likelihood of increased to behave responsibly in the countryside. insurance and legal costs. Less than 2% think that providing for A substantial proportion of the Hampshire public recreation is worthwhile, though Downs area is managed under agri- only 17% said that they would prefer to environment schemes. Research showed exclude all public from their land. that some local people feel these “There would have to be a significant shift in discourage landowners from considering responsible behaviour of the public for farmers to permissive access in case this affects their consider increasing public access.” payments. Land managers involved in “I would welcome more access to the public, but nature conservation are concerned about only controlled, because disturbance to wildlife, damage to habitats and disturbance of litter, car parking and facilities would all spoil this nesting birds by walkers, especially those beautiful area.” with dogs off the lead. One also Many believe that education about the mentioned the relatively new pastime of countryside and user responsibilities geocaching; some participants appear to should be a priority: head straight for their objective, rather than following any paths, and pay little “With rights comes responsibility to the heed to the habitat and vegetation they landowner and farmer, but it appears not to the may be trampling en route. user – this balance needs to change!” It is not surprising therefore that many The most commonly reported problems farmers, landowners and land managers in the Hampshire Downs area are out-of- are reluctant to increase public access on control dogs, litter and trespass, followed their land, except by informal, personal by fly-tipping, burnt out cars, vandalism, agreement that can be withdrawn if drug-related activity, dog waste, necessary. Nonetheless, a significant motorbikes being ridden on crops and number of agri-environmental schemes in damage to trees. At least one estate the Hampshire Downs area do include employs overnight security patrols. access agreements and just over 16% of “Gates all have to be welded on, otherwise they landowners in the area would consider disappear almost immediately after they are increasing public access to their land if installed.” there was sufficient financial incentive. “People do not respect the countryside it seems, Some land managers also recognise that we have always had gates left open, dogs worrying public access can reduce problems of livestock, cyclists riding where they shouldn’t – I can’t see how you can control this if people are vandalism and other anti-social behaviour. given even more access to the countryside.” For example, where harvesting operations in Basing Woods have made the wood Maintaining a viable business and keeping more accessible to the public, there has their land, crops and machinery secure are been a noticeable reduction in the much more important to farmers and incidence of dumped cars and other vandalism. 9 Survey of farmers and landowners, HCC 2006 24 ȱ Hampshire Downs

Aims and proposed actions Timescales and Lead bodies estimated costs and potential On- Medium Long partners going term term AIM: Encourage cooperation and understanding among users and between users and land managers. HD Support initiatives to increase HCC(CS) / 8.1 public knowledge of appropriate b HCL / HWT / behaviour in the countryside, £ landowners / e.g. through Trailblazer10, school schools & visits, user organisations and colleges / user clubs, colleges, farm walks and groups other events. HD Ensure that paths are well signed HCC(CS) / 8.2 and waymarked to increase user b landowners / confidence and reduce £ users unintentional trespass. HD Develop liaison between local HCC(CS) / 8.3 landowners and farmers, access b HCAF / managers and users, e.g. through £ landowners & CAP action groups, joint work land managers / parties, local meetings and district & parish events. councils / CLA / NFU / users HD Promote ‘best practice’ HCC(CS) / 8.4 examples of how access and land b HWT / NT / management can co-exist and £ FC / district & prosper. parish councils AIM: Minimise the financial burden of access management. HD Promote funding opportunities HCC(CS) /  8.3 available to landowners for b Defra / NFU / access improvements, where CLA / appropriate. landowners HD Develop opportunities for local HCC(CS) / 8.5 volunteer groups to work with b parish councils landowners to maintain access £ / user groups / routes, e.g. through the HCAF landowners Small Grants Scheme.

10 Trailblazer is a scheme led by the Outdoor Unit, HCC, which provides a framework for schools and youth groups to reward young people for the time they spend exploring, discovering and caring for the environment ȱ 25 Notes

26 ȱ Appendix 1

Length of rights of way in the Hampshire Downs CAP area (as at January 2007)

Length (metres)

Area BOAT (ha) Footpath Bridleway 11 RB12 Hampshire Downs 89,130 876,909 201,107 109,183 92,338

Hampshire overall 376,866 3,301,200 746,600 223,800 286,200

(Note: these totals are indicative rather than absolute, as they include the whole length of any right of way that extends beyond the CAP area.)

Density of rights of way network in the Hampshire Downs CAP area

Overall Density (metres/hectare) Walking Riding and Carriage network cycling driving (all RoW) network network Hampshire Downs 14.36 4.52 2.26

Hampshire overall 12.09 3.33 1.35

11 BOAT – Byway open to all traffic 12 RB – Restricted byway ȱ Overview of access in the Hampshire Downs area Showing rights of way, roads and main sites with access

Crookham Greenham Padwor Common Common Commo

Great Pen Newtown S Wood Common TA D LE Y C Pa Fo

KINGSCLERE

Beacon and Hill Watership Down

A34

BAS

OAKLEY

OVERTON

WHITCHURCH M3

ANDOVER

Black Micheldever Wood Station

Micheldever & Dodsley Wood

NEW ALRESFORD 012340.5 Miles WINCHESTER

Cheriton This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Wood Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. HCC 100019180 2008 Appendix 2

rth on Legend

Motorways Hampshire Downs CAP area Common A-roads Main sites with access mber orest Minor road network BRAMLEY Footpath Bridleway Railways Restricted byway Rivers By-way open to all traffic County boundary

Hook Common Basingstoke Canal &BartleyHeath Basingstoke SINGSTOKE Common ODIHAM

Alice Holt

ALTON

Chawton Park Woods

FOUR MARKS For further information: 0845 603 5636* (free textphone) 0845 603 5625 www.hants.gov.uk/countryside-access-plans * Calls will cost up to 4p per minute for BT customers. Calls made using other service providers or mobiles may cost more. Alternatively, call 01329 225398 – standard and local rates apply to this number.