THE DEVELOPMENTAND IMPACT OF FORMAL LANG-DISTANCE FOOTPATHS IN GREAT BRITAIN by Robin S. Henshaw VOLUME TWO PhD University of Edinburgh 1984 ýJ y1ýý W Text cut off in original -269- CHAPTER NINE THE COUNTRYSIDE COMMISSION ERA I. INTRODUCTION It had been the National Parks Commission itself which had held together the programme for long-distance routes at planning stage, during the implementation of routes and, in the case of the Pennine Way which had been formally opened, in the management stage. The by the Countryside Commission continuation of the -leading role new was considered essential. The old Commission had been willing to become involved in all aspects of the development of routes, but the main difficulty had been that it never had the capacity to make the impact on the programme that was needed. Its staff had already been increased in anticipation of the enactment of new legislation and it was hoped that this would help the situation, and that a reinforced Long-Distance Routes Section of the Countryside Commission would be able to clear the backlog of work and increase the momentum of the programme. This had been the declared intention of various representatives of the Ministry, when pressed both inside and outside Parliament to do something about the delays in implementing paths, that more staff would be_ available for the programme, "once circumstances permitted. " However, despite the fact that long-distance routes retained a central place among the new Commission's responsibilities, the Countryside Commission now had very much wider responsibilities. The National Parks Commission had been mainly concerned with the 9% of England and Wales which was in national parka and to a lesser degree with the further 7.3% in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. One of the few responsibilities of the old Commission outwith these areas had concerned long-distance routes. The new Countryside Commission now -270- had responsibilities for the whole of the countryside of England and Wales, with threefold duties spelt out in the Countryside Act and summarised by the Commission as firstly, the improvement and provision of facilities for countryside enjoyment; secondly, the conservation and enhancement of natural beauty in the countryside; and thirdly, the securing of public access. Although there was at first no new involvement the Commission in grant-aiding apart from experimental schemes and, outwith national parks, the only footpaths for which the Commission could secure government funding were long-distance routes, nonetheless, there was the concern that the new Commission would. 'water down' the importance of long- distance paths just as there was a major concern that the national parks themselves would lose their status. How the Commission responded to the new situation is the subject of this chapter. Changes. in the Commission itself are briefly reviewed and the effect of official reports, such as that of the Select Committee of the House of Lords on Sports and Leisure, the Government White Paper on the same subject and the Report of the Commons Expenditure Committee are examined to ascertain the pressures on the role of the Commission itself and the status of long-distance paths in discussions. Changes in legislation are examined to see their effect on long-distance routes and other Parliamentary interest in the subject is also noted. Attention is paid to the Commission's own dealings with the facility, including a special report it commissioned ('The on Long-Distance Routes Yapp Report') and its own publication Footpaths for Recreation. The research is based mainly on official documents, government reports and the minutes of the Commission, together interviews. with personal Long-distance routes continued to be a provision generally approved 1 CC First Report (1968), pl. -271- of by those with an interest in the countryside and the nature of the routes was still as originally envisaged by their proponents. They also continued to be something with considerable public appeal. The history of the development of long-distance routes had involved many crises during the life of the National Parks Commission, but the unique and central position of the facility within the national planning framework had survived. The facility had come virtually unchanged through the enactment of the Countryside Bill but the new situation was uncertain. Further developments in the concept of long- distance routes and their actual implementation are the subjects of this and the next chapter. 2. GENERAL OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENTS (a) The Countryside Commission As we have seen, personalities had been so important in the forming of policies and the moulding of the character of facilities and programmes, especially in the early life of the National Parks Commission. One of the concerns about the new Commission was the lack of members associated with the outdoor movement now that Ritchie, Yapp and Pauline Dower had been removed. The criticism was to continue through the 1970s and into the 1980s, although, in fact the amenity group did welcome the replacement of Lady Wooton of Abinger by John Cripps as Chairman of the Commission at the beginning of 1970. In 1975 the amenity movement received a boost when one person who was very closely associated with outdoor groups was appointed to the Commission. This was Gerald McGuire who made a fair impact. He had been prominent in the campaign for long-distance paths in the North- East and was now an official with the Youth Hostels Association and President of the Ramblers Association. However, he was removed in 1 In 1978 Cripps was replaced by Lord Winstanley, who was himself replaced at the beginning of 1981 by Derek Barber. L(G August 1979 by the new Conservative government angering the amenity groups and moving the Commission to record in its annual report that "We were disappointed by the decision of the Minister not to renew the appointment. " Currently the only Commissioner with strong connections with the outdoor movement and who is in favour of long- distance paths seems to be Lady Elizabeth Kirk. Changes in the Commission staff were also detrimental to the standing of long-distance paths. T. G. Miller, who had headed the Long- Distance Routes Section of both Commissions for several years, returned to the Ministry (now the Department of the Environment) in October 1972. He had a special knowledge of, and interest in, the subject and had enjoyed very good relations with the Ramblers Association. He was to write a popular book describing the various 2 official long-distance paths in England and Wales. In 1980, Reg 3 Hookway retired from the post of Director. He had joined the National Parks Commission in 1965 and his well-publicised walk along part of the Pennine Way had convinced him of the worth of the facility. Indeed, following his death in 1982, the Commission's Annual Report had at the foot of the obituary the acorn with the caption: "The symbol used on Long Distance Routes which Reg Hookway 4 did so much to promote". In 1973/74 the Commission moved from London to Cheltenham, a move which was seen by some observers as weakening it. Certainly it was a very disruptive experience. There was also displeasure, particularly among some outdoor groups, at the results of a general reappraisal of the work of the Commission which took place at this time. This review had been reported to the Secretary of State at the beginning of 1972, and there commenced a five-year programme, aiming at giving more attention to advisory and promotional work, interpretation and 1 CC Twelth Report 1979), pl. Miller _2 o . cit., 3 He was succeeded by Adrian Phillips. 4 CC Annual Report 1982-83, P9. -ý(: '- I information services and recreational management training. This resulted in 1973 in the establishment of a completely new structure with three divisions - Executive, Administrative and Advisory. The former branches of the Commission, carried over from the National Parks Commission, became part of the Executive Division, divided geographically into four sections. This had a major impact on long-distance routes, which had been supported by a Section employing one Senior Executive Office, two Higher Executive Officers, two Executive Officers and one Clerical 2 Officer. The Section was now split functionally and geographically, with the planning and strategic assessment of routes going to the Planning Branch of the Advisory Division and work associated with the implementation of routes going to the Executive Division. This, was seen by the interest groups as removing the special status of long- distance paths and the Ramblers Association voiced its opposition in evidence to the Commons Expenditure Committee in 1976 that: "The Commission themselves seem to be adopting the form of an agency whose main role is to advise and promote. The decline in the Commission's enthusiasm for such things as long-distance routes and access agreements is symptomatic of the shift of emphasis. We regard this as very unfortunate. "3 The shift in emphasis was reflected in the structure of the annual reports of the Commission for, after 1971, the section devoted to long-distance routes was reduced from about four pages to about one page. In 1975 the subject became a subsection of the section on 'footpaths and bridleways' (and later 'public access'), which was under 'Recreation Uses, Facilities and Services. ' However, as we have seen, the special nature and public interest in long-distance routes ensured continued interest in them and, being a specific facility in which the Commission was directly involved (and one where the Commission already was heavily committed), they did 1 CC Fifth Report (1972)t pl. 2 Report of the Select Committee of the House of Lords on Sport and Leisure HL 193,1972-73, ii, P22- 3 National Parks and the Countryside Statement by the Ramblers Association to the HC Environmental' Subcommittee on National Parks and the Countrvsi_de.