|
| You have been redirected from the former NFDOG NOTICEBOARD HOME PAGE, which is no longer available on this site |
This site has been established to give an opportunity for some comment on the New Forest National Park Authority's revised Management Plan and Recreation Management Strategy
David Dickenson can be contacted by following this link
|
Contents:
When my dog read through the Recreation Management Strategy, she wanted to give you all a big slobbery kiss.
I have persuaded her instead to join me in saying thank you, and well done.
The day before my letter was published, the revised RMS became available on line, and successfully addressed many of my concerns. The dog walking section was drawn up using a passage of text I had written myself as a suggested basis for a practical way forward.
Never mind the width, feel the quality. Do the four lines about dog walking address the issues that have aroused such passion? You would have to be barking mad to think so.
As I stated in my address to the NPA, ‘without clear guidelines spelt out in the RMS, it is irresponsible to fob us off with an assurance that key specifics can be left to an undefined steering group in the future’. The days of decisions being taken behind closed doors, with the potential for manipulation, must belong to the past. The RMS is open to public scrutiny, and is the result of much consultation and debate. This is the correct place to identify policies that are appropriate and reflect this process, fit for guiding us in the years to come. A steering group should aid, not make, policy.
We have had too much accent on conflict, and too little reliance on the sensible middle ground that characterises our Forest community. As a responsible dog walker, I do not want to score points against concerned conservationists and other Forest users, but rather seek to minimise their concerns. I am determined to put as much energy into finding acceptable solutions as I am to vigorously defending the position of responsible dog walkers not to have their freedoms unfairly taken from them.
By the time this letter is published, the proposed RMS text will be published, and our future will be set within its framework. As we build within these guidelines, bear the following in mind. We must all be thoughtful of other people, and in doing so, help preserve the freedom and tranquillity of the Forest that is our passion. Ignoring the concerns of other Forest users is offensive, and will perpetuate conflict.
Mr. Chairman, Thank you for having the forbearance in allowing me to address the Authority members once again.
First impressions of the second draft Recreation Management Strategy are that it is very rough and ready. Is this document a fit framework to guide recreation through the next 5 years and beyond? Granted, great strides have been made to listen and respond to public ‘disquiet’. But in seeking a quiet life, it has put aspiration aside, and the Strategy is now at risk of being considered mundane.
Disturbingly, there is an increased accent on conflict between troublesome natives. I do not recognise this.
Many of these divisions have been of the NPA’s own making. An adversarial approach to decision making is not appropriate. The NPA should pay scant attention to extreme views, and start harnessing that vibrant middle-ground of goodwill and consensus so abundant in our community. It is this power that the Strategy should be promoting to lead us forward.
My dog is concerned she has been forgotten. All the text about the nasty things she dreams of doing have been edited out, and nothing remains in its place. Unless she takes up cricket, there is nothing of relevance to her in this document. It cannot be sensible to have an RMS that fails to consider dog issues, good and bad.
Not only was dog walking the subject of many responses to the original draft RMS, but it is a key aspect of recreation in the Park. The NPA must have the courage and the skills to sit NFDOG and conservationists round a table and thrash out an acceptable text that is appropriate and reflects public attitudes.
Without clear guidelines spelt out in the RMS, it is irresponsible to fob us off with an assurance that key specifics can be left to an undefined steering group in the future.
Could and should the NPA be evolving a Strategy that aims to harness the goodwill and enthusiasm of the community? My experience suggests yes.
Just last week, the National Park of the Cévennes in France sent me a review of their recreation activities and exhibitions for 2009, in which I played a very modest part. This Park, with less than half the population of the New Forest, arranged over 500 assorted outings and exhibitions, all designed to improve public understanding and enjoyment, whilst promoting conservation.
How is it that the ungovernable French manage such a vibrant a National Park? The answer is just one word. Community.
Can we not, Mr. Chairman, do better than the French?
END
The draft revised Management Plan was a huge stride forward, and impressed myself and many others by the softness of its tones, and the lack of authoritarian approach.
The final version has evolved further in response to new feedback. It now appears fit for purpose.
The newly-published Core Strategy is clearly a sister document, and is also much to be commended.
My greatest pleasure was to see the reinstatement of a reference to the Sandford Principle in both documents. The reminder that if push comes to shove, recreation must give way to conservation, is now coupled with an unambiguous commitment that this must only be as a last resort. This sets a firm foundation for future relationships.
It is now incumbent upon the National Park Authority to find a way to ensure this happens. Information, discussion, comprehension, vision; these are all key to ensuring that future decisions and actions put the ‘Forest First’.
Stakeholder involvement must be a key part of this process. The ad-hoc nature of the Progress Project and New Chapter must be modernized into regular formalized sessions. I look forward to the Recreation Management Strategy containing firm, sustainable proposals for a structured forum that embraces all aspects of conservation and recreation, with key groups meeting on a regular basis.
In addition to tapping the knowledge and opinions of stakeholder groups, we must not forget the large numbers of the general public, who also have an important role to play, and should have the ability to drop in and out of a general discussion and information forum. From my French experience, an inter-active web-based nature forum demonstrates that this can work, and at minimal cost.
My view is that both stakeholder and public forums are best overseen by a common secretariat, independent of, but a major advisor to, the NPA and its key partners. I have pressed for these for some time, and have submitted some over-arching proposals to the NPA.
Having gained the goodwill of the public, the NPA should now have the confidence to move forward to the final hurdle, and produce a Recreation Management Strategy that harmonises conservation with recreation, built around consensus.
Mr. Chairman, both myself and my dog would like to thank you for producing a Management Plan and Core Strategy that put the ‘Forest First’.
Dear Editor,
Many readers look upon me as a dog that likes to show his teeth. Therefore they may be somewhat surprised to learn that I write today to praise the revised draft Management Plan, not to bury it. I have read the Plan in detail and am impressed at the softness of its tones, and the lack of authoritarian approach. Well done the new Chief Executive and his team.
Nonetheless, the time to relax is not yet upon us. Many minds, for example those with equine interests, will be turned towards the policies of the Core Development Strategy, to be published 3 December. The trailers suggest that this will be equally well received.
However, the Plan barely touches on recreation. These issues created a tsunami of protest last year. After 14 months of consultation, the revised Plan now offers us a one-line Priority Action: ‘Agree and implement a Recreation Management Strategy for the National Park’. All the fancy puff over the last few months from a ‘listening Park’ has been reduced to eleven words. The NPA must produce policies and actions to underpin its recreation objectives as part of the Management Plan, and stand accountable for them. We need to know, in a binding written form, what the Park’s policies are for recreation in the future. My dog needs to know.
The NPA is delivering very mixed messages. Gone is the ‘concept of dog free car parks’. But not a whisper on car park closures, and an ominous comment in the NPA’s report accompanying the Plan 'The only real issue apparent to date is the relationship between recreation and conservation and the emphasis given to each in the Plan. '
It is essential that the NPA team work hard to construct a robust recreation/conservation relationship, built on firm and lasting foundations. ‘Mr Fix-It’ Chief Executives do not last forever. With goodwill and imagination on both sides, there is absolutely no reason why recreation and conservation cannot happily co-exist, and moreover be mutually supportive. Most recreational users are there to enjoy and appreciate the very wildness of the New Forest, and conservation interests can harness the goodwill of the public to protect the area, giving information, expertise and physical aid.
I look forward to a Recreational Management Strategy that is labelled as part of the Management Plan. It should transparently demonstrate that we have entered a new era, one of cooperation and not one of imposition.
DAVID DICKENSON, B. Vet. Med., MRCVS
On 8 August 2009 I resigned from my position as Deputy Chairman of the New Forest Dog Owners Group. This followed disagreement over how the committee should go forward in their relations with the New Forest National Park Authority. It should be stressed that neither side believed it was necessary to be aggressive, and both sides aimed for a constructive dialogue.
There has been no difference over policy objectives, just about how to achieve them. It is my belief that we should not sit back and wait to see what the NPA offer dog walkers. Rather, it is vital to be proactive in order to shape the future of the Forest. It is essential to reconcile the needs of recreation and conservation. To bring harmony between groups with differing priorities needs skill and effort.
This presents a great challenge to Barrie Foley, and I have formally offered him my skills and involvement, with interests that range well beyond any one interest group. I believe Barrie to be big enough to rise to such a challenge. He is too dynamic a man to sit back and only listen to comfortable voices.
I shall remain closely in touch with events in the Forest, and am in regular contact with many individuals involved in the revision of the Park Plan and RMS.
I thank NFDOG for the privilege of allowing me to represent them during the last few formative years, and I look forward to NFDOG safeguarding the interests of responsible dog owners in the New Forest for many years to come.
DAVID DICKENSON, B. Vet. Med., MRCVS