NATIONAL PARK BETRAYS DOG WALKERS

NFNPA, Recreation Management Strategy, draft 2008

Dog walkers face complete ban from many or all of the New Forest car parks

WHAT'S IT ABOUT??

See explanation lower down this page

RECENT NEWS

Lindsay Cornish, the Chief Executive of the New Forest National Park Authority, resigned at the NPA meeting of 25/06/2009. This follows a period of unprecedented turmoil in the organisation.

Committe member Penny Gayler gave a presentation to this critical meeting, and followed this with a speech at One Voice's meeting for a petition to extend the 7 day Plan viewing period

Barrie Foley has been appointed interim Chief Executive in her place. NFDOG is pleased to welcome him on-board, but as our press release indicates, this is just the first stage towards resolving the problem.

RECENT BACKGROUND

The New Forest National Park Authority has been in complete disarray. First was the news that the planned adoption date of the final Plan had been postponed yet again, this time by a massive 4 months.

Hot on its heels has been the announcement that the architect of this revised Plan, Richard Lemon, has resigned, after only 6 months in post.

The final bombshell for the NPA arrived on the Forest Uprising Group's web site in the shape of an anonymous letter sent to DEFRA that severely criticised the behaviour of Lindsay Cornish, the Chief Executive. This had purportedly come from 11 desperate members of its staff, and claimed to represent many or most members of staff. She was blamed for exclusively taking control of all decisions, commonly totally against the advice of her own staff, and bringing the Park into disrepute. She was described as ‘expert at covering both her back and her tracks’.

From the dealings NFDOG have had with the Chief Executive, this letter had a strong ring of truth and authenticity. However, although this letter has been seen by, and published, in the local papers, its authenticity has not yet been verified. If true, until the Chief Executive resigned, it would be unlikely any progress would be made on any issue that has caused such outrage.

In a further development, there is fury that the public have been promised only 7 days viewing of the proposed Plan in late October before the Members of the New Forest National Park Authority vote on its adoption. This is no-where near enough time to consider the changes and lobby the Members, who are being asked to decide all our futures for the next 20 years. NFDOG’s charge that the NPA was operating the Forest as its own private fiefdom holds truer than ever.

NFDOG believe that change will never happen if Lyndsay Cornish remains in office. The Chairman must urgently review the problems that have overwhelmed the NPA and act to get rid of the CE. Only then will he be in a position of being able to ensure the team he serves can deliver the range of policies that stakeholders can sign up to. This team of many professionals within the body of the NPA can then move forward with the public and construct a plan fit for the next 20 years. NFDOG is keen to play its part in guiding a reformed NPA headed by a new, listening, Chief Executive.

MASSIVE NUMBER of OBJECTIONS AIR-BRUSHED OUT of PUBLIC CONSULTATION RESPONSES?

At the beginning of January, most people who responded to either the Plan or the Recreation Management Strategy received information on the unprecedented number of objections to the National Park Authority's proposals. There was a massive number of objections to dog-free car parks, at over 1730, compared to about 120 in favour, and probably as many objections to road and car park closures.

However, despite assurances that the figures would be openly and fairly presented, many people received letters stating only about on fifth of these levels. The NFDOG objections to road and car park closures in the template letters have not been included anywhere.
More details below

FREEDOM of INFORMATION ACT requests

We have been repeatedly refused much of the information we have requested under this act, even though we believe we are entitled to this information. Two of these requests are now being examined by outside bodies. For a full update on these targeted requests, click here

End of OFFICIAL RESPONSE PERIOD

14/11/08 Formal Consultation Period ended. The NPA claims to be still reviewing all responses (over 1730 objections to dog walking, against 120 in favour; we are still trying to get true figures for other aspects. The NPA has now held a total of only six closed discussions with stakeholder groups before proceeding to draw up the final plans. Their timetable is running very late. It has been repeatedly postponed, from early in 2009, then to May 2009, then June 2009, and now to end of October 2009.

NFDOG delivered OFFICIAL RESPONSE to the NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY

4 November 2008: NFDOG Chairman Pauline Ludlow sent the official response of NFDOG to the New Forest National Park Authority. This consisted of 21 pages detailing our concerns, with well-reasoned argument as to why, amongst other things, it is not acceptable to have dog free car parks and countless restrictions on general recreation within the Forest.

NFDOG's official response joined over 1730 individual responses from distressed dog owners.

Our weighty official response can be viewed at
www.naturescene.co.uk/nfdog/npa-nfdog_response.doc

NFDOG HAD ITS DAY OF ACTION!

Click on the link to 'SPEECHES' for NFDOG's main address

Your had your chance to protest, and you did your committee proud! Our 'surgery' at Brockenhurst Village Hall on Sunday 12th October was packed to capacity from beginning to end (10am to 4pm).
Our format and timing went out the window, as we had so many heavyweight speakers rolling up early, staying hours longer than anticipated, and you, the audience, had a hungry appetite for asking questions and demanding answers. As that is why you were there, our Chairman Pauline Ludlow allowed these sessions to continue, with a short break for lunch.

We had a real scoop in attracting not just the support of our 2 local politicians and the head of Hampshire County Council, but we triumphed in forcing to the table both the executive arm of the National Park Authority (Stephen Trotter), and the Chairman himself, Clive Chatters.

They bravely attempted to hold their corner, but the audience clearly were not in a mood to listen to or believe their reassuring comments about the 'listening Park'.

The press, both TV and newspapers, were there in force in the morning, and we recieved widespread sympathetic coverage as a result.

PLUS COUNTLESS PEOPLE WORRIED ABOUT THEIR FREEDOM TO WALK

YOU CAME AND HAD YOUR SAY!

WHAT'S IT ABOUT??

The New Forest Dog Owners Group was formed when there were rumours that it was proposed to take away the right of dog owners to walk in the New Forest off-lead. Now the National Park Authority is proposing to take away the ability of dog owners to walk in some or most parts of the New Forest at any time.

The New Forest National Park Authority has tossed aside months of consultations with local stakeholders, and proposes swingeing restrictions on traditional Forest users, primarily dog owners but also other groups that regularly use the Forest.

We had until the 14th November to convince the National Park Authority that this is totally unacceptable. If not listened to, our current freedom to walk dogs on the Forest will be lost for ever. Click the 'DIARY' link above to see how busy we have been.

GENERAL DETAILS

When they produced the draft Plan and Recreation Management Strategy, the National Park Authority tossed aside months of consultations with local stakeholders. They proposed swingeing restrictions on a wide range of traditional Forest users. despite massive adverse publicity, and a massive 94% of the public responses being against these proposals, the NPA have consistently refused to bend.

NFDOG stands for dogs on the Forest, off the lead. If the National Park Authority has its way, potentially the entire New Forest could be out of bounds to dogs.

Dog owners feel angry and betrayed, and NFDOG has been taking vigorous action to fight for our freedom to walk dogs right across the Forest.

Car Park Closures - Dogs:

Hidden in a section on controlling cars, there are proposals to create dog free car parks throughout the New Forest. This will treat us as second-class citizens.

No other user group has been singled out for exclusion in this way.
There has been no attempt to justify this action.
There is not the remotest attempt to support a policy of dog free car parks in any of their key assessment documents, where dogs scarcely receive a mention.

The reasons for banning dogs that they later put forward changed almost daily in the early weeks. Not one of them can be justified.

Car Park Closures – For Everyone:

However, this issue affects all Forest users, not just dog owners. They also plan to reduce the size and number of car parks for everyone, and propose selected road closures and road pricing as well. If you live in the New Forest, you have now become a 'recreational visitor' the moment you leave your door, and they have set no limits on your exclusion. In the next few years, how much of the Forest will be accessible to dog walkers, who will now be doubly excluded?

Keep out:

The message to all of us from the draft plan is that you are welcome to visit the New Forest National Park, as long as you keep out of the traditional woodlands and heaths of the Forest. The National Park Authority talk of constructing a ring of ‘robust’ areas around the periphery, not as a free-choice alternative to our current quiet enjoyments, but instead of them.

Their much-touted 20-year Vision is one of a Forest devoid of the public. The National Park appears to be treating the New Forest as its own feudal kingdom.

Wildlife Living in Harmony:

Many people, not only those who grew up in the Forest, are keen to preserve the harmony of the landscape and the wildlife that we so love. We do not want an ill-informed National Park Authority telling us ‘Keep out – you might disturb the wildlife.’

Natural England, speaking to the Access Forum recently, gave a blank refusal to accept that much wildlife is capable of adapting well to people sharing their Forest. This wilful ignorance will be driving the NPA’s conservation policies.

The recent Progress Project shut down a number of car parks last year in the name of conservation, without a shred of evidence. The National Park stakeholders made it abundantly clear they would require evidence in future, but this call has been ignored.

Proper protection of our environment comes from understanding the interaction of people and nature, and thinking through practical ways of encouraging both, rather than bureaucratic control-freaks blindly shutting everything down. The New Forest is our heritage, not the NPA’s private fiefdom.

Mis-use of legislation:

Throughout the document, the National Park Authority mis-quotes and mis-uses the legally defined Sandford Principle and the Precautionary Principle to justify their heavy hand. They seem to have no idea what these terms mean.

The government has given guidelines that restricting recreation in favour of wildlife should only take place after vigorous attempts to reconcile the two, and then as a measure of last resort. Take note, NPA. Last resort, not first resort.

Zoning:

Your leisure space has now been redefined as a ‘sensitive area’. They propose dividing the National Park into three zones. Look at the map and you will see that Zone One IS the New Forest, the traditional woods and heaths. Any recreation in this zone that they believe in their arrogance undermines the most tranquil areas will preferentially be re-located to another zone.Do you want to be relocated out of the Forest, to preserve its tranquility? Lucky old oak trees!

Post-draft Consultation:

Consultation with user groups/stakeholders after the november deadline, in order to refine the final Plan and RMS, has been begrudging and minimal. There were only 5 meetings carried out for the Plan, with a refusal to carry out any more (National Park Authority summaries available at their site). Each meeting was characterised by an insistence that the NPA were only there to listen, and it remained tight-lipped about how it intended to modify the Plan. Early June saw a single meeting to cover all recreation concerns, which followed the same pattern.

Despite early promises, and frequent requests from NFDOG, the National Park Authority have refused to hold any meetings with NFDOG.

Misleading figures:

The National Park Authority published the 'draft' results of the public consultation in early January. These figures were deeply misleading, and failed to show thousands of complaints, and made out, for example, that few people were bothered about car park closures or shutting down recreation for spurious conservation reasons. NFDOG investigated the true level of objections, and can state the following as the true minimum numbers:-

Those objecting (National Park Authority figures in brackets).
Dog Walking 1790 (1743); Recreation and Access 1790 (205);Traffic Management 2124 (584).
Those in favour (National Park Authority figures):
Dog Walking 120; Recreation and Access 70;Traffic Management 96.

NFDOG have maintained repeated pressure for the full disclosure of objections to their plans, including a request under the Freedom of Information Act, but every attempt has been blocked.