National Access Forum meeting - 22 September 2021

55^th meeting, Wednesday 22 September 2021, 10.00 am - 12:50 (virtual)

 

1. Welcome, introductions, apologies – Don Milton – Convenor – 10:00 – 10:10

2. Minutes of previous meeting, action points and matters arising – 10:10 – 10:20
(Unconfirmed minutes from the virtual meeting 2 June 2021 attached)

Please email comments on the minutes to Secretary by 20 September.

• AP 54 /1: Secretary to set up a date for the NAF Access and Roads Working Group (discharged item 3)
• AP 54/2: Volunteers for the NAF/LAF working group to plan the autumn meeting should contact the secretary (Discharged item 10).
• AP 54/3: Members to send comments on the work plan tracker and topics for future meetings to the Secretary.

3. Access and Roads Working Group Update  - 10:20 – 10:40 (note of the working group meeting 11 August 2021- attached)

4. Outdoor Access with E – bikes, Research Update – Graeme MacLean (DMBinS)  - 10:40 – 10:50

TEN MINUTE COMFORT BREAK

5. Level crossings and access issues– Sandra Hebenton (Network Rail)  - 11:00 – 11:25

6. Improving Public Access – NatureScot  11:25 – 11:35

7. Dog Sport Activity Guide – Stephen Jenkinson and Fiona Murray (FLS)  - 11:35 – 11:50

TEN MINUTE COMFORT BREAK

8. Visitor Management Strategy (VMS) & SOAC communication Update – Mark Wrightham - NatureScot  12:00 – 12:15

9. Membership Review – NAF secretary (paper attached)  12:15 – 12:25

10. Forthcoming meetings & agenda items – (NAF work programme attached)  12:25 – 12:40

• NAF/LAF late autumn virtual Joint meeting – ideas for the draft programme
• NAF meeting Wednesday 2 February 2022
• NAF meeting late May/early June -  date tbc

11. Any Other Business (please inform the secretary of any substantive items)  - 12:40 – 12:50

• ADMG and access

Close

Purpose

This paper from Kennel Club (KC) and Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS) proposes a code of conduct for all dog sports taking place in Scotland, to ensure that a well-informed and responsible approach, in line with SOAC, is taken by both participants and land managers in the public, private and third sectors.

Action

The Forum is invited to:

1. discuss and endorse this dog sports code of conduct
2. add it to the existing suite of online NAF guidance here:
3. recommend that NatureScot adds the code to the dog walking section of its online SOAC guidance 
4. notes the proposed design and communication activity by the Kennel Club and Forestry and Land Scotland and recommends that NatureScot acts to complement this awareness-raising activity within existing resources.

Key issues

While a range of outdoor sports involving human-dog partnerships has existed for many decades, the 47% increase in dog ownership since the start of the Covid pandemic means it is ever more important to help access-takers, land managers and access authorities optimise the increased opportunities for more active, healthy lifestyles arising from dog sports, as well as minimise any adverse impacts on other people, wildlife and land management activity.

While sled dog racing (such as the annual Aviemore rally in January) is widely recognised, other human-canine sports such as scootering, bikejor and canicross (cross-country running with one or more dogs) have made such activities much more accessible in practical and financial terms.

Common to all these activities is that the dogs involved are attached by harnesses to the human participant, thus providing excellent opportunities to exercise energetic dogs without them being off-lead, which is especially beneficial for those dogs with poor recall.

Background

Established in 1873, the Kennel Club is the largest organisation in the UK devoted to dog health, welfare and training, and its primary objective is to improve in every way the well-being of all dogs throughout their lives. As the leading canine sector body in terms of promoting responsible access-taking and management, in 2005 it signed a concordat of cooperation with the then Forestry Commission, which continues to this day with FLS.

The KC is also a significant landowner and so offers an impartial and informed opportunity to liaise with dog owning interests despite the varied nature of dog sports and related organisations. In Scotland the KC also acts on access issues on behalf of the Scottish Kennel Club due to its much greater expertise and resources.

The land manager perspective, gained from years of hosting dog sports events and training, has been shared by Forestry and Land Scotland, and incorporated into the paper. FLS is the largest single provider of outdoor recreation in Scotland, including provision of land for dog sports.

As part of this KC/FLS partnership a practical review of management of dog sports was undertaken, published in 2018, which made recommendations for improving the management of dog sports on the UK public forest estate, with particular reference to access provided under the Scottish Outdoor Access Code. The findings of this report have informed the development of the following code of conduct; this report is available on request.

Legal background

In principle, all dog sports are permitted under LRSA which covers the requirement for responsible access; keeping dogs under proper control; non-motorised vehicles used for dogsports (scootering, bikejor etc); minimising impact on environment and other users.

In some circumstances All Terrain Vehicles (ATV) are used during training, to provide assistance to sled dog teams on hills, as well as enhancing safety by providing effective braking and restraint where a ground hook (as traditionally used on snow) cannot be used. ATV use falls outwith access rights under SOAC and so is only undertaken by permission of the landowner (e.g.p ersonal permits issued by FLS).

The participation of dogs in outdoor sports also raises issues of animal welfare which are not covered under SOAC, nor routinely in the domain of most access and land managers. Thus this code of conduct has also been developed to incorporate the principles of the Scottish Government’s Welfare of dogs: code of practice  published in 2010 and associated supplementary advice.

A possible approach

NAF adopts this code of conduct in full (after any identified necessary modifications are made) and publishes it on the SOAC web pages, in a similar way to the Outdoor Events Guidance.

FLS’ in-house Design team improves the appearance of the code of conduct document, using SOAC branding, ready for circulation and publication.

FLS and KC undertake to support the code of conduct on social media and other channels, following an outline communications plan. Other NAF members are asked to do likewise.

Forestry and Land Scotland/Kennel Club

September 2021

The Dog Sports Code

The Scottish Outdoor Access Code includes a conditional right of access to land across Scotland to train and exercise dogs in canine sports such as canicross, bikejor, scootering and the use of sleds and non-motorised wheeled rigs.

This right of access depends on behaving responsibly at all times and not causing problems for wildlife, livestock and other people visiting or working in the outdoors.

Following this Dog Sports Code, developed in partnership with the Kennel Club, will help you and your dogs stay safe, enjoy your visit and be welcomed back by others.

Stay safe

• Make sure dogs travel safely and are under control when getting in and out of vehicles.
• Ensure all equipment is well-maintained and suitable for your dogs and activity.
• Only use soft, flat, flexible collars and harnesses during training and transportation. Avoid equipment that can cause injury or distress, such as shock, pinch, prong or choke collars.
• Wear all recommended safety equipment including helmets and eye protection as appropriate to your activity and prevailing conditions.
• Use a snub line and shock absorber to connect dogs to fixed objects and your rig, sled, bike, scooter or hip belt.
• Always carry a first aid kit, whistle, personal identification and a mobile phone or other means of summoning help.
• Keep a look out for other visitors and unexpected hazards, especially in poor visibility and after strong winds.
• Abide by all temporary access restrictions to protect wildlife and for land management reasons.
• Stop your activity if the weather or trail conditions threaten the well-being of you or your dogs.
• Check your dogs and yourself for ticks after every visit.
• Avoid leaving dogs unattended when in harness or in a vehicle.
• Follow any additional guidance specific to your activity and equipment; ideally join a club for more advice and support.

Prevent conflict with others

• Park vehicles to avoid causing problems for other visitors or land managers and comply with any local requirements such as parking fees.
• Ensure your dogs are always under control and don’t approach any wildlife, livestock or other people and their dogs uninvited.
• Choose your training times and locations to minimise the likelihood of meeting other people.
• Display information where other visitors will see it, advising them that training is taking place and how to stay safe.
• At night, dawn and dusk wear high-visibility clothing and use lights.
• Hail other visitors to warn them of your approach; remember some people may not be able to hear you.
• Slow down and be prepared to stop if you encounter other people, dogs, horses or wildlife.
• Remember that land management operations can occur at any time of day or night; look out for warning signs, diversions or closures.
• Maintain third-party insurance to protect yourself and others in case of an accident.
• Make sure you have permission from the land manager before using all-terrain vehicles or quad bikes.  
• If you want to organise an event, follow the land manager’s guidance to ensure you do so safely and lawfully.

Be an ambassador for your sport

• Leave only paw prints and wheel tracks behind.
• Remove any fouling or grooming waste; fill any holes your dogs have dug.
• Comply with any local travel restrictions, and clean paws, boots and wheels to avoid spreading pests and diseases to other areas.
• Help other visitors understand your sport and what to do if they encounter dogs being trained or exercised.

Review of the National Access Forum full members starting with the land management and recreational bodies followed by those representing public and other bodies.

Purpose

1. This paper outlines a proposed process for reviewing the Forum’s membership as outlined in the operating principles. Reviews of the membership from each of; the recreation bodies, land management bodies, public and other bodies for full membership of the Forum, are all due.

Action

2. Members are invited to agree the proposed approach for reviewing the membership and comment as necessary.

Background

3. This procedure for reviewing the Forum’s membership, which takes place on a four year cycle, is incorporated in the Forum’s operating principles and an extract is attached as Annex 1. The current membership of the Forum, including both full and corresponding members, is attached as Annex 2.

4. The last review of the membership was initiated at the NAF meeting in September 2017. The recreational and land management bodies had not been reviewed prior to the Convenor election in 2016 and instead they were reviewed after the Convenor election and change of Secretary that autumn along with a review of the public bodies. A review of the remaining groups namely: other bodies, other relevant interests and professional bodies commenced the following year in March 2018 with a report to the NAF meeting in May.

5. The review involved emailing the individual groups to ascertain if they were content to remain as full or corresponding members. In the previous review Police Scotland and the Woodland Trust Scotland became full members and Visit Scotland became a corresponding member. There were no competing applications for full membership status so a voting process did not come into play.

Proposed review process

6. The proposal if agreed by the Forum is to adopt a similar timetable and format to the last review i.e. a review in two stages commencing this autumn, 2021. However it would be useful to split the review as outlined in the operating principles starting with the ‘’recreational’ bodies (6 seats) and ‘land management’ bodies (6 seats) and leaving the ‘public’ bodies (7 seats, one NatureScot is non-voting) to be reviewed in stage 2, along with the ‘other’ bodies (5/6 seats) category. The other bodies should include at least one representative of:

• education interests within access rights;
• commercial interests within access rights, and;
• conservation interests.

7. The first stage of the review would be conducted by correspondence and the findings brought to the February meeting of the National Access Forum. In the event of there being more requests for full membership than there are places, a vote by ballot would be put in place. The second stage of the review would commence late winter and the findings brought to the next full NAF meeting in the Spring of 2022.

8. In order to commence this review, Forum members are asked to highlight any changes to the organisations listed or any groups or bodies that may be missing from the list that we may wish to invite to become corresponding members. This is more relevant for the second stage review of the ‘public’ and ‘other bodies’ groupings to ensure we have an appropriate coverage of relevant access interests.

Janice Winning – NAF Secretary

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Annex 1: Extract from the forum’s operating principles

B2.  The Forum will comprise representatives of recreation, land management and other interests. These bodies should be non-party political, have a national, membership-based structure through clubs and/or individual members, and be both recognised and authoritative. The Forum will also include public bodies which have significant national roles in access and can represent the wider public interest. SNH will maintain lists of such bodies in consultation with Forum members.

B3.    Full members of the Forum will be identified and reviewed as follows:

• the Secretary will invite relevant recreation and land management bodies to express an interest in full membership. Six members will be identified from within each group by discussion at a meeting convened for the purpose. Where agreement cannot be reached by this method, membership will be determined by a vote involving bodies within the relevant constituency;
• six relevant public bodies will be identified by agreement between the organisations concerned;
• the Secretary will invite relevant ‘other’ bodies to express an interest in full membership; up to five such organisations will be elected by full members representing the recreation and land management sectors, and these should include at least one body each to represent educational, commercial and conservation interests;
• unless they have expressed a wish to the contrary, all bodies which are not selected can become corresponding members of the forum.

(B4-6 relate to the appointment of the Convenor)

B7.    The membership of the Forum will be reviewed on a four year cycle as follows

Year 1: Review recreation and land management bodies; appoint Convenor
Year 2: Review public and other bodies
Year 3: No change in membership; review Convenor
Year 4: No change in membership

 

Annex 2: National Access Forum Current Members (December 2020) * = new or updated

Full members are indicated in bold, and attend meetings; the other bodies are the Corresponding Member organisations, who are emailed all meeting details, and can submit comments for meetings discussions.

Outdoor Recreation bodies:	British Horse Society Scotland Cycling UK Scotland Horse Scotland Mountaineering Scotland Ramblers Scotland Rough Stuff Fellowship (Off road cycle touring and MTB club) Royal Yachting Association (Scotland) Scottish Anglers’ National Association Scottish Canoe Association Scottish Carriage Driving Association Scottish Cycling Scottish Hang Gliding & Paragliding Federation Scottish Hill Runners Scottish Orienteering Association Scottish Rowing Scottish Sports Association Snowsport Scotland Sub Aqua Association (Scotland)
Land Management bodies:	Association of Deer Management Groups Fisheries Management Scotland British Association for Shooting & Conservation Confederation of Forest Industries - Confor Historic Houses Association of Scotland NFU Scotland National Sheep Association(Scotland)* Scottish Association for Country Sports Scottish Crofting Federation Scottish Golf Union Scottish Land & Estates
Public bodies:	EventScotland Forestry & Land Scotland* Health & Safety Executive Historic Environment Scotland Local Access Forums Defence Estates National Park Authorities NatureScot* NHS Health Scotland Office of Rail Regulation Police Scotland Scottish Canals Scottish Enterprise Scottish Forestry* Scottish Local Authorities Scottish Water Sportscotland Transport Scotland VisitScotland
Education bodies:	Boys Brigade Duke of Edinburgh Scotland Field Studies Council Girls Brigade Girlguiding Scotland Outward Bound Scotland Royal Highland Education Trust Scottish Advisory Panel for Outdoor Education Scout Association Scotland
Commercial/Tourism bodies:	Venture Trust Commercial/tourism bodies Association of Mountaineering Instructors British Holiday and Home Parks Association Scottish Adventure Activities Forum Scottish Agritourism* Scottish Chambers of Commerce Scottish Youth Hostels Association Trekking & Riding Association of Scotland Wild Scotland
Conservation bodies:	Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust John Muir Trust National Trust for Scotland RSPB Scotland Scottish Wildlife Trust Woodland Trust Scotland
Other relevant interests:	Fields in Trust Green Action Trust* Greenspace Scotland Kennel Club/Scottish Kennel Club Mountain Bothies Association Paths for All Partnership Salmon and Trout Association Scottish Autocycle Union Scottish Disability Equality Forum Scottish Rights of Way & Access Society (Scotways) Sustrans Scotland Scottish Wildland Group
Professional bodies:	Association of Heads of Outdoor Centres Law Society of Scotland Royal Town Planning Institute Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Scottish Countryside Rangers Association Scottish Gamekeepers Association Scottish Outdoor Access Network Scottish Raptor Monitoring Group
Additional observer member:	Scottish Government

 

Virtual meeting: 22nd September 2021

 

	Representatives	Organisation
1	Don Milton	Convenor - National Access Forum  (NAF)
2	Janice Winning	Secretary - National Access Forum  (NAF)
3	Frank Spencer-Nairn	Association of Deer Management Groups (ADMG)
4	Helene Mauchlen	British Horse Society Scotland (BHSS)
5	Colin Shedden	British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC)
6	Paul Timms	Cycling UK Scotland
7	Graeme McLean*	Developing Mountain Biking in Scotland (DMBinS)
8	Stuart Chalmers*	Forestry & Land Scotland (FLS)
9	Fiona Murray*	Forestry & Land Scotland (FLS)
10	Lois Bayne-Jardine	Historic Houses (HH)
11	Stephen Jenkinson	Kennel Club / Scottish Kennel Club
12	Angus Duncan	Local Authorities
13	Nick Cole	Local Access Forum (LAFs)
14	Stuart Younie	Mountaineering Scotland (MS)
15	Gordon McKilligen	National Farmers Union Scotland (NFUS)
16	Peter Crane	National Park Authorities (CNP)
17	Alan Macpherson	NatureScot
18	Mark Wrightham*	NatureScot
19	Linda Bowers*	Network Rail
20	Sandra Hebendon*	Network Rail
21	Innes Keith*	Network Rail
22	Rona Gibb	Paths for All Partnership (PfA)
23	Insp. Alan Dron	Police Scotland
24	Helen Todd	Ramblers Scotland (RS)
25	Jonathan Kitching	(SAPOE)
26	Eddie Palmer	Scottish Canoe Association (SCA)
27	Stephen Reeves	Scottish Countryside Rangers Association (SCRA)
28	Bob Frost	Scottish Forestry
29	Malcolm Duce	Scottish Government (SG)
30	Simon Ovenden	Scottish Land & Estates (SLE)
31	George Menzies*	Scotways
32	Eleisha Fahy*	Scotways
33	Gillian Kyle	Sportscotland
34	Roger Scrutton	The Scottish Sports Association (SSA)

*in attendance as additional representatives or guests.

Item 1 – Welcome & Introductions:

The Convenor opened the virtual meeting welcoming everyone to the Forum. He introduced a number of guests joining the meeting; Sandra Hebenton, Linda Bowers and Innes Keith (Network Rail), Fiona Murray (Forestry & Land Scotland), Graeme McLean (Developing Mountain Biking in Scotland) and additional representatives Bob Frost (Scottish Forestry), Simon Ovenden (Scottish Land & Estates) and Peter Crane (Cairngorms National Park). He thanked Jason Rust, David Clyne, Kevin Lafferty and Eddie Palmer for their many years on the Forum and wished them well in their new roles.

Apologies: Andrew Hopetoun (Historic Houses Association), Davie Black (Mountaineering Scotland), Grant Dollier (SCA) Stephan Hennig (Scotways), Kevin Lafferty (Scottish Forestry), David Clyne (CNPA), Kenny Auld (LLTNP), Eileen Stuart (NatureScot), Roy Barlow (Woodland Trust), Victoria Brooks (Wild Scotland).

Item 2 – Minutes, Action points and matters arising from previous meeting:

1. Minutes: - the revised unconfirmed minutes of the 2 June 2021 previously circulated were approved with one amendment required to the Minister’s surname.

2. Action points: 

• AP 54 /1: Secretary to set up a date for the NAF Access and Roads Working Group (Discharged; item 3)
• AP 54/2: Volunteers for the NAF/LAF working group to plan the autumn meeting should contact the secretary (Discharged; item 10).
• AP 54/3: Members to send comments on the work plan tracker and topics for future meetings to the Secretary (Discharged; comments received).

3. Matters arising: 

Eleisha Fahy gave an update on the work to further promote the NAF Guidance on ‘the Use of Mediation for Access’. A third successful on-line ‘building skills in mediation’ session was held for access staff, and rangers by the Scottish Outdoor Access Network (SOAN) in September. She explained that an introduction to the guidance will also form part of the virtual NAF/LAF joint meeting on 25 November with further skills sessions for LAFs planned thereafter. Nick Cole reported that he had attended the training and would recommend it, although he added mediation required both sides to voluntarily participate and for entrenched cases a resort to court action might be required.

The Convenor reported on two meetings he had attended. The first was with Kevin Lafferty and Bob Frost from Scottish Forestry to discuss consultation arrangements around forestry planning applications and opportunities to feed into the second stage of the UK Forestry Standards practice manual consultation. A presentation on the consultation arrangements around woodland creation and how access is taken on board will be given at the Feb NAF meeting. The second was the inaugural meeting of the National Forestry Stakeholders Group where he emphasised the importance of forward thinking, engagement and early consultation to ensure minimal disruption for responsible access.

Item 3 - Access & Roads working group:

4. Helene Mauchlen reported from the first meeting of the NAF working group which is ‘reviewing issues relating to the interaction of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 (RSA) and the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (LRSA)’. The group has begun to identify; the perceived and actual conflicts between the LRSA and the RSA, gaps in associated guidance and where poor communication is impacting upon responsible access or road safety for non-motorised users. She noted that the input from Fred O’Hara of Transport Scotland had been particularly helpful in identifying the intersections between the two sets of legislation.

5. The group had considered a wide range of issues including;

• early engagement in active travel plans and projects so that other non-motorised users (NMU) as well as cyclists are considered,
• the status of vulnerable road users, especially on quiet country roads, and keeping NMU users safe,
• the importance of case studies and recognising good practice,
• the need to push for legislation change in the longer term,
• the shorter term focus on preparing useable guidance at a local authority level.

6. Helene also informed the Forum that Transport Scotland’s ‘Cycling by Design’ guidance had recently been revised. This guidance would be updated regularly so there was an opportunity to influence the next editions to take account of other NMU when designing infrastructure on all roads streets and paths. See:  https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/cycling-by-design/. Nick Cole also mentioned the recent revision of the Highway Code and the hierarchy of risk associated with vulnerable users.

7. Mark Wrightham added that the main action for the working group was to look at Standards for Highways Design Manual GG142 ‘Walking, cycling and horse riding assessment and review’, to identify which parts of the existing guidance might be relevant for summary NAF guidance aimed at local authorities. The deadline for comments from the working group is the end of October and a further update will be presented to the NAF meeting in February 2022.

Item 4:  Outdoor Access with E-bikes, Research Update:

8. Graeme McLean provided an update on some of the initial findings from the UK joint research on ‘Outdoor access with e- bikes’. The research has found little in the way of literature on ‘off road’ use by e-bikes. Instead the research team have been working with 14 different focus groups to identify the demographics of participants, their motivation and experience. Participants fall into a variety of categories; older experienced riders, younger fit riders using e bikes for training, riders transitioning from one bike to another, through to new users and those lacking in fitness but wanting to participate. Motivation appears to be physical but also social providing fun and enjoyment for a wide range of riders. The research team is also working with the bike industry to understand future innovations and facility requirements (e-charging) to allow people to go from A to B.

9. Graeme explained that e- bikes will have consequences for trail maintenance due to the greater volume of e-bikes, reflected in the increase in sales as well as the impact from more ‘sessioning’, riding of loops on trails causing more wear and tear. There will be a need to look at rider behaviour and etiquette, as well as educating new comers in responsible outdoor access. Potential conflicts areas include speed on uphill tracks as well as the impact of larger groups of riders. A combined approach on education, working with the industry and landowners, is envisaged whilst not taking the fun out of e biking.  Further questionnaires are planned for the autumn and a final report due in Jan 2022.

10. In discussion, Jonathan Kitching highlighted the massive effort that will be required to reach e-bike users to get responsible access messages across. Graeme acknowledged this saying that the Forum, the e-biking community and the industry all had a part to play and that communication needed to be simple but effective. Stuart Younie welcomed the research findings saying that Mountaineering Scotland were keen to look at the emerging issues in relation to the shared use of trails by e-bikes, mountain bikers and walkers and the safety considerations. Graeme agreed, highlighting the need to; invest in the facilities and safety, reduce conflicts and share understanding about reaching new audiences for safe access to the outdoors.

11. Simon Ovenden mentioned the increased rate of erosion on mountain bike trails at Glenlivet, recommending the need for trail designers to build in ‘landing areas’ as well as dealing with sessioning.  He added that greater consideration of the acceleration of e-bikes on mixed trails and the impacts on walkers and other users was needed. He also asked about modifications of bikes and the conflict with other users from higher speeds. Graeme confirmed that modified bikes fall out with the access rights and the research findings will emphasis this.

12. The Convenor highlighted the difference between the discrete impacts made by a hoof print and the linear impacts from bike tracks which can increase water flow and erosion. Graeme said that some of these details were out with the scope of the current research but would be discussed with trail designers. Speed on downhill trails was he thought to be less of an issue whereas the impacts on uphill trails and coming up upon walkers was more of an issue. Joint collaboration was underway to look at trails for multi-use with e-bikes in mind and use positive promotion i.e. directing where e-bikes can go, rather than restrictions. Stuart Chalmers said that Forestry and Land Scotland had also noted greater wear and tear on paths from increased use. Graeme explained that the research would focus more on the analysis of participants’ use of trails, the subsequent impacts and how to manage these impacts. For example, what are the behaviours and how can these be modified to reduce impacts or how paths might be strengthened accordingly.

13. Graeme also reported that there was certainly a difference between experienced and new users and that the research findings would help tailor the messages to specific user groups. Nick Cole agreed that education was the key, recommending a public campaign eg TV. Roger Scrutton highlighted the need for more consultation with other outdoor user groups to ensure the research reflected a balance of use rather than just increased e–bikes use. Gordon Mckilligen said there was a wider issue with people from out with Scotland not being aware of the Code, including using e-bikes, and there was a need for responsible access messages to reach a UK audience. Graeme welcomed the feedback from the Forum and would continue to update members as the research progressed.

Item 5: Level Crossings and Access:

14. The Convenor welcomed representatives from Network Rail explaining that the Forum had been informed about the recent closure of the level crossing at Dalwhinnie, with the subsequent impacts on local access and wanted to better understand the background policies and considerations to the decision. He highlighted the different position regarding access rights in Scotland in comparison to England and Wales including duties on land owners to facilitate access and outlined previous involvement of the Forum in this topic including a letter to Scottish Government in 2014 following a report by the Scottish Law Commission.

15. Sandra Hebendon explained that she and her colleagues were familiar with the legislation in relation to access and level crossings.  As a town planning manager she was one of a number of people dealing with level crossings and closures, advising on planning matters, policies and advice to local authorities. She was aware of recent concerns regarding the closure at Ben Alder but their view was that Section 6 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 excluded access to railways, and the British Transport Commission Act 1945  and ‘The Railway Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 determine the rights that apply to level crossings and their status. She explained that the core purpose of Network Rail is as set out in the original legislation to enable the safe operations of the railway.

16. Linda Bowers explained her role in the management of level crossings, the measurement and assessment of risk and control measures. She explained in more detail how the risk assessment is made, with high risk crossings being reviewed more often, e.g. site visits twice a year or more to assess risks in all seasons. Each level crossing has a dedicated duty manager who engages with the local community. The risk assessment takes account of; the local environment, proximity to schools, train usage, vehicle and pedestrian use of the crossing, whether the users are vulnerable groups, dog walkers, or those with limited mobility. Public engagement is important to determine the type and level of use with incident history also considered. The restrictions at Dalwhinnie reflected safety concerns resulting from a failure to meet industry standards (i.e. ability of pedestrians to cross in less than 12 seconds). Because of train speeds on the this stretch of line, the limited visibility along the track and the maximum permissible distance for siting whistle boards (400m), insufficient warning time of the approach of a train is only possible by reducing speed to 10mph which was not operationally possible due to disruption to services on this line and the whole network.   

17. In discussion, Forum members raised a number of concerns. Nick Cole said that Network Rail needed to reflect the public interest in access across the railway and that any closures failed to recognise the significant need to cross the rail network by many user groups. Simon Ovenden mentioned that the crossing is still in use, and by closing it, Network Rail have effectively increased the amount of time taken for people to cross the railway, especially cyclists who need to lift the bikes and therefore have made it more dangerous. He added that duration and dwell time is now greater than before making it more hazardous. Innes Keith emphasised that they cannot make the crossing safer and that it was beyond the limit of acceptable risk, stating that the legal position is that the crossing is locked for public use, and continued use of the crossing is unlawful. He added that Network Rail are looking at additional options to find a solution that meets operational safety. He provided an update on the recent local consultation that had taken place, welcoming the views presented and inviting suggestions of other groups to consult.

18. Peter Crane said that the Local Access Forum had met to discuss the level crossing closure and had been disappointed about the lack of public consultation before the closure. He recommended working with Network Rail to find a safe solution as there are concerns locally that the route is being used by more people. He asked if there was monitoring in place. Innes confirmed that monitoring was in place by way of CCTV but monitoring of alternative routes was not being undertaken.

19. Stuart Chalmers asked if they had considered reducing speed of trains to allow for safer crossing. Innes replied that this had been considered but that it was not viable to reduce speed significantly. Helen Todd agreed with previous comments about the increased risk now associated with the route due to the closure stressing that that Network Rail was obliged under the Land Reform Act to facilitate access over the crossing given its importance for exercising access rights on adjacent land.

20. George Menzies, said that Scotways recognised that safety was an issue for concern, but that Network Rail had not looked at the impacts resulting from their decision, so their risk assessment was inadequate. He quoted the Office of Road and Rail guidance which states the need to look at not only who is using the level crossing but also what is actually happening. He added that Network Rail had been slow regarding the signage of alternative routes and confirmed that no one was actually ‘trespassing’ if it is a recorded Right of Way.  He said that it was wrong to assume that because it is a private crossing that a Right of Way cannot apply. It is a very old track and it is likely that it would have been a Right of Way but agreed that this was grey area and needed to be clarified quickly.

21. Innes Keith said that the assessment undertaken regarding risk was very much about the user and in particular access taking more than 12 seconds. He accepted that the signage was not yet adequate and confirmed that they have asked for assistance from Scotways for this. He noted the legal points made but said they were relying on their own legal counsel for advice. The Convenor noted that there was wider interest than from the Local Access Forum and identified the Scottish Canoe Association as being one of several recreation bodies who had an interest in the status of the level crossing.

22. Nick Cole mentioned that a Freedom of Information request had been submitted to identify all the level crossings with core paths and rights of way in Scotland. He added that it was safer for people to cross at level crossings and that these should not be a barrier to access. Malcolm Duce confirmed that the Scottish Government is gathering information on the number of core paths cross a private level crossing. The Convenor thanked Network Rail representatives for their willingness to attend at relatively short notice to discuss the matter and share information with the Forum as well as listening to the concerns expressed.

Item 6: Improving Public Access:

23. Alan Macpherson reported on the popularity of the recent round of the IPA scheme, with a record 147 applications totalling over £12 million in value received. The scheme is largely similar to previous rounds but with improved guidance and revised scoring on some aspects, e.g. connectivity. These applications are currently being assessed with the scale of approvals depending on the final budgets due to be announced at the end of the year. Applications receiving approval are likely to be given in Feb/March with path works required to be completed by the end of 2022. Members asked about the future arrangements for IPA. Alan said that IPA policy would still be in transition until 2024 but that NAF members could certainly meet with NatureScot in early 2022 to discuss funding of paths and help inform future policy. Stuart Younie questioned how many applications related to upland or mountain paths. Greater flexibility in the criteria for applicants he argued was required to take account of the path erosion caused by increasing numbers of people using upland paths. He added he would be keen to be involved in future discussions.

AP 55/1: Members interested in participating in a small meeting to discuss paths and IPA future funding issues are requested to contact the secretary.

Item 7: Dog Sport Activity Guide:

24. The Convenor introduced the item noting that the guide covered access issues and dog welfare, the latter being out with the remit and general expertise of the Forum. Stephen Jenkinson and Fiona Murray presented the background to the new jointly produced activity guide for owners undertaking dog sports. Stephen explained that there had been a 48 % rise in dog ownership in the UK since the start of the pandemic and an increase in dog sports such as dog sledding, canicross and canibike. The role of the Kennel Club was to help minimise the impacts of people walking with dogs but also to encourage responsible behaviour in other activities undertaken with dogs. Fiona said that Forestry and Land Scotland were well placed to host many of these high profile dog sport events and training facilities but that the numbers of events was growing and so too the risk of conflicts with other users. The guide therefore offers opportunities to educate the public about canine welfare and minimise adverse access impacts on local communities, wildlife and livestock.

25. The Convenor asked if members were willing to endorse the Guide on the basis that the Kennel Club endorsed the canine welfare aspects and help promote it through their communication channels. There was general support for the guide by members and no issues raised.

AP55/2: FLS to finalise the guide, for circulation by the secretary and to add to the SOAC website.

Item 8: Visitor Management Strategy (VMS) and SOAC communication:

26. Mark Wrightham provided an update on the co-ordinated activity to address visitor management pressures in hot spots across Scotland. The broad feedback is that that it is as busy as 2020 but front line staff are more prepared and coping, and that visitor behaviour in general is better. The additional staffing on the ground has helped improve the management of traffic and irresponsible parking.  Arisaig is one area that is still experiencing difficulties in managing the volume of visitors but the peak season problems are now easing. Looking to the future, there is a need to maintain investment especially for funding staff on the ground and to plan strategically for visitors across larger areas. Sustainability issues and creating a culture of caring for the environment are also being discussed.

27. Mark added that promoting SOAC and responsible access was very much part of the wider communication within the visitor management strategy. A very important part of the public facing campaign was being carried out in partnership with other key bodies focusing on new users, strengthening messages on access with dogs and camping, wildlife disturbance and inland water safety. NatureScot had issued 10 new press releases and lots of social media posts resulting in 13 million impressions and 400,000 visits to the SOAC website. In terms of the future focus, the plan is to maintain momentum but also to renew engagement with schools to communicate basic Code messages but also to promote ‘care’ for the environment.

28. Stuart Younie said he was encouraged that Scottish Government continued to be heavily involved in this type of work and he praised the partnership working. He agreed on the need to maintain momentum and investment in access and infrastructure. Mark replied that the need for ongoing commitment was recognised, but they would continue to highlight the importance of investment in infrastructure and also education.

29. Frank Spencer Nairn referred to the recent pressure from some MSPs for a review of SOAC and how it is working. Mark responded saying that the Code works well, and that any issues can be dealt with through improved messaging rather than a statutory review. Malcolm Duce said that SG had no plans to review the Code but he was aware of pressures from land managers to do so. Gordon McKilligen explained the pressures some farmers with livestock were under especially smaller highland farms where there were fewer options to move cows with calves to fields where access wasn’t taking place. Mark mentioned a helpful information sheet produced by HSE ‘Cattle and Public Access in Scotland’ see: – https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ais17s.htm. Simon Ovenden thought that MSPs were not seeking a review but more a refresh of the Code to take account of new issues, e.g. drones, and e-bikes, and bring it up to date. This view now has cross party support. Helen Todd agreed with Mark that SOAC works well as illustrated by its use during the pandemic. Instead she argued that funding for access was a more important issue.

Item 9: Membership Review:

30. The NAF secretary outlined the process for carrying out the first stage of the membership review as stated in the Forum’s operating principles and in the paper previously circulated. The review which operates on a four year cycle is now due. The proposal is to commence in November starting with a review of the recreation and land management bodies. These bodies would be contacted by correspondence to confirm whether they wish to remain as full or corresponding members and the findings brought to the NAF meeting in February 2022. In the event that there are more requests for full membership than there are places a vote by ballot would be made. The Forum agreed with the proposal to commence the review.

AP 55/3: Forum members are requested to highlight any omissions or changes required to the existing list of full and corresponding members.

Item 10: Forth coming meetings & agenda items:

1. NAF/LAF virtual Autumn Joint meeting –

31. A small working group had drafted some ideas for a virtual Joint NAF/LAF update meeting to be held in mid/late November. It would consist of a brief update from the NAF but would focus mainly on topics raised by the LAFs themselves. In the afternoon there would be separate session introducing the ‘NAF Guidance on the use of Mediation for Access’. The Forum agreed with these proposals recommending that further ideas for topics be sought from the LAFs in advance.

2. Future NAF meetings - Ideas for future agenda items should be sent to the Secretary.

Any Other Business

32. Frank Spencer Nairn raised the issue of disturbance to deer stalking from the increase in access to the remoter hills partly due to the pandemic. He said that the Association of Deer Management Groups (ADMG) welcomes responsible access to the hills but had noticed a marked increase in irresponsible access recently. He added that pressures on deer management groups to increase deer culls could lead to more conflicts between stalkers and walkers and that a review or update of the Code seemed appropriate to take into account these changes. Frank also raised the issue about applying the Code and how to generate greater compliance. Mark mentioned that NatureScot has developed social media resource which they are promoting along with ‘Heading for the Scottish Hills’. The Convenor suggested that the issue could be discussed at the February meeting of the Forum which would give the ADMG time to find out how widespread the issue was and prepare a paper for the meeting.

33. Mapping Scotland’s Paths – Simon Ovenden highlighted some of the inaccuracies that are causing concern for land managers with the new Ramblers Scotland paths mapping online resource. Helen Todd acknowledged that this was not the final map and that paths were being removed where they didn’t exist. She added that landowners had previously been invited to comment but there hadn’t been much uptake at the time. It is a long term project, with funding secured through to November 2022 so she welcomed feedback from landowners. Gordon McKilligen also expressed disappointment in the accuracy of the paths shown saying he would encourage more farmers to look at the resource for accuracy. Helen agreed that a meeting with landowning bodies would be helpful and that this would be set up.

34. Paths for All provided the following update items:

• The new CEO for PfA Kevin Lafferty started on 6 September.
• A new Paths for All Strategic statement is available on the website: https://www.pathsforall.org.uk/mediaLibrary/other/english/paths-for-all-strategy-document.pdf
• There is a new Active Travel site for information and funding: https://www.sustainabletravel.scot/  ‘Working with our active travel partners, Paths for All have launched SustainableTravel.scot, an interactive, one-stop-shop for anyone looking to get a walking, cycling, wheeling or sustainable transport idea off the ground. The site hosts what’s on offer from Scotland’s key active travel organisations including grants, training, advice, ideas and inspiration. Users simply search what they want to achieve, and the site will find funding or advice that meets their needs.’
• The Autumn Step Count Challenge starts on 25 Oct To register your team go to https://www.stepcount.org.uk/

35. Nick Cole mentioned that LAFs were not always being consulted on Section 11 closures and that the reason given by the local authority was one of staff shortages. Community and LAF consultations were becoming more infrequent and asked if this issue could be discussed at a future meeting.

Close - The Convenor closed the meeting apologising for the problems experienced with Lifesize and the resulting loss of connection for some people.

Date of Next Meetings -      

• NAF/LAF Autumn Joint meeting – 25 November 2021
• NAF – Wednesday 2 February 2022
• NAF/LAF late spring meeting (tbc)
• NAF – Wednesday 1 or 8 June

Summary Action Points

AP 55/1: Members interested in participating in a small meeting to discuss paths and IPA future funding issues are requested to contact the secretary.

AP 55/2: Forum members are requested to highlight any omissions or changes required to the existing list of full and corresponding members

AP55/3: FLS to finalise the guide and send it to the secretary to circulate and to add to the SOAC website. 

Summary of main topics - National Access Forum virtual meeting 22 September 2021

Mediation -

Further promotion of the NAF Guidance on ‘the Use of Mediation for Access’ has taken place with another successful on-line ‘building skills in mediation’ session held for access staff, and rangers by the Scottish Outdoor Access Network (SOAN) in September. An introduction to the guidance will also form part of the virtual NAF/LAF joint meeting on 25 November with further skills sessions for LAFs planned thereafter.

Access & roads working group -

A small working group of NAF members met on the 11 August to ‘review and report upon issues relating to the interaction of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 (RSA) and the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (LRSA)’. The group confirmed that TOR had been agreed and outlined their initial progress on identifying the perceived or actual conflicts between the LRSA and the RSA, gaps in associated guidance and where poor communication is impacting upon responsible access or road safety for non-motorised users. Using GG 142 (Standards for Highways) as a baseline to work from, the group will continue to work on potential solutions including summary guidance for local authorities and will report to the Forum again in February 2022.

Outdoor Access with E-Bikes –

The UK joint research on ‘Outdoor access with e- bikes’ is underway and some initial findings were presented to the Forum by Developing Mountain Biking in Scotland. The research has found little in the way of literature on ‘off road’ use by e-bikes. Instead the research has been working with focus groups to identify the demographics of participants, their motivation and experience. The findings show that e- bikes appeal to a wide range of participants from very fit young riders for training, to less fit new users, with motivation being both physical and social. The research will work with the bike industry to understand future innovations and facility requirements (e-charging) and with landowners and riders to understand the consequences of more e-bike use on trails. Further questionnaires are planned, with a final report due in Jan.

Access and Level Crossings -

Representative from Network Rail joined the Forum to provide background on the purpose of Network Rail, including safe operation of the railway. They also provided information relating to the operation of level crossings giving a detailed description of the planning, measurement and assessment of risk undertaken for each level crossing which includes the assessment of the level and type of pedestrian and other use. Forum members highlighted sections of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 and duties on land owners to facilitate access.

There was discussion about the recent closure to the public of the private level crossing at Ben Alder near Dalwhinnie and Network Rail stated their safety reasons behind this. A discussion followed and Forum members raised the issue of inadequate public consultation affecting the recorded Right of Way and stressed that the closure had now increased the risk to those still trying to cross the railway at this point instead of taking the 0.9 mile alternative route. Members sought a change of approach from Network Rail to facilitate access across level crossings rather than closures and greater consultation  with wider recreational users eg canoeists, horse riders, cyclists etc.    

Improving Public Access -

NatureScot reported on the popularity of the recent round of the IPA scheme, with a record 147 applications totalling over £12million in value received and currently being assessed. The budget for 2021 applications is likely to be finalised by the end of the year and approvals announced in Feb/March with path works completed by end of 2022. Future funding for improving public access would be discussed by a one off sub group in the New Year.

Dog Sport Activity Guide –

A new activity guide for owners undertaking dog sports was presented to the Forum. The guide has been prepared jointly between the Kennel Club Scotland and Forestry and Land Scotland following the rise in a number of dog sports such as dog sledding, canicross and canibike. Many competitive events and training occurs on the public forest estate and potentially can impact on other users. The guide therefore offers opportunities to educate the public about canine welfare and minimising adverse access impacts on local communities, wildlife and livestock. Forum members agreed to endorse the Dog Sport Activity Guide and help promote it through their communications networks.

Visitor Management Strategy & SOAC communication -

NatureScot provided an update on the co-ordinated activity to address visitor management in hotspots across Scotland. The feedback is that it is as busy as last year but staff are better prepared and are generally coping. The additional staffing is having a positive impact on parking and traffic management and there is less irresponsible behaviour. Going forward there is a need to maintain investment for funding staff on the ground and for education. In terms of SOAC communications, NatureScot has been targeting new users and strengthening messages on access with dogs, camping and wildlife disturbance. There have been 13 million impressions on social media resulting in 400,000 visits to the SOAC website. The next stage is to increase engagement with schools to promote basic Code messages but also promote ‘caring for the environment’.

Membership Review –

The NAF secretary outlined the process for carrying out the first stage of the membership review as stated in the Forum’s operating principles and members agreed the approach. The review would commence in November starting with the recreation and land management bodies and the findings brought to the NAF meeting in February 2022.  

NAF/LAF virtual Autumn Joint meeting –

A small working group had drafted some ideas for a virtual Joint NAF/LAF update meeting to be held in mid/late November. It would consist of a brief update from the NAF but would focus mainly on topics raised by the LAFs themselves. In the afternoon there would be separate session introducing the ‘NAF Guidance on the use of Mediation for Access’. The Forum agreed with these proposals recommending that further ideas for topics be sought from the LAFs in advance of the meeting.

Future NAF meetings –

The next Forum meetings are: NAF/LAF Joint Update meeting Thursday 25 November 2021, NAF meeting Wednesday 2 February 2022. These meetings will continue to be ‘virtual’ rather than face to face until the current guidelines change.

For more information or comment on any of the above topics, please contact the NAF Secretary – Ali Tait ([email protected]; 01463 701662). Further information can be found on the National Access Forum pages.