Countryside To Stay 'Open'

For most walkers, climbers and mountain bikers, the news of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Surrey will have brought back unpleasant memories of the 2001 crisis and blanket footpath and bridleway bans, but will it happen again?

Obviously the ramifications of the 2001 outbreak both for the agricultural, tourist and outdoor equipment industries went far beyond the frustratiion of closed paths and trails, but for outdoors people, the most immediate effects were the path closures.

There are positive signs already on a few levels. One is that the Government seems determined to act rapidly to confine the disease to the area where it started and so far, the only positive tests for the disease come from the initial outbreak. The other is that after 2001, it seems that nationwide blanket access bans are unlikely.

Local Closures Only?

There are signs that lessons have been learned from 2001 and in particular the wider damage to rural tourism that was caused by blanket closures.

Already Welsh Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones has come out and stressed that Wales remains open despite the restrictions on animal movements introduced throughout the UK.

Jones is quoted as saying that there were "no plans for a blanket closure of footpaths" and that the assembly government has a "well-rehearsed contingency plan" to deal with any outbreak with "footpaths to be closed only on a local basis in the vicinity of any disease outbreak."

'Countryside Remains Open'

The message coming from DEFRA - Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs - is similar:

'Despite the outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) on a farm in Surrey, the countryside remains open.  There is no need for people to stop visiting the countryside and, at the present time, the only impacts on visitor attractions are those which result from the restrictions on animal movements and animal gatherings.'

In terms of access, the DEFRA statement continues:

'We have learnt the lessons of the experience of the 2001 outbreak and would not close down the countryside if it is not justified by the disease risk. Current veterinary advice is that outside a protection zone, the risk of rights of way users and other visitors to the countryside spreading disease is low. Access to the countryside and in particular to footpaths, may be restricted but only within the Protection Zones (PZ) (areas of minimum 3km around an infected premises) if it is felt too risky to keep them open. Footpaths on the infected premises are closed.

'There is a clear principle that there should be a presumption in favour of maintaining public access. Thus, any decision to close land over which there is a public right of way, or where there is public open space or a right of access to open country, would only be taken when it is clearly necessary to do so.

'In the event of a disease outbreak, inspectors may have the power to prohibit entry on to any land within designated areas and, in some cases, a specific power to close rights of way. In cases where the power is used to prohibit entry to designated areas, this power would, incidentally, enable the prohibition of entry on to any public right of way or land to which the public have a right of access situated within the designated areas.'

Cautiously Optimistic

Hopefully the current outbreak will be restricted to Surrey, but we're cautiously optimistic that the aftermath of the 2001 outbreak and an awareness of the damage caused to the rural tourist economy means that even if the disease does spread further, the impact on access at least, will be nothing like as draconian.