Following my posts on how litter (see here) and traffic management issues (see here) are being used to attack access rights, Perth and Kinross Council has now gone further than even the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority has dared to do. The move could undermine access rights across Scotland. The comments on thei Facebook page (see here) incidentally show once again how social media is being used to stir up antagonism against visitors and with that access rights. Thankfully some people are now sticking their heads above the parapet to counter the bile and hatred. We need more people to do so.
Up until now, Perth and Kinross had been one of the better access authorities when it came to enabling people to enjoy their access rights again after lockdown (see here). Their Frequently Asked Questions document on Informal and Wild Camping (see here), for example, showed a clear understanding of the law and respect for it. But the ban they have announced on parking along the verges of nine roads changes all that. It make access for outdoor recreation to large parts of rural Perthshire almost impossible.
For example, the ban plays into the hands of landowners like the North Chesthill Estate in Glen Lyon. They have been trying to restrict access by mountaineers and people simply wanting to walk along the river for years (see here). They have done this by asking people to use just one parking place along a long stretch of the glen. The message is “We will welcome walkers but only if you park where we tell you and walk where we tell you”. By introducing a ban on parking on the verges of the C448 between Fortingall and Bridge of Balgie, Perth and Kinross have now decided to mis-use their legal powers to enforce the long-held wishes of the North Chesthill Estate. All North Chesthill now needs to do is say “no campervans overnight” in the car park it provides and a large chunk of Glen Lyon will also be a campervan free zone.
The implications for access rights and campervanners are horrendous. Until now there has been little point in landowners trying to shut off the many informal stopping off places along rural roads because people could always park on the verge. This is an important general right under Road Traffic law and ironically is there partly for safety reasons. It is normally only curtailed on fast A-roads where any stopping could be dangerous and that is done by a clearway order. However, as soon as the Roads Authority is prepared to ban parking on the verges of any road, this is an invitation to landowners to close off all informal parking areas on their land, complain about people parking dangerously – or get others to do so – get a verge-side ban and thus effectively stop people from exercising access rights on the land they own. This was NOT the intention of the Land Reform Act which gave us access rights.
The parking restrictions had not this morning been listed on the section of the P and K website dealing with roads restrictions (see here), temporary or otherwise. I am unclear at present of their legal basis (I have asked). If these measures have been introduced using the provisions under the Coronavirus (Scotland) Act for Temporary Road Traffic Regulations Orders, this is an abuse of the powers in that Act. Those provisions were intended to enable MORE people to go walking and cycling, not to prevent this over large swathes of the countryside. A much more appropriate alternative measure under that Act would have been to introduce temporary speed restrictions to reduce any safety risks associated with parking issues.
If P and K did not introduce the measures under the Coronavirus Act, the question is what public consultation has taken place on this?
Whatever the case, it is legitimate to ask what evidence Perth and Kinross Council holds that parking on these roads is creating safety issues?
After my post last week on traffic mis-management in the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park and the potential for bikes, I was gently reminded that there are very real safety issues in the Trossachs where people have been parking along both sides of the road near the most popular access points to Ben A’ An and Ben Venue when the car parks get full. Where demand for parking is so high that a road becomes impassable, clearly the Roads Authority and Access Authority need to act. That, however, should be based on the provision of appropriate new infrastructure, whether temporary car parks, shuttle buses or bike hire schemes.
Many of the roads affected, such as that between Calvine and Trinafour are generally very quiet. I have, for example, in the last couple of years walked a couple of times off the A923 between Blairgowrie and Dunkeld and not seen a soul. The parking ban now covers no less than ten miles of one of the quietest A-roads in the country. Just off that road, however, is an estate where its not easy to park and which doesn’t want people there from 1st August till 20th October:
I reported this sign to Perth and Kinross Council as contrary to access rights. I was told it was a low priority and have heard nothing since. Perth and Kinross and now playing into landowners hands or perhaps it might be more accurate to say, Perth and Kinross are clearly controlled by landowning interests.
I hope everyone who cares about access rights in Scotland will campaign against these roadside parking restrictions. Here are some suggestions:
- Get active on social media and counter the bile
- Contact your MSP and ask them to get the Scottish Government to intervene by promising to finance whatever infrastructure is needed in the countryside to support access rights
- If you live in Perth and Kinross ask your local councillors to get the decision reversed
- If you are a member of the John Muir Trust, ask them to take a stand – Schiehallion, which they manage on behalf of those who care about wild land and its importance for recreation, is along the C450.
- If you are a member of Mountaineering Scotland, Ramblers Association, Scotways or other organisation with an interest in defending access rights, please ask them to speak out about this.
Postscript
While I am awaiting for an answer from the Council about what legislation has been used I understand that the restrictions may have been introduced NOT under the coronavirus emergency legislation but under Road Traffic Regulation which enables “rural clearways” to be created where it is an offence to park on the verge even if fully off the road. I understand too “local consultation” may have taken place, i.e with landowners along these section of road, which if true is totally wrong – this is an issue that affects anyone in Scotland who visits the countryside..
As always, a well written article, but one I suspect will generate a lot of heat on certain facebook feeds. I would like to make a couple of points:
Whilst I believe that a parking restriction such as the one we are talking about here is not the right solution to the problem of inconsiderate parking, you have to look at how it affects farmers on these narrow roads when trying to negotiate between parked cars, whilst manoeuvring large tractors and trailers. The Fire Service have also been involved in implementing this restriction, citing an inability to access rural properties over the very busy Summer weekends. At Loch Rannoch we were asked whether we would want to be a part of the scheme, but declined, for the moment at least. I do agree that landowners are more likely to seize upon this legislation to prevent access to upland areas, but in reality the restriction was brought in to counter the problem of campers cars. Whilst the walking and mountaineering organisations are right to be worried about the effect on access rights, they do have to take account of genuine concerns by the people directly affected by inconsiderate parking, such as was witnessed at Schiehallion in July.
In truth, part of this measure was implemented to counter so-called ‘Dirty Camping’, and such solutions as shuttle buses etc would simply be ignored by those who refuse to stray too far from their cars and the water. This is the case on the Foss Road, (minor road that runs along the South Side of Loch Tummel), where campers were abandoning their cars to set up camp in fields by the water, and then citing drink drive legislation as an excuse not to move.
Your article mentioned that the restriction prevents parking on verges, my understanding is that if the vehicle can get all 4 wheels off the highway, then they are free to remain where they are, as they would effectively be parked on private land.
I think the evidence for the measure is limited, and it will be interesting to see how such evidence is presented at the end of the season.
And one final point:
This is a common theme; ‘I reported this sign to Perth and Kinross Council as contrary to access rights. I was told it was a low priority and have heard nothing since’. Perth and Kinross have a real reluctance to enforce access rights, where the landowner refuses to comply with the legislation.
Perth and Kinross Council have an access Forum meeting scheduled for this coming Thursday, 27th of August, and I believe ‘Dirty Camping’ will be a topic, I wonder if any of this will be discussed?
Further confirmation – if any were needed – that today the over centralised administrations run by permanent officials regard open spaces across Scotland as little more than leisure ‘play parks’. Control of access is everything . Such public places in urban areas can have access tightly regulated with fences and gates . Through the Covid-19 emergency “decrees” (not debate) has become fashionable . Little wonder this “park mindset” promotes and extends the idea that access can be controlled with fines. The public must awake to the freedoms being taken from them before it is too late
Another example of finding the easiest – not the best – solution. If only we could bar those pesky visitors, our roads would be clearer and we wouldn’t have to sort out litter and toilet provision. Perhaps city councils will take the same approach. Clearly this is anti-democratic and bad decision making. It also highlights how much of a “rule taking” society we have in Britain – not just England.
I remember being on a bus going around Florence once. The car driver in front stopped, blocking the street, and hopped into a bar to have a coffee. He was double parked. Despite the bus driver’s remonstrations we all sat there until he came back after his espresso, and we continued on our way. Italy is not a rule-taking society. However it’s citizens do believe in standing up for their personal rights – perhaps a little too much sometimes. But the lesson is clear – if we don’t stand up for our rights and mutely mutter to each other behind closed doors, then we’ll loose them. Anyone concerned about keeping their right to roam who lives in P&KC should be contacting their local councillor. Everyone else (like me) should be writing to their MSP.
The staff at Duncan Mills Slipway have now take over the car park for their own use. People turning up to park are now stoped at barrers and turned away from what is a public carpark . Hopefully their will be a lot of refused to pay fineds and challenging in our court’s The Scottish SNP Government are out of touch with what is going on with our rights are going down the road of Dictatorship and lossing a golden opportunity for Tourisom
Sadly, access rights have been abused by what appears to be the majority this year. These rights are not sacrosanct. They come with responsibilities and if people can not be responsible, their rights get taken away. It’s as simple as that. These parking restrictions are a good thing and a step towards controlling the devastation occurring to the environment in these hotspots. The level of human waste from hundreds of so-called “wild campers” is a health hazard. The cars churn up the verges. Wildlife is being destroyed. The preservation of the environment in these special places is far more important than the right to pitch an Aldi tent and have a party.
So Andy a few racist bigots articulate their views and you think the right to freedom of speech should be removed for everyone? In effect that seems to me what you are arguing. The importance of rights is precisely that they should not be taken away and it is beholded on our public authorities to find solutions to the current pressures in the countryside.
Stop talking guff man.
Perhaps he is suggesting if they, shat,indiscriminately littered out outside your house then you would demand action to reduce it.
Whatever way it is painted the behaviour by a not insignificant minority is certainly not attractive at best and actually compromises the very environment that the majority behold.
But hey ho we can always build more roads,car parks,toilet blocks and houses so it looks oh I do not know? Glasgow?
I have been calling for action, that is very different from calling for people’s rights to be removed. The toilets in Pollok Park, by the way, are still locked and the bins in Maxwell Park were overflowing. The overwhelming majority of people in the cities and countryside share the same interests and we need to share the same country
Restricting motor vehicle parking (which is often inconsiderate), is not an erosion of access rights. The huge numbers coming to certain hotspots need management. No sensible person can argue that fact. The volume of so-called “wild campers” in these areas are actually restricting access and enjoyment of these areas by walkers, cyclists, families etc. Often, eery available spot has a bunch of tents and campers sat about a pile of rubbish and a smelly campfire. Not very welcoming
Ive been trying to get more information on clearway and have came across your article, I do however feel that you are trying to fight the issue of clearway with the Scottish countryside access code which does not extend to the use of vehicles.
what I am trying to ascertain is, If a vehicle is parked well off the road then it is not obstructing the clearway and the idea of a clearway is to stop parking that causes an obstruction
Hi Gordon, there are two types of clearways, those that include the verges (however far you pull off) and those that don’t. The right to pull off a road is legally quite separate to access rights – as the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority found out when they learned their byelaws were unenforceable against campervans and caravans – but in many areas of Scotland if you cannot park on the verge, its very hard to access much of the land. In other words access rights are dependent to an extent on the rights travel round the country (and a bus cannot stop on a clearway either) Nick
No public access. No public subsidies.