THERE are new concerns in the SouthWest this month over proposals to push through a statutory right of access to land bordering the coast.

The vast majority of the region borders the coast and most is farmland.

Natural England, the group behind the scheme, which has caused considerable debate for some time, has been accused of turning its back on promises not to inflict financial damage to businesses and individuals through its proposals.

Agricultural pressure groups want assurance that concerns of farmers whose land borders the coast are met.

The Country Land Owners Association's south west director, John Mortimer, said that both Natural England and Defra minister, Jonathan Shaw, claimed to have understood and appreciated the problems that driving a right of access through private gardens, parks and businesses would cause.

"When they visited the South West and looked at the issues on the ground they said it was not their intention to introduce measures which would punish or financially damage businesses and private individuals along the coast - yet that is precisely what they have done."

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee which is scrutinising the coastal access provisions in the draft Marine Bill has been told there can be no justification for attacking householders by threatening to destroy their privacy and undermine the value of their homes.

Thousands of coastal homes were now under threat of having an access corridor run through their front gardens without any right to compensation for loss of value and with no opportunity to appeal.

"This is a decision taken by an un-elected and, seemingly, unaccountable body. It is just wholly unacceptable," said Mr Mortimer.

The CLA said the Bill itself was unnecessary as powers to create access already existed. The only difference was there was a requirement for compensation where loss could be proven.

"This Bill will deliver nothing new. It will squander public money and overturn one of the fundamental principles of English Law - all in the interests of providing statutory access to that tiny percentage of the coast where it does not already exist.

"We genuinely thought we had made a powerful case to the Minister and to Natural England representatives. They told us they had listed and learned - but that clearly was not the case as we have been presented with a set of woolly-headed proposals about an access corridor with spreading room to the seaward and the landward side wherever they consider it necessary - to us that appears like open access by another name, but without the right of appeal."

The proposals had to be defeated, as no coastal owner would ever be able to be assured that their property values were secure.

It was "riding roughshod over private individuals," said Mr Mortimer. The NFU in the SouthWest said it was quality and not quantity, which was needed and had argued over a lack of "fair balance" for farmers and landowners and disproportionate costs.

The NFU support open access but stress the importance of working in partnership with landowners and land managers who make a living at the coast.

Vice-president Paul Temple has visited some of the farms that stand to be affected by the coastal corridor and says there are very real concerns that the money, estimated at £50m spread over a ten year period, would be better spent maintaining the current footpaths which are falling into disrepair.

"What we need to ask is whether or not we need this new path and whether we can afford to manage it properly," he said.

The Government and Natural England had to ensure the concerns of farmers and growers living and working along the proposed route were taken into account including:

  • The right for farmers to appeal against decisions and apply for exclusions or restrictions to keep farming options flexible in the future.
  • Assurance the open access land would be mapped giving clarity to landowners and walkers about where they can go.
  • Give clear guidance for dog control on land where there is livestock.
  • And confirm compensation and assurance that farmers won't be liable for accidents along coastal pathways.

"The NFU will continue to work with Natural England to represent farmers and growers and ensure that sufficient money is available from Government to achieve and maintain this coastal corridor," he added. But he questioned the need for compulsory coastal access where there seemed to be little public demand.