Progress? - I Don't Think So!

[Lancashire Lad]

Today, I decided to visit (for the first time this year), a particular area which has always been very productive for the diversity of fungi to be found.

The site is only about two and a half miles in length, and follows a small stream feeding a reservoir. The first half of the walk is across open moorland country, with the other half being in a mostly narrow woodland strip adjacent to the stream.

The last time I visited, I noticed that the Water Authority / Landowner had commenced works close by the start of the walk, and had assumed that they were constructing something in connection with the reservoir.

It transpires that the works they were actually doing were the beginnings of transforming the natural footpath into a structured route, supposedly under the guise of a "bridleway". - Which, in the intervening months of my absence, is now complete.

What was once a wholly natural footpath has for the most part been transformed into a 3-metre wide walkway, consisting of what must have been thousands of tonnes of hard-core, gravel & sand.

The latter half of the walk now consists of a wooden edged gravel pathway & boardwalk, with much of the surrounding areas having been fenced off by timber fencing or posts & barb wire meshing. In some areas the new path is almost a full metre higher than when in its original state.

This is all well and good for the horse riders and afternoon strollers, and the many dog dumpers (sorry - I would normally say dog walkers - but the plastic bags of faeces are already much in evidence beside the new path. ).

OK, so the original path was rough and natural, and yes, when it had rained it was muddy - very muddy in some areas, so you had to wear boots. But, and it is a very big but, there was a diversity of plantlife and particularly fungi, all along that path. Now, from what I can see, most of it is buried under about 300mm of compacted hardcore.

The one small area where Cordyceps Ophioglossoides could be found has been completely interred under at least 300mm, as have the best areas for Boletus edulis and Amanita muscaria.

I met and discussed the situation with several people using the path, none of whom seemed to have any great concerns over the loss of flora/fauna. One woman, summed it up with this gem "Well I don't know anything about fungus, but the path is lovely now and I am able to push the pram along really easily".

God strewth - let's just cover the planet in concrete and have done with it.

Regards,
Mike.

[JennyS]

Yes, and they call it progress....... happens here too, quiet woodland paths I enjoyed walking transformed in loud, crunchy gravelled highways.
Gravel and hardcore are a completely different experience for walking on as opposed to earth or grass and another step (unintentional pun) away from experiencing the natural world. Not impressed!

[thunder]

Possibly the Water Authority/Landowner have lost the lists of records you have sent to them explaining how important the site is. It can happen.

henrya

[loripo]

Quote "let's just cover the planet in concrete and have done with it."

That's what I've been saying about our local park - they have cleared lots of areas supposedly to stop rough sleepers etc, but now people just walk dogs and ride bikes thru what is left. They also hire out (not sure what they're called) lay back bikes that the kids tear around on even thru the gardens. They can't put gates up otherwise peaople in wheelchairs don't have access.
And prams!!! Soon all our buses will be seatless to allow perambulators to ride.
It's depressing isn't it?

[Paul mabbott]

I'm not familiar with any of these sites so am just talking generally - from wide experience. I can see that in some cases putting a hard surface onto paths may destroy some of the 'naturalness' of the path and surrounding area but in some cases its is the lesser evil!

I know some managers of woodlands who baulk at putting down a hard path since it destroys the natural environment (not a lot if the surfacing is water absorbent); unfortunately this means that in winter the original path becomes a quagmire and people walk a different route with a result that much of the woodland floor becomes impacted or boggy walkway.

The same applies to moorland and heath - in winter folks walk to the side of the pathway which becomes filled with water; thus extending the path width - far better to provide a stone or wood pathway.

The original mail mentioned that the path was a bridleway - this seems a very good justification for hard surfacing: confine horses and cyclists to a well-defined course rather than encouraging them to ride all over the place!

So, managers need to make decisions based on circumstances and providing a relatively narrow, well constructed pathway over heavily-used terrain can save a lot of wider soil damage.

PS: we should also have some consideration for people in wheelchairs, pushing prams or just having walking difficulties - green space is not just for fit males!

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by Paul mabbott

....The original mail mentioned that the path was a bridleway - this seems a very good justification for hard surfacing: confine horses and cyclists to a well-defined course rather than encouraging them to ride all over the place....

The original path was (in parts) very narrow, and somewhat overgrown. It was certainly a none navigable route as far as horse riding or off road cycling would be concerned.

Originally Posted by Paul mabbott

....PS: we should also have some consideration for people in wheelchairs, pushing prams or just having walking difficulties - green space is not just for fit males!

I certainly agree that wheelchair users and people with general walking difficulties should have access to the great outdoors, but whilst this new path might now be travelled by persons fit or unfit, much of the character and naturalness of the environment has been obliterated. A feeling that will no doubt be sensed by all persons, be they able bodied or not.

In parts it is now nothing more than a sanitised fenced off walkway. And in my view, the needs of wheelchair users cannot have been a consideration. There is one small section where the new path diverts around a small tributary stream resulting in a short sharp descent and ascent. This diversion would not comply with the recommended maximum gradient for outdoor access paths for wheelchair users of 1 in 15, let alone the preferred maximum gradient of 1 in 20 as recommended by the Sensory Trust. Indeed it most definitely would not comply with the 1 in 12 maximum gradient given in British Standards.

The original path at this point has a small concrete/metal foot-bridge with upright posts to prevent cycles from passing through. If the needs of wheelchair users were being considered, it would have made much more sense to remove those uprights, and upgrade the existing bridge walkway. - That would have maintained a level path, and negated the need for the diversion. (Which however, is now eminently more suitable for horses/cycles).

The path is now designated as a bridleway. I have done some research since becoming aware of the changes, and have discovered that it has been integrated as part of the "West Pennine Bridleway Strategy", - the creation of a long distance bridleway crossing much of Lancashire's wild and natural upland scenery.

Having now studied the bridleway strategy route map, looking at what's been done here, since this section is for the most part quite flat, (and I would imagine for horse riders and off roaders quite uninteresting), I come to the conclusion that this was just an exercise in joining up two other existing sections of the bridleway, to enable horse riders and off road cyclists a short cut through to the more challenging parts of that route.

Regards,
Mike.

[animartco]

Hear Hear Paul.
Lancahire Lad, you say they had a fence along the path too? I am sorry about the fungi, and the sides of paths are the favoured, and often the ONLY habitat for some species, but a fenced path in a much used area of woodland can only be a good thing. As Paul says, in winter; and people walk now much more frequently in winter than they did, unmade paths become quagmires, and people trample outside them over wider and wider areas. The impacting effect of human trampling can destroy SO MUCH!

[Lancashire Lad]

Animartco,

Whilst what you say may be true for some locations, it certainly is, (or was ), not true of this one.

The path had been in its original semi-overgrown state for many years, and as a consequence, was not much used! - other than by those people with an interest in the natural environment.

Quite clearly, there was no trampling of other areas or impacting on the flora fauna, as that was there in abundance to be found by those hardy souls willing to don a pair of boots and make the effort.

Many of the small micro-habitats which had been doing so well before this bridleway construction are now obliterated. - So much for the theory that structured walkways can only ever be a good thing.

Yes it will now become much more used than it ever was - mainly by horse riders and cyclists using it as a short cut to areas more challenging to their sports, and by dog walkers, a large proportion of whom think it quite acceptable to leave their pet's faeces behind.

What was once a unique place in its own right, has been turned into yet another sanitised country walk.

Regards,
Mike.

[diggleken]

Nice one Mike - even though I'm in the business of countryside for all, access and all that, I support leave well alone as far as poss, partic where theres sound biodiversity.
Your path sounds like an example of riding (literally!) roughshod over a mature and biodiverse area.
We seem to more and more lose that as the point when faced with pressure to 'improve' access or ridiculous health and safety issues.
There is of course a reasonable balance we all need to find - users and owners/managers - but it often seems to tilt the wrong way in my view without due consideration of the environment as a whole, including fungi which are often overlooked or ill-considered because its a specialist and ignorant area for many wildlife and countryside staff.
Discuss...................................:rolleye s:
Cheers
Ken

[treecreeper]

Large parts of the Flintshire countryside have been municipalised in this way. The authorites can't see a footpath without thinking 'must tarmac that'.