London "Safer Parks Award"

[SpikyPhasmid]

I wasn't sure where to put this, so I hope I have it right.

Mayor Boris Johnson has launched a scheme to reward efforts to cut crime and anti-social behaviour in London's parks.

A recent survey conducted on behalf of the Greater London Authority (GLA) found more than a quarter of Londoners avoided them because of safety fears.

The poll found 26% feared being mugged or attacked and 27% were concerned about teenagers hanging around.

Online applications for the Safer Parks Award have to be in by 31 January.
Big impact

Mr Johnson said he hopes to recognise tough measures boroughs and friends of parks groups have taken to reduce crime and anti social behaviour.

He said: "We live in one of the greenest capitals in the world, with over 3,000 parks and we all have the right to use them without fear of crime.

"Parks make a tremendous difference to our quality of life and everyone from early morning joggers, to kids riding their bikes after school should be able to use them with confidence.

"From cutting down hedges to increase visibility, to installing CCTV and strong lighting, little things can make a big impact on safety and deter criminality."

Winners will receive a Mayor's Safer Parks Award plaque to display in the park.

BBC News - London mayor launches safer parks award

What impact do you think this will have on the wildlife in the parks, if any? I am a bit concerned about destroying hedgelines. Also, will strong lighting affect anything adversely? If you're a Londoner, do you avoid parks because of crime or dodgy people hanging about?

[Deb London]

I do tend to avoid parks altogether as they don't hold my interest. Although some of the Royal Parks are good places to see a variety of birds of prey and water- and other birds in London.

Maybe if the improvements to visibility are concentrated mainly around the paths and routes travelled by walkers then this will be OK. But if the Mayor means a blitz of all dense vegetation higher than a couple of feet, that's bad news.

Improved lighting will probably be along paths, and I'd doubt this would make a huge difference, as London is generally very bright as it is.

I'm all for more CCTV.

But I'd be interested to hear what others think.

[Ukwildlifeo]

Considering most parks have a limited budget and rangers are stretch beyond their means already I imagine most will be to busy to apply for it!

[SpikyPhasmid]

One thing I'm wondering about this survey is WHEN people avoid parks - do 25% of Londoners avoid them constantly? Seems unlikely to me. At night seems more realistic, and I don't think you can guarantee safety at night anywhere without large amounts of staff etc.

[Cowgirl]

Not really sure about this as not from London, but when has that stopped me from sticking my 'neb' in?) The parks I know of around here are all fenced anyway & closed at night.

I'm presuming areas like Richmond Park Hampstead Heath? (please correct me as I am only guessing ) where they are too big to fence(?) would be the focus of these safety measures. I would tentatively say it would be a good thing (but open minded. However I think lighting along paths would only be effective with regular foot patrols & as UKwildlife points out, this wouldn't happen due to overstreched budgets. I imagine that after dark (legitimate) users would be mainly dog walkers & die hard joggers? If the hedges were cut along the path (to stop people hiding behind them) then as long as there are plenty of othere areas not touched (as Deb says) then that should be ok as well. Depends on what Boris means by clearing back areas I suppose.

I'm not very good at night-time walking I must admit, I'm scared of the dark. It's very dark around me (rural) I take a super duper bright torch but usually at the first heavy rustling & especially when the dogs suddenly stop & look intently behind me (I hate that!), that's it I'm back down the road in a flash! I blame my older sister who when I was v. young used to turn the lights out shouting "the bogeyman's going to get you" just so I'd come screaming out & latch onto her! Family eh? Who needs enemies....?

[healfdan]

To reiterate on earlier comments. When local authorities are looking to cut costs it is usually parks, gardens and the environmental sector that suffers in the initial cull. CCTV is an excellent tool in the fight against anti social behaviour and where it is applied I am sure helps keep out the rif raf and beggars that give some parks a bad name; the unsavourary element in our society prefer not to be identified. But how many parks can afford more than just a token display and may well resort to dummy cameras that fool only the innocent. Lighting is good along main routes and in the interest of safety vegetation should be controlled to allow decent vistas to improve visitor confidence. As Deb has mentioned if this control goes beyond what is acceptable, by removing or drastically thinning all vegetation, then the solitude and wildlife interest that many people seek suffers. Unfortunately a knee jerk reaction to a major incident is to remove vegetation from sites that could provide a refuge or hiding place for the offenders. It all boils down to good policing, usually the responsibility of the staff, seats sited with visitor security in mind, adequate lighting, grafitti regularly removed, litter kept to the minimum and good directional signs to include emergency contact numbers. I could go on but the point I am making is that a safe park is all about perception.... If it looks safe and well managed then more people will use it for the right reasons and their numbers will help to police the park and make it a safer environment. No one can expect 100% security (Buckingham Palace has had intruders) but good management and visitor common sense will help to reduce the risks. Sorry to rant on but London Deb did ask for opinions.

[SpikyPhasmid]

Only parks under 400 hectares in size are allowed to take part in this, so it's not open to places like Richmond.
It doesn't specifically mention cutting down vegetation in the rules:
The Mayor's Safer Parks Award | Greater London Authority

[Brocakat]

The Cycletrack between Morecambe and Lancaster is popular in the daytime and evening. It is well lit. Unfortunatelty that has lulled some cyclists to use this track at night. It is well lit. Being well lit also make it easier for some BadBoyz to mugg these cyclists.
Conclusion? Being well lit drew these users into a sense of false Security, and it did not stop them being mugged at all.