email:laf@lake-district.gov.uk web: www.lake-district.gov.uk Nick ...
email:laf@lake-district.gov.uk web: www.lake-district.gov.uk Nick ...
email:laf@lake-district.gov.uk web: www.lake-district.gov.uk Nick ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Nick</strong> Thorne<br />
Access & Rights of Way Officer<br />
Lake District National Park Authority<br />
Murley Moss<br />
Oxenholme Road<br />
Kendal<br />
Cumbria LA9 7RL<br />
13 May 2008<br />
Murley Moss<br />
Oxenholme Road<br />
Kendal, Cumbria<br />
LA9 7RL<br />
_____________________<br />
Tel: 01539 724555<br />
Fax: 01539 740822<br />
Minicom: 01539 731263<br />
Dear <strong>Nick</strong>,<br />
Public Footpaths 512054, 512056 & 529023 at Tarn Hows and Rose Castle, Parishes of<br />
Hawkshead and Coniston.<br />
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposals detailed in your letter dated 5<br />
March 2008. Following a site visit on the evening of 23 April 2008 the comments and advice<br />
from the LDNP LAF are as follows.<br />
1. Map 1: We found it impossible to relate the detail of Map 1 to what we saw on the ground.<br />
We think that we were confused by the number of tracks and paths that are evident on the<br />
ground which are not featured on Map 1. We did not have the benefit of GPS and<br />
consequently were unable to even vaguely identify the points A, B, C or D. We regard this as<br />
a fundamental problem for the consultation exercise and advise that maps supplied with<br />
papers should be readable and referensable with confidence with what is identifiable on the<br />
ground. Perhaps we missed something in our map reading, but if the proposals do not<br />
accurately reflect what is visible on the ground then there may be a danger here that one set<br />
of problems will be simply replaced by another set of problems. On the face of it the proposals<br />
appear to be practical and uncontentious, but we cannot confirm that until we can be sure that<br />
we have interpreted the proposals accurately and completely.<br />
2. Map 2: We feel that there are potentially a number of issues here that should be subject to<br />
further consideration. We advise caution and further consideration.<br />
It is clear that although the line of the definitive route (E - G) is not used, there are other<br />
routes in the vicinity of it, or parts of it, that are currently used, in addition to the engineered<br />
route E - H - K. There may be justification in establishing / creating the engineered route E- H<br />
- K as an additional definitive footpath, whilst at he same time diverting the original definitive<br />
route E - G onto a more useable / attractive route. This could provide an option of routes<br />
according to desire, purpose, ability, level of use, etc..<br />
Also, whilst we agree that there is no visible path on the definitive line between F and N it<br />
seems that there are walked routes close to eastern half of it. There also seems to be a<br />
walked route, via a stile located between points L & M, which heads north towards the Corpse<br />
/ Fell Road.<br />
Our advice relating to paths on Map 2 is that is that for this area, and possibly for other areas<br />
in the NT territory at Tarn Hows, before any order is pursued for extinguishing and creating<br />
paths, a more complete and holistic study should be made of the needs and preferences of<br />
_________________________________________________________________________________<br />
<strong>email</strong>:<strong>laf@<strong>lake</strong></strong>-<strong>district</strong>.<strong>gov</strong>.<strong>uk</strong><br />
<strong>web</strong>: <strong>www</strong>.<strong>lake</strong>-<strong>district</strong>.<strong>gov</strong>.<strong>uk</strong>
RoW users in the area. This would result in a more complete picture of which are redundant<br />
definitive routes, and of preferred permitted and definitive routes. A key feature of a holistic<br />
approach would be a single map showing all the paths visible on the ground as well as the<br />
definitive lines and the permitted paths promoted by the NT.<br />
We think that a study should also consider the provision of rights of way to Access Land<br />
access points that appear to have been provided around the area.<br />
3. Map 3: We commend the proposals contained at Map 3 without further comment.<br />
4. We understand that there are outstanding map modification orders extant for the Tarn<br />
Hows area that possibly should also be considered as part of a wider context study.<br />
Please note that as an exception to usual forum practice I have prepared this advice at<br />
Charles Flanagan’s request due to Charles’s historic close association with the location<br />
under consideration.<br />
I will welcome trying to answer any other questions that you may have arising from this<br />
response.<br />
Sincerely<br />
Geoff Wilson<br />
Chair LDNP LAF<br />
_______________________________________________________________________<br />
__________<br />
<strong>email</strong>:<strong>laf@<strong>lake</strong></strong>-<strong>district</strong>.<strong>gov</strong>.<strong>uk</strong><br />
<strong>web</strong>: <strong>www</strong>.<strong>lake</strong>-<strong>district</strong>.<strong>gov</strong>.<strong>uk</strong>