National parks: a common good

I was invited to have the last word at the national park societies’ annual conference, What value our national parks? held at the Two Bridges hotel in the heart of Dartmoor, on 6 October.  Organised by the Dartmoor Preservation Association, it was a very full day with many excellent speakers, covering sustainable tourism, natural and cultural capital, and farming and conservation.  Inevitably it focused mostly on farming, especially since the Agriculture Bill had recently been published and we were staring Brexit in the face.

It was particularly appropriate that the national parks societies’ annual conference should have been held during World Commons Week (4-12 October).  The week, organised by the International Association for the Study of the Commons, is to celebrate half a century of commons scholarship since Garrett Hardin’s influential but misleading Tragedy of the Commons article in Science magazine.

Public benefit
National parks are common goods in the broad sense—they are not commonly owned but they provide massive public benefit: clean air and water, beautiful landscapes and places for quiet recreation and reflection.  More than a third of Dartmoor is registered common land where commoners exercise rights of grazing, peat cutting etc and the public enjoys rights to walk and ride.

IMG_2365

Double stone row on Merrivale, Dartmoor

There is so much that national parks can achieve, given strong leadership from the national park authorities, Natural England and Natural Resources Wales.  The Campaign for National Parks has set the parks the challenge of upping their game on nature conservation (Raising the Bar), and in Wales the minister has recognised that it must be a priority for designated landscapes to improve the resilience of their ecosystems.

Flexible
Farmers are important partners, but not the only ones; the value of cultural heritage, wildlife and archaeology had all been highlighted.  We need to have flexible prescriptions for agricultural grant schemes because Dartmoor and Exmoor are very different from the northern uplands; it is essential to keep grazing at the right level or molinia (purple moor grass) will swamp our moorland and its ancient monuments and restrict access.  The wording in the Agriculture Bill about public goods is a start, but it must become a reality.

Wensleydale

Wensleydale, Yorkshire Dales National Park

The Glover review of designated landscapes in England is a great opportunity for us to say what we want for national parks, but it must be the start of the process and not an end in itself.  We are facing the biggest change in living memory (for most of us) and national parks must be at the core of it.  They can demonstrate what can be achieved and generate many public goods.

The national parks are each very different, but we are all united in our belief in them and their special qualities.

And the Campaign for National Parks unites us all as the campaigning organisation for the National Parks in England and Wales; it does an amazing job on small resources.

It is time to rekindle our movement.  National parks are as important now as when they were invented nearly seventy years ago.

Norman Cowling and Janette Ward

Norman Cowling, chair of the Dartmoor Preservation Association and Janette Ward, chair of the Campaign for National Parks

Advertisements

About campaignerkate

I am the general secretary of the Open Spaces Society and I campaign for public access, paths and open spaces in town and country.
This entry was posted in Access, commons, Dartmoor, International Association for the Study of the Commons, National parks, Natural England, Natural Resources Wales, wild country and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to National parks: a common good

  1. John Bainbridge says:

    I have never been so concerned about the future of NP’s as I am now.

  2. National Parks are an important part of our heritage. They to protect landscapes and ecology and to reconnect us with nature in a way that’s good for mind and body.

  3. johnmuir2013 says:

    ‘it is essential to keep grazing at the right level or molinia (purple moor grass) will swamp our moorland …and restrict access.’
    Presumably if will not restrict the right of access, only ease of access? I agree with most of your article but this confusion about vegetation restricting access is frequently wrongly represented. If you think there is a problem in vegetation or habitat changing then please tackle the issue as I don’t believe it is an issue.

    • Thanks for your comment. Yes it reduces ease of access. There is photographic evidence that molinia has hidden the archaeological remains, due to reduction in grazing. Surely there is a balanced state where the appropriate grazing density has a beneficial effect on wildlife, archaeology and access?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s