Access Issues

Recreational walkers( the term includes everyone from occasional danderers, through ramblers to energetic hillwalkers) , need legal access to land to enable them to pursue their activity.
In England and Wales, recreational use of both designated access land and coastal areas has been won, Scots enjoy access to most land and water surfaces but, in Ireland, walkers can only legally walk on public roads, public rights of way, permissive paths and where an access agreement has been agreed with a landowner.   Ireland is unique in Western Europe in that it has little legal provision for walkers to enjoy their hobby, much walking territory being accessible only by trespassing.  Literature produced by Tourism Ireland promotes the wonderful scenery and walking on the Island but lamentably fails to clarify the true legal position.
In Northern Ireland, the 1987 Occupiers’ Liability  (NI) Order places a ’duty of care’ on landowners/occupiers for entrants to their land- a ‘responsibility’ for entrants by the landowner. On publicly owned land- for example, Council Parks, Housing Executive, Forest Service  and Water NI estate, there is a general permission to enter, all walkers becoming ‘visitors’ and any claim is met, ultimately, by the taxpayer. On privately owned land-mostly farmland or hillside-if permission is sought from the landowner and given freely, the walker becomes a visitor also but any claim is met directly by the landowner.
If permission is not given, the walker is trespassing but-perversly-the landowner ,under the above Order, still owes a duty of care, albeit of lesser demand and any claim is again met by the landowner.
In practice, it would be exceedingly difficult to claim successfully as a Court would determine that the walker, by entering, thereby accepted the possible risk involved. However, this Order causes much confusion, owners being understandably concerned by the term ‘duty of care’ and disinclined therefore to permit access. The implementation of the  new Ulster Way was unreasonably delayed by difficulties in negotiating access permissions, the planned launch being repeatedly postponed.
The Federation has worked extensively to seek amendment of the Order, sadly without success, although it has been amended in the Republic of Ireland but the wording used there has been difficult to interpret in practice.
The Department of the Environment in Northern Ireland has indicated  that it wishes to use the 1983 Access to the Countryside   (NI) Order as a means of providing recreational access to privately owned land. This Order empowers District Councils to negotiate access –Public Rights of Way, Public Footpaths and Access Agreements to tracts of land-with landowners/occupiers. It has been conspicuously unsuccessful ,to date, in its intent
Why? Partly because Councils find it difficult and expensive to implement and because it has the potential to antagonise ratepayers. There is little desire ,in many councils, to maintain existing public access routes and even less to begin to assert new routes. Recent experience ,where the Federation has become involved in Rights of Way issues,  points to a lack of co ordination between Planning Service and District Council as ,in some cases, planning approval for development has been given which, if undertaken, would obliterate an existing  Public Right of Way.
The Department appears to have little incentive to offer and even less will to impose action upon a Council. Northern Ireland has recently had three Ministers for the Environment and  the Federation, having written to two seeking action on access, despairs of the political cynicism which moves a Minister to another Department before there has been a real chance to master a brief, let alone act effectively .
The Federation urges individuals to lobby both their District Councillor, MLA and Council    UFRC will continue, on behalf of its member clubs, to seek some movement  and progress towards legal access for recreational walking but recognises that it would be easy to become dispirited by the almost total lack of concern –and action-from politicians, many of whom still cling to the old shibboleth ‘’we don’t want walkers trampling  all over the countryside’’
UFRC has been involved in access negotiations  in a number of areas, ensuring that each is visited by either a member of the Executive Committee or by a club member, before a decision on Federation action is taken. While there is a desire to protect and maintain existing access arrangements, each  case is considered individually and occasionally it may be that the reluctant decision is to agree abandonment as the best option.

 Recent activity