|We add our suggestions for a possible Dog Public Spaces Protection Orders to our broad support for the two already proposed New Forest District Council PSPOs. This statement was given by our Trustee / Council member, Brian Tarnoff in the Public Participation section of the NFDC Cabinet meeting on 2nd November 2022. Here we include the Endnotes separately shared with Cabinet Members.|
We commend the council for considering Public Spaces Protection Orders to bring forward measures to address inappropriate interaction with Forest livestock, and banning the use of barbecues and open flames on the Crown Lands. However, positive control of dogs is a priority widely suggested by the National Park, Forestry England[i] and the Verderers [ii].
East Hampshire District Council successfully brought out a PSPO for controls on dogs in November 2021. [iii] Similar rules for the New Forest could be mandated which would be entirely consistent with the New Forest National Park’s Dog Walking Code [iv] which is supported by all stakeholders in the New Forest Dogs Forum, including New Forest Dog Owners Group.
Such an order may include:
- Leads to be mandatory:
- When their use is requested by any staff of the relevant land managers, including rangers, keepers, agisters, etc. [consistent with FE byelaw 5.xiv.]
- In areas designated by the land managers of the Crown Lands, adjacent commons or reserves, primarily during ground nesting bird season, but for any other reasonable management purpose intended to reduce disturbance to wildlife or commoner’s stock.
- Along all stretches of the England Coast Path[v] that are directly adjacent or include within their coastal margin either fields containing livestock, or sites of importance to nature conservation (including SSSI, and/or any areas exempted from coastal margin by Natural England).
- Out of control dogs worrying/chasing/attacking livestock.
- Persistent dog fouling of car parks and paths.
- Littering, including leaving bagged faeces.
The district council should not treat this as a political hot potato. There is nothing here not already agreed to by the key stakeholders. While it is possible to roll out PSPO’s separately, you would address an arguably more prevalent set of issues in a more timely fashion, and save on time / expense / effort of separate consultations.
I myself am a dog owner who enjoys the privilege of exercising our dogs under close control on the Forest. I also represent Friends of the New Forest, a conservation organization, on the New Forest Dogs Forum (as well as the Recreation Management Strategy Advisory Group). As a responsible dog owner I would like to see measures rolled out that would further positive education. The Forest is an important remaining bastion for wildlife, and a working forest for commoning. By introducing consequences we may get the attention of those who take our Forest for granted.
|New Forest District Council has sent two draft Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO) , which we broadly support, for public consultation. The first to ban the lighting of fires and use of BBQs (principally on the Crown Lands), and the second to ban the feeding and petting of ponies, horses, mules, and donkeys in the open areas of the New Forest. The consultation runs for nearly 8 weeks from Monday 6th December 2022 to Friday 27th January 2023.
In This Series on PSPOs:–
Public Spaces Protection Orders And The New Forest : What are PSPO’s and what can they do for the Forest?
Protect Heathlands by Restricting Sky Lanterns and Fireworks Along With Barbecues – A Presentment to Verderers November 2022
PSPOs for the Dog Control in the Forest: Our Recommendations For a Draft Dog Control PSPO, how they stack up against existing guidance, and What the Kennel Club Says About PSPOs
[i] From the Forestry Commission Byelaws:
|Acts Prohibited on the Lands of the Commissioners
[ii] Verderers Minutes Jan 2021 page 12:
As with many other issues which are damaging to the Forest, enforcing a dogs-on-leads policy would be extremely difficult. Byelaws are an unwieldy and expensive means of enforcing the law and an alternative is badly needed in the Forest. The Official Verderer suggested it would be best to wait for a legally enforceable solution to verge parking to be identified, as a similar solution may be possible to try to reduce the impact of other undesirable activities on the Forest – out of control dogs being one. Meanwhile, the Deputy Surveyor said he will investigate Public Spaces Protection Orders again to see if there is any way they can be used.
[iii] East Hampshire District Council’s PSPO :
[iv] New Forest National Park’s Dog Walking Code:
|Stay safe and respect the environment:
Be considerate to other forest users
[v] England Coast Path – Issues relating to Access For Dog Walkers:
There are key issues surrounding the England Coast Path for the Coast of the New Forest. The scheme inadvertently creates a combination of factors which would allow new, unwelcome access by dogs to protected habitats, and fields used for livestock, including back up land for commoners animals. This is due to the way in which “spreading room” referred to as “coastal margin” is defined, the way the Ordnance Survey intends to show the land as access land, and Natural England’s uneven guidance and proposals for the New Forest route.
As defined Coastal Margin creates Access Land for the entire seaward side of the Route to the Waters edge. Where the route is relatively close to the water, this is less of a problem. However coastal habitats which need to be avoided send the Route inland, and are therefore automatically included in Coastal Margin. This was not defined in Primary Legislation, but as a statutory instrument. It was not mooted within the consultation on 2009 Act, presumably bringing forward the spreading limitations of the CROW Act 2000. The 2010 order was discussed for 20 minutes by 17 MPs in Delegated Legislation Committee, and in Lords Grand Committee in 3 hour meeting with 5 other items. The order has no provisos for the scenario where Coastal Land is Excluded by Natural England, leaving its definition impracticable.
Highcliffe to Calshot route potentially creates @3,500 acres of access land on protected habitats. This includes an Area of Special Protection which even the landowner may not enter without Natural England permission (Needs Ore Point, Gull Island and Warren Shore east of Gravelly House are given special levels of legal protection being subject to an Area of Special Protection order in accordance with Section 3 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)). This order makes it an offence to enter this area and to disturb birds. Entry, except by permit, is prevented to Warren Shore and Needs Ore (1 March-31 July) and to Gull Island (at all times of year).
Natural England have the power to Exclude such areas of the coast from Coastal Margin. However, the Ordnance Survey have decided to publish the route, and to display all potential access land under a “Magenta Wash”, regardless of whether the land has been excepted or excluded. They’ve suggested that their printed maps will include a very small print caveat that their “depiction of access does not imply or express warranty as to its accuracy or completeness”. Given that their data is used by both their own and 3rd Party mapping apps, which will not show this caveat, this policy is useless, and undermining to positive control and messaging about the route. It is estimated that 75% of the New Forest’s coastal margin will be excepted or excluded land, but would be shown as access land.
Natural England’s proposals for the Highcliffe to Calshot are inconsistent with their own guidance on dog controls. Only 2 stretches have Dogs on Lead Restrictions for habitat protection, for the rest of the route dogs are only required to be under close control off lead. The lack of livestock based restrictions ignores NE Coastal Access Scheme Guidance: 2.4.6 “under Part 1 of CROW, a person with a dog must keep it on a short lead in the vicinity of livestock” And Excepted Land status of “land covered by pens in use for the temporary detention of livestock” has not been applied consistently along the route. Unfortunately the Natural England guidance for the Coastal Path says that the route be made to the “least restrictive option”, which places the needs of walkers above conservation. This invention in the guidance is not mandated in legislation, and within a National Park flies in the face of the Sandford Principle which is enshrined in law.
For the entirety of the New Forest portions of the England Coast Path dogs should be on lead for all sections adjacent to:
- Protected Habitat (whether or not Excluded)
- Land in use for Livestock Management
- Coastal Margin leading to either
Potential Impact on Features of Nature Conservation Importance of increased public access to the coast
- Damaging levels of trampling on vegetated shingle habitats, and adjacent saltmarsh, with erosion of woodland ground flora.
- Increased levels of disturbance would have adverse impacts on breeding waders and other ground nesting birds including nesting Ringed plover, Redshank, Lapwing and Avocet.
- Avocet and other waders and wildfowl nesting on lagoons inland of the coast would be vulnerable to disturbance, in particular from dogs.
- Impacts on nesting Ringed plover would have an adverse effect on the Solent and Southampton Water SPA & Ramsar Site for which this is a qualifying species.
- Wildfowl & waders feeding and breeding on grazing marshes, lagoons and improved grassland fields inland of the coast would be very vulnerable to disturbance from public access.
No comments yet.