In spite of the huge volume of visitors over many decades to British National Parks such as Snowdonia and the Lake District, these areas are extremely well looked after and are an impressive example of how National Parks can and should be run. Among the initiatives worthy of mention are shuttle buses or park-andride schemes operating from principle towns and villages within the parks, good camp site facilities, easy access onto high ground, planning guidelines (which are geared towards maintaining local building traditions and also towards preventing inappropriate development), proactive measures to combat visitorrelated environmental degradation and an ongoing policy to educate visitors on the need to respect the countryside and those who live in it.

In Ireland we have no large-scale National Parks and access to the countryside has always been a controversial issue. Landowners have been slow to accept the idea that other people might have any right to enjoy the piece of land which bears their name on the title deed, even if their (recreational) use might be very occasional and very low impact. A number of high profi le disputes between farmers and hillwalkers have featured in the Press in recent years. Some farmers have resorted to violence or threatening behaviour towards hillwalkers. In a small number of cases, walkers have allegedly damaged fences and stone walls that they have climbed over in a bid to gain access to high ground.

The question of farmers’ liability for accidental injuries sustained by walkers and other recreational users has further complicated the issue. It does seem ludicrous that Irish Courts might entertain the idea that farmers are somehow liable for accidental injuries sustained by people crossing their land. It is yet another sad symptom of the litigation culture which has emerged in Ireland in the last two decades, a culture which decrees that there must always be someone else to blame for our bad luck or carelessness. While this attitude of not taking responsibility for one’s actions is perfectly understandable when it is expressed by a young child, it does seem a bit pathetic when it is the automatic response of otherwise intelligent adults.

Recently, farming organisations have demanded ‘compensation’ for allowing walkers to cross their land. The sums of money mentioned have ranged from a few thousand Euro per annum to the totally brassnecked demand of the equivalent of the price of a house site (€50-150,000).

The organisation, Keep Ireland Open, a lobby group which campaigns for greater access to the countryside, has pointed out that farmers are already heavily subsidised by urban taxpayers and that if it weren’t for these taxpayers, many, if not most farmers would have sold up long ago.

The massive compensation payments sought by Irish landowners in return for permitting access onto high ground do not exist in any other country. Up till now, successive Governments here in Ireland have tended to favour the landowner, and this policy shows little sign of changing, in spite of the clear evidence that this approach has destroyed what otherwise would have been a very sustainable form of tourism: hillwalking and related activities.

Is there any way out of this impasse? Jim McMorrow believes there might be. Jim comes from a farming background and works within the farming community of North Leitrim. He has also been involved in the running and marketing of the North Leitrim Glens Hillwalking Festivals for many years.

Jim has a number of misgivings about the IFA’s proposal to establish countryside walkways in tandem with a scheme of annual payments to farmers.

“The announcement by the IFA in July 2005 concerning the establishment of Countryside Walkways and a scheme of annual payments to farmers has prompted me to write this article. I feel that a direct payment scheme to farmers who open up their lands has several disadvantages:

The enormous administration costs of organising the payments.

The task of getting enough adjoining landowners in the one location to make a long enough walk. It only takes one landowner in the centre to decline the scheme and the whole chain collapses.

The financial burden imposed on the Local Authority of insuring the walks. The walks will probably have to be inspected regularly by an engineer to make sure they are safe.

The difficulty and cost in checking that the Capital Grants are properly spent.

The entire cost of developing the walk and marketing it, will be wasted if the landowner does not rejoin the scheme after the expiration of the first five years.

I feel that the Countryside Walkways Plan proposed by the IFA is misguided. You can not put the smell of gorse, heather and bog myrtle into a bottle and charge every time you undo the cap. You can not record the sound of the Lark the Wheatear and mountain streams and charge people every time they get to listen to these sounds. You can not corral people into a confined area and charge them for the view. IFA’s proposal is in effect a charge on the members of the public before they can enjoy the wilderness. The public deserves more than this. The wilderness is wild. Access to the wilderness should be unfettered and unrestrained.

I wholly support all farmers and landowners who ban walkers from their land because of occupiers’ liability risk. It is not fair that farmers should have any liability for personal injury caused to walkers. Under Irish law, farmers run the risk of personal injury claims if they are deemed reckless. Let’s take an example: Farmer X is fencing his mountain commonage. He has had an excavator dig 600 holes for the fencing posts. On Saturday he finds he has only 590 posts and he goes home leaving 10 holes uncovered on the land, intending to go to the creamery on Monday to get 10 more posts. The following day a hillwalker breaks a leg when his foot accidentally goes into one of the holes. A Judge may well decide that the farmer in question was reckless and give an Order for Damages in favour of the hillwalker. This is not fair.

The Legislators must decree by Statute that walkers in wilderness areas enter at their own risk and that the landowners owe them no duties whatsoever (apart from a duty not to physically assault them!). Recreational users have the choice to stay at home if they wish; they also have the option to take out personal accident insurance. The onus should not be on the farmers to insure the walkers, but that is the crazy situation that exists today. The wilderness is inherently dangerous and that is part of the magic of such places. Millions of euros are being wasted on occupier's liability insurance.

New legislation should be drafted and NOT implemented until the following acid test is carried out: The draft should be examined by six solicitors in different parts of Ireland and unless and until every one of these six solicitors advise their farmer clients across their desks that their farmer clients have no occupier’s worries whatsoever, then and only then should the draft Legislation be put before the Dail. The present unsatisfactory Occupiers Liability Laws in Ireland is the cause of hundreds of thousands of people (be they photographers, hillwalkers, bird watchers, nature lovers, families with children having picnics, tourists etc.) being banned from the hills. A generation of young people have grown up without ever having had the thrill of reaching the top of a hill. People are scared to enter the wilderness areas for fear of a confrontation with a farmer who is rightly worried about his liability situation.”

Some suggestions:
Ban walkers from lowland fields and fields where intensive farming is carried out.

Ban walkers from walking near private residences so to give landowners privacy.

Via Statute, completely abolish occupiers’ liability for landowners for the reasons set out above. This is the key to the whole problem.

Via Statute, give members of the public a right-to-roam in all remote uplands areas (eg. ground over 300ft.) and designated wilderness areas where they will not interfere with intensive farming. Access to these remote areas can be by way of the many existing bog roads and lanes without any disruption to farmers, the right to roam only kicks in when the lane reaches the prescribed area.

To give farmers generous Capital Grants to repair and renew fences and to construct stiles and to provide serviced areas which will create income for the farmers.

Any farmer who wants to gain financially from Agri-Tourism can do so by providing camping grounds, serviced car parks, farmhouse accommodation, guide work, transport services, craft sales and the like. This sector is worth hundreds of millions of Pounds Sterling in the UK and many of those employed in it are from the farming community. There would also be many knock-on benefits for shops and services within the local community.