Cambrian Mountains - Please Read!

I received an email from Mark Margetts, head of the Powys 4x4 Response group regarding a draft proposal regarding the use of recreational vehicles in the Cambrian mountains. I know this wont affect a lot of you but any support I can raise here will help to keep our already dwindling supply of lanes open.

Essentially all that is required is to send an email to: countryside@ceredigion.gov.uk

With the subject line: CMPP – Draft Strategy - Section 5.3

Stating that you are an offroader/greenlaner and you have issues with section 5.3 - Remoteness and visual tranquility. Something to the effect that you use a 4x4 to access remote and tranquil areas of the countryside as a hobby, that you respect the countryside and that if the areas are remote and tranquil then there shouldnt be anyone there for us to bother. I for one rarely see walkers when out laning, and it is almost as rare for me to see other 4x4ers when I go laning local to me.

Please also congratulate them on the work they have done, as this proposal is a significant step forwards for unity between different outdoors groups. But we really do want those remote lanes kept open.

the website to visit is: http://www.ceredigion.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=9891

I would really appreciate it if as many of you as possible could do this before the 13th of October. Not long I know but I only got the email yesterday and it will help ensure that all of you who want to go into the wilderness of Wales will still have to opportunity to do so in the future.
Thanks

Phil

The email is as follows:
------------------------------------------------

I have today posted the following note on the CRAG Forum and it occurred to me that this information may be of interest to a number of our 4X4 Response Group Members. If you get the opportunity to have a look at the consultation documents and make a response it would be appreciated.

Best Regards

Mark

The Consultants have now prepared their draft report for this project and it is out to public consultation until 13th October. In general I think that they have done a fair job. However, they have included a measure of remoteness or tranquility within their analysis which tends to remove a number of otherwise acceptable routes from the potential network. Their logic is that if a route passes through a tranquil area then the presence of bikes and 4x4s will spoil that tranquility.

Their definition of remoteness is based on proximity to urban settlements, roads, pylons etc. and as a consequence 14% or 256km of the survey network is found to be in remote/tranquil areas and is therefore not proposed to be included in the network going forward.

The effect of this is that a number of the more interesting upland routes are theoretically 'lost' from the network. This means that the selected network routes are likely to pass close to communities etc. and exacerbate existing conflict.

There is an alternative logic that can be postulated which is that routes should pass through tranquil areas (albeit on a controlled and responsible basis) to minimise conflict. Also, if people cannot visit 'tranquil' areas in motor vehicles then a significant proportion of the population will be denied the opportunity to visit and experience same.

The other measures used in the study include surface carrying capacity, sustainability, proximity to ecologically and architecturally sensitive areas and in general the view of the users sitting on the stakeholder group (which included myself) was that a fair job had been done and a balanced view taken.

This is a pilot project to determine a methodology that may be used in the future to determine the ongoing viability of MPV routes and as such could become a mechanism to justify TROs etc. It is therefore essential that we as a responsible user group engage in the consultation and make sure that our views are taken into account. In particular, we must put pressure on the Project Team to disregard the Visual Remoteness factor as it is potentially the element that is going to enable them to take away our most interesting routes.

I would therefore encourage all of our members to take the time to visit http://www.cambrianmountains.org and have a look at the proposed Network Maps and also the Draft Report and then to write to Ian Dutch congratulating them on the quality of the work undertaken and the evenhandedness with which it has been done but pointing out that the Visual Remoteness aspect appears unreasonable and illogical and is likely to lead to unnecessary problems in the future. One of the points is that the reason many of us go greenlaning is to get out into remote areas and if they are remote then there is no-one there for us to bother or inconvenience.

The consultation period ends on 13th October and therefore if we don't act effectively prior to that we will only have ourselves to blame if we lose some of the fantastic routes in the Cambrian Mountains.

PLEASE DON'T LEAVE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE TO TAKE ACTION - MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD IN THIS CONSULTATION PROCESS AND LET THEM KNOW HOW YOU FEEL. YOU CAN BE SURE THAT THE ANTIS ARE RALLYING THEIR TROOPS TO TAKE THE OPPOSING VIEW!
---------------------------------------------------------