OPINION: It's Time to Stand up for Stanage

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Stand up for Stanage montage, 3 kbStanage will hopefully be enjoyed for generations to come, but the landscape and the access we enjoy cannot be taken for granted. Stanage – and the rest of the North Lees estate – is again facing an uncertain future, write Adam Long and Henry Folkard.

Read more
 toad 20 Sep 2017
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:
Has anyone seeen the PDNP plans in advance of the meeting? or have any indication of what their plans are? Or is it all a big reveal at the meeting?
 TobyA 20 Sep 2017
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Unless anything dramatic happens, I'm going to go. Is there anyone who fancies attending the meeting but also going to Stanage either before or after and doing a few routes too? Forecast is currently a bit grey but dry for High Neb on Saturday. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/weather/forecast/gcqzd69kf#?date=2017-0...
In reply to toad:
As a sweeping summary, the current Management Plan for Stanage expired back in March 2017 and currently there is no clear picture of what the PDNPA's vision is for it going forwards. Louise Hawson goes into a lot more detail on this within the September Newsletter, but the initial impression is that their broad strategy is exactly that - broad (!!); hence lacking in depth on the finer details (i.e. how it's actually going to be implemented).

Henry makes further comment within the September Newsletter, that when the PDNPA presented their plan to the Peak Park Parishes Forum the impression from their perspective was that "the Forum is again disappointed that yet another consultation document is presented in a far from friendly form. It is full of “management speak”’, and the Forum is identifying too many occasions when the Authority says one thing and does another’.

I think the points above touch on what I believe are the two key issues: the first being the lack of clarity of their plan and the second being the lack of communication and engagement with relevant user groups on what is within the plan.

There's a lot more information within the last two BMC Peak Area Newsletters, which are well worth reading - here's a link to each of them:

June: https://www.thebmc.co.uk/Handlers/DownloadHandler.ashx?id=1469
Sept: https://www.thebmc.co.uk/Handlers/DownloadHandler.ashx?id=1504
Post edited at 09:18
 Adam Long 21 Sep 2017
In reply to toad:

At a recent Steering group meeting we asked about the vision and the PDNPA rep showed us a single page summary. Frustratingly the provider appeared to have no idea that it's production been steered by the Forum three years ago. In their defence the overall thrust we were told was positive but, as mentioned it remains to be seen how it can be delivered with what appears to be reduced resources. A worrying point was made several times that PDNPA staff do not consider Stanage in any way special or different to their many other estates. This is definitely not how Members saw it when they decided not to sell a few years back ( source of 'the jewel in our crown' quote), and seems to imply that stakeholder forums are not required elsewhere so why here? Whereas the reality is, for whatever reason, Stanage has an iconic status the rest of these estates do not (as reflected in the UKC stats), and the Forum arose specifically due this honeypotting effect, increased stakeholder attachment and consequent conflicts that were not as easily managed as elsewhere.
 rogersavery 21 Sep 2017
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Can I suggest one minor correction to the article

"The Peak District National Park Authority (PDNPA), who own and manage much of the crag and surroundings..."

PDNPA is a public funded body, paid for by the tax payer - therefore the people own stanage and we have simply appointed them to manage it.

I was hoping to attend the meeting but I don't think I can make it this weekend. One thing I want to know is if peak park are desperate to raise revenue to make up for budget cuts, why don't they make the monsal trail a public bridleway (rather then a consensionary bridleway as it is at the moment) - this will cut the cost of ownership by 50%
 toad 21 Sep 2017
In reply to rogersavery:

I guess because you then cant shut it for income generating private events, he says cynically.
 olddirtydoggy 21 Sep 2017
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

The new ideas will equate to charging visiors to use wild land.
 TobyA 21 Sep 2017
In reply to rogersavery:

> One thing I want to know is if peak park are desperate to raise revenue to make up for budget cuts, why don't they make the monsal trail a public bridleway (rather then a consensionary bridleway as it is at the moment) - this will cut the cost of ownership by 50%

Can you explain how this works?
 Adam Long 22 Sep 2017
In reply to rogersavery:

> Can I suggest one minor correction to the article

> "The Peak District National Park Authority (PDNPA), who own and manage much of the crag and surroundings..."

> PDNPA is a public funded body, paid for by the tax payer - therefore the people own stanage and we have simply appointed them to manage it.

Agree completely in principle. However in the past when this point is raised the PDNPA have been quick to point out that it is in fact their name on the deeds. Make of that what you will.

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...