Ministers walking into trouble with the law

Exmoor farmer Roger Webber already had to live with the consequences of encouraging more people to explore the English coastline.

His farm, just west of Minehead, is crossed by the South West Coastal Path, the 630-mile route which runs all the way around the South West peninsula to Poole.

And a few years ago the authorities decided to make it a little more interesting by carving out an alternative "rugged" route along its first section, skirting the spectacular 800-foot cliffs and plunging steeply into deeply- incised combes.

The route is certainly dramatic and not one to be tackled without the proper kit, or by vertigo sufferers. There are official posted warnings that it is only suitable for fit and moderately experienced walkers. But in the eyes of too many people, warnings are only there to be ignored.

The result is that Mr Webber gets a steady procession of casualties crossing his land as the path proves too much for their stamina or their footwear and they limp and hobble back to the nearest road.

The prospect of many more such unwelcome invasions taking place if the entire coast is opened up is one of the concerns of those opposed to the Marine and Coastal Access Bill. As they point out, although there is already public access to around 70 per cent of the coastline, the remaining 30 per cent generally remains devoid of human visitors simply because it is too dangerous.

But their major objection has been to the way the Bill, introduced in the Queen's Speech last December, gave neither a right of appeal against the line of the route, nor any right to compensation for owners of secluded coastal properties whose value stands to be lowered as a result of them losing their privacy.

However the first cracks are starting to appear. Months of lobbying by the National Farmers Union and the Country Land and Business Association have resulted in a minor triumph.

The Government has now introduced amendments to the Bill. These will at least provide farmers and landowners with a right to appeal over the position and management of the coastal route and its associated open access land which could affect their land and business.

And Natural England, the agency charged with implementing the 10-year, £50 million project, will now be obliged to walk the proposed line of the route with the individual farmers and landowners involved before any indelible lines are drawn on maps.

Concerns still remain, particularly over the fact that unlike ordinary footpaths, the coastal route will allow users to stop, picnic, and even play games – for which the notion of "spreading room" has been introduced.

Spreading room is the area landward of the actual coastline which will be deemed to be covered by the path, usually up to a convenient natural or man-made feature – landowners were recently advised to start erecting fences a few yards inland in order to limit the amount of spreading room that would be designated.

Opponents of the Bill say there are still many points to be argued over, none of which will be conceded without a fight – and the spreading room issue is certainly one of them.

NFU deputy president Meurig Raymond says although a Government-proposed amendment means farmers can now request a map to show where the spreading room lies, the decision on whether to produce a map in the first place, as opposed to simply relying on a written description, will still lie with Natural England.

All the same, says Mr Raymond, he is heartened by the first signs of a significant Government climb- down.

He said: "The proposal for the objection procedure marks a substantial change of heart by the Government.

"It will give farmers and growers the right to object to any adverse changes to their business brought about by the proposals for the coastal path and will make the whole process fairer.

"We need clarification on a few remaining details as to how the objection procedure will operate in practice, but it will make a significant difference to the acceptability of the proposals for coastal access to our members."

Issues now likely to be tackled include farmers' and landowners' rights to request amendments to the route a few years down the line, if any particular problems have emerged, or when circumstances have changed.

But with the total absence of any provision for compensation for lost property values those opposed to the Bill are still pinning their hopes on it quietly sinking out of sight in the turbulence that is likely to grip Parliament in the next few months.