FORESTRY COMMISSION'S HORSE-RIDING FEES (Hansard, 22 July 1965)

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES (LORD MITCHISON)
My Lords, the decision to make an annual charge of £4 per horse for the use of Forestry Commission land to organisations such as riding schools was taken in the course of the Commission's normal management of their estate, in accordance with Section 4(6) and Section 4(7)(b) of the Forestry Act, 1945. The resulting income is paid into the Forestry Fund in accordance with Section 6(3) of the same Act.
The decision was not made under a direction given to the Commission by my right honourable friends; and I suggest that it is not inconsistent with the Commission's policy of encouraging public access to their forests to charge a fee to any person or organisation making commercial use of their land for riding or any other form of recreation. I hope that the noble Duke will agree that it is only equitable that, where the Commission's facilities are used to the profit of a third party, the Commission should expect a reasonable return.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL
My Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for that 893 Answer, do I gather that, henceforward, it is going to be the policy of public Commissions to make charges for such things as riding through their land? Do I further gather that the Government are going to encourage this; and would they not agree that this will tend to remove these forms of activity from the pockets of the vast majority of the people of this country? Because at the moment pony-trekking is not a paying proposition.

§ LORD MITCHISON
My Lords, as the Question indicated, this charge is made only in respect of the commercial use of the Forestry Commission's land. There is no charge for occasional riding; and regular riders can get a permit for a fee of £2 a year. I do not think that this is extortionate.

§ LORD CARRINGTON
My Lords, in the light of the original Answer given by the noble Lord, will he give an assurance that the Government can see the wood for the trees?

§ LORD MITCHISON
Yes, my Lords; without any difficulty.

LORD REA
My Lords, could the Minister say whether donkeys and motor-scooters are free?

§ LORD MITCHISON
My Lords, I am afraid that I have no information either about donkeys or about motor-scooters, but I will gladly inquire if the noble Lord asserts afterwards that he would like to know.

LORD HAWKE
My Lords, the first part of the noble Lord's answer dealt with the question of commercial use; and later he mentioned a £2 fee for ordinary riders. That is a completely new one on those people who regularly use Tilgate and St. Leonard's Forests and other forests for recreational purposes as ordinary riders. Is this intended to apply all over England?

§ LORD MITCHISON
What I understand to be the case is that the occasional user is not charged; but if someone uses Commission land regularly he can get leave to do so for £2 a year. I feel sure that the noble Lord would think it right that a small charge of that sort should be made, given that it is, after all, Forestry Commission land and public land.

§ LORD MOYNE
My Lords, would the noble Lord give an assurance that no charge would be made, however regular the use, when the riding was on a public bridle path which happens to cross Forestry Commission land?

§ LORD MITCHISON
Not without notice, my Lords.

§ LORD DERWENT
My Lords, would the noble Lord say that the Government would approve if private landlords did the same thing?

§ LORD SHEPHERD
Private landlords do so.

§ LORD MITCHISON
My Lords, I wish some of them would.

§ LORD DERWENT
Why?

§ LORD MITCHISON
Because it would be to the advantage of the public who, in those circumstances, would be able to ride on land or at places where perhaps they may not be so allowed at the moment.

NOBLE LORDS
They are allowed to do so.

§ LORD DERWENT
My Lords, anyone can ride over my land, provided he does so without damaging the crops. Is the noble Lord seriously suggesting that we should start charging?

§ LORD MITCHISON
My Lords, the noble Lord is a very public-spirited person. I am glad that he has told us that we may ride over his land provided we do not damage the crops.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that heretofore the Forestry Commission have given almost unlimited access to riders anywhere in Scotland, and does he really think that making a charge of £4 a horse will encourage the use of the land for recreational purposes, as apparently is the Government's policy?

§ LORD MITCHISON
My Lords, I do not think it will discourage it. I think it is reasonable that a small charge should be made to someone who is making a profit out of letting out horses or organising expeditions of pony riders over Forestry Commission land. It is a matter for the Forestry Commission themselves; it is a matter of management. 895 I feel sure that the noble Duke himself will feel that allowing the use of land in this way for horses which are let out on hire is an ordinary question of estate management and ought to be left to the Forestry Commission.

§ LORD SHEPHERD
My Lords, we have a lot of Business to deal with to-day. I know that this is a very important subject, but perhaps we could have it down for another day.

LORD SALTOUN
My Lords, may I ask one question? I am anxious that the noble Lord should clear it up. May I hope that what he has said applies only to England and Wales?—because in Scotland his answer would be contrary to Common Law; and therefore the matter is of some importance.

§ LORD MITCHISON
My Lords, I should hesitate to venture an opinion on Scottish law; but my answer was applicable to all three countries, England, Scotland and Wales, each of which has a Forestry Minister.

LORD SALTOUN
My Lords, do the Government really mean to invade the ordinary Common Law rights of the Scottish people for the sake of the Forestry Commission?

§ LORD MITCHISON
My Lords, Scottish rights are not being invaded.