Dear Editor,

I would like challenge parts of Harlow Council’s statement aired on BBC Essex on July 10^th which stated:

“The council leader and cabinet member for environment recently met with the riders to listen to their concerns and to try and find a way forward. Communication between the council and the riders has continued.”

Since our meeting of the 5^th June in which we were given 30 minutes and no more, we have received just a single communication from Councillor Purse (the cabinet member for environment) sent 23^rd June. This communication contained factual inaccuracies to which we sought further clarification. 

These inaccuracies are then repeated in their on-air statement of: 

“Therefore, based on advice from the West Anglia Area Delivery Team at Natural England we cannot allow access to the woods for the purpose of horse riding.”

Four requests for clarification have been made, two e-mails, one recorded delivery letter and one chance meeting with Councillor Swords on July 1^st (who happened to be out canvassing).

We asked to see this evidence based on the following communications received from Natural England including:

Sonja Kaupe, Protected Sites Lead Adviser, West Anglia Area Team Dated 27^th June.

“If Harlow District Council did wish to consider incorporating horse riding access to Harlow Woods SSSI in the future, then Natural England would be available to provide advice and consider any proposals submitted by the landowner.”

Rebecca Coward, Lead Adviser, West Anglia Area Delivery Team, Natural England (Responsible Officer for Harlow Woods SSSI) Dated 4^th July:

“If the owner of the woodland wishes to permit horse riding on their land then they will need to consult with Natural England and gain consent. Natural England will welcome discussions with the landowner to advise . . .”.

AND (same communication)

“I understand you are trying to find safe routes for your young horse riders and we would encourage you to continue the dialog with the landowner. Until the landowner gives permission and seeks Natural England’s consent through the appropriate channels”

IF Harlow Council has received advice from the “West Anglia Area Delivery Team at Natural England” how come the very same team state – both during and AFTER the councils investigation – that they are more than willing to welcome discussions on hacking, encourage us to engage with the council and only need Harlow Council to start the discussion? 

According to the council that discussion has not only started but actually been concluded – perhaps the council may wish to let the Natural England know, they don’t seem to be aware!

For a moment let’s give the councillors the benefit of doubt and say that they were provided this information by the Biodiversity Team at Harlow Council – which is the team responsible for this mess in the first place (as opposed to actually attempting to read the source materials themselves). 

The Environment Client Team Manager has had his say when answering a complaint, I had previously lodged. In a letter dated May 25^th he states:

“My colleague has provided me with a Scientific Research paper commissioned by Natural England on the effects of access on bicycle and horseback on nature conservation. The document makes for extremely enlightening reading on how horse riding in natural areas impacts habitats and vegetation . . .”.

Having now read all 194 pages of this document (I would suggest the Councillors and Council officers do the same again) I would like to ask him (which I have – and again this has not been answered) which parts he found most interesting. Was it:

“There is relatively little information on the impacts of horse riding and cycling.”

OR

“There are very few studies that directly compare horse riders or cyclists to other types of user, and little can be concluded from the limited results.”

OR maybe even 

“There is no new information relevant to statutory exclusion or restrictions under the CRoW Act (2000) and the recommendations in the original guidance (chapter 9.6.2; that exclusions are unlikely to be necessary anywhere but that there may be situations where restrictions are warranted) are still relevant”

Perhaps he latched onto the part that says:

“The impacts of horse riding or cycling will be dependent upon a range of factors (see Figure 1), many of which will be specific to a site or location. To understand the total impact it is necessary to draw on social research of visitor behaviour and choice of site, visitor surveys describing the routes taken and direction travelled by different users, their group size and frequency of visit, as well as ecological research on the different impacts to species and habitats.”

Well guess what? we’ve asked to see this survey and the council have chosen to ignore the request. This will be the survey(s) that are meant to happen first to demonstrate a need for exclusion – which may I remind readers is also noted in the same text as “unlikely to be necessary anywhere”

In a recent “Letter to the Editor” published on yourharlow.com Mike B makes every effort to guide the reader to the conclusion that the damage caused to these barricades was indeed horse riders. What they fail to mention when using their circumstantial evidence is the fresh tyre marks leading to the damaged posts? Why omit this detail? – because it doesn’t fit the desired narrative of the article.

In our one and only meeting with the councillors on the 5^th June we pointed out then that posts were already being removed and categorically stated then it was not us – we were first to bring this to the council attention – again why wait till now to bring this up?

I also note the attempts by the volunteer team to reinstate restrictions. All I can say is to any member of the public using the woods – make sure you take a first aid kit, and your tetanus is up to date. The hastily restored barriers have rusty nails sticking out in one-inch gaps along the length of the poles (this is not the odd nail this is a series of nails left protruding)

As mentioned on the radio the other morning – it is stated we may be in breach of “Operations requiring Natural England’s consent” (the governing rules) point 27 “Recreational or other activities likely to damage features of interest.” 

But after 50 years of Hacking (acknowledge and accepted by all parties) which predates the SSSI (awarded in 1986) AND with Rebecca Coward, Lead Adviser, West Anglia Area Delivery Team, Natural England (The Responsible Officer for Harlow Woods SSSI) saying their only current concern on the 4th July was: 

“Poaching of the ground and compaction by horses has been observed by myself and a second colleague at Natural England and this does pose problems for ground flora, soil health, and in turn the structure of the woodland. The level of damage from poaching is currently considered minor”.

How can it be argued that we are in fact “likely to damage features of interest.”? Compounded by the fact the SSSI was awarded in spite of hacking already taking place? And 50 years of poaching has led to only a minor concern?

All that was needed to resolve this situation correctly was for Harlow Council to have read the documentation properly and approach Natural England as required. Natural England would then have surveyed the site and come to a considered conclusion. If that conclusion was to exempt horses so be it – at least we would have been treated fairly – however due process has not been followed and the actions of one man has lead to a considerable waste of time and resources for both parties. It has lost us many months of hacking when the weather is best to support this activity. 

It’s incredulous that we have been demonised in press releases and online by the likes of “Mike B” and the numerous other “anonymously authored” negative posts that seem to come very think and fast the very moment any article is published from our side of the argument. 

If we were to put the actions of the council under the spotlight, we would see breaches of several of the “operations requiring Natural England’s consent”

11: “The destruction, displacement, removal or cutting of any plant or plant remains, including tree, shrub, herb, hedge, dead or decaying wood, moss, lichen, fungus, leaf-mould or turf.” – Just a cursory look will show the mass of clearing being done around the areas where the barriers have been installed – not to mention the healthy trees outside of any coppicing areas that have been cut down across paths

21: “Construction, removal or destruction of roads, tracks, walls, fences, hardstands, banks, ditches or other earthworks, or the laying, maintenance or removal of pipelines and cables, above or below ground” –

22: “Storage of materials.” – The industrial fence panels stored at the bottom of the access roads in the woods (I note they have been moved to the side recently in an attempt to clear up perhaps? But they remain stored in the SSSI.

Of course, Harlow Council may have gained consent in advance as per the title – but we have asked for evidence and again we have been ignored – yet we are the ones breaking the rules…..

The underhand – and I do not use this term lightly – tactics of all council representatives involved is abhorrent and all should hold their heads in shame. These actions fly in the face of other Council initiatives. I leave you with the following statements from the “Harlow health and wellbeing strategy 2023 to 2028”.

Page 2

• “As a community leader, the council believes it has an important role to work to reduce the trends holding back better health and wellbeing outcomes in the town.”
• “Some of the 2028 outcomes include: addressing barriers to health provision, promoting physical activity, encouraging an active lifestyle in later life.”

Page 4

• “In October 2021, Harlow Council issued a positioning statement outlining the council’s approach to health and wellbeing, which indicated the intention to work in partnership with the wider community.”
• “In addition, in October 2022, a survey of Harlow residents was undertaken. The results reinforced the evidence-base by demonstrating that Harlow residents do not get enough physical activity, suffer from a lack of sleep and don’t feel safe.”

Page 10 

• “A place where people feel heard, empowered, included and supported to identify and manage their own health and wellbeing and have equal access to the right services and support, at the right time and in the right place.”

Page 12

• “We will ensure that we talk to and consult with the community to help gain a deeper understanding of the issues that they face and to help consider appropriate solutions. The partnership will work together to address any identified barriers to health provision and to challenge and tackle health inequalities in Harlow.”
• “It is acknowledged that reducing inequalities requires sustained effort over long periods of time, which will continue to be challenging.”

Page 13

• “Harlow has high levels of obesity in children and adults, and experiences high levels of physical inactivity.”
• “Active Harlow and partners across the voluntary and community sector support the delivery and promotion of a range of activities aimed at supporting physical activity.” 
• “Across Harlow there are numerous green spaces, including the various parks and connected green wedges that include the Town Park and Jean McAlpine Park, woodlands, ponds such as Oakwood and Netteswell, as well as the River Stort and its surrounding area. All of these green and blue assets, including the extensive cycle track network, enable opportunities for physical activity and active travel.”
• “Harlow has the highest percentage of children overweight or obese in Year 6 in Essex.”
• “Harlow has the second highest in Essex percentage of children who are overweight or obese at reception age.”
• “Harlow has the third lowest proportion of children and young people who are physically active in Essex.”
• “Harlow has the second lowest proportion of adults who are physically active in Essex.”
• “Enabled children, young people and their families to be more physically active (especially through fun active play) and that they understand the importance of an active lifestyle, healthier diets and healthy weight.”
• “Improved levels of physical activity amongst adults by helping them find ways to integrate physical activity into their daily lives.”
• “Supported weight loss in communities through the development of healthier, designed places by addressing environments that support or promote obesity.”

For those wishing to sign and the petition to get the Council to behave in the manner expected please sign the petition: https://www.change.org/p/saveharlowhacking

Yours sincerely

Edmund Wilson