20 February 2003
Fylingdales bridleways closures:
reply to NYMNPA
 
 

WOMENWITH HILL WOMEN'S PEACE CAMP(AIGN)
P.O. BOX 105, HARROGATE HG3 2FE

20th February 2003

Mrs V Dilcock,
Chief Planning Officer,
North York Moors National Park Authority,
Old Vicarage,
Bondgate,
Helmsley YO62 5BP

Dear Mrs Dilcock,

Re: your letter to me ref. VAD/2046, 4th February:
RAF Fylingdales: Bridleway and boundary issues:

Enclosed please find a copy of letter from the Under Secretary of State for Defence, Dr Lewis Moonie, which is relevant to the matters I raised with you in my letter of December 22nd.

Consideration of the points he makes in this letter reveals the following:

a). '…I do regret the obstruction of the bridleways by the security fence…'

This is acknowledgement of the fact that the security fences were built across the public rights of way, but avoids admitting that the Ministry of Defence acted unlawfully by doing so.

b). 'Under the Defence Act 1842, the course of the bridleway (number 500200) was diverted onto a new route…'

This fails to answer my assertion that the section of the 1842 Act, which authorises the closure of public rights of way on Defence Lands, is repealed by implication, as the procedure is incorporated into the Military Lands Act 1892.

c). '…the route that was, in fact the commonly used one.'

This route was 'the commonly used one', because the RAF Fylingdales Byelaws prohibited use of the lawful route. MoD Police Officers have, under the authority of these Byelaws, the power to arrest and charge 'trespassers' with criminal offence.
At present the MoD Police are not applying the Byelaws, because they state that 'a coach and horses can be driven through the legislation'. They have requested new Byelaws.

c). 'The commonly used route was on Forestry Commission land at the time it was diverted. The Forestry Commission gave prior consent for the diversion of the bridleway…'

If the NYMNPA Footpaths' Officer had been informed of this, it would not have been necessary to point out to her that the Under Defence Secretary does not have the power to divert footpaths off 'his' land and on to somebody else's.

I suspect that the MoD believed that the 'commonly used route' would never be queried. I should like to see the correspondence which authorised this diversion.

d). '…a parallel course of action was taken, which involved the transfer of Forestry Commission land to the Ministry of Defence.'

This statement carefully avoids stating when this transfer took place or how much land was involved.

Was it transacted before or after the Secretary of State for Defence, Geoff Hoon, assured the people in the locality that no more land would be required for Fylingdales?

e). '…following the stopping-up of the western part of the bridleway (number 524206)…under the Defence Act 1842…'

Wrong. This is the section of that bridleway which crosses the open moor from the A169. The eastern end of this bridleway goes through the Security Fence. The original notices of 25th September 2002 had to be replaced when I pointed out Dr Moonie's mistake.

f). '…it is my current intention to seek to close the remainder…under the Highways Act 1980. My officials have not yet made an application to the North Yorkshire County Council Highways Authority…'

Wrong authority. It should be NYMNPA.

g). 'It is the requirement of the Act that there is a period of public consultation prior to any such application.'

I trust that the public will be informed properly 'prior to…application' and not by the usual means of attachment of an insignificant notice to an almost inaccessible post. I should certainly not like to discover that such a 'public consultation' had taken place without my knowledge.

I believe that the MoD has behaved in an unacceptable manner towards the public and the local authority on this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Anne Lee

pp WoMenwith Women

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------