What are National Parks for ?
24th October 2015
What are National Parks for?
What are National Parks for? What function do they serve? Why have them?
If asked many years ago I would have suggested National Parks were formed to conserve rare, wild and beautiful spaces and to protect varied and vulnerable wild life. This protection would ensure fragile and diverse Eco systems survived, whilst providing the nation with beautiful landscapes.
The National Park web site points out how the revised Environment Act 1995 set out two statutory purposes for national parks in England and Wales:
"Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage.
Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public"
They also add that when national parks carry out these purposes they also have the duty to:
"Seek to foster the economic and social well-being of local communities within the national parks"
There is an additional caveat that was introduced by Lord Sandford, that is used to test any new initiative.
Sandford Principal
"Where irreconcilable conflicts exist between conservation and public enjoyment, then conservation should take priority"
The values contained within this revised 1995 act mirror my own views, however, it is not clear to me that these principals are strictly followed through by authorities. Tacitly accepted within these aims is the commercialisation of the landscape, where the interpretation of the Sandford Principal is being stretched so far as to be irrelevant - I fear the baby is being thrown out with the bath water.
All of our National Parks (NPs) are now branded, with fancy logos, colour schemes where activities and messages are all about staying 'on brand.' An increasingly significant function of the NP is marketing, promoting and selling. Selling the NPs as lifestyle venues by exploiting the popularity for endurance and adventure events.
My own area, the Lake District National Park, is a popular venue for a wide variety of visitors, but increasingly, due in part to this type of marketing and branding it has now become a popular destination for races, sportives and all manner of physical challenges. The Lakes has always had its' Fell Races and its landscape has inspired amazing physical feats. However, these activities fitted into the culture and history of the area and only represented a thin layer of the sub culture of the outdoor fraternity.
The NPs have jumped on the band wagon, by positively marketing the Parks as a place to come to race or take on a challenge. Every weekend there are hundreds of runners, cyclists, swimmers, car rallies, off road convoys, motor bike meets. Activities that, in my view, do not meet the Sandford Principal.
This can be seen when these activities are applied to the Sandford Principal:
"Where irreconcilable conflicts exist between conservation and public enjoyment, then conservation should take priority"
Plus when the conservation and education aims of the NP are viewed:
"Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage".
"Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public"
In this context it is clear these mass involvement events are not compatible to the purpose and function of a NP. This point is emphasised when the very character of these events is considered. Many of the race/challenge activities are very formalised and are motivated by physical and mental achievement. These activities, come with a mind set that wants to exploit the landscape for its shape and physical attributes. It is the physical challenge and not for the less tangible value of appreciating its unique habitats and beauty.
The increasing worry is that more these these activities take place the more they become embedded and culturelised, resulting in a standardised landscape as it is primarily viewed as destinations for 'thrills and spills'. The hills and dales become asset free race tracks, that attract an income stream.
In this context the landscape is only being used for commercial ends, where each hill, summit, stream offers a physical challenge. The landscape, is an open air Boot Camp, where every slope, and contour is commodified and standardised. The land's only significance is its ability to be the venue for adventure.
As Edward Relph warns:
"The making of standardised landscapes results to the insensitivity of the significance of place".
If this 'insensitivity', through regularity and cultural acceptance becomes normalised, then a key NP aim is compromised. The NPs need to appreciate and understand that activities are done for their own sake as the participants are driven by personal, intrinsic needs. Destination National Park is not about the landscape and environment, it is about its physicality. The landscape is only a means to an end, not the end itself.
In addition these types of activities, due to their frequency and the huge volume of participants, have an immediate and long lasting impact on the fragile environment. This impact is not just the physical harm, but also because it develops a mindset of indifference.
Oliver Rackham notes the four ways in which the landscape is lost; "through the loss of beauty, the loss of freedom, the loss of vegetation and wildlife, and the loss of meaning"
The nature of these events, and due to the motivations of its participants, is arguably little to do with wildlife and beauty of the landscape. The events do not incorporate, or consider an appreciation or sympathy that helps understand the delicacy of the environment. The consequences of these activities are much removed from the true meaning of NPs original intentions. The meaning of the wild, beautiful and fragile landscape is lost.
This mind set is further reflected in the many adverts and strap lines of the businesses that exploit the 'adventure' culture. "Beat the Mountain" "Conquer the Outdoors" "Take on the challenge". In all cases the NPs values are lost under the sweat and Lycra of people with very personal human, physical aims, that are arguably remote to the aims of the NPS. None of this activity promotes an understanding of the environment, enhances the beauty of the landscape or help participants better appreciate the cultural heritage of the area as the activities are self serving and insular. The purpose of these activities is to be 'completed' not necessarily appreciate, immerse and learn about the land they flow through. The fact it was completed in a NP gives the participant extra kudos, however, the same challenge could have been completed, in just as daunting and difficult an environment, on a track found in a metropolis. They are, every weekend.
Furthermore, I also argue the NPs are failing its visitors as these Parks intended to be places that foster an ability to reflect, learn, understand and gain a broad appreciation of oneself and the place we inhabit. A moment that is separate from the hectic human world, that helps put 'us' in context with the larger world outside our daily routines. As Peter Lanyon points out:
"I believe that landscape, the outside of things and events larger than ourselves, is the proper place to find our deepest meanings"
Unfortunately, these events mean most participants speed past, they miss the nooks and crannies that hold the most beautiful secrets. They overlook the detail of the landscape as their only motivation is to get around this course as fast as possible. There is no inquiry into the places and things that inhabit these areas, as there is no time. The 'purpose' is to complete the event.
I recognise that these events bring people into the wild landscape, but I also fear that the consequence of these activities is to develop unseeing eye. The purpose of the event means the land, its inhabitants and the processes of life are unintentionally ignored. These types of activities do not promote and educate participants about the landscape a y more than playing football informs the participant on the science and technique the groundsman used to prepare your pitch. It is just a space that 'is there' and to be used for the 'game'
As a person who has spent most of his life developing and promoting sport, and working with sports men and women, I understand the intrinsic motivations to take part in these activities/events. I also recognise that the nature of these activities result in fewer people truly engaging with the land they pass through. There is no time to notice and appreciate the environment, the aim is complete and beat the challenge. It is about self and not beauty of a babbling Beck, or the vulnerability of the thin soil and the mosses it supports.
By default, these activities reduce the appreciation of the landscape and falls far from the aims of the NP as participants are distracted from the broad content and process of the environment. They pass through it but do not see it. This journey ignores the landscape and its life, there is no active recognition of the phenomena and entities that inhabit the land.
An ignored landscape soon becomes anonymous space, where anonymity can reduce our appreciation, understanding and attitude towards an environment. Soon we lose the names for things that fill the land and the phenomena that takes place. When this happens our attitude toward the land will inevitably direct our behaviour within these fragile landscapes.
If we do not know the words for the things we encounter, we soon lose the words to describe our feelings of place. The land was passed over, unnoticed and we lose the language and depth of vocabulary to understand the wider world and our place within it.
I have previously commented:
"Language, words are vital to human understanding of the world. How frustrating it is to not be able to convert our feelings into words. We grasp and grab at something that seems formless and hidden in a mist of swirling feeling, that is undefined. We need it to take shape so we can bring order to the storm of chaos that surrounds us. We need to categorise and identify and thereby gain perspective and understanding. A meaning - meaning to our own world.
Through (naming the unidentified, they) now stand out against the, as yet, uninterpreted world. The (now) identified shine like beacons within our consciousness, prompting and helping us notice and then enjoy, and then appreciate, and then understand the little place we pass through.
Each name is not only bold against the backdrop of words, but now each bird, flower, insect, etc stands out against the complex scenery of life. We start to see animal or plant in its setting and maybe begin to recognise patterns, so gain a better understanding of the process of its life. In short, the name helps us better define and the appreciate our world"
However, the concern is that the NPs are happy to accept these events as they increase the footfall into the NP, thereby increasing income, but without developing a vocabulary and appreciation for the environment the event takes place in. If the activity attracts an increasing number of visitors who have and will not gain an appreciation or understanding of the landscape as they pass through then the NP authority is failing. The 3 Peaks fund raising event is the most obvious as the park is used and abused, with little return. This is because these types of activities indirectly reduce (due to their nature) meaning and sensitivity towards the landscape, beyond the needs and aesthetic of the activity.
I am not proposing that the NP authorities act like mini police states, however, I strongly feel the NPs have a moral responsibility to better consider the use of the spaces they oversee (beyond the P&L). Any activity endorsed (directly or indirectly) by the NP must build knowledge and appreciation of the fragile landscape by developing an environmental lexicon for its visitors. The authorities need to ensure only events/activities are compatible, as the engagement in these activities would provide an opportunity to gain an increased understanding, appreciation and developed meaning of the landscape; a vocabulary that can describe more than the exertion and personal achievement, to one that can talk about the non human. Support participation that reveal how the rare and fragile landscapes are and these paces are more than just a place to take on a challenge. Make sure activities 'see, a value in the landscape that is beyond our own needs (as it has its own, hard to describe, value).
"People exploit what they have merely concluded to be of value, but defend what they love, and to defend what we love we need a particularising language, for we love what we particularly know"
Wendell Berry.
What are National Parks for? What function do they serve? Why have them?
If asked many years ago I would have suggested National Parks were formed to conserve rare, wild and beautiful spaces and to protect varied and vulnerable wild life. This protection would ensure fragile and diverse Eco systems survived, whilst providing the nation with beautiful landscapes.
The National Park web site points out how the revised Environment Act 1995 set out two statutory purposes for national parks in England and Wales:
"Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage.
Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public"
They also add that when national parks carry out these purposes they also have the duty to:
"Seek to foster the economic and social well-being of local communities within the national parks"
There is an additional caveat that was introduced by Lord Sandford, that is used to test any new initiative.
Sandford Principal
"Where irreconcilable conflicts exist between conservation and public enjoyment, then conservation should take priority"
The values contained within this revised 1995 act mirror my own views, however, it is not clear to me that these principals are strictly followed through by authorities. Tacitly accepted within these aims is the commercialisation of the landscape, where the interpretation of the Sandford Principal is being stretched so far as to be irrelevant - I fear the baby is being thrown out with the bath water.
All of our National Parks (NPs) are now branded, with fancy logos, colour schemes where activities and messages are all about staying 'on brand.' An increasingly significant function of the NP is marketing, promoting and selling. Selling the NPs as lifestyle venues by exploiting the popularity for endurance and adventure events.
My own area, the Lake District National Park, is a popular venue for a wide variety of visitors, but increasingly, due in part to this type of marketing and branding it has now become a popular destination for races, sportives and all manner of physical challenges. The Lakes has always had its' Fell Races and its landscape has inspired amazing physical feats. However, these activities fitted into the culture and history of the area and only represented a thin layer of the sub culture of the outdoor fraternity.
The NPs have jumped on the band wagon, by positively marketing the Parks as a place to come to race or take on a challenge. Every weekend there are hundreds of runners, cyclists, swimmers, car rallies, off road convoys, motor bike meets. Activities that, in my view, do not meet the Sandford Principal.
This can be seen when these activities are applied to the Sandford Principal:
"Where irreconcilable conflicts exist between conservation and public enjoyment, then conservation should take priority"
Plus when the conservation and education aims of the NP are viewed:
"Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage".
"Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public"
In this context it is clear these mass involvement events are not compatible to the purpose and function of a NP. This point is emphasised when the very character of these events is considered. Many of the race/challenge activities are very formalised and are motivated by physical and mental achievement. These activities, come with a mind set that wants to exploit the landscape for its shape and physical attributes. It is the physical challenge and not for the less tangible value of appreciating its unique habitats and beauty.
The increasing worry is that more these these activities take place the more they become embedded and culturelised, resulting in a standardised landscape as it is primarily viewed as destinations for 'thrills and spills'. The hills and dales become asset free race tracks, that attract an income stream.
In this context the landscape is only being used for commercial ends, where each hill, summit, stream offers a physical challenge. The landscape, is an open air Boot Camp, where every slope, and contour is commodified and standardised. The land's only significance is its ability to be the venue for adventure.
As Edward Relph warns:
"The making of standardised landscapes results to the insensitivity of the significance of place".
If this 'insensitivity', through regularity and cultural acceptance becomes normalised, then a key NP aim is compromised. The NPs need to appreciate and understand that activities are done for their own sake as the participants are driven by personal, intrinsic needs. Destination National Park is not about the landscape and environment, it is about its physicality. The landscape is only a means to an end, not the end itself.
In addition these types of activities, due to their frequency and the huge volume of participants, have an immediate and long lasting impact on the fragile environment. This impact is not just the physical harm, but also because it develops a mindset of indifference.
Oliver Rackham notes the four ways in which the landscape is lost; "through the loss of beauty, the loss of freedom, the loss of vegetation and wildlife, and the loss of meaning"
The nature of these events, and due to the motivations of its participants, is arguably little to do with wildlife and beauty of the landscape. The events do not incorporate, or consider an appreciation or sympathy that helps understand the delicacy of the environment. The consequences of these activities are much removed from the true meaning of NPs original intentions. The meaning of the wild, beautiful and fragile landscape is lost.
This mind set is further reflected in the many adverts and strap lines of the businesses that exploit the 'adventure' culture. "Beat the Mountain" "Conquer the Outdoors" "Take on the challenge". In all cases the NPs values are lost under the sweat and Lycra of people with very personal human, physical aims, that are arguably remote to the aims of the NPS. None of this activity promotes an understanding of the environment, enhances the beauty of the landscape or help participants better appreciate the cultural heritage of the area as the activities are self serving and insular. The purpose of these activities is to be 'completed' not necessarily appreciate, immerse and learn about the land they flow through. The fact it was completed in a NP gives the participant extra kudos, however, the same challenge could have been completed, in just as daunting and difficult an environment, on a track found in a metropolis. They are, every weekend.
Furthermore, I also argue the NPs are failing its visitors as these Parks intended to be places that foster an ability to reflect, learn, understand and gain a broad appreciation of oneself and the place we inhabit. A moment that is separate from the hectic human world, that helps put 'us' in context with the larger world outside our daily routines. As Peter Lanyon points out:
"I believe that landscape, the outside of things and events larger than ourselves, is the proper place to find our deepest meanings"
Unfortunately, these events mean most participants speed past, they miss the nooks and crannies that hold the most beautiful secrets. They overlook the detail of the landscape as their only motivation is to get around this course as fast as possible. There is no inquiry into the places and things that inhabit these areas, as there is no time. The 'purpose' is to complete the event.
I recognise that these events bring people into the wild landscape, but I also fear that the consequence of these activities is to develop unseeing eye. The purpose of the event means the land, its inhabitants and the processes of life are unintentionally ignored. These types of activities do not promote and educate participants about the landscape a y more than playing football informs the participant on the science and technique the groundsman used to prepare your pitch. It is just a space that 'is there' and to be used for the 'game'
As a person who has spent most of his life developing and promoting sport, and working with sports men and women, I understand the intrinsic motivations to take part in these activities/events. I also recognise that the nature of these activities result in fewer people truly engaging with the land they pass through. There is no time to notice and appreciate the environment, the aim is complete and beat the challenge. It is about self and not beauty of a babbling Beck, or the vulnerability of the thin soil and the mosses it supports.
By default, these activities reduce the appreciation of the landscape and falls far from the aims of the NP as participants are distracted from the broad content and process of the environment. They pass through it but do not see it. This journey ignores the landscape and its life, there is no active recognition of the phenomena and entities that inhabit the land.
An ignored landscape soon becomes anonymous space, where anonymity can reduce our appreciation, understanding and attitude towards an environment. Soon we lose the names for things that fill the land and the phenomena that takes place. When this happens our attitude toward the land will inevitably direct our behaviour within these fragile landscapes.
If we do not know the words for the things we encounter, we soon lose the words to describe our feelings of place. The land was passed over, unnoticed and we lose the language and depth of vocabulary to understand the wider world and our place within it.
I have previously commented:
"Language, words are vital to human understanding of the world. How frustrating it is to not be able to convert our feelings into words. We grasp and grab at something that seems formless and hidden in a mist of swirling feeling, that is undefined. We need it to take shape so we can bring order to the storm of chaos that surrounds us. We need to categorise and identify and thereby gain perspective and understanding. A meaning - meaning to our own world.
Through (naming the unidentified, they) now stand out against the, as yet, uninterpreted world. The (now) identified shine like beacons within our consciousness, prompting and helping us notice and then enjoy, and then appreciate, and then understand the little place we pass through.
Each name is not only bold against the backdrop of words, but now each bird, flower, insect, etc stands out against the complex scenery of life. We start to see animal or plant in its setting and maybe begin to recognise patterns, so gain a better understanding of the process of its life. In short, the name helps us better define and the appreciate our world"
However, the concern is that the NPs are happy to accept these events as they increase the footfall into the NP, thereby increasing income, but without developing a vocabulary and appreciation for the environment the event takes place in. If the activity attracts an increasing number of visitors who have and will not gain an appreciation or understanding of the landscape as they pass through then the NP authority is failing. The 3 Peaks fund raising event is the most obvious as the park is used and abused, with little return. This is because these types of activities indirectly reduce (due to their nature) meaning and sensitivity towards the landscape, beyond the needs and aesthetic of the activity.
I am not proposing that the NP authorities act like mini police states, however, I strongly feel the NPs have a moral responsibility to better consider the use of the spaces they oversee (beyond the P&L). Any activity endorsed (directly or indirectly) by the NP must build knowledge and appreciation of the fragile landscape by developing an environmental lexicon for its visitors. The authorities need to ensure only events/activities are compatible, as the engagement in these activities would provide an opportunity to gain an increased understanding, appreciation and developed meaning of the landscape; a vocabulary that can describe more than the exertion and personal achievement, to one that can talk about the non human. Support participation that reveal how the rare and fragile landscapes are and these paces are more than just a place to take on a challenge. Make sure activities 'see, a value in the landscape that is beyond our own needs (as it has its own, hard to describe, value).
"People exploit what they have merely concluded to be of value, but defend what they love, and to defend what we love we need a particularising language, for we love what we particularly know"
Wendell Berry.