Thanks Sue I am sure that this is some thing that all of us who use these lands will be keeping an eye on.
David H

As I understand it, it means that walkers are not affected (even if 'paying' as part of a course or event) if they're on existing rights of way. If walkers are not using rights of way but just there independently, it also wouldn't apply. If, however, they're paying to do a 'commercial' walk, then it's a grey area, but even then I think there are various precedents and that there would have to be a test case to see whether UU could really levy charges.

Sue Thank you for the reply, which I am sure is correct but in plain simple English what does it mean?. Oh and by the way the next time I have an argument with the wife will you come and help me.
David H

The following points were included in the Outdoor Industry Assoc. press release following the announcement, of which point 6 is the main one for walkers...
1. There is a flaw in the suggested interpretation of 'commercial activity' - we have good guidance that indicates that education, training, charity probably has a perfect entitlement under the act to use access charge without charge.

2. There is an abstruse but important point that the Act can be read to specify that certain activities are 'not entitled' UNDER THE TERMS OF THE ACT but are not thereby prohibited. i.e. You can't claim you are doing this because you are allowed by the Act but you may well be allowed to anyway.

3. 'Section 15' land is land to which there were existing access agreements before CRoW and CRoW does not override those agreements - mapping is currently being undertaken of 'Section 15 land' by natural England. Therefore any land to which there was agreed access with no charge before CRoW should maintain that status.

4. When the land was transferred to UU an undertaking was apparently given by the then minister that charging would never be levied for access to that land - a legal test would be interesting.

5. If you want to ban an allowed activity on CRoW land (e.g.ghyll scrambling) there is a legal process to go through; you cant simply place signs or issue letters.

6. If you are on a public right of way your rights supercede the restrictions of CRoW.

I have just read an article in the February edition of "Trail" that seems to indicate that United utilities are looking at the possibilty of charging commercial groups who use their access land and are useing a section of the CRoW Act as an excuse. Has any one got more positive information on this? and on the effect it may have on LDWA activitys or is it just another barmy idea by an official after promotion.
David H