Sir, - I refer to the feature "The Right to Roam", by Sylvia Thompson (Weekend, April 3rd). In a short space, it is difficult to deal with all aspects of access to the countryside, a complex and emotive subject. The feature, however, made an inadequate reference to occupiers' liability which is very relevant to access.
Walking World Ireland in its 1998 annual, published a series of four articles on access to the countryside from different perspectives. That leading specialist magazine covered the various aspects in a comprehensive and constructive way. The Irish Times feature quoted from only three of the four authors of the Walking World Ireland series and did not refer to the fourth article written by me on the Occupiers' Liability Act 1995.
For balance, I restate some points on access in the context of occupiers' liability. The apparent consensus for law reform resulting in the Act of 1995 did not fully reflect conflicts of interests between landowners and recreational users, so it is not surprising that inherent problems are now coming to a head. Landowners' duty to recreational users such as walkers was reduced considerably to a lower level of not causing deliberate injury nor acting recklessly. Reducing the perceived burdens on landowners was expected to improve access but walkers are now very concerned about restrictions on traditional access to the countryside. In retrospect, it seems that recreational users' groups lacked the experience of the agricultural lobby and were probably naive in accepting law reform on occupiers' liability without concessions or guarantees on access.
I attended the parliamentary debates on the Occupiers' Liability Act 1995 and examined the topic in detail as a barrister and from my experience as a hill-walker. My resultant book which also covers access is with the publishers, Round Hall Sweet and Maxwell.
The "right to roam", a term used loosely as the title of your feature, has specific meanings, e.g. traditional customary rights in Nordic countries. The term is used also with reference to the British government's current proposals for statutory rights of access to the open countryside in England and Wales because of the inadequacies of a voluntary approach to enhance existing rights. Similar wide legislative proposals could be opposed in the Irish jurisdiction because of current constitutional provisions on private property. Co-operation has a role, but the importance of hill-walking for tourism and recreation requires statutory action at least on rights of way as one aspect of access.
Meanwhile, walkers and farmers always have the right to moan. - Yours, etc., Anthony P. Quinn,
Law Library, Dublin 7.