Guiding Principles - Fundamentals
Take account of conservation, heritage, recreation, cultural and landscape objectives
The use of modern safety precautions may conflict with conservation, recreation or landscape objectives. For example, it would be possible to reduce risk when crossing historical aqueducts by erecting railings. Handrails and steps could reduce risk on steep mountain descents. Fencing might lessen risk if erected at the edge of cliffs or water. However, the application of such control measures could fundamentally detract from the historical integrity of the structure and inherent attraction of the landscape. A balance must be acheived between risk and the impact of safety measures.
Do not take away people’s sense of freedom and adventure
Do not destroy the appeal of wild and remote places by putting up signs and fences.
People should be free to participate in high risk or adventurous activities as long as they are aware of the risks. Riders of mountain bikes should not be prevented from experiencing the exhilaration of steep descents and challenging drops, if that is ther informed choice.
Where activities conflict, you might have to restrict one person’s freedom for the benefit of others. However, first look for solutions that could still allow conflicting activities to take place, for example by zoning, or by scheduling them to take place at separate times.
Avoid restrictions on access
Try to find safety solutions that both allow access and protect the buildings or landscape. Only restrict access in the interest of conservation as a last resort.
You may need to exclude the public to carry out repairs or commercial operations (like timber harvesting). If so, keep restrictions as short as possible, and time them to cause least interference to visitors.
Avoid giving visitors a long list of dos and don’ts. Disclaimers rarely offer legal protection.
Discuss this in our forums | Contact us directly about this Guiding Principle