WARNING - By their nature, text files cannot include scanned images and tables. 
The process of converting documents to text only, can cause formatting changes and 
misinterpretation of the contents can sometimes result. Wherever possible you 
should refer to the pdf version of this document.

Logo - Scottish Natural Heritage

COMMISSIONED REPORT 

Summary 

Responsible behaviour amongst recreational users and land managers: 2007 
monitoring 

Report No: F05AA602 (c) 
Contractor : MVA Consultancy 


BACKGROUND 

This report presents the findings from the final year of a three year study 
commissioned by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) to monitor responsible behaviour 
among recreational users and land owners/managers. It investigates changes in 
behaviour arising from the introduction of the Scottish Outdoor Access Code (The 
Code) and compares the results to the baseline survey which was conducted in 
2002/03 (referred to as the baseline survey). This summary presents the main 
findings from the third year of the monitoring programme, in which three target 
groups (recreational users, land managers and outdoor recreation managers) were 
surveyed between August and November 2007 using a third party approach to 
distribute postal self-completion questionnaires. 

METHODOLOGY 

This third year report has met the objectives of the three year monitoring programme 
by: 

• building on the findings of the previous year of awareness, attitudes and 
actual behaviour of the key target groups: recreational users and land 
managers (private sector). 

• continuing to implement a method of survey to obtain more information from 
birdwatchers as a new subset of the recreational users target group. 

• continuing to include information from land managers from key public and 
voluntary sector organisations within the land managers target group. 

• gathering information from Scottish Ranger Services, and other appropriate 
access staff, in order to obtain a balancing view on the levels of responsible/ 
irresponsible behaviour reported by the two target groups. 

It has not reported on or compared the results with data from the monitoring of the 
general public, nor with the baseline, as this will only be done at the end of the three 
year monitoring programme. 


MAIN FINDINGS 

Key characteristics of recreational users and land owners/managers 

Recreational users generally felt comfortable when pursuing leisure activities in the 
countryside – 72% reported being “very comfortable”. 

The majority of recreational users used the countryside mainly for more active 
recreational pursuits (74%), with over half of them (52%) using the countryside at 
least once a week. Walking (over 2 miles) was the most common activity 
undertaken within the last month (75%), followed by walks of up to 2 miles (60%). 

Over half of visitors were accompanied by friends or family on their last visit (54%) 
while a quarter (25%) were alone. Recreational users were most likely to visit 
mountains or moorland (40%) or forest and woodland (19%), with off-road tracks or 
routes and footpaths the most common surfaces used. 

Just over a quarter of land owners/managers (28%) reported no problems in the last 
2/3 months, with the rest reporting a range of problems associated with public 
attitudes, including litter, gates left inappropriately open/closed, fly tipping and 
problems associated with dogs. 


Awareness, perceptions of key responsibilities, and impact of The Code 

Ninety-seven per cent of recreational users and 94% of land owners/managers had 
heard of The Code. A high percentage of respondents from both groups were also 
aware of its content (77% and 70% respectively). 

More active recreational users (79%) were more likely to be aware of the content of 
The Code than those who used the countryside for more general leisure activities 
(71%). 

Agents/land managers were most aware of The Code (100% said they were aware 
of its content). Awareness was higher the larger the size of the farm or estate, 
amongst those whose land is used for recreational purposes and amongst 
owners/managers who received support or advice from a public body. 

Both recreational users and land managers showed a high awareness of the 
responsibilities associated with access or management respectively. 

Fifty per cent of recreational users and 37% of land owners/managers reported that 
The Code had had a large or some effect on their activities or land management 
practices. 


Perceptions of the audiences of The Code 

Most recreational users and land owners/managers felt that The Code was primarily 
aimed at the general public (94% and 91% respectively). However, both groups 
were less likely to consider public bodies as a target audience for The Code (56% 
and 35% respectively) than other audiences. 


Problems and their effects as encountered by and from different groups 

Thirty percent of recreational users experienced at least one problem when 
accessing the countryside. The most commonly reported problems were coming 
across a locked gate or a path blocked by overgrowing vegetation (each of these 
problems was reported by 10% of all respondents who visited the countryside for 
recreational purposes in the last month). 

Three quarters (76%) of land owners reported that they had experienced a problem 
within the last 2-3 months, including people dropping litter, 54% of the full sample 
mentioned this as an issue. Notably, the key problems land owners/managers felt 
had got worse over the last three years were problems with people dropping litter, 
problems with dogs and people leaving gates inappropriately open or closed. The 
most frequently reported problem with dogs not being kept under proper control by 
their owner while on land owners/managers’ land was dogs in fields with livestock 
(36% of all respondents). 


Perceived behaviour of different groups utilising the countryside 

Recreational users were asked how much they agreed or disagreed with a series of 
statements about the behaviour of land owners/managers. Recreational users were 
generally more negative about land owners/managers than the land managers were 
about them. The biggest concerns amongst recreational users regarding the 
behaviour of land owners/managers were about planning and conducting land 
management to minimise interference with people accessing the countryside; 
working in partnership with local authorities, recreation organisations and public 
bodies; providing clear/constructive advice to event organisers; and informing the 
public of the extent and duration of management operations. 

Land owners/managers were asked to indicate their level of agreement with a series 
of statements about the behaviour of visitors. However land owners/managers gave 
responses which illustrate that they tend to have a neutral view of the behaviour of 
recreational users expressing a number of concerns, particularly in relation to 
problems with the control of dogs and helping land managers to work safely and 
effectively. 

Given the likelihood that the views expressed by recreational users and land 
managers would be opposing or contrasting, the views of outdoor recreation 
managers were also examined in order to provide a balanced overview. Overall the 
findings imply that outdoor recreation managers tend to have a positive view of 
visitors to the countryside, believing that they behave appropriately with regard to the 
behaviours asked about. Across all the behaviours mentioned (with the exception of 
keeping dogs under proper control) the outdoor recreation managers had a slightly 
more positive perception of visitor behaviour than the views held by land owners/ 
managers. 

Similarly, outdoor recreation managers have a more positive view of the behaviour of 
land owners/managers than that held by recreational users. Throughout all the 
behaviours asked about, the recreation managers appeared to hold a more positive 
opinion of land owners/manager behaviour than the views held by recreational users. 

Perceptions of recreational users’ positive behaviour varied considerably. Seventy 
one per cent of outdoor recreation managers said that they had seen instances or 
evidence of the general public helping them or nearby land owners/managers within 
the last two to three months. Only 26% of land owners/managers, however, could 
recall receiving any help from the public within the last month. 

For further information on this ongoing project contact: Eleanor MacGregor, SNH, tel.no. 
01463 725000. For further information on the SNH Research & Technical Support 
Programme contact The Co-ordination Group, Advisory Services, Scottish Natural Heritage, 
Great Glen House, Leachkin Road, INVERNESS, IV3 8NW Tel: 01463 725000 Email: 

ascg@snh.gov.uk