The debate over the Stray’s official designation has been rekindled following an intervention by Andrew Jones, MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough. 

He became involved in the controversy after the Open Spaces Society applied to register Harrogate’s 200-acre expanse as common land, a move which has been met with opposition by some in the town. 

Mr Jones wrote to the general secretary of the OSS seeking more information about the application. He said:

“After reading it carefully it was still difficult to see why the Open Spaces Society had made this application. I was unclear what it would achieve and why this designation was needed when we already have law – the Stray Act – giving the area protection.  

“The Stray Act has served us well. It limits large-scale use of the land; changes can only be made after Parliamentary scrutiny, and where the Stray is damaged it has to be restored by law.” 

Founded in 1865 as the Commons Preservation Society, the OSS is Britain’s oldest national conservation body. Its past victories include the preservation of Hampstead Heath, Wimbledon Common and Epping Forest. 

When the Commons Registration Act 1965 came into force, the Stray was exempted from inclusion in the common land register, but following the passing of the Commons Act 2006, the OSS has been trying to register such exempted land and wants to bring the Stray “back into the fold”. 

When the application was made in January 2023, OSS case officer Hugh Craddock said: 

“The decision in the 1960s to keep the Stray off the registers was understandable but misguided. Only a quarter of one per cent of registered common land was exempted from registration, and exemption proved to be both misleading and unhelpful. The Stray has always been common land, and ought to be registered as common land.” 

Frances Kerner, the OSS’ commons re-registration officer who made the application, added: 

“Registration can only reinforce the protection already afforded to the Stray under the Harrogate Stray Act 1985.  The land will also become protected under the Commons Act 2006. And registration will ensure that those who buy and sell land adjacent to the common are always notified of its protected status.”

‘Unnecessary and alarming’

But Judy d’Arcy Thompson, chair of the Stray Defence Association (SDA), said the application was unnecessary as the Stray already enjoyed three layers of protection: it is Crown land; it was granted in 1778 to the people of Harrogate “forever hereafter” under the Enclosures Act of 1770; and it is safeguarded by the Harrogate Stray Act 1985. 

Writing to the commons registration officer at North Yorkshire Council, she said: 

“The SDA has been contacted by many who are worried and would like to know what is going to happen. All are bewildered as they have always felt certain that their beloved Stray was already fully protected and they are alarmed in equal measure as to what might happen should the OSS application be approved.”

A drone image of West Park Stray. Picture: David Simister

Ms d’Arcy Thompson also pointed to the fact that some parts of the Stray are not connected with the main 200-acre expanse, such as land in the Woodlands area and the grass verges, or “slips”, along Wetherby Road, Skipton Road and Knaresborough Road. She said if the Stray was designated common land, some people could theoretically be barred from crossing those verges, effectively denying them access to their own property.

She also feared that the OSS may be working from the wrong maps – a concern first raised by the late Harrogate historian Malcolm Neesam. 

She said: 

“This kind of designation has happened elsewhere and has caused such legal machinations that in some cases it has ended up in the High Court and cost a lot of money. We don’t want that to happen here. 

“It might not turn out like that here, but knowing how careful people have to be with maps and boundaries, the OSS only need to get one small thing wrong to cause a lot of trouble. This may prove to be a legal minefield in the making.” 

‘It would strengthen protection’

In its reply to Mr Jones, the OSS said that, using a mechanism provided by Part 1 of the Commons Act 2006, its policy is now to apply to register as common land all exempted land in North Yorkshire, including the Stray. It said:  

“Registration will ensure that the exempted land properly is recognised as registered common land and will be reported as such on a search conducted in relation to a purchase of land or house adjacent to the common (where for example access is required over the common).  

“It will also ensure that the land definitively is brought within the protection of Part 3 of the 2006 Act, which provides for controls on works on common land, with a régime for the Secretary of State to consent to such works.”

It added: 

“The controls in Part 3 of the 2006 Act will be in addition to those set out in the Harrogate Stray Act 1985. Far from weakening the 1985 Act regime, registration will strengthen the protection for the Stray.” 

But Mr Jones said: 

“In the response from the Open Spaces Society I could still see no positive reason to progress this application. They may think that the exemption in 1965 was misguided and they may have some blanket policy they are implementing from their Henley-on-Thames HQ. But the important thing is to ensure the Stray is protected rather than ticking some policy box.  

“The Stray Act is very powerful protection. That will not change, so the question remains about the purpose of this new common land application. I simply haven’t yet been given any meaningful reasons by the Open Spaces Society to support their proposal.” 

Ms d’Arcy Thompson also remains unswayed. She said: 

“We’re not being petty – we’re just foreseeing potential problems. Why open the Pandora’s box to possible litigation here, there and everywhere? 

“It’s all ifs and buts and maybes, but we don’t want to see something happen that could cause stress and expense when the status quo works very well.”

Read more:

• Student to run 100km around the Stray at night for charity
• Ramshackle phone box transformed into Stray information point
• Cherry trees on Harrogate’s Stray vandalised again

Harrogate Borough Council looks set to begin legal moves to evict Travellers on the Stray tomorrow.

Six caravans and several cars arrived on the Oatlands section of the Stray yesterday.

Three days earlier Travellers also parked on the old rugby field at Knaresborough.

The council, which is the legal protector of the Stray, has not replied to the Stray Ferret’s request for information about what action it is taking.

But Judy d’Arcy Thompson, chair of the Stray Defence Association, said the council had informed her that is is “aware and prepared to serve papers on Monday if required with a court hearing already scheduled for Thursday. Unfortunately due to the legal process, this is the fastest we can progress the situation.”

It is thought the Travellers are on their way to Appleby Horse Fair in Cumbria, which begins on Thursday.

Read more:

• Travellers arrive on Harrogate’s Stray
• JUBILEE LIVE: Harrogate district set for street parties

Ms d’Arcy Thompson said the council had informed her that its street cleaning team was “prepared to check the area and clear any waste left behind”.

She added the council appeared to be doing everything it could to resolve the situation, adding:

“With experience of similar events in the past we appreciate the complexity of the legal process.

“We naturally hope that they respect our Stray and that the minimum of mess and damage is left behind when they depart.”

The Stray Defence Association was founded in 1933 to safeguard the Stray against building and encroachment.

Parcel delivery firm DPD has been charged £374 plus VAT for one of its vans damaging the Stray in Harrogate.

The Stray Ferret reported last month that a DPD van had got stuck in the mud when it attempted a shortcut over the public parkland

Tyre tracks indicated the driver had tried to bypass the recent road closure on Beech Grove by mounting the snow-covered Stray but was unable to complete the manoeuvre in the wintry conditions.

The Harrogate Stray Act 1985 made Harrogate Borough Council protector of the 200 acres of land.

A council spokesperson said:

“Following the damage caused in February, DPD have been charged £374 plus VAT to cover the costs of repairing The Stray.

“The ruts will be levelled and area seeded. Bulbs will also be planted to replace any that have been damaged.”

Read more:

• Delivery van gets stuck on Harrogate’s Stray after attempting shortcut
• Flooding reveals ‘major unresolved problem on West Park Stray’
• Ghosthunting with a paranormal investigator on the Stray

Beech Grove closed to through traffic just over a year ago on an 18-month trial basis.A DPD spokesperson said:

“I understand from the local depot that the team have been in contact with the council and that arrangements are being made to pay for repair work.”

The Stray Ferret asked the spokesperson if DPD had taken any action against the van driver, but has yet to receive a response.

A Twitter user called Helen was among those who uploaded photos of the beached van.

https://twitter.com/HellyR1/status/1495077805964595201?s=20&t=6_0_UnvruN9Y_DdG8wRA9w

Judy d’Arcy-Thompson, chairman of the Stray Defence Association, which was set up in 1933 to safeguard the Stray from encroachment, said she hoped the van driver had not lost their job.

She added:

“However, it was a very daft thing to do.

“Taking short cuts in bad weather almost inevitably ends in disaster of some sort. Taking one in snow across the Stray was foolish in the extreme and also caused a great deal of damage, plus being illegal.

“Let’s hope that others take note and a lesson has been learned.”

Stray Views is a weekly column giving you the chance to have your say on issues affecting the Harrogate district. It is an opinion column and does not reflect the views of the Stray Ferret. See below for details on how to contribute.

Double yellow lines would prevent parking on the Stray

Regarding the Oatlands no parking signs, such signage is not allowed under the Stray Act and is, therefore, technically illegal. However, so is parking on the Stray.

That said, we have been working with Harrogate Borough Council and have mutually agreed with the temporary erection of these signs as we have sympathy with their efforts to resolve the ongoing parking problems.

Over the past many years the Stray Defence Association has tried to get this situation resolved. We have always felt that the simplest solution would be a double yellow line down BOTH sides of the road. However, North Yorkshire County Council has flatly refused to do this, despite innumerable approaches.

Regrettably people seem to think they have an innate right to park wherever they choose. Sadly they do not appear to have the same recognition of the damage they do to the Stray all along there, together with blocking the cycle lane.

Frankly NYCC have been ridiculously uncooperative over putting in double yellow lines, the best and simplest solution all round.
Why is beyond comprehension as it would be a quick, simple and legally binding solution to the problem and could have been done 15-plus years ago.

As it is there has been endless damage to the Stray all along Oatlands Drive and the edges of Oatlands Stray and endless complaints from the cycling fraternity who, rightly, complain that their cycle lane is obstructed.

It is time that the law was enforced and this illegal parking was brought to an end. Perhaps this will make NYCC see sense and install double yellow lines.

Judy d’Arcy-Thompson, chair of the Stray Defence Association 

End this parking confusion

Your photo of parking on Oatlands Drive gives an easy pointer to why people park as they do. They mistake the dotted line of the bike lane as an encouragement to put one side of the car within that line and one side on the verge.

It is compounded by there being a double yellow on the western side (with the bike lane markings) and nothing on the other side.

So, the council could fine people for having one side of the car on the Stray verge, but if they simply park wholly on the road, no offence against the Stray and no offence against parking? Their signs imply that parking on Oatlands Drive is not allowed.

Bob Hankinson, Harrogate

Read more:

• Cycle group welcomes new ‘ parking’ signs on Harrogate’s Oatlands Drive
• Harrogate residents criticise ‘ridiculous’ Victoria Road scheme

Councils need to stop these illogical projects

I continue to be surprised by the enthusiasm of North Yorkshire County Council and Harrogate Borough Council to spend taxpayers money on illogical projects which are universally unpopular with local residents and merely serve to exacerbate and concentrate traffic flows rather than keep them diluted.

Having already registered my opposition to the Beech Grove experimental traffic order, which has frustrated both drivers and local residents and has inevitably increased the flow of traffic down Victoria Road, Queens Road and Cold Bath Road, I am now surprised to see that NYCC will continue to create further problems by introducing a one-way system on Victoria Road.

This new plan, apparently intended to reduce traffic, is going to push even more drivers down Queens Road (where I live) and Cold Bath Road. Cold Bath Road is congested at the best of times but as soon as the schools go back (and indeed once office workers start to return) it will become unbearable.

Moreover, I dread to think what sort of impact the several thousand new houses they are building on Yew Tree Lane, Whinney Lane, Cardale Park and Otley Road will have on congestion. All the traffic created by these developments will flow down Otley Road and Cold Bath Road with no improvements to the road traffic routes.

It’s all very well for public sector employees to sit around examining ways of maintaining their budgets and tinkering with local roads to divert traffic when it has no material impact whatsoever on their personal lives. But on the ground it will concentrate traffic down certain roads and your next initiative is going to worsen rather than improve this situation.

Surely NYCC and HBC have more worthy and important projects to spend taxpayers money on? A few of note might be:

1 Rejuvenating the town centre, which is a depressing day out now that many stores have closed and are unlikely to reopen. Surely more can be done to encourage businesses to take up empty retail space.

2 Cleaning up the litter problem in the town centre. Every morning I walk our dog through the town and the amount of litter gets worse and worse.

3 Showing more consideration for local residents by completing jobs which inconvenience thousands of people on a daily basis far more quickly. Two examples are: The 4/5 way traffic light at the top of Pannal Ash Road were in place for months during school term and created huge tail backs. There appeared to be no urgency whatsoever to complete the job. We then had a similar experience on East Parade with temporary traffic lights causing significant tail backs. The works, which finished on the Wednesday, were in place for two more days with no-one doing any work. I called up NYCC and asked why this was the case and the operator said that the traffic lights were still in place because the works were due to finish on the Friday. But the works had clearly finished on the Wednesday!

4 Improve the state of Harrogate’s roads which are appalling in parts.

None of the above reflects particularly well on NYCC or HBC. I am not alone in holding these opinions.

David Pickering, Harrogate

Doppelganger issues

Please could you congratulate John Plummer on being appointed Editor.  I hope makes a great success of the role and enjoys it.