Pentland Skyline Race 2023 – why we have cancelled
It has been a couple of weeks now since we made the decision to call off the Pentland Skyline race, which was to have been held on October 8th this year. I’d like to explain the background to this decision, and what might happen next. This is my own personal narrative and opinions, and are not necessarily that of the club or the club committee. The club committee has been very supportive though, for which I am grateful.
I’ve been involved with the Skyline Race since 2015, and took over from Shane Bouchier as race organiser in 2017. The race has been going for almost 40 years, this year would have been the 36th event, with just one pause in 2020 due to the Covid restrictions. Looking back at the correspondence in 2016 and earlier, it is instructive to see that Shane would contact the land managers a month or so before the event, and get the permissions and advice he needed. In contrast, my negotiations for the permissions needed to run the 2023 Skyline race started in September last year, over a year in advance.
Two years ago, a group of land managers in the Pentland’s formed the Pentland Land Managers Association (PLMA). You can read about the PLMA at their excellent website https://pentlandmanagers.org One aspect of the PLMA is to provide a single point of contact for event organisers who wish to utilise land for events in the Pentland’s. We already had such a body, for years we have liaised with the Pentland Hills Regional Park (PHRP). The PHRP have always been very helpful to us, and I’m grateful for that.
In April 2022, I sent the event plan for the 2022 race to the PHRP as normal, and received a response from the PLMA in August. The PLMA made a series of demands on the race and its organisation that we did not have time to properly respond to, including a demand for payment when we had already set the entry fee and the race was nearing full. The PLMA eventually gave us permission less than a week before the race, but warned us that permission would not be given on the same terms for 2023. The 2022 race went smoothly. A report was issued to all interested parties soon after the event, but there was little feedback. We started looking at how to meet the PLMA demands for the 2023 race. Carnethy members may remember some discussion on this at last years club AGM.
We entered into the discussions in good faith, and agreed to much of what they were demanding, despite serious questions over whether the PLMA had the authority or right to make such demands. The starting point for the PLMA was denial of permission. Only if we agreed to their demands would they consider giving permission. The demands kept increasing, and no compromise was made by the PLMA on any points we raised. This continued from October 2022 to early July this year. We had no guarantee from the PLMA that even if we agreed to all their demands now, that there would be no further demands made, or even that if we were given their permission they would not withdraw it at any time right up to the day of the race, at huge cost to the club. The risk was mounting, and would have started to include real costs (not just my time), so I decided to ask the committees permission to call off the race. This the committee agreed to.
The demands included:-
- That we submit an Environmental Impact Assessment
- A £5/participant fee
- A cap of 200 runners
- No access to South Black Hill
- No access to Hare Hill
- An imposed diversion via Bavelaw
- An imposed change to the route over Black Hill
On none of the above points has there been any compromise from the PLMA. Every demand has been take it or leave it, in truth, there have been no negotiations, just correspondence.
Note that we are not averse to making donations to the upkeep of the park, indeed CHRC has contributed many thousands of pounds to the PHRP and Friends of the Pentlands over recent years. It is important that we give back to the hills we enjoy using so much. However a donation that is not voluntary, where it has been made very clear that if we were not to pay it then permission would be denied, well that is a demand for payment for access, no matter what the money might be used for.
The Environmental Impact Assessment was drawn up over the winter, to show good faith and that we were willing to believe in the PLMAs good intentions. We took expert advice. The submitted EIA ran to 17 pages and committed the club to conducting a survey of the ground before and after future events to determine the sustainability of the environmental impact. This was in addition to a 7 page risk assessment and numerous forms. From the response, it was clear that the PLMA was less interested in our wanting to demonstrate the sustainability of a 37 year old race, as in our providing the PLMA with the evidence they could use to deny us the race as it currently exists in future years.
The denial of access to South Black Hill and Hare Hill was the final straw. The Skyline Race is hardly a skyline if it doesn’t cross all the tops. The reasons given were environmental impact, but there is zero evidence that the race caused any long term damage. Indeed we offered to move a flagged route every year, so there could be no possible build up of damage by the race. The offer was refused by the PLMA, we were told we would not have permission to cross South Black and Hare Hill. Permission that we would not need as individuals.
Calling off the race is obviously a great shame, but also a lost opportunity for the PLMA. They could have worked with us, rather than make impositions on us. Together we could have overcome the ‘us and them’ attitude that causes so much aggravation. To do so takes dialogue and compromise on all sides. I am very comfortable that I have gone far beyond what is reasonable to make this happen, but to no avail. There was no compromise on the part of the PLMA. I’m sorry I couldn’t make it happen.
Why do we even need permission?
You might wonder why we needed to seek the PLMA’s permission at all. After all, the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 establishes that we have a statutory right to cross land for recreational purposes. As individuals this is definitely the case. Chapter 3 of the Act sets out how the Scottish Outdoor Access Code (SOAC) was to be drawn up by Scottish Natural Heritage (now called NatureScot). It is the Scottish Outdoor Access Code (2005) that most people would recognise, rather than the Act. The SOAC sets out at some length and generally quite clearly, how the access aspects of the Land Reform Act are to be interpreted and implemented. The website is well worth a browse by all those who use the hills https://www.outdooraccess-scotland.scot
The SOAC states that running is included as a recreational purpose, as is taking part in hill running races (section 2.7). The SOAC addresses organised events in section 3.60. The SOAC is extended in another document from the National Access Forum https://www.outdooraccess-scotland.scot/doc/guidance-outdoor-events-scotland-guidance-organisers-and-land-managers . The guidance sets out that prior to any running event larger than 50 people, the organiser should liaise with the affected land managers. It goes on to say that under some circumstances, organisers must specifically ask for land managers permission. These circumstances are:-
- Needing new or temporary facilities or services
- Likely to unreasonably hinder land management operations
- Likely to unreasonably interfere with other peoples enjoyment
- Likely to unreasonably affect the environment.
It is my view that the Pentland Skyline Race does not meet any of those thresholds, other than at the start/finish line where it is clear that we needed the agreement of the Snowsports Centre, prior to it becoming a building site. However, the PLMA interpretation is different. Two hundred pairs of running shoes crossing their land, in their view, will unreasonably affect the environment. A lot rides on the interpretation of what is ‘unreasonable’.
We can debate the rights and wrongs, interpretations and legalities, but right now, the PLMA get to decide their interpretation until such time as they are perhaps instructed by the mechanisms set out in the Act. A case could be made that we should ignore their demands and just go ahead with the race. However I am not prepared to expose myself or the club to the dangers that course of action might entail.
I should point out that the one land manager we do actually need permission from to put stuff on their land has been very helpful and placed no obstacles in our way. Thank you Swanston Farms. Similarly, the MoD have been helpful, though they did impose an eye-watering fee of £700, subsequently reduced considerably. Interestingly, the PLMA claim the MoD as a member, but the MoD have stated on multiple occasions that they are not.
What happens next?
These issues are now too important to be the concern of a mere race organiser. They are not limited to the Skyline Race, or the Pentlands, or even just hill running. The club committee is taking them seriously, as are the SHR, PHRP and Scottish Athletics. If you have views on what should be done, you may wish to talk to a committee member about them.
Joel Sylvester. July 31st 2023.