HOW can we improve mobile phone coverage in the Yorkshire Dales without damaging the landscape? Jonathan Riley, a trustee of the environmental campaigning charity, Gargrave-based Friends of the Dales, discusses what be done.
THESE days we all want and expect the best connectivity wherever we are, including in rural spots. Why then is there controversy surrounding the latest rollout of the government-sponsored Shared Rural Network (SRN) scheme, which has suddenly resulted in a large number of planning applications for siting telecommunication masts in the most tranquil and scenic parts of the Dales?
The SRN programme is nearing its end and hence there is a rush to get the final applications through the planning system. The remaining areas deemed to need better connectivity are much harder to deal with because they are more remote – this increases the likelihood that such installations will cause considerable harm to the special landscapes of the Dales that are so valued by visitors and residents alike.
Part of the challenge is that the SRN, being a collaboration between the mobile network operators, is aiming to achieve over 95 per cent 4G coverage by 2025 and each mast forms part of a network. However, that is not how it’s being rolled out and each application is developed unilaterally and must be assessed individually.
We all want to see good connections in the Dales for the benefit of residents, businesses and visitors, and with ever-increasing numbers of visitors there are even more pressures on emergency services that are difficult to contact without good connectivity. People working remotely have cited the much greater safety that connectivity provides in the event of needing to summon help.
Many locations in the Yorkshire Dales now benefit from the B4RN super-fast broadband programme and this removes the need for more infrastructure such as masts. However, these recent proposals are more problematic and the preparation of the applications is much poorer than the earlier ones with multiple shortfalls including:
* Little or sometimes no reference to the area with no or poor mobile network coverage and no demonstration of how the proposed mast is intended to fill the gaps.
* No community engagement – in some applications the community has objected on the basis that it already has good coverage through superfast broadband.
* Conflicting or incorrect information – this is an issue because applications cannot be properly assessed as to whether they meet need and fit with planning policy.
* No or limited consideration of alternative sites, without assessing whether the requirement can be met elsewhere with less visual impact or damage to the countryside and habitats.
* Landscape and visual impact assessments often only focusing on the immediate surroundings and not adequately assessing the special qualities of the national park. In 2023 and 2024 there have been 12 planning applications to the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority for masts that are up to 30m in height and in very prominent locations such as Ribblehead, Cam Houses, Barbon Fell, above Kettlewell and Kidstones.
Of these 12, one has received approval. One, at Coal Road above Dentdale, demonstrated all the attributes of a good application and went above the requirements to propose a peat restoration programme after installation.
There is real concern about the impacts of these large built structures, which can be highly visible for miles and from all directions, and located in areas where an absence of built forms makes them very intrusive. There are often associated impacts such as the construction of long tracks across hillsides, the noise and fuelling of the generators and damage to habitats notably peatlands. In these recent applications it is clear that, with such low populations, only a handful of properties might gain improved connectivity.
More contentious have been recent references to these masts being there to provide connectivity for recreational visitors. This was cited by the Planning Inspectorate in its recent decision to overturn an objection by the national park for a mast proposed at Higgs Hill, Barbon Fell, which is extremely remote and experiences very few visitors.
The inspector surprisingly stated the benefit to recreational users as the reason to overturn the decision. Friends of the Dales, along with other groups, have complained about the decision because it completely failed to follow policy.
The argument that better connectivity will make it safer for walkers especially if they get lost or need help has merits but reliance on mobile phones is no substitute for being adequately prepared and knowledgeable about walking in the more remote hills.
Simply providing improved connectivity for recreational visitors at the expense of the landscape also goes against the Sandford principle. This states that if there is a conflict between the two purposes of national park designation, conserving the special qualities of the landscape must take precedence over access.
We will work with the national park authority and other groups, including the applicants themselves if so minded, to ensure that the right number of masts in the right places is achieved.
We will challenge the applicants to show:
* That the sites chosen are as unobtrusive as possible.
* Clear evidence that all the potential impacts of new masts are addressed including access and power supplies .
* The basis of benefits to be gained.
* That there is a real need and cross-over with existing masts installed by other operators.
* That the mast and any supporting infrastructure are removed when no longer needed We want to see mobile connectivity improved - but not at all costs.
This article first appeared in the Friends of the Dales Yorkshire Dales Review (Summer). Visit: https://friendsofthedales.org.uk/
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here