III.
Inequality of access to nature. It’s slightly connected to the first point, but it’s a separate issue. We need to restore nature in the UK, but to do that, people need to love it. And to love it, they need to experience it.
84% of people in the UK live in urban environments. Many have no real experience of wild nature. I take people on retreats to Cabilla who’ve never walked on unmown grass. Some find it strange that we don’t pick up after the cattle. Others are afraid of silence and darkness when there are no streetlights or traffic noise.
We’ve separated ourselves from nature and created a two-tier system. Through better public transport, more urban wild spaces, better town planning, or the right to roam movement, we need to reduce this inequality and enable more people to be in the natural world. That’s how we get people to love it and want to heal it.
Me: I’m completely on board with that. It’s probably the theme of my next book. I wanted to ask more about the right to roam, because you clearly know the positive aspects of nature, but you also own your own bit of rainforest. I looked on Ordnance Survey and there aren’t many public footpaths through your woods. So what’s your take on balancing access, protection, and ownership?
Merlin: That’s a great question. I think of it as a spectrum. On the one hand, you have private land that no one ever gets to go into and benefit from. I’ve felt so lucky to benefit from the rainforest I steward, but also aware that others can’t access it, which is unfair.
On the other end, you have places like Wistman’s Wood on Dartmoor, which has been damaged by over-trampling and unmanaged access. Too many people, not enough education or control.
We try to strike a balance at Cabilla. Over the last three years, we’ve brought more than 3,000 people into the rainforest. That’s helped people heal and connect—but the forest has also improved each year. Nature is always our number one client. People come second.
I support the right to roam movement and admire people like Guy Shrubsole [author of the excellent The Lost Rainforests of Britain], but we have to do it with care. Sweden and Scotland have more open access, but they also have 10% of our population density and strong cultural education around how to behave in nature.
If we had that here—education, infrastructure, cultural understanding—then absolutely, let’s open up more land. I want Cabilla to be far more accessible, especially to those who otherwise wouldn’t get the chance. But it must be done in a way that doesn’t harm the rainforest.
Me: Yes, I always say “the right to roam responsibly.”
Merlin: Exactly. We should all have a right to roam, but we don’t have a right to damage. The two too often go hand in hand. I’d love to see a system where access could be dialled up or down depending on how the natural world is coping. Like a volume knob.
We live in an Instagram age, and we’ve seen this play out all over the world—in the Norwegian fjords, or famous beaches. Certain fragile spots get trashed because everyone flocks there. We need to avoid that here.
Q: I try to encourage people to find their own local patch of wildness, rather than following books like recipes. Go find your own wood.
Merlin: Yes, that’s the challenge for the right to roam movement—to avoid concentrating pressure on a few beautiful, accessible places. We need to open access, but in a way that spreads people across the landscape and protects all of it.
Q: I agree. I’m a supporter of the movement, but I think my personal mission is more about encouraging people to explore the nature that’s 15 minutes from their front door—on foot or by bike.
OK, on to your recommendations… |