to not understand the level of fuss about the Stoke Gifford Parkrun?

[Lucydogz]

I appreciate that, ideally, Parkruns should be free, but can't understand the level of fuss about Stoke Gifford proposing a £1 charge for this. I pay more than that to park my car when I do a parkrun in my town. Football clubs pay to use parks, as do other organisations, and parks really need the money. Well over 100 runners go on 'my' run, and it does increase wear and tear on the ground.

I heard the leader of the town/village/parish council on the radio yesterday (5Live) and at no point have they asked them to charge etc for Parkrun. What they have suggested is that the local Parkrun organisers contact the many many grant-awarding bodies (Sport England, The National Lottery etc) and apply for a grant to cover the damage that the parkrun does to the park.

No fee for entry or weekly rental like the football pitches, but that a contribution is made.

They acknowledge that the runners don't get use of the changing rooms etc, hence the reason they aren't being charged the £60 that the football teams are - but the damage to the grass is similar to the football teams, so some sort of a contribution is appropriate to cover that.

All the other parks haven't coped and some runs have had to move on due to the parks not being able to maintain the damaged grass and keep it safe for runners.

We are early morning users of parks and we don't take ds to a park if we know there is a park run on because he cannot cope with that number of people in there. I don't think at all that park runs should not go on or be paid for because of this but to say it is not stopping anyone else using the park isn't true.

I really don't know where I stand on whether or not Parkrun should be free. Yes, exercise should be encouraged, but I can see the issue about wear and tear on the facilities.

Maybe they should just increase council tax by an appropriate amount, or cut other services to free up money to keep the park nice.

However, it is a bit much to cite this as too much of a barrier to exercise. If you want to run and don't want to pay, just run in the park for any of the other 167 hours in the week. Or run anywhere else that is free like footpaths and other parks. It's not like Parkrun is the only opportunity anyone has to run or that one single 3 mile run per week on it's own will make that much of a difference.

I think the parish council could have approached the organisers and explained that they were incurring repair costs, every few months they have a bucket and if you can afford it, you throw a couple of quid in towards the upkeep of the park. I'm sure people would be far more accepting of that than an imposed charge. They should also open up the showers and changing rooms to the runners if they are going to charge.

There was an issue with our local (huge) park run that an area of grass at the starting point was getting damaged, organisers just worked with the council to change the route slightly so they start on concrete and everyone is happy.

What they have suggested is that the local Parkrun organisers contact the many many grant-awarding bodies (Sport England, The National Lottery etc) and apply for a grant to cover the damage that the parkrun does to the park.

Oh that's a good idea, problem solved.

The whole point of PR is to get people out and exercising in an easy and accessible way. Enforcing a charge for it is a dick move.

I had heard there are no Parkruns in Wandsworth because the council said they could only operate on a pay basis.

Can anyone confirm?

Because if true, then no I don't understand the fuss over this one, because no they're not the first council to impose charges.

This type of petty small-mindedness is precisely what prevents the much needed step change to millions of people exercising every weekend. What's the point, as others have said, of spending £££ on health campaigns to encourage changes for life, like running with your kids, and then penalize people or in any way provide a disincentive for going.

It's like complaining that town centres are dying and no-one shops in them any more, and then having little parking and expensive parking tickets and fines...oh yes, that's happened too.

It's like trying to encourage activity in young people whilst selling off school playing fields...ok, there's a pattern.

If you try to get back the 'fair' monetary cost of everything, the losers are ordinary people trying to have fun and create a community and get fit. If we got the 'fair' monetary cost of covering the banks losses in the financial crisis, they'd be paying us! Only the little people have to truly pay their way for every bloody parking space and running in a public park.

It is a classic case of being a victim of its own success. Small local events were fine but sounds like this one has 300 people coming from all around and the council says it is liable to maintain the park or it would be an insurance problem and it is costing them to do that. All very well saying to put up council tax but why is that fairer? Or cutting services - they are already cutting things like day centres for elderly people and I would rather they charged the Parkrun to be honest.

I'd never heard of park run until this news article. Do they mark out courses etc or do people just turn up and run? What happens if other park users want to walk there too?

I suppose if it has no impact on other users then no charge. If it does affect other users then charge. If you can afford a pair of trainers you can probably afford £1 to have someone time your run. Or just have a run at your own convenience.

Many of the people taking part in Parkrun on a weekly basis pay taxes to their local council for services, which includes upkeep of local parks and public spaces. Charging is utterly unreasonable and contrary to what local authorities should be doing in terms of encouraging people to get fit and use local facilities.

The decision by this particular council is short sighted, mean spirited and entirely about generating revenue in as easy a way as possible, not about maintaining parks of whatever drivel they came out with yesterday.

The whole point of PR is to get people out and exercising in an easy and accessible way.

Isn't it easier still just to run from your house? If you're running for fitness times shouldn't matter.

There's something I don't understand about this from the parkrun UK website:

"parkrun is able to offer hundreds of free events across the country every week thanks largely to the fantastic support we receive from our partners."

If parkrun is organised by volunteers, and the councils haven't been charging for use of the parks, what are the sponsors providing that otherwise mean these events couldn't take place? Seems to me that the councils are offering hundreds of free events, not parkrun or their sponsors.

If parkrun are benefiting from sponsorship, why don't they offer each council with a park that hosts a parkrun something towards wear and tear? While I agree that parks are funded by council tax, and this isn't the same as footballers renting a pitch, 300 runners careering over grass (as it isn't all on path) does damage the grass, especially when it's not height of summer.

The course is marked by marshals standing in appropriate places, the park remains open to the public, the organisers remind runners that other park users have an equal right to be there. Also as it starts at 9, nearly all the runners are finished by just after 9.30 so it is using the park at a fairly quiet time.

They don't mark out the course at our local one. But they do run on the grass for part of it and they go round three times and it does interfere with other people as obviously you cant use that area when people are constantly running across it whilst it is on, and it also uses up all the (free) local parking. Having said that I think it is a good thing, but I don't see why someone else has to pay for the costs of it.

But managing and maintaining parks isn't free. It used to be paid for by the LA but their budgets have been cut. Parks/woodlands/countryside managament are all areas that have taken a big hit.

The money has to come from somewhere - either centrally, through the LA or from individuals. But it can't/won't come from the first two until there is huge political pressure for this to be the case.

Given the guge health benefits of parks/open spaces maybe the NHS should contribute?

huge health benefits....

I have family that do this, volunteers turn up but there is equipment needed to mark of course, provided mircaphone for annocement a and warm ups. High via jackets and other equipment. Thers running and hosting of website there tags that log your times do you can check on line. There certificates for half marathon and marathons etc. So I imagine sponsor cover these costs with enough to pay some staff at top level in the organisation plus providing insurence and legal costs must all add up with so many events.

Squirm of eels there is one in Wandsworth - tooting common.

I think it's outrageous. there is a maintenance fund, it's called council taxes