Whilst I agree with the need to protect valuable peat bog habitats, I am often dismayed to find that 'repair' of upland paths amounts to laying paving slabs along a route. As a Peak District fell runner, it is now increasingly difficult to find path routes in the popular areas which are not fully paved. If you've ever had to run along hard slabs in studded fell shoes, you'll realise what a horrible experience a paved path presents to a runner. We surely should not be turning our valuable upland and mountain environments into 'high streets with nicer views'. A hard path is appropriate in an urban area but I'm not at all convinced that this is the best solution to curb erosion in wilderness areas. Curbing human traffic is clearly the best approach but this isn't practical or socially acceptable for the busiest paths. What other ways can path erosion be controlled or is it even necessary? For a path with a moderate degree of erosion, e.g. on some of the upper Derwent Valley moors, laying paving slabs isn't going to return the peat bog to its natural state - because it isn't naturally covered with slabs of rock! - so isn't it better to simply accept that the path will be a bit boggy in places? For fell runners, bog is far more preferable terrain to hard stone slabs. The passage of human feet has only caused a relatively small amount of damage to peat bogs, i.e. along the thin lines of paths. Atmospheric pollution has caused the largest amount of damage, according to Moors for the Future. I would contest that 'repair' of upland paths by laying continuous miles of stone slabs is a form of urban encroachment into wild areas and may actually be counterproductive in terms of conservation since it encourages even more people into what were previously quite inaccessible places. Let's seriously consider whether paving wild, upland areas is what we should be doing. The principle argument for it seems to be just making it easier for people to gain access without getting a bit wet and muddy. If that's the only argument, you might as well put strips of tarmac into the moors, which we'd all (hopefully) be against. If there really is a conservation argument for upland paving, what is the scientific evidence that a paved path is better for the environment than an eroded natural one?