Green Signals Podcast: Interview with Matt Rice - Chief Operating Officer of Northern

[Iskra]

Some promising words and intent from Northern for the future, in terms of performance, rolling stock and solving the all important Sunday issue. The interview was done for the Green Signals Podcast.

22 Apr 2025
Northern Trains operates one of the most complex and expansive rail networks in the UK, serving everything from scenic rural routes to busy urban lines across the North of England. But recent years haven’t been easy—staffing challenges, service cancellations, and political pressure have all taken their toll. In this rare and candid interview, we sit down with Matt Rice, Chief Operating Officer of Northern Trains, to discuss how the operator is turning things around.

Filmed in York, Matt shares his vision, addresses criticism, and outlines what’s next for rail passengers across the North. Whether you're a rail enthusiast, transport professional, or just curious about the future of northern transport, this conversation is essential viewing.

 

[Killingworth]

Good words but when will Northern be operating their full Sunday timetables? The 6 day railway issue has been plain to see for a very long time but they were managing to run more trains 2 years ago than now. Today passengers should at least have a better idea of what should actually turn up, costs are lower and so, presumably, are subsidies.

The longer this goes on the more these cut back services become accepted as the norm - and car use becomes even more entrenched as the way to travel for leisure.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Good words but when will Northern be operating their full Sunday timetables? The 6 day railway issue has been plain to see for a very long time but they were managing to run more trains 2 years ago than now. Today passengers should at least have a better idea of what should actually turn up, costs are lower and so, presumably, are subsidies.

The longer this goes on the more these cut back services become accepted as the norm - and car use becomes even more entrenched as the way to travel for leisure.

Doesn't he set out when by based on the current plan in the interview?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Doesn't he set out when by based on the current plan in the interview?

I heard a TOC mgr with a good vision of where they want the business and the plans to get there but sounded like 2027 TT change before anything significant will change. Hes very clear Sunday needs to be sorted but wants to do it in a way thats doesn't damage the good relationships they now have with staff after many years of poor relationships. He certainly had a good handle on operations and particularly praised the rolling stock staff in keeping units available.

 

[Killingworth]

I heard a TOC mgr with a good vision of where they want the business and the plans to get there but sounded like 2027 TT change before anything significant will change. Hes very clear Sunday needs to be sorted but wants to do it in a way thats doesn't damage the good relationships they now have with staff after many years of poor relationships. He certainly had a good handle on operations and particularly praised the rolling stock staff in keeping units available.

Exactly. I heard the supposedly temporary timetable announced in January for a few weeks, that then might be until the May timetable change, that has become until further notice, slipping off to some vaguely positive aiming point in the future.

The most positive bit was that aiming point and the absolutely vital need to restore good human working relationships at all levels throughout the company. Easy to say, very difficult to do.

 

[Iskra]

Exactly. I heard the supposedly temporary timetable announced in January for a few weeks, that then might be until the May timetable change, that has become until further notice, slipping off to some vaguely positive aiming point in the future.

The most positive bit was that aiming point and the absolutely vital need to restore good human working relationships at all levels throughout the company. Easy to say, very difficult to do.

Very expensive, I fear. Particularly resolving the Sunday issue.

 

[jonnyfan]

From watching the interview, he said the plan is to have the Sunday issue resolved at the December 2025 timetable, with conductors all having Sunday in the working week, which will involve a massive amount of change to links and rostering.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Very expensive, I fear. Particularly resolving the Sunday issue.

Yes wont help the amount of subsidy needed short term but what will happen here is Burnham will lean on DfT (as well as RMT) along with other Northern city mayors and maybe stick a few quid in the pot from their own budgets to get it over the line. Then with a stable reliable service its should drive up ridership and cover the costs in the long term.

 

[aron2smith]

Why is Northern Rail's subsidy such an issue? Intercity services are what make profit on the railway, followed by commuter routes. Northern doesn't have Intercity at all, presumably Transpennine Express which is more of an Intercity service was separated from Northern at one time. Many cities in the North don't have much of commuter railways and those that do have or will separate them from the regional network. Northern rail's network is full of regional routes that don't bare much resemblance to each other and probably would make more sense split into 3 or 4 networks. Lancashire, Yorkshire and Northumberland + Cumbria. Rail devolution may end up doing that. Merseyrail is successful and if the Bee Network ends up as good when it starts to run trains, I can see a Yorkshire version and hopefully more integration between Northern and the Tyne and Wear Metro in the North East too, like we've already seen with the Ashington line.

My point is Northern is simultaneously neglected and held to high standards with little support then people wonder why it needs the subsidies? Sounds like BR all over again! Imagine if the intercity services of GWR or EMR were separated from the branches/ regional routes? They'd need more subsidies too. I think the wrong question is being asked of Northern, its been underinvested in and neglected for decades. Northern would do better if the region had got more electrification which would make the new trains it desperately needs more likely. It would do better if cities like Leeds and Bradford had mass transit.

A lot of Northern Rail's routes allow for tourism too, so surely the best approach is to let the people who know what they are doing and involved day to day make it all work. Think of the subsidy as an investment in the north, then use it to improve the infrastructure and make it something people can actually depend on. The Huddersfield upgrade should be the start of a long term rolling plan of improvements and a strategic upgrade to the regions connectivity. Anything that removes bottlenecks like in Manchester and greatly improves journey times to the cities of the north should be prioritised. Listening to Matt Rice gave me hope for Northern and his head seems in the right place, it must be frustrating having to deal with the limitations of his regions railways though.

 

[Killingworth]

Why is Northern Rail's subsidy such an issue? Intercity services are what make profit on the railway, followed by commuter routes. Northern doesn't have Intercity at all, presumably Transpennine Express which is more of an Intercity service was separated from Northern at one time. Many cities in the North don't have much of commuter railways and those that do have or will separate them from the regional network. Northern rail's network is full of regional routes that don't bare much resemblance to each other and probably would make more sense split into 3 or 4 networks. Lancashire, Yorkshire and Northumberland + Cumbria. Rail devolution may end up doing that.

Merseyrail is successful and if the Bee Network ends up as good when it starts to run trains, I can see a Yorkshire version and hopefully more integration between Northern and the Tyne and Wear Metro in the North East too, like we've already seen with the Ashington line. My point is Northern is simultaneously neglected and held to high standards with little support then people wonder why it needs the subsidies? Sounds like BR all over again! Imagine if the intercity services of GWR or EMR were separated from the branches/ regional routes? They'd need more subsidies too.

Merseyrail and the Metrolink services, plus Bee buses, are good in urban areas. Northern operates many routes through sparsely populated areas with infrequent trains. Cumbrian coast, Settle and Carlisle, Whitby, Brigg are lovely lines but need large subsidies. There are others. The realities of Northern's subsidies were explained at a meeting I attended early last year. An average of 42p per passenger mile travelled. The previous government was wanting that trimmed back to 41p. (After the salary increases that's more difficult/impossible.) Even the best routes may be costing subsidies of 5-10p per passenger mile, the worst over £1.25! None is subsidy free.

I think the wrong question is being asked of Northern, its been underinvested in and neglected for decades. Northern would do better if the region had got more electrification which would make the new trains it desperately needs more likely. It would do better if cities like Leeds and Bradford had mass transit. A lot of Northern Rail's routes allow for tourism too, so surely the best approach is to let the people who know what they are doing and involved day to day make it all work. Think of the subsidy as an investment in the north, then use it to improve the infrastructure and make it something people can actually depend on. The Huddersfield upgrade should be the start of a long term rolling plan of improvements and a strategic upgrade to the regions connectivity.

Whilst I agree with the sentiments railways are competing against health, education, prisons, defence, etc - and the roads that far more of use far more often.

Anything that removes bottlenecks like in Manchester and greatly improves journey times to the cities of the north should be prioritised. Listening to Matt Rice gave me hope for Northern and his head seems in the right place, it must be frustrating having to deal with the limitations of his regions railways though.

I'd certainly agree with prioritising Manchester and all power to Matt to resolve the 7 day working conundrum. Once we can see the Sunday published timetables operating as they should be maybe more services can be added, but............

It's probably a subject for a new thread. Assume Northern adds one more unit to operate new services 7 days a week. What extra revenue might it bring in? What would it cost? First the cost of the unit, fuel, servicing, track access. Then crewing, not just one crew but possibly as many as 6 or 7 crews to cover 7 days, maybe 18-20 hours a day to include rest days, holidays, training, sickness. That's not a full list. Once you start adding everything up it's enough to give the financial management (and H M Treasury) nightmares!!

 

[aron2smith]

Merseyrail and the Metrolink services, plus Bee buses, are good in urban areas. Northern operates many routes through sparsely populated areas with infrequent trains. Cumbrian coast, Settle and Carlisle, Whitby, Brigg are lovely lines but need large subsidies. There are others. The realities of Northern's subsidies were explained at a meeting I attended early last year. An average of 42p per passenger mile travelled. The previous government was wanting that trimmed back to 41p. (After the salary increases that's more difficult/impossible.) Even the best routes may be costing subsidies of 5-10p per passenger mile, the worst over £1.25! None is subsidy free.

Whilst I agree with the sentiments railways are competing against health, education, prisons, defence, etc - and the roads that far more of use far more often.

I'd certainly agree with prioritising Manchester and all power to Matt to resolve the 7 day working conundrum. Once we can see the Sunday published timetables operating as they should be maybe more services can be added, but............

It's probably a subject for a new thread. Assume Northern adds one more unit to operate new services 7 days a week. What extra revenue might it bring in? What would it cost? First the cost of the unit, fuel, servicing, track access. Then crewing, not just one crew but possibly as many as 6 or 7 crews to cover 7 days, maybe 18-20 hours a day to include rest days, holidays, training, sickness. That's not a full list. Once you start adding everything up it's enough to give the financial management (and H M Treasury) nightmares!!

That's a really interesting response and thanks for the information, I wish the government would look at it in terms of 'it's costing us X, but it's bringing in Y in economic, social and health benefits'. So even though it is making a loss, it keeps things moving. If it's loss is 42p/ mile but it brings in even 50p of benefits, should it matter? I think rail franchising hasn't done the North's railways any favours. It's lead to fragmentation and isolated thinking and cities like Manchester, Leeds and York have so many TOCs overcomplicating things. Tickets seem even more complicated in the north compared to the south where the difference rail companies are actually well defined. It all needs to be treated as if it's one transport system.

Also transport definitely shouldn't be seen as competing for scarce resources, in truth all of these policies have been underfunded by austerity since 2010. At this point, inaction and low investment is proving more and more expensive. We seriously need long term thinking and joined up thinking. Transport could be just the thing to tie everything else together. GBR should provide a real opportunity to change the mindset for rail. We do not question roads in this way and I think it's only fair we treat all forms of transport infrastructure the same as roads. If the treasury won't see reason, they need to get out the way. A lot of the mess this country is in is because of the treasury and their short-sightedness, they are too powerful.

 

[Meole]

Northern needs to rationalise its network, it has retained lines which would be closed further south.

 

[aron2smith]

Northern needs to rationalise its network, it has retained lines which would be closed further south.

Which lines would you close? I don't think any should close, they should provide a proper service on the Brigg line for example, at least 6 trains/ day Monday to Saturday would do. Regional connectivity in Lincolnshire barely exists, it needs to be improved. Maybe certain individual stations could close across Northern instead of the Parliamentary service they get. The other route with a weird service is Stockport to Stalybridge via Reddish South and Denton, I'd like to see this converted to Metrolink and the area much more built up. Buses in the South East of Greater Manchester can get quite busy and the routes there regularly run every 10 minutes, so the rail infrastructure seems underused. Same with Ardwick, if the area wasn't such a wasteland, people would use the station. The problem with Northern is it's not really a network, a lot of their services are disjointed and would make more sense run by the combined authorities in the north.

 

[yorksrob]

Why is Northern Rail's subsidy such an issue? Intercity services are what make profit on the railway, followed by commuter routes. Northern doesn't have Intercity at all, presumably Transpennine Express which is more of an Intercity service was separated from Northern at one time. Many cities in the North don't have much of commuter railways and those that do have or will separate them from the regional network. Northern rail's network is full of regional routes that don't bare much resemblance to each other and probably would make more sense split into 3 or 4 networks. Lancashire, Yorkshire and Northumberland + Cumbria. Rail devolution may end up doing that. Merseyrail is successful and if the Bee Network ends up as good when it starts to run trains, I can see a Yorkshire version and hopefully more integration between Northern and the Tyne and Wear Metro in the North East too, like we've already seen with the Ashington line.

My point is Northern is simultaneously neglected and held to high standards with little support then people wonder why it needs the subsidies? Sounds like BR all over again! Imagine if the intercity services of GWR or EMR were separated from the branches/ regional routes? They'd need more subsidies too. I think the wrong question is being asked of Northern, its been underinvested in and neglected for decades. Northern would do better if the region had got more electrification which would make the new trains it desperately needs more likely. It would do better if cities like Leeds and Bradford had mass transit.

A lot of Northern Rail's routes allow for tourism too, so surely the best approach is to let the people who know what they are doing and involved day to day make it all work. Think of the subsidy as an investment in the north, then use it to improve the infrastructure and make it something people can actually depend on. The Huddersfield upgrade should be the start of a long term rolling plan of improvements and a strategic upgrade to the regions connectivity. Anything that removes bottlenecks like in Manchester and greatly improves journey times to the cities of the north should be prioritised. Listening to Matt Rice gave me hope for Northern and his head seems in the right place, it must be frustrating having to deal with the limitations of his regions railways though.

You are spot on in your observations.

Northern rail are the unprofitable bits of the railway hived off, so the subsidy is there to see, to the horror of pearl clutching right wingers.

The great western franchise, on the other hand, contains many local and regional services similar to Northern's, yet because these are cross subsidised within GW's overall franchise, the pearl clutching right wingers are oblivious.

The whole set up is designed to make the North's services look uniquely over-subsidised.

Northern needs to rationalise its network, it has retained lines which would be closed further south.

Utter claptrap.

 

[Iskra]

You are spot on in your observations.

Northern rail are the unprofitable bits of the railway hived off, so the subsidy is there to see, to the horror of pearl clutching right wingers.

The great western franchise, on the other hand, contains many local and regional services similar to Northern's, yet because these are cross subsidised within GW's overall franchise, the pearl clutching right wingers are oblivious.

The whole set up is designed to make the North's services look uniquely over-subsidised.



Utter claptrap.

While I agree with the sentiment of the statement, it’s not unique to Northern; TfW are in an even worse position for this, but they do of course have a stronger political situation.

 

[aron2smith]

You are spot on in your observations.

Northern rail are the unprofitable bits of the railway hived off, so the subsidy is there to see, to the horror of pearl clutching right wingers.

The great western franchise, on the other hand, contains many local and regional services similar to Northern's, yet because these are cross subsidised within GW's overall franchise, the pearl clutching right wingers are oblivious.

The whole set up is designed to make the North's services look uniquely over-subsidised.

Glad I'm not the only one who sees this. Definitely agree with the GWR comparison, good to see them want to improve the Newquay line. Can be seen to a lesser extent with the East Midlands too, take away the services from St Pancras to Corby, Leicester, Nottingham and Sheffield, it is basically Northern with just as unloved routes on it. Norwich to Liverpool with 4 carriages of class 158, only 2 between Norwich and Sheffield anyone?

I live in an area served by Greater Anglia and that franchise is way more balanced between commuter, regional and the 1 intercity service. The geography also made it compact and self-contained, as a result it could focus on improving individual regional routes and is pretty successful now.

 

[yorksrob]

While I agree with the sentiment of the statement, it’s not unique to Northern; TfW are in an even worse position for this, but they do of course have a stronger political situation.

Indeed, I agree absolutely.

Glad I'm not the only one who sees this. Definitely agree with the GWR comparison, good to see them want to improve the Newquay line. Can be seen to a lesser extent with the East Midlands too, take away the services from St Pancras to Corby, Leicester, Nottingham and Sheffield, it is basically Northern with just as unloved routes on it. Norwich to Liverpool with 4 carriages of class 158, only 2 between Norwich and Sheffield anyone?

I live in an area served by Greater Anglia and that franchise is way more balanced between commuter, regional and the 1 intercity service. The geography also made it compact and self-contained, as a result it could focus on improving individual regional routes and is pretty successful now.

Indeed, and to be clear, I think the main lines cross subsidizing the secondary ones is the way to run the railway. GWR and Greater Anglia show that.

 

[aron2smith]

Indeed, and to be clear, I think the main lines cross subsidizing the secondary ones is the way to run the railway. GWR and Greater Anglia show that.

Hopefully this is what will happen across the whole system when everything but open access is nationalised.

 

[yorksrob]

Hopefully this is what will happen across the whole system when everything but open access is nationalised.

Well, it should do. You never know with the treasury et al !

 

[D365]

Northern would do better if the region had got more electrification which would make the new trains it desperately needs more likely.

Northern is in the process of procuring new rolling stock with or without further electrification.

 

[Meerkat]

Indeed, and to be clear, I think the main lines cross subsidizing the secondary ones is the way to run the railway. GWR and Greater Anglia show that.

It really isnt - it just makes the whole railway look more of a drain.
Why should passengers on higher revenue lines subsidise the basket cases? If the lines are kept open for social reasons then that subsidy should be clear, not hidden, and paid from general taxation.

 

[yorksrob]

It really isnt - it just makes the whole railway look more of a drain.
Why should passengers on higher revenue lines subsidise the basket cases? If the lines are kept open for social reasons then that subsidy should be clear, not hidden, and paid from general taxation.

Complete nonsense. Even the companies that built the railways realised that they needed secondary routes to feed and distribute passengers and goods to and from the main line.

In the case of Great Western, passengers from St Ives, Falmouth and Looe will supplement the passengers on the main line to Paddington.

If the overall service requires subsidy, then so be it.

 

[aron2smith]

Complete nonsense. Even the companies that built the railways realised that they needed secondary routes to feed and distribute passengers and goods to and from the main line.

In the case of Great Western, passengers from St Ives, Falmouth and Looe will supplement the passengers on the main line to Paddington.

If the overall service requires subsidy, then so be it.

I strongly agree with this, we can actually see this effect quite well in Devon with the lines to Barnstaple, Okehampton and Exmouth to Paignton, all very busy little lines that feed the mainline at Exeter St Davids. Not only does it make the mainline to Paddington help 'pay it's way' for a lack of better phrase, these lines give the towns on the way a lively feel to them. Compare Okehampton to Minehead, the railway has made Okehampton a hub of sorts, encouraged investment to improve cross-county buses to places like Tavistock and Bude and it seems like the local businesses are really benefitting from the increased footfall.

Minehead outside of school holidays is a very quiet town, whilst in the holidays it chokes with traffic! The 28 bus isn't too bad and reasonably frequent but it's not ideal for holiday makers with loads of luggage and is a busy local route as it is. The area would benefit from not just a train but direct trains to Paddington I think. If we want places like Minehead to grow their local economy, the status quo just isn't enough. I'd say there's a couple dozen towns around the country that would really benefit from having a railway again and if they need subsidy, I agree so be it. The benefits would greatly outweigh the subsidy.

Also saw the other day the reopened Ashington line has already had 250,000 journeys on it, even though half the stations aren't opened yet. Okehampton took a year to do the same!

Northern is in the process of procuring new rolling stock with or without further electrification.

Good, I'd hope so, the class 150, 155 and 158 are from the 80s!

 

[yorksrob]

I strongly agree with this, we can actually see this effect quite well in Devon with the lines to Barnstaple, Okehampton and Exmouth to Paignton, all very busy little lines that feed the mainline at Exeter St Davids. Not only does it make the mainline to Paddington help 'pay it's way' for a lack of better phrase, these lines give the towns on the way a lively feel to them. Compare Okehampton to Minehead, the railway has made Okehampton a hub of sorts, encouraged investment to improve cross-county buses to places like Tavistock and Bude and it seems like the local businesses are really benefitting from the increased footfall.

Minehead outside of school holidays is a very quiet town, whilst in the holidays it chokes with traffic! The 28 bus isn't too bad and reasonably frequent but it's not ideal for holiday makers with loads of luggage and is a busy local route as it is. The area would benefit from not just a train but direct trains to Paddington I think. If we want places like Minehead to grow their local economy, the status quo just isn't enough. I'd say there's a couple dozen towns around the country that would really benefit from having a railway again and if they need subsidy, I agree so be it. The benefits would greatly outweigh the subsidy.

Also saw the other day the reopened Ashington line has already had 250,000 journeys on it, even though half the stations aren't opened yet. Okehampton took a year to do the same!


Good, I'd hope so, the class 150, 155 and 158 are from the 80s!

I had the pleasure of using the Okehampton line a few years ago. It was pleasing to see how popular it was, and this was a couple of years after reopening !

 

[aron2smith]

I had the pleasure of using the Okehampton line a few years ago. It was pleasing to see how popular it was, and this was a couple of years after reopening !

I used the line a couple times since it reopened, it seriously impresses me how many people get off the train when it pulls in at Okehampton. The trains appear to be full in rush hour. Bus routes that connect with the station seem busier too.

 

[yorksrob]

I used the line a couple times since it reopened, it seriously impresses me how many people get off the train when it pulls in at Okehampton. The trains appear to be full in rush hour. Bus routes that connect with the station seem busier too.

Indeed. We need someone to pull their finger out and get Tavistock opened now.

 

[Meerkat]

Complete nonsense. Even the companies that built the railways realised that they needed secondary routes to feed and distribute passengers and goods to and from the main line.

In the case of Great Western, passengers from St Ives, Falmouth and Looe will supplement the passengers on the main line to Paddington.

If the overall service requires subsidy, then so be it.

When they built the railways there weren’t buses , cars, and lorries.

 

[Killingworth]

When they built the railways there weren’t buses , cars, and lorries.

Or bicycles!

 

[yorksrob]

When they built the railways there weren’t buses , cars, and lorries.

Yes, but the principle remains as true for the passenger railway of today as it was for the more mixed railway of yesteryear.

Or bicycles!

On Saturday I found myself having to get from Whitby to Morecambe. Good luck cycling that in one morning !

 

[Killingworth]

On Saturday I found myself having to get from Whitby to Morecambe. Good luck cycling that in one morning !

Morecambe!

On Saturday morning I met a bemused couple on the platform at Dore having got off a Northern service from Piccadilly to Sheffield. English was not their first language and they were now looking for their next train - the one they'd just got off.

Good old split ticketing. How Trainline had routed them to somewhere beyond Peterborough (Thetford?) along the Hope Valley on Northern puzzles me but the next leg from Sheffield was to be on EMR. A shame the train they were supposed to connect with passed through Dore half an hour later without stopping, then again 20 minutes later on the MML - no platform. They could have caught it at Piccadilly and gone all the way without changing. It must have cost more - and it took them an extra hour by alighting at Dore.

On coast to coast cycling I once met a chap cycling from Southport to Cleethorpes in a day. A morning would be more of a challenge.

Back to topic. Matt Rice knows the problem Northern faces with Sunday working. It's so deeply entrenched and there's no money to resolve it. Run more Sunday trains and every one that runs must add to the total subsidy needed. The irony is that some Sunday trains can be so well filled that revenue collection and protection is impossible. The conductor can't move up or down the train in the crush.

Here on the Hope Valley line we're getting used to only 2 in 3 services running on Sundays. Initially only in January, then quietly extended until the May timetable change. Timetables on platforms still show the full hourly Sunday service. Matt's words were carefully chosen. We might get the full hourly service back for the summer, but it seems most unlikely. December? Maybe.

In the meantime Edale and the Hope Valley are becoming gridlocked with abandoned (parked isn't the right word for many of them) vehicles. News reports about this are appearing locally almost every week, this one on the BBC Parking chaos and poo: The price of Mam Tor's fame I could quote several more.

There's a sad common denominator. There's a railway with hourly services (but see above). There are buses. Buses are slow and get snarled up in traffic. They don't run from Manchester to Edale. Despite all the parking problems in media reports they barely mention public transport alternatives. Despite all the parking problems public transport is not seen as a viable option for the vast majority most of the time. To make matters worse last Sunday one return Northern service was cancelled leaving a 3 hour gap between services.

Give us reliable and regular trains and more weekend business will come, slowly. Currently local communities and businesses are fed up of pushing the rail alternative only to find that when visitors come by train they can't rely on them.

Umm. I wonder if an Open Access operator might get a short term agreement to operate those missing diagrams until October. Anyone with a mainline certified heritage DMU that could be an attraction in its own right - for a premium fare. Users in the Hope Valley might sometimes have said 'better a Pacer than no train at all'

Maybe a heritage Pacer could run 3 hourly on Sundays - any takers? That's assuming a 3 car 185 couldn't be made available to cover this diagram.

Parking chaos and poo: The price of Mam Tor's fame​

Image source, Getty Images
Image caption,
Almost a million people walk up Mam Tor every year, according to the National Trust
Caroline Lowbridge
BBC News, East Midlands
Reporting from

Castleton and Mam Tor

• • Published
    4 May 2025

Of all of the hills to choose from in the Peak District, Mam Tor has become strangely popular in recent years. But why is this happening - and what effect is it having?
Ed Procter has a clear view of Mam Tor from the back garden of his home in Castleton.
"I can come down here in the morning, have a cup of coffee and see hundreds of people up on top," he says.
"I'm still wiping the sleep from my eye, and we can see them walking up and watching the sunrise."
Ed has lived in the Hope Valley area of Derbyshire since 2012 and says Mam Tor wasn't as popular then.
However, it's now so popular that walkers have caused significant erosion in some areas, and helicopters are being used to fly up soil for repairs.

Image caption,
Ed Procter and his partner Sophie can see Mam Tor from their back garden
Data from market research firm Mintel, external suggests that hiking jumped in popularity during the Covid pandemic, but Mam Tor has become a particularly sought-after destination, even compared to other places in the Peak District.
Ed thinks it's good that more people want to get outside, but there are downsides - aside from erosion damage - to the boom being concentrated in one area.
He's part of a group called Concerned for Castleton, which was set up a year ago to collate information and share it with local authorities.
Reported problems include roads being blocked by inconsiderate and illegal parking, vast amounts of litter, and people emptying their campervan toilets into bushes.
"I've come across human poo before," Ed says.
"There's a lot of volunteers in the village that go litter picking every week and they come back with bags full of litter that has just been discarded by random people.
"One of the biggest frustrations I find when I litter pick is people leaving their dog poo bags - I just can't understand that at all."

Image source, Supplied
Image caption,
The driver of this car reportedly told a Castleton resident: "I'll park where I want"

Media caption,
Cyclist Valerio Stuart shared his experience on social media of coming across "irresponsibly" parked cars near Mam Tor
So why has Mam Tor become so popular, when there are loads of areas to explore in the Peak District?
A flick through walking books doesn't mark it out as being especially noteworthy, and some seasoned hikers regard it as being a bit underwhelming.
However, Mam Tor's location makes it easy to reach from Manchester and Sheffield. Nearby Castleton - which has plenty of pubs, cafes and shops - also means visitors can make a day of it.
There's a car park close to the summit, meaning visitors can walk up the paved footpath in about 15 minutes.

Image caption,
The summit of Mam Tor can be reached in about 15 minutes from the car park
It's also an accessible place to watch the sunrise without having to hike up a treacherous route in the dark, which has made it popular with TikTokers.
"Places like Mam Tor are featuring really heavily or prominently on TikTok and Instagram, and that is an advert really for people to come and visit these places," says Craig Best, general manager for the National Trust's Peak District portfolio, which includes Mam Tor.
"We are seeing huge volumes of people arriving, really early morning, before sunrise, and those high volumes of people are continuing throughout the day into the evening."

Image caption,
Craig Best says visitors have increased due to the pandemic and social media
Dozens of families with young children walk past as Craig stands a short way up from Mam Nick car park.
He says visitors initially started to increase during the pandemic.
"All of a sudden, loads of people from across society discovered the great outdoors because a lot of places were closed," he says.
The National Trust installed people counters on Mam Tor just over a year ago.
"We know now, with evidence, that almost a million people are walking up Mam Tor every year, which is incredible," says Craig.
"We've not seen levels of visitors like that ever, or as far as we're aware."
The popularity of Mam Tor is evident from Mountain Rescue data too. There were 77 callouts in 2024 - the highest number out of anywhere in the Peak District.
To put this into context, there were only 50 callouts to Kinder Scout, which is the highest point in the Peak District and much more challenging to hike.

Image caption,
In 2024, there were more mountain rescue callouts to Mam Tor than anywhere else in the Peak District
While the National Trust aims to encourage more people to experience heritage and nature, Craig admits there are downsides.
"We're seeing big issues around litter, dog waste, food containers just being left throughout the outdoors, which is obviously having a massive impact on nature," he says.
"We are seeing people parking inappropriately... to the extent that the police are now having to close roads, which is clearly having a massive impact on local people."
The organisation is also having to do restoration work to repair erosion caused by high footfall.
"So just up on the hill there, we've got a hill fort, which is an incredibly important archaeological feature," Craig says.
"People are walking off footpaths and they're damaging the heritage features."

Image source, National Trust
Image caption,
Rangers and volunteers have been repairing erosion damage to Mam Tor
Concerns are so high that the National Trust is currently working with the Peak District National Park Authority, Derbyshire County Council, Derbyshire Police and High Peak MP Jon Pearce, to come up with a plan to reduce the impact of visitors.
Craig believes car park capacity needs to be increased, and physical measures need to be put in place on the side of roads to prevent people from parking in dangerous places.
He also says people should be encouraged to park appropriately via social media channels - or just go somewhere else if Mam Tor is busy.
"Have a back-up plan, think about where else you may want to visit in the Peak District," he says.
"There are lots of places across the Peak District where you can visit and still have a great walk."

Media caption,
Derbyshire County Council sometimes issues penalty charge notices for parking near Mam Tor illegally
Back in Castleton, I struggle to find a parking space myself, until I spot a sign that directs me to Holmesfield Farm, where the owners have been running a pop-up car park.
"We get a lot of regulars wanting to come," says Jo Bradley, who owns the farm with her parents.
"They know where they can park and they haven't got to ride round the village."
But Jo is only allowed to open the field as a car park for 60 days a year.
"What we would really like is more days, not just your 60 days," she says.
"I'm sure it would help the village a lot more. There are some that don't like paying, they park on the roads, but we're open, we're here."

Image caption,
Rachel Holloway said waste collections and deliveries were being affected by poor parking
While businesses in Castleton are profiting from high visitor numbers, parking is causing problems for them too.
"Within the last six months, we've had 20% of our waste collections being unsuccessful, and we've been charged for that," says Rachel Holloway, who runs Castleton Fish and Chips with her husband Martin Sutton.
"And when we've challenged it, the company have sent us photos of where they've been unable to get to us because of the inconsiderate parking."
She said delivery drivers also experienced "grave difficulties and quite a lot of verbal abuse when they're trying to reverse up in very tight spaces".

Image caption,
Many of the streets around Castleton are lined with cars

Image source, Andrew Denny
Image caption,
Residents have reported problems accessing their own homes due to visitors parking so closely to them
Rachel believes there isn't enough parking for the amount of visitors Castleton is now attracting.
"Some people are parking in a way that isn't safe, for example within the last couple of months the police have had to come out and ticket, and remove some vehicles that were causing emergency services vehicles to get blocked," she says.
She believes pop-up car parks are a good idea, but would like public transport to improve too.
"It would be great to have more integrated public transport to enable people to come from the local train stations of Hope and Edale with easier bus access, more reliable bus access, and that would help people to enjoy the valley in a more sustainable way," she says.

Image caption,
Lawrence Key, operations director at the Northern Collective, lives in Castleton and runs two businesses in the village
Lawrence Key says he can see the issue from multiple points of view - because he runs businesses in Castleton but has also lived here for 12 years.
"Tourism is great, it's what keeps this village alive; it's the reason I get to live in a village of this size with seven pubs," says Lawrence, standing outside Castleton Coffee Co.
"It's just that tourism needs to be sustainable and managed in a way that there will still be a community here."
Most of his staff - both at the coffee shop and nearby Peveril Stores & Bakery - live locally so they don't need to drive to work.
However, Lawrence believes more parking spaces need to be found for visitors.
"I think one of the major problems is simply the size of the village and the amount of people that come to it," he says.
"It's like building a theme park for 10,000 people and 30,000 turning up. There's naturally going to be problems with that.
"It's not a sleepy village of a couple of thousand people that just live and work here any more."