Peak District MTB has submitted a call for reform to the UK Government’s inquiry on outdoor access.
Peak District MTB are calling for:
- A legal right to ride suitable footpaths already in informal use.
- A national target for all National Parks and Local Authorities to open a minimum 22% of rights of way to cyclists.
- A legal duty on the National Trust, water companies, and other landowners to publish Rights of Way Improvement Plans.
- A review of HMRC tax relief schemes to ensure access agreements with landowners are legally enforceable, include cyclists, are developed with local user input, and are transparently monitored to guarantee the public benefit promised in exchange for taxpayer subsidy.
- Recognition of mountain biking’s value to health, rural economies, conservation, and land stewardship.
- Support for MTB volunteers who maintain and repair trails.
Peak District MTB statement:
As proud supporters of theBritish Mountaineering Council’scampaign to the APPG Inquiry on Access to Nature, Peak District MTB is demanding urgent action to address the unfair and outdated restrictions on cycling access to the countryside.“
From defending Rushup Edge to building partnerships around the Hope Valley, the Roaches, and beyond, the group has shown how responsible cycling access can benefitwalkers, riders, landowners, and nature alike.
“The Peak District is a national park in name—but not in access. Just 11% of trails here are legally open to cyclists, compared to 22% across England. We need legislation that reflects how people actually enjoy the outdoors today. That’s why we launched our #22PercentCampaign: to challenge outdated rights of way law and give responsible mountain bikers the access they deserve.” – Greville Kelly, Chair of Peak District MTB.
Latest Singletrack Merch
Buying and wearing our sustainable merch is another great way to support Singletrack
Singletrackworld’s story The Duke, the bike ban and the taxman story formed part of Peak Ditrict MTB’s submission.
Thanks to those involved for trying to get improved access.
The first picture is local to me…(north west side of Lantern Pike). It’s clearly an old cart track that was built hundreds of years ago to connect local towns. It has a solid, rocky base with very little erosion. Unfortunately, a 600 metre section is recorded as footpath rather than bridleway. Cyclists and horse riders have used it for decades without any challenges or problems. However, the anti-cycling signs have recently appeared and a perfectly sound, wide gate replaced with drystone walls and a narrow kissing-gate.
Why has this been done?! I guess it’s one of the farmers. Can’t see how anyone gains from this retrograde step.
What can us individuals do to help gain access to these routes?
Lift your bike over the kissing gate and ride it like you always have (doesn’t help the horsey lot though, who are similarly affected. Or eBikers, who won’t have the strength 😉 )
It’s an admirable cause, and I would bet the issue on Lantern PIke is what’s kicked it off as it is ridiculous, but it just feels too woolly; who says a path is ‘suitable’? What is defined as ‘already in informal use’? What is essentially being asked for is a wholesale analysis and re-categorisation of the existing Rights of Way, which is a huge amount of work that won’t happen.
I shall keep riding where I’ve always ridden, regardless of how that path is categorised, and have polite conversations with anyone who may object (which is incredibly rare). If they fail to have a polite conversation back then that’s their day ruined, not mine.
if the route was used as a bridleway, but not designated as such, there are ways of makng a case to redesignate:
https://www.cla.org.uk/news/how-to-defend-claims-for-historic-rights-of-way/
the historic OS 25″ maps are a useful source, some state “BR" ie bridleway, as seen here:
https://maps.nls.uk/view/114586124
on the eastern side of the sheet.
Â
Â
Â
Â
Stanley – I have ridden that path many times and did not know this has happened.
There’s a section off the Gritstone trail (near Bowstones) above Lyme Park, Disley, which I’ve ridden since 1998. The bridle way runs along then off to the right is a perfectly suitable farm track (which again locals have ridden for decades) which is not a bridleway. Why these tracks can’t be re classified into BWs is crazy, but I’m guessing the landowner (I’m not sure if it’s the NT in this particular area) would need to care and maintain this. Eventually this track does come out near to the BW off Brickworks, Pott Shrigley.Â
The bridleway stops at the end of the track from Bowstones, where it comes out onto the open land at Shit Pile Corner. Neither the track to the right that pops out at the Brickworks or the track straight on that goes over Sponds Hill (which is also the Gritstone trail) are bridleways, they’re both footpaths. However, this is another good example of no-one caring, I’ve ridden both loads of times, seen loads of people, everyone’s fine.
The landowner is Brinks Farm, who are at the top of the Brickworks road.
Well that’s my productivity shot for the day…
Yes, but in practical terms there wouldn’t be any difference whether it was a footpath of BW unless erosion was an issue.  If it’s a BW then more room has to be left for it e.g. after planting crops a path has to be cleared, or wider margin left around the edge of fields. If any work is done on it then there are different standards whether it was a BW or FP (e.g. it has to have gates suitable for horses) but there’s no requirement to upgrade what’s there or repair erosion. Â
The problem is there’s no upside for the landowner. A bit more erosion just means a bit more maintenance for them, because whilst they don’t have to repair that track for us, that (hypothetical) nice rocky step that’s eroded in to make it a fun descent might be making it impassible on a quad. The (inevitable) litter get’s eaten by livestock. The gates get left open. Diseases get spread between farms. There’s more traffic passing through your farmyard. Unless you’re going to diversify into a tea-room there aren’t any upsides to the farmer.
Â
Or I could just carry on riding it and not worry about what the bureaucracy care to call itÂ
your call!
I’m really not sure what this proposal brings.Â
There are 2 types of people that ride footpaths, those that don’t know the rules and those that don’t care about the rules. I don’t have stats but I imagine the number of people that know AND care is pretty slim so how much impact is this really going to have.
Added to the fact that no one is going to agree on what constitutes as “suitable" plus RoW departments are already struggling so the likelihood of anything changing on the ground is super slim.
Don’t get me wrong, I like PDMTB but I just don’t get this.Â
A great example was given above of a footpath in the middle of a bridleway which has now had obstacles added to it. This affects riders whether they care or not.
There’s similar issues several places in Kent. A good bridleway that is functionally useless because it only connects up to a footpath which the landowner has made as obstructive as possible.
Cycling UK have a tool to try to mark such missing links but I don’t know if they do any advocacy based on this tool, you the reporter are supposed to bring it up with your council: https://action.cyclinguk.org/page/68755/action/1?ea.tracking.id=LP
Â
Â
It’s no good banging about the edges, you (In England/Wales) need full access, just like we have in Scotland. Your access rules are a joke, and the Landowners are laughing at the public. Labour will do little about this as they are in bed with the Landowners, it isnt the Labour Party of 40 years ago. It was Hilary Benn who objected to walkers passing through his land as it would ruin his privacy. IIRC, it is a coastal path, and he would not allow anyone to walk along the river/coast, so the coastal path bypasses his Estate.
My missus cares, unfortunately. Which restricts what routes we ride together in the Peak.
I wouldn’t ride footpaths in an area unfamiliar to me, i might do it locally if i know it’s widely used as a permissive bridleway but I wouldn’t travel to the Peak District and plan a route on footpaths with no knowledge of them. I’ve walked Mam Tor a few times and seen people cycling down footpaths, not sure what category that falls into….
My experience is that farmers have enough to worry about so don’t really give a monkey’s as long as gates are shut (or left open) and people are considerate about their livestock or crops.
My understanding with this one is it’s the land of a farm that is no longer farmed so is just about land protectionism.  Understandable if there was no official right of way but petty given it’s a short footpath joining two bridleways.  Not sure if they’ve had any issues with off-roaders which could have driven the gate change.
Of course, there’s nothing stopping bikes being pushed / horses being led on footpaths – assuming gates don’t totally prevent access.
@alani can you point me in the right direction for your information about Hilary Benn please? It was my understanding that he was the minister involved with rights of way at one time but reclused himself from decision making.Â
Two links below, lots of others available with a search of the right terms – (Stansgate Abbey Farm, Hilary Benn, walkers access etc). Its a long time ago, so finding the true story is difficult, but from what I recall he was the Minister who was going to improve access, but then stopped Essex Council from arranging a long distance riverside path through his property.
https://www.countryside-alliance.org/resources/news/the-continued-issues-with-coastal-access
https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/2054899.take-a-walk-on-the-wild-side-around-our-coast/
Â
Yeah, pretty much this.
I care about damaging sensitive ground
I care about not riding obviously contentious tracks at busy times
I care about riding consideratelyÂ
I care about not giving mtbers a bad rep.
But zero **** given about the classification of a track tho
Â
It’s still alive!
The cheek of it
Â
Â
Living in the Derbyshire Dales, a lot of the good riding is footpaths. The thing to do if/when riding them is to remember that it’s a footpath and ride accordingly and respectfully. Obviously some people will think that riding them in the first place isn’t being respectful, but….
Â
Anecdotally – was riding from Beeley village to the bridge at Chatsworth the other day – big wide open field with a double track across it. An elederly couple chuntered at me – my response was that the farmer had seen me in there on numerous occassions and didn’t seem bothered, so dont let it bother you – have a nice day
I’ve considered riding that a few times to miss out that horrible stretch of road up to the bridge but always gone past the entrance before remembering it was there. Was never sure about the access at the bridge end either, how easy it is to get a bike through/over whatever gate there is.
Plus being near to Chatsworth, I always assumed I’d be much more likely to get complained at!