[Closed] Farmer charging to use MTB on public footpath - Cardiff

Is it a "permitted" footpath?

As above, understanding the true classification is the only starting point. The local authority will be able to advise, once that is known what the landowner is doing can be questioned ( reasonably) and challenged if what he is attempting to do us unlawful.

The local officer of The Ramblers or The Open Spaces Society could advise

If this is legal and this idea spreads, I’m guessing that mountain biking could become very expensive or involve a lot of pushing?

1) I can't see why it's not legal.

2) It would only become expensive if you are always riding where you aren't supposed to all the time.

3) It's not a bad idea in some ways as by putting 50p in you're now riding on it legally which is a nice feeling.

4) It's opportunistic from the farmer, sure, but farmers round here aren't exactly taking it in. And this is better then blocking it and telling you all to **** off.

Tough one
Really, despite the farmers charge, I don’t suppose it’s really ok to ride on an actual footpath.
Of course we all do it at quiet times.
I suppose if he is charging you to ride on his land so that you don’t have to use the footpath that’s different.
Wonder what the legal situation is.

PS can you give a pic or a grid ref as I cannot figure out where you mean from your description.

I’m not sure, but according to Cardiff.gov website, it’s down as “Public right of way” under “Footpaths”. I’ll see if I can get detail or share a dropped pin to the location

Really, despite the farmers charge, I don’t suppose it’s really ok to ride on an actual footpath.

With the landowners permission, you could drive a tank up a footpath if you really wanted to.

51.5388801, -3.3078152

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

F - approach farmer, confirm that the idea is his and offer £5/10/15/£20/as you see fit for an annual pass and see what he says.

I should add that I’m not suggesting it’s illegal (I don’t know whether it is or not or, rather, the implications of charging to access land - liability, safety, taxation although this is not an area that I would expect to generate a lot of income) and the suggested fee is not extortionate. I’m mainly interested in views and how this could change mountain biking if it becomes commonplace. Quite right that we shouldn’t be riding footpaths, but how many here can honestly say they’ve never done so in a quiet, rural location?

That would be the owner of Garth Uchaf Farm. Had a chat with him while up on Garth Hill during lockdown, he's had a few issues with mountain and motorbikes racing around scaring his animals. He's not anti-bike but can easily see his point of view.

That whole area has become more popular since lockdown, I hadn't ridden up there until recently for example. I'd be asking the farmer, politely, why he's done it. Get a conversation going, find out the root reason behind it and see what we, as a group, can do about it.

That sounds reasonable to me, Towzer and that was my first thought. My next thought was if this extends, how it could affect mountain biking in general. I tend to ride routes that are generally ridden by mountain bikers but I can’t say that I know the detail of every bit of every route and whether they are all bridleways. I probably should, of course.

It's a footpath.

Prior to speaking to the farmer I would speak to the council rights of way team (*not the sodding ramblers) and ask for advice, and if you pm your phone no I’ll explain it. (Or if you read the Cardiff gov rights of way website you can maybe work out my logic)

Slippery slope.

Isn’t the WA supposed to be considering letting bikes on many more footpaths than now?

Thanks Reluctantjumper. I agree and I’m generally sympathetic to this farmer. It was mainly the legality and implications of charging in the wider sense.

Really, despite the farmers charge, I don’t suppose it’s really ok to ride on an actual footpath.

It's not actually illegal to ride on a footpath. What the ROW legislation actually provides is the absolute right for someone to walk on it. There may be other bylaws that specifically prevent it, but the general legislation does not, and it's a matter of debate about whether riding a bike along a footpath over someone's land even 'causes nuisance' - if a bridleway in the same situation isn't a nuisance why is a footpath any different?

And ultimately as said up there; it's only the landowner or their agent that has the right to say no. If they do as they have here it seems reasonable to me the agree to the request. If it's some busybody they can go and get stretched*

* I'd still avoid busy paths at busy times, basically rule 1

https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/campaigns-guide/cycling-on-footpath-trespass

So it's not illegal for him to do this as far as I see. You're basically paying to ride on his private land, like you would a trail centre. It just so happens that there is a public right of way there that consists of a footpath on his private land that you are riding on.

Quite innovative of the farmer TBH. Only thing he'd have to be careful of is allowing so many people to use it as a bridleway that you can then show the planning dept a historical use as a bridleway and get it upgraded to one. Possibly?

It looks like NRW and therefore open access land, in which case there is a right of access by bike if there is a pre existing tradition of access. Which it sounds like there is.

Edit: ah wait it's the first part that's not open access which is the bit in question.

But I'd still pay the 50p because it's a lot better than some.of the crap we get from.some farmers. And if you get moaned at by walkers you now have the right to be there.

Not that I've ever been moaned at around Cardiff mind.

Also, looks like a useful trail and a tidy descent. Must check it out 🙂

There's a few really nice little descents in there. The climb back up is the only downside.
It's always a good one to ride when it's sloppy elsewhere as it rides well in the wet.

The sooner we get open access the better.

Pretty sure that landowners don't have powers yo apply tolls to existing ROW arbitrarily, needs some kind of enabling legislation.

Ask.him if he is declaring it on his tax return.

I'd be surprised if it's legal to charge a toll without some sort of licence/permission from the council.

If he is charging, and someone gets injured, I wonder what the liabity implications are. He should probably be wary of that, but otherwise that doesn't sound completely unreasonable to me.

if it's an honesty box and you get challenged at the opposite end of the footpath to the box how do you prove you've paid, it there a receipt? just wondering, not advocating not paying even though i can't remember when i last had 50p or any cash in my wallet tbh, is there a card scanner too?

As motorcyclists we did that with a farmer in the early 80s, £2 to ride on a few fields, his plan was You were meant to use an envelope with your reg or name etc written on it.

I ride the spot a fair bit and the farmer has had trouble with motos and mtb's in the past as the field in question is usually full of sheep.

I've always walked my bike through and never had a problem with him. If mtbers can't push their bike for 5 minutes along a footpath then the fault's on them tbh.

There's also several other entrances to the wood so it's not like he's got a monopoly on it..

Provided he actually does some maintenance on the path I don’t really have a problem with it. It’s an honesty box so if it really bothers you just don’t pay. Or alternatively find another route.

Nice to see such reasoned and temperate comments. Thank you. Most, if not all, of the conversation reflecting my own view.
Doesn’t this need a more joined up national solution? Total sympathy with the landowner who is trying to be fair, I think and whilst I would be happy to pay, I think it opens a potential Pandora’s box (liability, taxation, multiple fees on a long route, proof etc). I fully appreciate that it may not escalate and could remain as an isolated honesty box for a landowner who has a genuine need to take action of some sort.
I presume things are different in Scotland with different access laws? How does it work out there? (I mean in terms of possible damage to land/fences and how the landowners are compensated - or not).
Ultimately, as is reflected in this thread, we need to be mindful of each other’s views (landowners/MTBers) and work together.
I’m not sure that this is the solution on a national level but thanks for the views. Very interesting discussion. Interested to hear more views and whether there are any better mutual solutions to this issue elsewhere.

Thanks, Enigmas. I haven’t ridden that route in over a year and wondered if there were issues such as those you described that led to this (rather than simply responsible riding across that route). I guess my reason for posting are the wider implications. Like you, I think I would probably opt to pay or push (although never normally carry change, so this would need to change). It’s a shame to hear that there’s been irresponsible behaviour in that area - farmers have a hard time, I reckon (fly tipping on farm land has been featured a lot on social media recently too), so much sympathy with their side of this.

I used to cave a lot in the past and since many caves were not conveniently alongside existing ROWs it was almost the norm to have to pay the landowner a £1 or so to walk across the fields to the cave entrance. WRT liability, as a farmer he will already be paying for that to the tune of £10 million. Plenty of people claim for injuries for climbing fences or being injured by animals while miles from foot paths. I doubt the risk of being sued are any greater just because of a fee having been paid. Personally, as a farmer, mountain biker, out doorsy person and someone who has travelled a lot, I would love to see a more open access, with more responsible shared use of the countryside. I do know most of my colleagues are not quite so broad minded 🙂

I presume things are different in Scotland with different access laws? How does it work out there? (I mean in terms of possible damage to land/fences and how the landowners are compensated – or not).

I was given a hard time by a farmer in Scotland as I was about to set off up a path that had been made by people following some idiot's GPS track that went up the side of a hill and then clambered over a fence half-way up the mountainside.

He said he had spent thousands of pounds on repairing said fence, no compensation.

I think he could have just put up a laminated sign pointing to the sensible route up.

(To be clear, it wasn't *me* who had damaged the fence).

I ride the spot a fair bit and the farmer has had trouble with motos and mtb’s in the past as the field in question is usually full of sheep.

I’ve always walked my bike through and never had a problem with him. If mtbers can’t push their bike for 5 minutes along a footpath then the fault’s on them tbh

That's how I got chatting to him on Garth Hill, he was tending to his cows up there and I stopped short of them and asked him if they were pregnant or not. He was surprised to hear me ask until I explained I was a country boy so knew to be careful round farm animals in the spring. That's how I found out he'd had issues before. He said if they were pregnant he kept the cows off the tops.

I’m not sure that this is the solution on a national level but thanks for the views. Very interesting discussion. Interested to hear more views and whether there are any better mutual solutions to this issue elsewhere.

I know some of the farmers round where I grew up (Crickhowell area) would, and still do AFAIK, keep some of their animals away from the walker spots during the holiday seasons and when the Walking Festival is on as they have lost animals to shock and them jumping down and injuring themselves. It's surprising how many people really don't understand that the 'countryside' is a working environment, not a free-for-all for the town folk to use as a giant theme park. @welshfarmer will no doubt have a few stories to tell from his area or even know of local solutions to him?

I was given a hard time by a farmer in Scotland as I was about to set off up a path that had been made by people following some idiot’s GPS track that went up the side of a hill and then clambered over a fence half-way up the mountainside.

He said he had spent thousands of pounds on repairing said fence, no compensation.

I think he could have just put up a laminated sign pointing to the sensible route up.

Or, you know, a gate.

Or, you know, a gate.

Why should the farmer install a gate to accommodate some folk who just happen to want to go that way?

Why should the farmer install a gate to accommodate some folk who just happen to want to go that way?

To save himself thousands of pounds in fence repairs?

A sign pointing to an alternative route would certainly be cheaper.

I'd consider paying for access to areas not normally accessible, if I thought it was worth it. Would not pay for that footpath though, would just ride it if necessary, or avoid if convenient.

To save himself thousands of pounds in fence repairs?

A sign pointing to an alternative route would certainly be cheaper.

Hold on. The original post said

I was given a hard time by a farmer in Scotland as I was about to set off up a path that had been made by people following some idiot’s GPS track that went up the side of a hill and then clambered over a fence half-way up the mountainside.

That suggest to me someone had created some random GPS track that others decided to follow and you think the farmer should install a gate to facilitate that route?

If there's any legalities regards riding on the footpath, you could just ride a bit to the side of it 😉 Farmer still gets his money.
Or offer to pay him more money and / or help him build a sick trail away from the footpath! Could be the beginning of a Bike Park if farmers are earning eff all from farming. Slap a tea shop in a barn. Job done!

As I understand it: a public footpath gives you the right to walk there, but not ride. So if you ride there you are trespassing the same as if you are walking where there is no public footpath. However, you can ride anywhere where the landowner gives you permission, which he is doing (as is his right) via the 50p box.

This means that you can also race on footpaths, but you cannot race on bridleways because there is an old (1880?) law that prohibits racing on bridleways explicitly. Obviously not aimed at 21st century cycling events but the wording is such that it does ban it inadvertently. AFAIK.

In a similar vein the Bathurst Estate in Gloucestershire has an extensive public footpath infrastructure. What’s notable is the blue signs ‘allowing’ walking between certain hours but also permits horse riders to use the footpaths but not cyclists. I make a point of riding outside the hours given the illegality of the signs.

no, i wouldn't pay. if he's had problems with motorbikes he needs to get them sorted = police. i don't ride a motorbike. if he wants to put up no cycling signs i'll carry the f'ing bike if i have to but we're not causing any more nuisance than a walker and arguably less damage. it also gives him a revenue stream and therefore a reason to oppose open access. it's BS. f off.

@molgrips, sort of but also read my link above yours. Trespass is a civil offence and limited to I think damages caused - either physical damage to land which is hard to justify for the impact of a tyre track vs a footprint or damages caused by 'nuisance' which is where if a bike on a bridleway isn't a nuisance then why should it be on a footpath?

damages caused by ‘nuisance’ which is where if a bike on a bridleway isn’t a nuisance then why should it be on a footpath?

That one is more subjective and more open to argument of what does and does not constitute a nuisance. Much the same as one person's loud music for them = a great party whereas for everyone else it = a nuisance...

A farmer could fairly reasonably argue that the speed of a bicycle going past livestock / other path users does indeed constitute a nuisance although again, it's hard to prove either way. And it falls slightly flat if the farmer uses that path to access the fields by (say) a quad bike. While the farmer is legally allowed to drive whatever he wants on his land, he'd have a hard time specifically stating No Bicycles if he's regularly driving a quad or Landie across it.

Edit: actually I know the path in question. I was riding it in late 90's when I was at uni in Cardiff. We used to go up the Garth pretty regularly. Only issue we ever had up there was the bastard hunt who on the two occasions we met them caused serious problems both times.

article from the ctc Is cycling on a footpath a trespass?

Interesting article. Thanks for the link

@tonyf1 Living very close to the Bathurst Estate myself for many years and received my share of bollockings for either riding in there or running in there after hours including from Bathurst himself. I am fairly sure alot of the estate is not public footpath but actually private estate which is merely given access to the public during certain hours. There are a few certain sections which are bridleway (near Sapperton) or footpath but the majority is neither.

Has anyone suggested just nicking the honesty box yet?

I presume things are different in Scotland with different access laws? How does it work out there?

Due to a tradition of using cycles to access some hills along estate roads and the like, cycles were considered as an accompaniment to walkers rather than as a separate class of use so have pretty much always been allowed on "footpaths".

Personally I think the access laws in England and Wales just need to be routinely ignored if anything is to actually change.

Rule 1 obviously applies, as it does in Scotland. Snowdon and Ben Lomond are good examples. Its legal to ride both but one has a voluntary ban and the other is covered by "responsible use" So if you went up Ben Lomond on a Saturday afternoon you would rightly get a bit of stick. Do it on a quiet morning or evening and any walkers around will probably just give you a bit of encouragement

Admittedly the current situation is testing everyone, but when it settles down and the new "Covid Countrysiders" have returned to the pubs and retail parks then cyclists should be pushing for responsible access to footpaths or just riding them until everyone sees sense.

Bit I’m thinking about is the footpath that runs passed the air shaft at the Sapperton Tunnel. It’s a public footpath on OS but sign states hours of operation which implies no right of access outside hours.

Option 5: Move to Scotland, or somewhere else without such stupid land access rights.

Option 6: Lobby the Welsh Government - why do we have to use these silly english laws....

Rule 1 obviously applies, as it does in Scotland. Snowdon and Ben Lomond are good examples. Its legal to ride both but one has a voluntary ban and the other is covered by “responsible use” So if you went up Ben Lomond on a Saturday afternoon you would rightly get a bit of stick. Do it on a quiet morning or evening and any walkers around will probably just give you a bit of encouragement

I take a responsible access approach to footpaths in Wales. Wouldn't ride a welsh coast path in summer, but a rare cold and dry Tuesday in February is fair game.

Does he need planning permission for his new toll road?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/shortcuts/2014/aug/04/private-toll-road-bristol-bath-a431

Option 5: Move to Scotland, or somewhere else without such stupid land access rights.

Nah it's full of smug ****s.

Personally I think the access laws in England and Wales just need to be routinely ignored if anything is to actually change.

They are, really. Everyone walks and rides on the 'mountains' (the colloquial name for the high land between the South Wales valleys before anyone gets pedantic) - casual riders, families, the lot, no-one cares regardless of RoW access. And the amount of MTB trails being built in the forestry by MTBers is quite incredible.

re nuisance - yes, cycling past livestock could be argued to be a nuisance but it's totally legal (albeit rule 1 / bad form) on a bridleway so how can it be a nuisance in one case if not the other.

Not saying it's correct or not (legally or morally) but that's one of the gists of the CTC article which I linked previously about why cycling appropriately on footpaths should be allowed.

yes, cycling past livestock could be argued to be a nuisance but it’s totally legal (albeit rule 1 / bad form) on a bridleway so how can it be a nuisance in one case if not the other.

Well, a farmer could put his pregnant or vulnerable animals in fields that do not have bridleways on the assumption that they won't be spooked by bikes. In that case, it would be a nuisance on the footpath but not the bridleway.

and if the bikes are ridden at walking pace?

Nah it’s full of smug ****.

Fair enough, stick to the eternal plebacy then.

He's effectively creating a contract, like private parking. I wonder what rules apply eg liability as referenced above.

Fair enough, stick to the eternal plebacy then.

My post wasn't a dig at Scotland (a place I like), it was a dig at the smart arses who come out with these stupid lines. That you also then came out with 🙂

Tinners
...I presume things are different in Scotland with different access laws? How does it work out there? (I mean in terms of possible damage to land/fences and how the landowners are compensated – or not)....

Yes much better.

We always had the right of open access but the recent laws put it in black and white.

In the past, 50+ years ago, we'd carry wire cutters and spare wire so if a gate was locked, we cut through the fence*, and then wired it back up. We had more than a few confrontations with gun carrying posh types, but just told them to eff off, we knew our rights.

It surprises me that people are prepared to accept restricted access. Maybe you all need to get a bit Bolshie like we were. It's much more pleasant these days.

*EDIT: mesh deer fences usually 7' or more high. For ordinary barbed wire fences we used to carry a bit of canvas to put over it, and then step over.

That you also then came out with

Need a cuddle Molly?

Merely pointing out that if you lot down there continue to 'know your place', nothing will ever change.

Blaming us for it is a bit rich mate. Where were you in the great revolution in Scotland that I must've missed?

Where were you in the great revolution in Scotland that I must’ve missed?

It's probably worth remembering that Scottish access laws were only enshrined in law relatively recently. Access to the countryside was largely based on a historical tradition of access.

Essentially it was a legal grey area. You didn't in fact have a legal right to access the land but landowners also had very little legal recourse to prevent access, which funnily enough is pretty much what the situation is in England and Wales at present. Somehow for the most part it worked okay and the tradition of access persisted until it was made actual law in 2005.

The other Scottish anomaly is the bicycles were never considered separately from walkers

Hmmm, a mate of mine owns the land directly to the south of it. I'm sure that little strip of trees are his. I wonder if he knows about it.

Christ Molly, you DO need a cuddle! 🙂

Merely pointing out that if you lot down there continue to ‘know your place’, nothing will ever change.

As a Welsh person, I agree. It runs deep.

Sometime around the 1850s, we just gave up.

I’m definitely with the Bolshie faction. We need to stop doffing our caps at landowners and demand access rights equal to Scotland. Suggesting that we tiptoe around these people so we don’t frighten them is just a way of continuing deference.

Power to the people! As Wolfie Smith would say.

If It's an honesty box he's got up then he's not actually charging is he?
Cough up. (or don't)

molgrips
Blaming us for it is a bit rich mate. Where were you in the great revolution in Scotland that I must’ve missed?

It only happens because you permit it. That's why I said you have to get Bolshie.

And as for where I was when the great revolution happened, I was in Australia, cutting my way through fences there (and wiring them back up).

Restrictive property laws are rights that have been stolen from you, so bloody well steal them back or flout them.

You're already good at the Bolshie bit, now aim it at the right people... 🙂

It only happens because you permit it

Me?

That’s why I said you have to get Bolshie.

Like what? Organise a mass trespass movement? Take on the world single-handedly? I'm not sure I can handle that, I have work and a family and stuff. Is that what you did to get access in Scotland?

You seem to be suggesting that the English and Welsh are all happy to be subservient. Which is bollocks, insulting and quite ignorant of the different contexts, IMO. Victim blaming, if you like.

or flout them

We do - read back.

Like what? Organise a mass trespass movement? Take on the world single-handedly? I’m not sure I can handle that, I have work and a family and stuff. Is that what you did to get access in Scotland?

Almost the opposite. Almost.

The first draft of the Land Reform Bill was published just before Foot and Mouth erupted. If you were to read that draft, you'd be shocked at some of the constraints being put forward; no night-time access (and therefore no wild camping), no rights over "agricultural" land (which included sheep grazing) and a few others. During F&M, two things became apparent. The first was that the public generally took on board all of the advice about avoiding certain places, disinfecting shoes on arrival and departure etc. showing that, as a whole, they could be trusted to act responsibly. The second was that land managers were shown to be openly flouting the law by illegally restricting access. Some of us were involved in highlighting this second point and re-gaining access via both militant means and by raising issues with the Police, LAs and the Scottish Govt. (FWIW I lost a role with the Pentlands Hill Regional Park as a result). When the Land Reform Bill came back to parliament, it was substantially changed and almost every restriction was removed.

There is definitely a balance to be sought. It is necessary to act with a certain degree of caution when trying to change things but sometimes, it's necessary to push the boundaries by actually getting involved and doing something other than whinging on an internet forum

I just read about this. It seems that everyman's right always existed in Scotland, it just wasn't enshrined in modern law. So it was just a case of fine tuning (or resisting erosion of) what you already had.

In England and Wales we'd have to overturn laws that specifically prevent us from accessing private land, which is a much greater task.

molgrips
You seem to be suggesting that the English and Welsh are all happy to be subservient.

More Stockholm Syndrome perhaps.

And mass disobedience and activism is the only way you're going to get your laws changed.

Or are you waiting for the nice chaps who own your country to suddenly decide to be really nice chaps and remove the restrictions voluntarily.

Oh, and by the way, it's not smugness to be happy you have freedom to set foot in the wilds of your own country. It may be incredulity that others don't have it in theirs.

It only happens because you permit it....Restrictive property laws are rights that have been stolen from you, so bloody well steal them back or flout them.

Well said. There's far far too many folk (not necessarily mountain bikers)  walkers and the like who are full of "you shouldn't ride here, or "It's illegal" and the answer to all of them is "Mind you own business".

There was a comment piece in the Guardian by George Monbiot yesterday around this very same topic.

The amount of forelock tugging in the comments beggars belief.

Most of the arguments essentially boiled down to "the public can't be trusted to use the land"

"Stockholm Syndrome" is probably the right term.

In England and Wales we’d have to overturn laws that specifically prevent us from accessing private land, which is a much greater task.

Getting rid of the remaining hereditary members of the House of Lords would be a start. They are still going a long way towards blocking public access reforms. When it comes to democracy we are still a joke when you get more of a say because your great great…grandmother shagged a king or your many more great grandfather chose the right side in a fight.