You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Not cycling related but just a local landowner and his lackeys being deliberately awkward. Here's the background...
We moved into a small new build development last year. 1 street, about 40 houses. At the back of the development is some woodland that's owned by a very wealthy local guy. Since buying the woodland the guy has setup a community trust to look after the woods and they have a bunch of volunteers that do various bits of maintenance around the woods. The woods in total are about 1km squared. From what we've been told, the woods people do not like the fact houses were built next door.
The owner and volunteers consider this to be "private woodland" (their own words) despite them being on the edge of large town and in Scotland where such things don't exist as the access laws allow us to responsibly access such land. They have a real hatred of dogs and have loads of signs up saying dogs must be on leads. Lets not get into an argument about dogs, but the Scottish access laws allow dogs off the lead if they're under close control. These volunteers take a zero tolerance attitude to all dogs. My neighbour encountered an old couple with a very small dog in tears one day after one of the volunteers got highly aggressive, screaming at them and threatened that he'd put their dog on a lead and take it off them. This is not an isolated incident and I'm mentioning it more to give a picture of the people involved.
They also like to close the woods off to run private events that they charge for. None of the notices that are required to exempt land from access in the Scottish LRA are ever displayed. I can only assume as they have this "private woodland" mentality they think they can stop people accessing it whenever they want.
Here's the latest saga I could use some thoughts on.
The land our houses are built on was formerly a quarry next to the woods. From what I can see on old maps, this land and the woods has lain out of use for a long time, and over that time a series of unofficial paths developed. In the woods themselves, the volunteers have formalised some of those paths and surfaced them.
The builders of our development have just built a short, well surfaced and tidy path that connected the street to edge of the woods. From what I can tell, this is essentially reinstating a small portion of one of the old unofficial paths that was partially lost when the houses were built. At the end of the path they built was a very small area clear of plants, trees etc and there was maybe a 6ft gap between the end of new path and one of the formalised paths in the woods.
The woods people have taken huge offense to this, and on that small open space between the new path and the path in the woods, they planted a bunch of large thorny bushes to block access. Stupidly, a resident allegedly ripped them out which has obviously worsened the situation. I just went for a walk at lunchtime and discovered a large metal fence has been placed at the end of the new path to block access and talking to one of the site staff, apparently some "heritage" group has got involved and ruled that the woods cannot be accessed from this point and the new path has to be removed.
Clearly this is the woods people throwing their toys out the pram. The new path is entirely on the development land and they've decided to block access out of pettiness. Clearly someone ripping the stuff they planted out has made the situation far worse.
It's still possible to access the woods, it just involves a slightly longer walk along a busyish road, but this path gave kids and adults nice safe direct access to the woods. There are also a few other points where the woods can be accessed unofficially on undeveloped paths, though not from our street.
What are our options here? The builders obviously wont care, and the owner is a bit of a local celebrity with probably a lot of clout. I've had a look on the Scottish outdoor access site and annoyingly the position of access officer for my area is currently vacant. Does this even count as blocking access if the access wasn't officially there to begin with?
Local Access Officer will help here such a bummer there is not one. Have you checked with LA about the access officer direct - they may have recruited.
So many variables, not known details about the site (such as historic site, any protected or vulnerable biodiversity etc).
Seems like grown up conversations are needed?
Remove the fence one night?
Remove the fence one night
From what the site worker said, the new built path has to be ripped out which will leave a muddy slope rather than a nice gravel path, so even without the fence, it's not really easy access
Where are you?
Independent of whether you have a local access officer you will have a Local Access Forum that may be able to help.
Development builders do not build paths unless they are told - generally under a Section 75 for the planning permission.
Development builders do not build paths unless they are told – generally under a Section 75 for the planning permission.
The path is on the plans for the development. It was actually a key factor in us moving here as it cuts about 10 minutes off the walk to the local train station
Where are you?
South Lanarkshire
I would look at the planning permission
files and conditions for your development on the council website. If the builders built the path then I'd expect that something was said at the time about maintaining access to the woods. If so there will be a record of those discussions either on the file or if you speak to the development management officer who handled the PP. If so planning enforcement may help.
It's hard to give advice with so many unknowns of the situation and history, but it sounds like it should fall under the general access rights of SOAC and the LRA, and they cannot just close the land for events without going through certain processes and consultations. If you feel that it might be a public right of way that been obstructed contact Scotways.
A shame there's no OAO in place to help.
The path is on the plans for the development. It was actually a key factor in us moving
Definitely contact Planning then to query the blocking of it.
They held a Halloween event. Sold thousands of tickets. Erected fences blocking access completely. They were up for 2 days after the event. From my time racing bikes, I'm well aware of the process and signage needed to temporarily exempt land from public access. They don't bother and just stick these fences up
How did the land become private in the first place? Can you just challenge the owner to a duel?
That looks easily moved...(which obviously doesn't help with the original question!)
Relevant example within link....
As usual, its likely one of those which would need to be tested in court if the owner is difficult. But given theres a bridge there it looks pretty 'cut and dried' that access has (had) been established. Maybe not by right of way - however ROW's have been superceeded by Land Reform Act (which does have caveats for access)
"Sold thousands of tickets. Erected fences blocking access completely"
They need a Local Authority Suspension, valid for up to 5 days.
In the absence of a access officer I would contact your local councilor.
You will not be the only one complaining and they may be progressing it (if not, tell them to),
And out of interest, who actually is the celebrity walloper in question?
How did the land become private in the first place?
That's irrelevant. All land is essentially private (i.e. owned by someone) but there are generally public rights across it in Scotland, unless access rights are excluded for various reasons as per the Land Reform Act (2003) Scotland. Different in England and Wales.
bob, i walk in there every few days with the dog (we are in Hairmyres). Interestingly they have recently chained off the 2 access gates on the path at the hospital/station side and now all access and egress is via the main entrance which is a PITA.
I noticed that new path at the bottom of the hill in from your development the other week and wondered how it will work with summer evenings, kids, dogs etc.
I let our dog off the lead in the Woodlands once away from the road and when safe to do so, so essentially outwith bird breeding season etc. He has decent recall but if he sees a squirrel he's off, and IMO that is fine, as the squirrel will run up a tree ! I haven't been challenged on it yet but know many folks have. If/when challenged their tactic has been to take pics of the 'volunteers' and to put it on FB pages, tag on the Coppertrees insta page etc etc. The landowner has so many fingers in other pies such as that food place that he seems to be aware of issues and will hopefully shift his view. So many of his patrons in his various establishments want to use the Woodlands for dogs and other recreations, and he's very much a businessman.
Oh and welcome to town, nobeer will be along in a moment to berate you for moving up here 🙂
Some doggy pics from Sunday for cuteness 🤪
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/wBwZv7yy/38-BA5-FD6-48-FB-4-BA1-938-F-F972-EF71-E71-B.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/wBwZv7yy/38-BA5-FD6-48-FB-4-BA1-938-F-F972-EF71-E71-B.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/85hv4rRs/9-C18-F6-A3-0355-4-DDE-B581-C581-CC5-A5-FB5.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/85hv4rRs/9-C18-F6-A3-0355-4-DDE-B581-C581-CC5-A5-FB5.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/Bv0wN2D1/E3-F39-EF0-57-FF-4132-993-A-D737-E3-DB6-CFC.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/Bv0wN2D1/E3-F39-EF0-57-FF-4132-993-A-D737-E3-DB6-CFC.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
can you check if there are core paths across the land? if they're well established and have been there a while they may have been recorded as part of SLC core paths plan. I think that blocking core paths in scotland is essentially the same as blocking a RoW in england, an alternative convenient route needs to be put in place. if not it becomes a local authority issue.
Sorry, the fence bridge pic isn't the latest debacle. That pics from when they closed the woods off for their Halloween event.
“Sold thousands of tickets."
Oh - and an event licence too.
Heaps of paper work behind that - roads sign-off, toilets, police- signoff.
Yeah, straight to local councillor.
Local access forum.
Local rag.
Planning.
Same letter, bullet point the issues: i.e. you previously had access rights, there was a path built, physical intimidation by volunteers of elderly people.
^^^ I don't understand this - if the owner isn't trying to stop access altogether (as the main entrance is still open) then why are they closing off other access points?
can you check if there are core paths across the land?
There are some sporadic dashed lines on the OS map which cover some parts of the paths but they're not linked up and complete as per the actual paths on the ground
Found the plans that are on the council website and the path they've built is clearly shown on those plans
Check on here to see if there is a core path. Scroll down to the interactive map
https://www.nature.scot/enjoying-outdoors/routes-explore/local-path-networks
Even if they've not got an OAO in place at this time they will have a core paths plan on their website with paths mapped and listed.
Unfortunately OS have still not managed to get around to showing core paths on OS Maps since 2003 and have various excuses for why not.
who actually is the celebrity walloper in question?
Oh, he's quite the character
I don’t understand this – if the owner isn’t trying to stop access altogether (as the main entrance is still open) then why are they closing off other access points?
To make access as difficult as possible. Its a well known tactic - see archerfield estates
being Scotland they cannot close off access completely but it they make it as restrictive as they can with only one entrance then it reduces the amount of folk who use the land as you can no longer walk across it. They also will put the single access point in as difficult a position as they can for the local people
^^^ I don’t understand this – if the owner isn’t trying to stop access altogether (as the main entrance is still open) then why are they closing off other access points?
I sense some disconnect between the celebrity walloper and his lackeys on the ground. It's amazing what abit of assumed power can do to some people.
they make it as restrictive as they can with only one entrance then it reduces the amount of folk who use the land as you can no longer walk across it. They also will put the single access point in as difficult a position as they can for the local people
yep, this is exactly what has been done in the past few weeks.. (though we could all now come in via bob's new path.. 🙂
I have to say I would be tempted with a bit of "direct action" ie opening up the closed path and also make sure locals video these wallopers that try to intimidate. A few arrests amongst his minions for assault ( and that is what that is - no actual physical contacted needed for it to be assault) would soon stop the shenanigans
Dissapointed celebrity walloper isn't english, I was already to apologise. He is one of your own. Punish him.
Well he sounds delightful and unfortunately may have the council bent over a desk....
bob, they have a FaceBook page where you could pose some questions, I do not know how/if they moderate before posts are public :
Who are the Laird's lackeys? Are they like the midget in that Clint Eastwood film? Power and Respect at last and abusing it...
Oh, he’s quite the character
He seems the best definition of a walloper I've seem for a while. Well, since I had dealings with the ddgy character who built the houses we stayed in previously and was most definitely of dodgy background it turned out.
bob, they have a FaceBook page where you could pose some questions, I do not know how/if they moderate before posts are public :
/blockquote>
Almost every post they put up has a mention of "our land". They genuinely think they can do what they want. My back garden faces right onto the woods and I've actually put a gate in to let us walk straight into the woods. Unfortunately it's only useable in summer as quite a large pond forms in winter, but I'm amazed they haven't been down to have an angry word with me yet.
Is there anything in your development plans about access to public transport? If that path was put in to allow new residents easier access to the existing train station you could be onto something. Can you access a planning portal to find all the documents used in the planning process?
In the absence of a Local Access officer you could always try the National Access Forum...
https://www.outdooraccess-scotland.scot/act-and-access-code/national-access-forum
My understanding is that basically all land in Scotland being accessible is the default, with the exceptions to this, and reasons for exclusion, set out in the legislation.
Went and spoke to the site foreman today to get the definitive story and he confirmed that the owner of the woods has indeed blocked access. When they saw the path being built, they planted the large thorny bushes at the point where the new path would join the path in the woods. He also confirmed that a fellow disgruntled resident had indeed pulled them out as one of the factors on him moving here was that proposed new path and the ease of access that gave to the woods and the much shorter walk to the train station.
Here's the new path. The fence on the left is the one they've put up to block access but it's easily moved, as I did this morning
This is the bit of ground that the new path should have used to merge into the existing path. This is where the woods people planted stuff to block the path. They've also dug a measly wee drainage ditch all of a sudden that traverses this bit. No doubt another tactic to claim a path cant go there.
And there's the approved plans from the council website with the path clearly shown, including the link section beyond the red boundary line
Good for you. Encourage your neighbours to do the same. Be prepared for fence escalation tho
I'd be curious to see why they wanted to make access difficult.... what are they up to in there...
£5 on badger bating
I really don't understand their motivation for being so angsty. I followed the facebook link
and they look like they are very active in opening the area up for events and free gatherings...the Spooky event must be the halloween one you mentioned. So why box-off a few locals in such an aggressive manner.
Just, why?
I’d be curious to see why they wanted to make access difficult…. what are they up to in there…
Control and reducing the amount of folk going into the woods.
I know that TJ but why?
Thats all it is. Exercise of power and an attempt to reduce folks rights. Keep the plebs out.
rickmeister
Full Member
I really don’t understand their motivation for being so angsty. I followed the facebook linkand they look like they are very active in opening the area up for events and free gatherings…the Spooky event must be the halloween one you mentioned. So why box-off a few locals in such an aggressive manner.
Just, why?
Same as i see it, the 'landowner' is the trust, not the 'famous' person, who i've never heard off before.
Looks like the trust put a lot of work into that area and encourage people to visit, the Halloween event was free from the website, you just had to sign up for a free ticket, so no keeping the plebs out, you just had to buy a ticket.
Maybe the best course of action is to become a volunteer and work out what reasoning there is against that path, from the maps they don't appear to have a single point of entry for the woods anyway.
To be fair, they have done good work in the woods. They turned what were muddy trodden paths on grass into well surfaced paths that all can access. They run nice events in the woods, walks, educational stuff for kids etc.
They do however absolutely hate the fact these houses were built there. Ironically, the guy who owns the woods sold the land that the houses are built on. It's utter madness. He still owns all the surrounding land, and he himself has got various planning permissions in place for some of the land. Permission to build a pub & restaurant, permission to build retail, permission to build more houses, all on land adjacent to the woods.
It's utterly bizarre
As a dog owner I wouldn't rule out poo being an issue. I walk mine through fields often and always pick up. But there's someone who claims it's not necessary. She has three dogs twice a day that's a lotta poo
There are core paths all over those woods.
core paths plan for SLC can be read here:
https://www.southlanarkshire.gov.uk/downloads/file/7588/core_paths_plan_adopted_november_2012_-_text
assuming yours is the development to the north west of the woods, your access path to the core paths hasn't been adopted yet, presumably because SLC core paths plan is 10 years old, and your house is not.
The landowner would need to apply for permission and have to have pretty robust reasonable grounds for restricting access, or removal of core paths.
definitely one for the council to sort.
the guy who owns the woods sold the land that the houses are built on.
It's the trust that owns it, not the individual, not even sure how much he'd be part of what's going on, looks like he was the 'philanthropist' who set it up, and probably only turns up for events where the press are around, we have similar down here, they are the poster person for the trust/charity, but do little for the day to day stuff.
Ask to join up as a volunteer and see what is happening, get a few more from your estate as well, makes it a stronger case if you're assisting the area as well.
Balaclava. Face mask. Bolt cutters or whatever tools are required to maintain access.
There are core paths all over those woods.
Just above where it says EK/4007/1 is where this new path would join that existing core path
It’s the trust that owns it, not the individual, not even sure how much he’d be part of what’s going on
He's very hands on. My father in law met him out digging in the woods one day. He owns pretty much all the land around us for some considerable distance either directly or through one of his companies or trusts.
Lots of nice chat on their website that seems to totally contradict their actions:
n bringing the woodland into active management in respect to its historic beginnings, improving integral core path routes and linking to the wider core path network and building a new Community Engagement Programme, we will provide locally distinctive, added value ensuring that the woodland becomes a more connected, regenerative, functional and resilient place.
If they want it to be connected, why remove the connection to local houses?
The planning documents for your development clearly show access planned there, noting the train station and the usual notes about making sure the neighbourhood is integrated to the surroundings and amenities properly.
[img] 
[/img]
The council need to be getting involved in my opinion.
Not up on Scottish law but wouldn't they need permission for the fence and to alter the drainage? Plus that fence looks unsafe and the ditch is a hazard to anyone walking. It's practically a man-trap. Perhaps the council might be interested in that aspect. Or a quiet word to the walloper about how much of his fortune would disappear if the fence fell on someone or an ankle got damaged in the ditch.....
Its not as clear cut in Scotland unlike England with the bridleways / foot paths stuff where blocking a ROW is not allowed
I think if its a core path it cannot be blocked but other paths tend to live in a legal grey area and can be blocked so long as some access remains
RoWs can't be blocked in Scotland either but none of the paths in question are RoWs
Ta Scotroutes - I was hoping you would comment ( I didn't mean that ROW could be blocked btw)
I have never been clear on this - do we actually have rights of way in Scotland in the same way as England and how are they defined? I know core paths are a different - are core paths rights of way and are all rights of way core paths?
Ta
RoWs have a specific legal standing over and above the right of access that applies more generally. They have existed since long before Core Paths (though there is obviously an overlap as some routes can be both). Also, you may have seen the occasional sign pointing out a RoW and mentioning that there is no path. I recently had to survey one of these between Dalwhinnie and Laggan. It was an interesting day.
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/N0GvZc9X/DSC-2575.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/N0GvZc9X/DSC-2575.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
Ta. Ive been on a few of those myself 🙂
Try to get into a telephone conversation with the landowner or his representatives over this issue and make sure you record the conversation. If he/they are used to overtly threatening the council they could be more likely to make the same mistake towards a member of the public.. There can be no denial or misinterpretation then, and it looks like The Herald would be more than keep to publish a story were it to include threats.
In the mean time, if the fence is wooden, burn it.