You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
"When this was first devised in 1953, the Ramblers' Association promoted the rights of walkers and the National Farmers' Union protected the interest of their members.
No such organisation existed to represent horse riders. In the event, Parish Councils, largely made up of landowners, did most of the groundwork for the map and it is fair to say that a great many routes, which had been ridden for decades, were either left off entirely or put on as footpaths. This is not particularly surprising since those were the days of little road traffic and comparatively few horses (equine pursuits had not been a priority in a nation fighting a recent war). It was not appreciated how important bridleways were to become."
This from
https://www.essexbridleways.co.uk/essex-bridleways
Most rights of way on the map make little sense especially where bridleways suddenly turn into to foot paths. Path designation would appear to have been defined by landowners and ramblers in 1953 and is now difficult to change.
With the proliferation of no bike signs and trespassers will be eaten signs appearing, is now the time for a complete revison of where we are allowed to ride?
I ride where I think its appropriate - not always where I like but yes, I'll happily ignore 'traditional' right of way signs when they are patently ridiculous. Life is indeed too short.
Apply rule #1 - works fine here
Reclassifying footpaths is aiming too low. We need a full right to roam and Scottish style access rights in England and Wales. It's easy to say 'it'll never happen', 'too many vested interests' etc. But there is a greater push for it now than I can ever remember. It's still a long way off but I can only see the clamour for it increasing.
is now the time for a complete revison of where we are allowed to ride?
I mean, yes, probably, but it's not going to happen. Ride where you want, but don't be a dick.
Scotland is so much nicer to ride in you go where you like its more like walking in England if it looks like a path you just follow it and avoid gardens.
The only place I have been hindered from riding in Scotland is near Balmoral.
blokeuptheroad +1
The right to responsible access is what is needed.
The only place I have been hindered from riding in Scotland is near Balmoral.
Mrs_oab and I had a 'discussion' with a burly gentleman in military uniform about launching our canoe on the Royal Dee just upstream of Balmoral about 22 years ago. The discussion was more a "**** off now" as we walked from the roadside through the trees at Invercauld Bridge to look at launching...
His smartly dressed colleagues appeared at our bunk house in the evening to enquire who we were and why we had been driving up and down the river (because shuttle).
Matt I know someone who woke up in the bothy, name escapes me, behind the shooting lodge to blue lights. Police came in looked round and left and in walked Charlie W with a bottle of whisky for a dram 😆
The problem with starting from scratch is that all groups fear their situation getting worse
Say we got the right to ride on 50% more trails but they made riding on the rest a criminal offence
Hence the status quo
The problem with starting from scratch is that all groups fear their situation getting worseSay we got the right to ride on 50% more trails but they made riding on the rest a criminal offence
Hence the status quo
This ^^.
Plus cash-strapped councils (who have to record and maintain the RoW in their areas) are already completely overwhelmed with access stuff and it's way down their list of priorities - when you've got locals complaining about public toilets, the condition of the road network, social care etc, any complaints that this FP should really be a BW falls way down the list!
And each user group fears further restrictions or conversely fears a deluge of MTBers suddenly being given free-for-all on "their" trails.
And landowners have no interest in assisting any of this - quite the opposite generally.
Rule 1 - ride wherever, be polite, say hi, don't be a dick.
I think it's very much one of those things that benefits from being a bit under the radar at the moment. Less likelihood of enforcement or further restriction!
Where I used to I went exploring one day for new trails. I saw a footpath that had horse muck on. It wasn't signposted as a footpath, so when I saw the horse muck naturally I thought it was a bridleway. Mint. Got home did some map reading, saw it was a footpath, meh, carried on riding it.
A few weeks later going down it, a chap who's house it was next to shouted at me. I stopped and asked him what he said as I didn't hear him. He comes over to the fence and I thought it was gonna be a nice chat, he didn't seem angry. He comes over and starts kicking off at me. As he was mid rant a woman on a horse comes past and he says hello to her and she said hello to him. It was clear they knew each other. I pointed out how the horse shouldn't be on the footpath also. He moaned and said horses don't cause damage like 'us'
I got in touch with the local public right of way officer and they were really helpful. But to get it changed to a bridleway I had to go to the local livery and adjacent houses to get signatures etc to say there is no objection to it being used as a bridleway and also if there have been any objections in the past. In the end I cba so just carried on LOL.
Rule 1 – ride wherever, be polite, say hi, don’t be a dick.
This basically. Went out with a lad a few years ago on Bridleways and he was riding like a complete dick at speeds where there were walkers. Just chill FFS.
Ride where you like, always look lost, sorted.
"Oh this rocky descent ISN'T Sustrans route 1?!”
The problem with starting from scratch is that all groups fear their situation getting worse
Say we got the right to ride on 50% more trails but they made riding on the rest a criminal offence
Hence the status quo
I would generally agree with that. We have it pretty good. In 30+ years of riding I've had hassle from landowners a handful of times, and that only resulted in riding back the way I came. In fact I've probably had more issues riding where I'm allowed to ride.
I would like more access but I suspect I'd up with more access where I don't particularly want it and less where I already have it, albeit cheekily.
In fact I’ve probably had more issues riding where I’m allowed to ride.
I'd say that's broadly accurate.
I'm not bothered by access legalities, most folks don't care, most folks don't know the rules. Most folks who even do know the rules often don't care to enforce them.
Current laws are pretty unenforceable, trespass is a civil matter, not a criminal one. To enforce a landowner or their agent needs to sue you. To do that they need to know who you are, there's no reason for you to tell them. Second they have to be able to show there was financial loss through damage to the location or loss of amenity, hard to prove and unless you're building dirt jumps not applicable anyway.
Key thing is mister moany over the fence can do one in the nicest possible way, unless he's the land owner or their agent it's got sweet FA to do with them.
As said above Rule #1.
Rule #1 here as well. I haven’t ridden for a few years, but I first got a mountain bike back in ‘88, and started exploring all the trails and footpaths, bridleways, byways, etc I could get to. Studying OS maps showed some anomalies, like one bridleway from Castle Combe to Long Dean, which changes to a footpath part-way along, actually at the parish boundary. Never had an issue, except for having to hoike the bike over locked gates, because a local landowner felt the need to graze a heard of Highland cattle along the footpath which runs along the side of the valley, and which turned the path to a quagmire in wet conditions.
I did once have a walker, part of a rambler’s group, look at my bike as they went past one rather warm day as I was sat having something to eat, and ask if he could borrow my bike, in a rather wistful manner… 😁
Never a problem anywhere else, though. Let sleeping dogs be.
Another for rule #1. I did have a chat with a farmer a couple of years ago who expressed his displeasure at me being there. In a couple of weeks time Havok bike park 2 opens on the land I was on, so I guess he figured if you can't beat them...
Don't be a dick doesn't seem to apply to landowners does it?
Recent examples beihng the shutting of the bridge at Bolton Abbey to bikes and the restrictions on wild camping on Dartmoor.
^ Or the national park authority apparently
The "magic bullet" for resource strapped local authorities is of course a Scottish style right to Roam. The major challenge being those most likely to oppose such a solution are disproportionately wealthy and politically well connected...
A compromise might end up being "Right to Roam (with caveats)" i.e. no roaming within say 10m of private residences (unless on a legacy, established ROW) and perhaps landowners have some responsibilities wound off of them, like removing the duty to maintain paths (but being required to allow access for volunteers to do so?) As well as perhaps removing/reducing their liabilities for any injuries that might occur for people exercising their RTR on their land?
Maybe turn it around and make the default status that there's a blanket Right to Roam on foot/horse/bicycle unless a landowner can demonstrate a specific risk that justifies not allowing or limiting public access? I can see that just resulting Olin a new backlog of applications to repeal RTR though...
The “magic bullet” for resource strapped local authorities is of course a Scottish style right to Roam.
Absolutely. It needs little "policing" and does away with the various categories which result in a mess of purple lines on the OS Maps, though there would have to be some thought given to the (already very restricted) motorised vehicle access, something which basically doesn't exist in Scotland.
though there would have to be some thought given to the (already very restricted) motorised vehicle access, something which basically doesn’t exist in Scotland.
I think it's pretty simple actually, Ramblers/horsiests/bicyclists (inc Eeebs with the same speed restrictions they have on the roads applied) get the Right to Roam. Motorbikes and 4x4s can stick to the existing rules and use existing green lanes and byways, do they really need more access?
What will be your answer to “ do they really need more access?” When people group bikes and emtb with vehicles ?
Below is probably about correctish
In England, the public rights of way network amounts to 188,700km, consisting of 146,600km of footpaths, 32,400km of bridleways, 3,700km of byways and 6,000km of restricted byways. Horse riders, therefore, currently only have access to 22 percent of public rights of way and horse-drawn vehicle drivers only five percent.
The length of the public right of way network in Wales currently amounts to 33,211km, consisting of 26,320km of footpaths, 4,965km of bridleways, 431km of byways and 1,495km of restricted byways. Horse riders therefore, currently have access to only 21 percent of public rights of way and horse-drawn vehicle drivers to only six percent.
Observation - There ain’t that many byways are there.