ePetition - mtb access on footpaths

bails87

I ride footpaths all the time. The ones here have stiles and gates every 5 minutes if I'm lucky, more like every 3 minutes. That's all I've got. It's rubbish! And they're all flat and boring....it's why I spent most of my time on the road bike. If I'm going to be bored, I might as well be bored at 30mph than 15mph

But, the law changes in Scotland haven't resulted in it eroding away to a pebble, so I'm sure it can be done here.

As for lifting the bike over stiles....tough! If you ride a footpath you should be prepared for stiles, it's a footpath, not a trail centre. If you ride a bridleway then there will be gates instead.

Edit: However, I think these e-petitions are a pish poor attempt to appear to be listening by a goverment that doesn't actually give a to$$, so I'm not going to sign it. If we want it to happen we need to be going to council access meetings and speaking to our MPs.

Tank-slapper

Northwind wrote:

Tank-slapper wrote:

Clearly the infrastructure has not caught up with the legislation, if it ever will.

Why would you say that? There's a big difference between being allowed to ride somewhere, and turning everywhere into bike trails. It's not hard to lift a bike over a deer stile.

Because it is true. In England, it is legally required of the local authority to ensure that rights of way are kept open. If footpaths were to be turned into bridleways, all stiles would have to be changed for gates. Perhaps the situation is different in Scotland? Anyway, it seems much more sensible to me to grant the same access rights to cyclists and horse riders that walkers have in open access areas.

The difficulty of hoiking your bike over a stile depends how heavy your bike is.

butcher of bakersfield

The petition is asking to grant cyclists access to footpaths. Not turn footpaths into Bridleways. The reclassification in the 2nd option would never happen.

And I kinda agree about horses. I mean why shouldn't they have access, it's the oldest form of transport going... But I think it's a far more complex situation for them. They need gates. They weigh a ton. Some footpaths could be seriously dangerous. Etc. And you could go on to say, well why don't motorbikes have access? Or 4x4s? Or helicopters..?

Cycling is pretty much the same as walking. Many a time I just go out to enjoy the countryside. To explore. I cycle a bit. Walk for a bit. Sit down for a bit. Cycle a bit more. I really couldn't give a shit about styles as long as I can get from A to B. The only difference is I have a convenient form of transport that weighs little more than my backpack. Aside from that I'm just a darned rambler.

cycle monster

Given the increase in off road cycling something has to give. There will inevitably be an increase in mtbikers using footpaths. I suggest they are opened to us all and the styles are recycled to build north-shore over the muddy bits. It would be interesting to know how many miles of paths/roads etc that are open to walkers as opposed to paths open to cyclists and horse riders. That aside, the compulsory sale of all golf courses to local mtb clubs for a pound will improve my humour no end.

bails87

butcher of bakersfield wrote:

The petition is asking to grant cyclists access to footpaths. Not turn footpaths into Bridleways. The reclassification in the 2nd option would never happen.

Exactly.

But I think cyclists have more in common with pedestrians than horses. Bikes don't kick people in the face for walking behind them. You can get off a bike and walk over anything that's not rideable, you can carry a bike over a stile, and if you can't then you shouldn't be riding somewhere where there are going to be stiles. You can't carry a horse over a stile!

Walkers have to climb over them, why shouldn't we?

allen.coulson

Signed and after reading it carefully found that it was gibberish, unstructured and unconvincing.

Northwind

Tank-slapper wrote:

If footpaths were to be turned into bridleways

Nobody's asking to turn all footpaths into bridleways.

Tank-slapper wrote:

The difficulty of hoiking your bike over a stile depends how heavy your bike is.

I'm a total runt, so if I can lift my 36lb full suss over a 2-level deer stile then it's not that difficult Though there is a bit of technique to it, you tend to figure it out quite fast once you realise that the trail you're on has one every 500 metres.

Tank-slapper

Northwind wrote:

Tank-slapper wrote:

If footpaths were to be turned into bridleways

Nobody's asking to turn all footpaths into bridleways.

You are being pedantic now. It is either turn footpaths into bridleways or give cyclists access to footpaths. It doesn't matter which, the council would still be legally obliged to change all stiles into gates.

bails87

Tank-slapper wrote:

Northwind wrote:

Tank-slapper wrote:

If footpaths were to be turned into bridleways

Nobody's asking to turn all footpaths into bridleways.

You are being pedantic now. It is either turn footpaths into bridleways or give cyclists access to footpaths. It doesn't matter which, the council would still be legally obliged to change all stiles into gates.

No. One means reclassifying every footpath as a bridleway, so horses and cyclists are also allowed on them. The other means changing what is allowed on a footpath so that cyclists are allowed to use them. Horses wouldn't be.

Also, why would anyone be legally obliged to change stiles? And I thought it was the landowner, not the council, who had to keep them clear/usuable.

butcher of bakersfield

Tank-slapper wrote:

You are being pedantic now. It is either turn footpaths into bridleways or give cyclists access to footpaths. It doesn't matter which, the council would still be legally obliged to change all stiles into gates.

The thing is. It's not asking for dedicated cycleways. Just access. You don't need gates for that. And I certainly wouldn't expect gates. I don't see any legal obligation... Otheriwse they'd all have to have wheelchair access already...

nwallace

Read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Refor ... 9_Act_2003

Then start petition for same to aplly in the rest of the UK.

Northwind

Tank-slapper wrote:

You are being pedantic now. It is either turn footpaths into bridleways or give cyclists access to footpaths. It doesn't matter which, the council would still be legally obliged to change all stiles into gates.

No, they wouldn't. It's not pedantic, just stating the obvious. Allowing bikes to use footpaths does not mean turning footpaths into bike paths, and doesn't imply any obligation to remove gates whatsoever.

Come ride in Scotland, stiles and fence-hops everywhere, and no councils running around trying to turn them all into kissing gates. it's not some wild theory, it's already been done, and it works.

Your current system could be designed to cause contention and erosion- concentrating riders, walkers and horsiclists into limited spaces is a stupid idea, you can half the erosion on a trail just by halfing the traffic and you do that by doubling the usable trails.

nwallace

Stiles and fence hops are much easier than wicket gates.

paulbox

Signed, but I ride footpaths every time I go out.

JDRfive

Signed. But it still wouldn't stop me.