More Bridleways - ePetition

bails87

But if you put in a vague request you'll get nothing.

I don't know if anyone north of the border wants to comment, but I haven't heard any stories of cyclists being forced off bridleways because they've also got access to footpaths in Scotland. That doesn't seem like a likely thing to happen. If we were asking for cycling specific routes to be built then yes, I could see it, like if I ride on the road and get told to ride on the cyclepath on the pavement, even though I'm allowed to be on the road, and the road goes where I want to go and is in better condition that the cyclepath. But I don't think that's like the bridleway/footpath conundrum.

I think it should be a clear request for Scottish access laws to be introduced down south, phrased in a general 'improved access' way, rather than a 'mountain bike' way. Then we can get the 'bobblehats', MTBers, and general outdoorsy types on board too.

cooldad

Or just ride them, don't make a nuisance and generally you'll be ignored.
Busy footpaths are no good for riding anyway, so stay on the lesser travelled ones, smile and say hello to the bobbleheads, stop and pull over if necessary, and don't worry.

bails87

Cooldad, I do ride them, but if someone's going to malke a petition it should make sense and ask for something acheivable.

cooldad

I agree but don't have any faith I petitions unless maybe they appeal to the masses like bringing back hanging.

bails87

unless maybe they appeal to the masses like bringing back hanging

Shirley you mean the anti-capital punishment one that got more signatures than the pro-capital punishment one?

I agree that they're a bit pointless though. You sign it, it might reach 100,000 signatures, or a whopping 0.167% of the population, then our dear leaders might talk about the issue, then they probably won't do anything after talking about it. If they even bother to talk about it at all, which they can just choose not to. And they onlyhave to think about talking about it f it gets to 100,000, which only three have done so far. Woohoo, democracy in action!

cooldad

Having whizzed through some of them, I depair for the future of mankind.

Anonymous

mat-ster wrote:

Everyone please ask others to sign this Petition - Once it gets to the 100,000 mark it WILL be discussed and has a very realistic chance of being acted upon.

This is happening more frequently now in Parliament and they're getting a little annoyed that they ever agreed to let this happen. However the tactic is to discuss it but very few turn up and generally nothing happens, a report is produced to reply to the petition and a lot of time and tax payers money is wasted.

100,000 on this however is extremely unlikely. Something like the price of fuel yes as that affects everyone.

cloudynights

if these epetitions work or dont im not sure but i find it very strange that any knob head from a mountain bike forum would not support wanting more bridleways, we all dont ride at nice trail centres some m/bikers like knarly bridleways, and there not full of horse riders, a lot of the bridlepaths in the north of england not really suitable for horses

bails87

cloudynights wrote:

i find it very strange that any knob head from a mountain bike forum would not support wanting more bridleways,

We love you too.


Building 70,000 miles of bridleway would be expensive. I would support a change in access laws, allowing bikes to use footpaths (not pavements). Then there's no need to build a load of bridelways.

How would you feel if you local council said
"Oi, Mr Cloudynights, you've got to remove the fences on two sides of your garden and replace them with gates meeting specification XYZ so that we can meet our quota of new bridleways. Also, don't stop anyone walking, biking or riding a horse through your garden. Chop chop.
Yours sincerely

Northshire Council"

That is a massive ball ache for councils, govt and land owners.

Changing the access laws requires no construction, no replacing of gates, just paperwork. Probably still a ball ache, but less of one.

cloudynights

most footpaths are not mountain bike friendly, the national trail could be part used as well as linking up exsiting bridle paths which is being done at the moment from the peak district up to the lakes none of which goes through back gardens, farmland yes moorland yes but not back gardens, i think that getting the whole thing debated would be a start, goverment wants to build a highspeed rail link to the midlands then further north, i dont think wanting more bridlepaths is a need for any hysterical pen pushers outbursts

Anonymous

Aside from stiles on some footpaths (not all of them have these), most are not much different from singletrack except no berms. Very bike friendly.

Bridleways often take the route of farm or forestry vehicle tracks and can involve huge churned up tyre tracks, which are not very bike friendly.

Maybe I'm used to southern bridleways and haven't experienced the glory of them up north, but down here they're dull and boring farm tracks in the main. Almost tarmac in places.

That amount of bridleways still will require a hell of a lot of new ones to be allocated. Okay, not through someone's garden perhaps, but if you're a farmer you wouldn't want one to be allocated through the middle of your crops.

As has been said, raise the profile of demanding access and you get a big fight on your hands with the bobble hat wearers (some of whom have a lot of influence and status, compared to us scruffy drunken bike riders). That despite the fact that bikes may have been using the place all along anyway, just without a legal right of way. An example is a case I'm following down in Devon where the NT want to build bike trails on their own land, where riders already ride, and suddenly the local NIMBY bobble hats are out in force insisting the entirety of nature will be destroyed as a result.

Also - bridleway access just promotes further the perception that bikes should be treated and restricted the same way as horses.

A Bike Is Not A Horse

and to quote

"1968 – Section 30 of the Countryside Act; permits the riding of bicycles on public bridleways but they must give way to other users.The act says that it “shall not create any obligation to facilitate the use of the bridleway by cyclists”"
http://singletrackworld.com/2010/09/onl ... all-areas/

adiggers

epetitions are a joke ,made up to think you have rights.
the tax on fuel one,last month is a prime example.

Eranu

Maybe I'm used to southern bridleways and haven't experienced the glory of them up north, but down here they're dull and boring farm tracks in the main. Almost tarmac in places.

You must be riding the wrong ones, although sanitisation is reducing the good ones.

bompington

Scottish access laws rock: essentially I can walk, ride, paddle, camp (away from roads), light fires, ski or whatever - pretty much wherever I want so long as it's self-propelled. A few test cases have clarified the "back garden" clause - for instance some obnoxious millionaire failed to convince the courts that his 80-acre estate was his back garden, but Anne Gloag (Stagecoach, normally a non-obnoxious millionaire) managed to get 12 acres around her house declared as such. And craftier landowners are making increasing use of the ability to ban people due to a specific event at a specific time.

But actually there are factors affecting Scotland that don't work as well in England. One is that there is a history and culture of open access, which, although far from universal, has always been part of the Scottish outdoor scene. The other, of course, is that Scotland has a lot more empty spaces.

Still it's nice that I can literally head out of my back gate and ride across a couple of fields to the nearby woods whenever I want. Don't get jealous now ;-)

mat-ster

diy wrote:

What we need is a nice vague request simply to increase the facilities for riding in the countryside, by allowing cyclists access to more of the countryside. This way you don't go head to head with the bobble hats.

Exactley - this is a petition worth signing, because it does not put conditions on how MORE bridleways are made available.

cloudynights wrote:

if these epetitions work or dont im not sure but i find it very strange that any knob head from a mountain bike forum would not support wanting more bridleways, we all dont ride at nice trail centres some m/bikers like knarly bridleways, and there not full of horse riders, a lot of the bridlepaths in the north of england not really suitable for horses

Words of wisdom...

Bridleways often take the route of farm or forestry vehicle tracks and can involve huge churned up tyre tracks, which are not very bike friendly.

Is that not part of the fun...

sniper68

deadkenny wrote:

Maybe I'm used to southern bridleways and haven't experienced the glory of them up north, but down here they're dull and boring farm tracks in the main. Almost tarmac in places.

Aye :roll:



Not a dull and boring farm track

bails87

mat-ster: Calling someone who disagrees with you a 'knob head' is 'words of wisdom'......? :roll:

Where will these bridleways be built? And by who?

You aren't asking for (in my opinion, the sensible thing of) increased access for MTBers, which I absolutely support, you're asking for more bridleways. Which means building new ones, or converting footpaths to bridleways. It might be that there are some footpaths that have been downgraded, where they could be made suitable to be classified as a bridleway with no work, just change the sign and job done. But enough to match the current level of footpaths? I doubt it. The vast majority would be newly constructed bridleways. And based on what? Nothing to do with the succesful laws in Scotland, just a "there are X miles of this, so there should be X miles of that too". There are more miles of local roads than motorways, but if someone suggesting building enough motorway to match the current miles of local roads people would think you were mad.

Ibbo: That stuff looks brilliant. But why not allow MTBers to use the hundreds of miles of similar footpaths? There isn't going to be 70,000 miles of new bridleway that looks like that, not in a million years. As you can see from the pointlessness of most cycle lanes, if councils get a target to build 10 miles of something, they'll build it where it's not wanted, where it won't be used and where it'll be the least disruptive to other people.

I don't want the person who designed this:
to be picking routes for new bridleways just because gov't has told him he's got to provide X miles of it by a certain date.

squired

I can't help but think that some of the people commenting on this are thinking about themselves and not the bigger picture. Would it be bad, for example, if they opened up 10,000 miles of new bridleway that was "boring"? If that extra 10,000 miles helped more people to get out and enjoy being on their bikes away from ever more dangerous roads I'd be happy.

I once cycled the track that runs down from Guildford to the south coast. It was incredibly boring, but I was really impressed by how many families I saw out on their bikes. From that point onwards I've always had it in my mind that giving more people access to such paths would bring a real shift in the attitude to cycling.

By the way, I signed the petition.

Anonymous

Well there's no chance of getting bridleways like they apparently have up rocky north from those photos, down here in the south. If they build any it will be flat and dull.

Sure, gets lots of people out there cycling, but as I said before it also gives ammo to the woolly hat brigade to insist bikes stick purely to these bridleways and allows them to get them banned from all the good singletrack.

Anyway. It won't happen. I'd much rather we convert to the Scottish system or even something like shifting liability for users of land to the user where they are unauthorised. i.e. if a land owner is trying to kick bikes of their land it's often more because they would be liable if someone has an accident. If liability was all on the rider and they were made fully aware of this, then some would be more responsive to bikes on their land.

sniper68

bails87 wrote:

Ibbo: That stuff looks brilliant. But why not allow MTBers to use the hundreds of miles of similar footpaths? There isn't going to be 70,000 miles of new bridleway that looks like that, not in a million years.

Building BWs is not the answer,as you said allowing bikers to use existing FPs is the answer.The BWs in my photos are old packhorse/drovers routes and in some cases old Roman military passes,years of erosion and wear and tear has created them,you just can't build that :?
Getting access rights changed isn't going to happen.When they CRoW act was passed in 2000 bikers/horses were deliberately excluded.
I've posted this before when we tried a similar petition.It's from Richard Benyon MP,Minister for Fisheries and Countryside(Defra) Here's the conclusion:-

Mr Ibbo**** made suggestions for changes to current public rights of way legislation, but
the Government has no plans to introduce access provisions in England similar to those in
the Land Reform Act in Scotland.
The legislation has already been subject to a recent comprehensive review with direct input
from user groups. In autumn 2008 Natural England set up a Stakeholder Working Group
with a focus on the issues around the planned extinguishment by the Countryside and
Rights of Way Act in 2026 of pre-1949 public rights of way not yet recorded on the official
definitive map held by surveying authorities.

diy

More reason to tell them what we want rather than how to deliver it. If the question is please can cyclists use footpaths and have the same right to roam rights as in scottyland. The answer will be think of all the drunken yobs on their BMXs scaring the bobblehats and disturbing mr badger. What about the children they will say.

Whereas if the question is please can better access to the countryside for off-road riding to encourage all types of cycling from families out with their kids to cycling enthusiasts who want more challenging environments. There are obvious economic, health and feel good benefits. Currently cyclists have been excluded from legislation to open access to the countryside. etc etc, reworded in to sentences etc.

bails87

Diy: I agree with that second paragraph, I just don't see why it's mutually exclusive with the Scottish style access law.

sniper68

diy wrote:

Whereas if the question is please can better access to the countryside for off-road riding to encourage all types of cycling from families out with their kids to cycling enthusiasts who want more challenging environments. There are obvious economic, health and feel good benefits. Currently cyclists have been excluded from legislation to open access to the countryside. etc etc, reworded in to sentences etc.

I have a copy of the original letter we sent to our local MPs somewhere,I'll dig it out.Mine (AFAIK) was the only one to be passed on to MR Benyon.It was very professionally done and worded to include all cyclists and to encourage new people to get out there.The answer was exactly the same.

DodgeT

So... where are those 2 pics of ibbo ? They look great

sniper68

DodgeT wrote:

So... where are those 2 pics of ibbo ? They look great

They're on the Watendlath to Rosthwaite descent on the Borrowdale Bash in the Lake District.They're just a short section of a long and varied classic Lakes descent 8)

1mancity2

ibbo68 wrote:

DodgeT wrote:

So... where are those 2 pics of ibbo ? They look great

They're on the Watendlath to Rosthwaite descent on the Borrowdale Bash in the Lake District.They're just a short section of a long and varied classic Lakes descent 8)

Got to do that looks fantastic!

sniper68

1mancity2 wrote:

ibbo68 wrote:

DodgeT wrote:

So... where are those 2 pics of ibbo ? They look great

They're on the Watendlath to Rosthwaite descent on the Borrowdale Bash in the Lake District.They're just a short section of a long and varied classic Lakes descent 8)

Got to do that looks fantastic!

Strange ride,16 miles.50% Tarmac but with 2 brilliant descents.

DodgeT

Think a new thread in the rides section is due...

diy

bails87 from what Ibbo68 says - that request has been made and the answer is no or at best not for another 15 years. By which time I will be wearing a bobble hat and shouting at the drunken bmxers because I am too deaf to hear them coming up behind me ringing their bells.

sniper68

Letter in Full if anyone interested:-

Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London SW1P 3JR
Telephone 08459 335577
Email helpline@defra.gsl.gov.uk
Website www defra.gov.uk

Angela Smith MP
The Arc
Town Hall
Manchester Road
Stockbridge
S3620T
From Richard Benyon MP
Minister tor Natural Envlromnent and Fisheries
Your ref: RC/IBB001012/01100922
Our ref: MC 201472
14th October 2010

Dear Angela
Thank you for your letter of 30 September enclosing one from your constituent, Paul
Ibbo****of , High Green, Sheffield, about access for cyclists.
The Government is committed to improving access for cyclists and Mr Ibbo**** will be
pleased to know that Natural England's plans for implementation of coastal access include
proposals to identify opportunities to provide local access improvements for cyclists.
The Countryside and Rights of Way Act required local highway authorities to take a
strategic view of their public rights of way network by preparing rights of way improvement
plans to improve the network for users such as cyclists. Most authorities have finished their
plans and we hope that they will now take these forward and implement them, Defra would
also encourage cycling groups to co-ordinate their efforts, and work with local authorities
and other user groups to improve the bridleway and cycle network in local areas in line with
the plans.
Mr Ibbo**** made suggestions for changes to current public rights of way legislation, but
the Government has no plans to introduce access provisions in England similar to those in
the Land Reform Act in Scotland.
The legislation has already been subject to a recent comprehensive review with direct input
from user groups. In autumn 2008 Natural England set up a Stakeholder Working Group
with a focus on the issues around the planned extinguishment by the Countryside and
Rights of Way Act in 2026 of pre-1949 public rights of way not yet recorded on the official
definitive map held by surveying authorities.
The Group had a balanced representation from the user, land manager and local authority
sectors. The idea was to work together to suggest how the system could be streamlined,
and to propose associated reforms that would deliver real benefit to all sides.
The Group concentrated on making strategic proposals as to what needs to be achieved
through legislative and procedural reform making 31 specific proposals to Natural England
for change in this area. Natural England published those proposals in March of this year
and the Government is still considering them.

RICHARD BENYON