Everyone wants a slice of your FOOTPATH. Ramblers, BHS, Cyclists, Motorbikes,& 4×4 Off Roaders

Everyone wants a slice of your FOOTPATH. Ramblers, BHS, Cyclists, Motorbikes,& 4×4 Off Roaders

Lately there has been a huge increase in claims by access groups all wanting a ‘bite of the cherry’. Trouble is they have difficulty in agreeing with each other!

Ramblers protect the ‘rights’ of walkers, The British Horse Society think that horse riders should take precedence Cyclists demand that they should be catered for, motorbike riders think they are hard done by and 4×4 off-roaders want more Byways Open to All Traffic.

They are all focused on claiming FOOTPATHS!

Ramblers want any FOOTPATHS they can grab, including those that might have existed a hundred plus years ago and now inappropriately go through small and private gardens.

Horseriders suddenly see a huge need for extra bridleways and want FOOTPATHS upgraded to Accommodate them.

Cyclists see a need for more cycle paths and also see no reason why FOOTPATHS shouldn’t cater for them too.

4×4 Off Roaders feel hard done by. No one understands that they have just as much right to peruse their hobby the same as everyone else. Consequently they also want FOOTPATHS upgraded to Byways Open to All Traffic.

BUT

Ramblers do not want Cyclists on their FOOTPATHS!

Cyclists are against Motorbikes sharing their FOOTPATHS!

Horseriders are not keen on Cyclists using their FOOTPATHS

Motorbike riders Do not see why they shouldn’t use FOOTPATHS!

And NO ONE seems to agree that 4×4 Off Roaders should be using FOOTPATHS AT ALL!

If FOOTPATHS are allowed to be claimed or upgraded with absolutely NO consideration of the consequences this is sheer stupidity.

Yet another stupidity of our Public Rights of Way system is that it actively encourages ‘claimers’ to not only be dishonest but also break the law. The law states that cyclists cannot use Pubic FOOTPATHS ( unless they have been designated as part of a cycle trail) However Cyclists UK states the following;

“ If enough cyclists and/or other users such as equestrians use a footpath in this way without the landowner challenging them for (usually) 20 years,then a bridleway or a restricted byway may be claimed through ‘presumed rights’ under s31 of the 1980 Highways Act.”

Peddars Way is predominantly a FOOTPATH. A small section, near Thompson, encompasses Cycle Route 13. On this section Motorbikes and Horses are NOT allowed. It is neither a BOAT or a Bridleway (yet!!)

There is, however, frequent evidence of such use!


Irrelevant matters!

Very often, at an enquiry to determine the status or otherwise of a route. ( Private or Public) the Inspector will quote “Some of the objections raise concerns over issues such as the effect of recording a public right of way on privacy, dog fouling, litter problems and anti-social behaviour, suggesting that a public footpath is unnecessary and expressing concern over increased liability, maintenance responsibility and expense for landowners.

None of these are matters which are relevant to my consideration of this order.”

Suggestions that the route in the order could be improved by changing its line cannot be considered at an inquiry into a modification order.The condition of the way and its suitability, or otherwise, for motor traffic are not relevant factors.

The implications for such as private households and farmers are immense. With no consideration of Health and Safety, Public Rights of Way can go through working farmyards or even criss cross fields where the farmer is trying to make a living. Dogs also can be off lead in a field of sheep. Access from footpaths accounts for a considerable amount of sheep worrying, death and loss of livelihood.

Privacy for people’s own enjoyment of their own garden is also irrelevant! Very difficult to believe or make any sense of!

Cycling campaigners demand access to public footpaths as ramblers voice opposition

Update article from The Telegraph August 2019

Mountain biking in the Galloway Forest Park, Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland

10 thoughts on “Everyone wants a slice of your FOOTPATH. Ramblers, BHS, Cyclists, Motorbikes,& 4×4 Off Roaders

  1. I am pleased to see that pictures are used to advance your case. Videos are even better to show the evidence that is left behind. I could not find the mistake. Give yourself a break from this occasionally. Come to Australia where none of this happens.

  2. Australia! Now there’s a thought! However………
    a) It will have to wait until an enquiry is conveyed ( if it ever is).
    b) preparation for an enquiry is time consuming, stressful and expensive. No time or money for holidays or even ‘normal’ life until it is over. ( if it ever is)

  3. How about a ROW through a small rural primary school?
    This path was claimed some years ago during a neighbourly spat, and it has left a terrible legacy.
    ‘campaigner Kate Ashbrook’ has personally stated that it should not be re routed, so it’s official …. Ramblers want to walk through playgrounds when an alternative is available.
    This is surely proof that the laws regarding ROW are not fit for purpose. My sympathies to anyone facing issues of this kind.

    1. Yes, I am aware of this case.Where does it stand at the moment? You are spot on. PROW legislation is not fit for purpose. It is a corrupt quasi judicial process which allows itself to be manipulated by large well funded organisations and the access obsessed.

  4. I think that you may have been in contact with Marlene previously. She says, if you wish, please get in touch again to see if she can be of any further help.

  5. Thank you, yes, Marlene has very generously given her time, but I was concerned that she has many people asking for her help and i didn’t want to burden her further.
    It is at a standstill at the moment, but a new diversion is being talked about, but it means reducing the playing field which seems a great shame, and thus not achieving great distance between the playground and public.
    I can’t help feeling that it was wrongly put on the map in the first instance, having been claimed in 1996.
    Having read much about ROW, it is naturally understandable that a route between a school a private chapel and a Priory would have been walked for 20 years, but I do not believe it was intended that it would become a free for all. What is being sought is a diversion, not an extinction so this really should not have turned into such a drama.
    I am particularly concerned that the chair of the Ramblers doesn’t have a sense of which battles to fight, if the general public and members understood what she was doing int their name I don’t think many would condone it.

  6. Marlene advises that your assertion is CORRECT.
    It would NOT have been a Public Footpath!!.
    The advice is to apply for an Application to Delete the footpath because it is “an ERROR recorded on the Definitive Map”
    For a start, the way to a Church is NOT a public highway! It is a path TOLERATED by the owner and based on “CUSTOM” …… which is NOT “to the general public” or travelling public.

  7. I am going to tackle this again, thank you for your pointers.

    I would like to again emphasise the point that Kate Ashbrook should choose her battles more carefully.

    I can not reconcile the fact that she has gone on record stating that walkers should be able to walk through a primary school playground when a simple diversion is available.

    I would also like to point out that she suggested that the school installed CCTV instead without any reference to the fact that they would 1] have to monitor it constantly and 2] It would leave them open to claims under GDPR rules.
    I sympathise with anyone who has an intrusive footpath, but this particular ROW relating to a tiny rural school seems to be particularly pertinent example of what is wrong with the law.

  8. It’s called ‘Access Obsession’!!! The idea that you are right and everyone else is wrong. The idea that there are never any exceptions to the rule. That ALL ‘landowners’ are wealthy and have large estates to which they wish to deny public access. These people are on a crusade and have absolutely no thought for any victims caught up in a corrupt system. Unfortunately the government supports them and we now have a confrontational system which sets people against each other in an expensive ‘battle’ with the object being ‘to win’ in preference to finding solutions. The more you find out about it the more depressing it gets. It’s appalling!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *