need to be talking to?
Its part of the Kendal to Lancaster canal path that’s been filled in years ago the path through Kendal is part of a cycle way but once you hit the outskirts it changes to a footpath. The cyclists are diverted on to a road I have used the road a fair few times to take my daughter to beavers and not had any close calls with my daughter but its not ideal the footpath in question is about 2 miles long with several stiles and a bit of a pain when I do ride with my daughter when we had a tagalong. Would be a great cycling route to Sizergh Castle and other surrounding villages only thinking small scale here but there is scope possible to ride to Lancaster all offroad about 20 miles!!!!
I have browsed the Lancaster Canal trust and came to the membership page which states
http://www.lctrust.co.uk/pages/the-trust/membership.php?WindowWidth=1078 so they do not seem that cycle friendly!
Part of the trail is a bit boggy!

20131211_135828[1] by Richard Munro, on Flickr

20131211_141255[1] by Richard Munro, on Flickr

contact sustrans I reckon highlight the route and explain how it fit’s in with their ‘Safe Routes’ concept

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/

Find out who owns it, then start talking. Maybe get Sustrans involved? Does it link up with any other NCN routes?

Lancashire rights of way office? – as a starting point…

Its quite complex – it may depend on the original acts of parliament which permitted the building of the canal, as use of the towpath by horses may well not have been ‘by right’ but rather by licence or payment.

If so you would have to demonstrate user evidence showing a significant history of use – I’d suggest your first point of call would be your local bridleways/BHSS Horsie group

Would anyone using it need to wear a white dress?

😉

Very good Captain 🙂

Damn to late to edit!

As ninfan said you’d need to gather evidence of 20 years use by horses (as BW’s can’t be claimed for by use on bike) in order to put in a claim, but seeing as it’s only relatively new the claim won’t pass the first hurdle unfortunately.

So, I’d get in touch with sustrans to see if they originally contacted the landowner/s (of the bit further along which isn’t a cycle route) as they’d have worked as far along the old canal as possible and only stopped when they reached a ‘no’.

If they hadn’t asked them (or if they were originally turned down, its been long enough for them to ask again, it’s worth a shot TBH) then ask if they could do so now as you’d really like it extended for safety reasons. Maybe get a list of locals who’d like it opened so you can say ‘look, these 50 people would like to see it opened too’. If they umm and ahh then say ok, I’ll ask the landowner yourself to see if they will allow permissive access on bike / horseback.

As to who pays for replacing the stiles with gates, assuming the landowner is OK with it, then get back in touch with sustrans and your local Rights of Way department with a proposal. Get lengths / numbers of stiles / gates / etc so they at least can work with something solid 🙂

schnor – Member
As ninfan said you’d need to gather evidence of 20 years use by horses (as BW’s can’t be claimed for by use on bike) in order to put in a claim, but seeing as it’s only relatively new the claim won’t pass the first hurdle unfortunately.

Out of interest, I assume the twenty year stipulation can stretch back a long time?

There are a good deal of old mine tracks around upper Teesdale that are classified as footpaths, but make better bridleways than designated ones.

Back to the op, Durham cc have dept. dedicated to this. Probably only one bloke on a p/t basis.

It’s all about horses – bikes are not recognised in any reclassification issue!

Surely a towpath will have historical use by horses, or does it need to be recent?

It needs to be 20 years uninterrupted use backwards from the date at which the right is claimed or disputed, assuming there is no evidence (photos of notices / locked gates / plans submitted to the council / etc) that the public have been prevented from using it. e.g. you put in a claim on 01/01/14 then use will need to be from 01/01/94

In this particular case use by horses has been interrupted due to existing stiles, which presumably were put there a few years ago when they filled in the canal.

In theory I suppose you could claim any (current) towpath as a bridleway as they’ve been used by horses since the year dot, but since towpaths can 99.9% of the time be used by bikes / horses anyway, there is no need and AFAIK it’s never been done.

As for whether you could claim recently in-filled canals in the same way? If you weren’t prevented from using it after it was filled in, presumably so. I’d have thought sustrans / RoW department would have considered it initially in this case, and if the landowner was amenable the claim wasn’t necessary.

Lancashire rights of way office? – as a starting point…

kendal is in cumbria

I know that walk fwiw shame about the styles I advise trespass and saying its a boggies route and SFB said it was good to ride 😛

/\/\/\ True/\/\/\ !

To ride a bike on BW canal towpath you need a permit that you buy from them. No rights here, all permit / licensed use only.

BW dont exist and you have not needed the permit for a while now

The Canal & River Trust welcomes considerate cyclists to its towpaths and you don’t need a permit to use your bike on any of our towpaths.

http://canalrivertrust.org.uk/see-and-do/cycling

BW/ canala and river trust dont own all canals iirc so may be correct where you are

If this indeed was an old tow path. it will be protected by law from any claim to be made up to a bridleway. Unless the landowner permits this, my local water trust allows cyclists but not horse riding due to problems of surface maintenance. I know a great deal about such matters as I used to be a Public Rights of Way Officer……….

Schnor – would the doctrine of ‘once a highway’ not apply?

Ie. If you could demonstrate a use ‘as of right in the past’ by horses when it was a working canal, that use could not be extinguished through disuse?

Hmm, I’ve just looked it up and – presumably in the 60’s when the definitive map was made – the British Waterways Board used their powers (now amended as Section 2(2) of the British Waterways Act 1995) to prevent dedication (under the 20 year rule) for riding, due to no historic rights for horses except for pulling boats.

AIUI a towpath isn’t a highway but the navigational part of a canal / river, which was never intended for public use. Having looked into it a bit more it was only the 1968 Transport Act (Part 7) which allowed public use of canals but not under dedication, meaning a majority still aren’t highways.

Every day’s a day at school 🙂

20 years uninterrupted use backwards from the date at which the right is claimed or disputed

So 20 years of illegal use then!!
The laws in this country are ridiculous – ride where you like as life is too short

It will be a mammoth task and very costly to get a change of classification. Send an email to Sue Hogg at South Pennines Packhorse Trails Trust in Todmorden; she’s been doing it for years.

Sent a few emails yesterday including the Chairman of the Canal trust highlighting the fact more people using it might increase the amount of volunteers and possible extra finance from groups like GOLAKES.
Their vision of getting the canal filled with the water is a bit of a dream that’s not going to happen but opening up the canal to other users would be a good legacy!
Kendal is not awash with safe family routes that are fairly flat!

Schnor – very interesting

Curveball for you, I wonder if the 1960’s actions by the waterways board would apply to this stretch of canal which it seems was closed in 1944 and seemingly drained in the fifties

I’m sure that there will be some fascinatingly complex history of ownership of the assets, likely passed from a canal company to a railway company then on to the government with nationalisation, but whether it has subsequently passed on to first the british transport commission, and then the waterways board since it was no longer operating, and subsequently the canals trust – you could probably lose half a lifetime in tracking it down 8)

Argh, my head hurts enough as it is! Thats the thing with these cases, initially it looks relatively simple but the more you investigate the more complicated it gets.

It’s the first I’ve heard of an in-filled canal anyway, the closest I get are dismantled railways 🙂