Mate of mine got collared the other night by some fellas from the environment agency, for riding on a cheeky trail. It was late evening, and there was no one at all about, but these guys, who were radioed up and obviously working a spotter and chaser system. The mate rode off, but was literally tracked down by a fella in a van.
Anyone else come across this ? I didn't even know they had the power to hand out on the spot fines, nor did I know that it could be done without a formal complaint from the landowner.
Bit of a worry, as in our neck of the woods there are very few bridleways thats aren't either mullered by horsey folk, or that don't go from nowhere to nowhere.
as far as i know you can only be asked to leave an area of cheekiness by the landowner or agents thereof. Also the offence is a civil one not a criminal one so the issue of on the spot fines is immaterial (and illegal)
Hmmm... he was actually fined? Under what authority?
As I understand it, it's a civil matter akin to trespass NOT a criminal matter. If anyone knows otherwise, I'd very much like to know.
Did he get the details of the people handing out the fines? And whereabouts was this, by the way?
it is a criminal matter in some parks of the lakes/ peaks (i'm not sure which) but civil elsewhere.
where was this?
really thomthumb? do you have a reference for this? Not doubting you but i don't like the sound of that and could use some extra info.
there are specific byelaws in place in areas such as the Peak National Park and SSSIs etc, so it's possible he fell foul of something specific? Do you know exactly where your mate was riding, G?
Could be a criminal matter if he's riding through a SSSI, or similar protected site. As it's the EA "policing" it here I'd guess that might be the case?
Max fine of £20000 if you know you're riding on an SSSI, £2500 if you're ignorant to that fact.
Yep it was on the outskirts of Ipswich near a reservoir called Alton Water. He initially suggested that they should take intercourse and travel, but they actually chased him in a van and eventually got him coming through another trail. They gave him a £30 fixed penalty notice. He has no intention of paying it, but you will appreciate a certain incredulousness over it, as he was riding a trail we've used for a looooooonnnnnnnnnggg time, in my instance 26 years.
I think its a footpath, but starts life as a bridleway
Ah yes - lots of land owned or managed by the utilities companies have very restrictive byelaws - and it looks like Alton Water falls into this category. See [url= http://www.anglianwater.co.uk/_assets/media/water-park-byelaws-2004.pdf ]Anglian Water byelaws[/url]
Max fine of £20000 if you know you're riding on an SSSI, £2500 if you're ignorant to that fact.
Jonathan, I think you are reading too much into the law there. From DEFRA's website:
Carrying out an activity which destroys or damages [b]the special features of an SSSI, or disturbs any fauna interest features[/b], without a reasonable excuse can result in a fine of up to £20,000, or an unlimited amount on indictment, if these activities are intentional or reckless and it is known the land affected was a SSSI.
The "special features" of an SSSI can be very narrow and it would be difficult to show that a single mountain bike riding through an SSSI destroys or damages them.
By way of example, the mountain bike trail in Bristol skirts an SSSI on the Ashton Court Estate which is protected due to the presence of rare invertebrates. There are some large beech trees which have rare wood-boring insects living in them. That doesn't mean that if you ride a mountain bike though there you will get slapped with a fine. However if the Estate decided to cut all the beech trees down then they probably would.
The place he was pulled was not on AW land. All of the accesses and paths at the reservoir are designated as cycle paths anyway.
They must of had some busy-bodies complaining to get those bods of they arses in the night - Would be worth someone emailing them to ask their reason for this action?
Were they indeed who they say they were - spot fines - never heard of anything so ridiculous!
Sorry - I wasn't so much reading too much into it as paraphrasing/summarising outrageously 😉
But, given the nature of some SSSIs you could quite easily be deemed to be damaging them by riding over vegetation etc, or disturbing fauna. So it pays to be careful.
it pays pot be careful
Why? Riding seems to be considered no worse than walking by most scientific studies. Are you suggesting that SSSIs should be no-go areas to walkers too?
If you were building a trail there or cutting down trees for firewood it would be a different matter, but anyone who gets fined for riding through an SSSI would be very unlucky indeed
These guys would have quite a difficult time 1. Getting a name addy etc. They have now powers to request this 2. They certainly cannot confiscate bikes etc 3. If they try to call the old bill they cannot hold you there till the police turn up. I think the middle finger is the best option. 😉
Jesus, that's an outrage isn't it? I'd have screwed it up, or given my name as Michael Jackson or something. Random blokes (radios or not) have not rights handing out fines to folks going about their business. At the very most they should have been letting him know that he can't ride there, and shown him how to get off the land in question, not acting like some sort of bunch of rent-a-cops. As others have said, it's at best trespass, and even then there has to be evidence of intent to damage, not just being there...
Find land owner, write enclosing the ticket suggesting with explicit diagrams, just exactly what they can do with the fine...
Why? Riding seems to be considered no worse than walking by most scientific studies. Are you suggesting that SSSIs should be no-go areas to walkers too?
No - I was only suggesting that it pays to be careful to avoid falling into the cluthcs of Environment Agency busy-bodies!
If this is a fixed penalty notice for cycling on the footway (ie the pavement) then it's probably bollocks as that legislation doesn't apply to footpaths, I think.
A fixed penalty notice needs a name etc! They have no authority to ask for this
Why? Riding seems to be considered no worse than walking by most scientific studies. Are you suggesting that SSSIs should be no-go areas to walkers too?
The problem is that in the eyes of the law a bicycle is considered to be a vehicle and not a 'usual accompaniment' of someone on foot. Given that prams, pushchairs and wheelchairs [i]are[/i] perhaps it's time for a change in the law, but until then...
Right - we need more detail - can you get it? The fixed penalty notice should have info on it.
However from the limited amount I know he could and should have just told these guys to go away.
DoctorRad, is that distinction frequently applied in the real world? Like in Jonathan's scenario above?
IF they lost sight of him at ANY time during the persuit any fine would be tossed out of court if taken there. I'd bet my bottom dollar on it, having had the police come back to me very angry with the CPS for stopping a criminal damage case in its tracks because the witness lost sight of the criminal while he moved from window to door to collar him.
Well to be honest TJ thats why I'd posted it up on here, because it doesn't seem kosher to me. My attitude to it is that footpaths are fair game after dark, and simply drop into the category of cheeky trail to be used with care and reasonable respect for others. There are few options other than that in the immediate vicinity. In fact I am thinking about trying to get some sort of pressure group going to see if we can get some footpaths upgraded in status for that reason. Quite a few that I use only remain passable because I clear the vegetation back, so I reckon its a fair exchange.
Try to get more info and report back would you. I am interested
They gave him a £30 fixed penalty notice.
Thats ****ing hilarious - would love to know more about that one as there's no power anywhere in law to issue fixed penalty notices for byelaws, so I reckon they're probably misusing 'accredited person' powers to issue FPN for riding on a footway - which this route clearly was not one of.
reckon you could scan the ticket and sent it to labrat.imba@gmail.com please? Would be fun if we can try and nail this one down properly!
Criminal, rather than civil offence to be off piste on Dartmoor. This is because most of it is Duchy land and as we know, Prince Charles is really progressive in his thinking.
@Mr Agreeable:
DoctorRad, is that distinction frequently applied in the real world? Like in Jonathan's scenario above?
Don't really know, but that's the reason bicycles are not allowed on footpaths, i.e. you wouldn't 'normally' take one with you if you were out for a walk.
Dogs, prams, pushchairs and wheel chairs, yes; bikes, no.
I think Zulu probably has this right
If its the EA, I can only thing of water bailiffs. Sounds very suss to me. Definitely more info required.
EA out after 4? This doesn't sound like it falls under their general work either - usually more water, air and industrial legislation focussed. Natural England have more to do with SSSI and access falls with local council/highways.
Some places have byelaws, but they are rarely enforced, as the cost is greater than the revenue, more a back-up to telling someone to change their behaviour
i.e. you wouldn't 'normally' take one with you if you were out for a walk.
So does that mean no walking across short FPs pushing the bike then? (legally speaking)
I know of one ride recently where we took a shortcut, and yes we did actually push the length of the FP, so we still could have earned ranger's/RA's/landowner's wrath if caught doing that?
that's the reason bicycles are not allowed on footpaths, i.e. you wouldn't 'normally' take one with you if you were out for a walk.
I've heard this before, it's an amazing piece of legal reverse engineering. 😉
D0NK, in the real world, no-one would take issue with what you did.
Had to s**** at timber's comment on the EA being out after 4pm, does seem very unlikely given the subterranean morale of their staff in general. 😉
And also agree that it's more like Natural England jurisdiction now that SSSI's / AONB's were taken from the EA's remit so they now cover more like the old NRA/HMIP/Waste Regs roles prior to their merger.
But if these jokers were from EN not EA then I wonder if this signifies some shift in their approach to enforcement after a review of how the law might be interpreted? Kind of worrying if that's so 😐
@D0NK:
I know of one ride recently where we took a shortcut, and yes we did actually push the length of the FP, so we still could have earned ranger's/RA's/landowner's wrath if caught doing that?
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. That said, as I understand it, your mileage may vary etc:
In theory, yes, as the interpretation of the law does not allow you to have a bicycle about your person when on a footpath. I don't know of any cases ever having come to court though.
As I understand it, like trespass, the landowner or their representative can ask you to leave the land in question, but neither force you to do so nor tell you in which direction you should leave. So you can, in principle, carry on in the same direction as you were already travelling.
You could also be had up in court for trespass, but it would be a civil matter rather than criminal in most cases. The landowner would therefore have to pay for the case - though they would probably seek to recoup costs - and would likely have to show that you had caused them loss or damage. They could also argue for punitive damages to be awarded against you.
Unless you failed to pay any damages awarded against you, I don't think there would ever be any question of a custodial sentence being involved.
Did he see the guys warrant card? EA officers have some defined powers including entering property and collecting evidence but this sounds very unlikely. They are mainly concerned with industry and businesses, with the exception of the fisheries guys (rod licences etc). Is there a chance he’s been had by some enterprising landowners?
There was a comment on here ages ago form soemne acosted by a red-sock on an impassible section of footpath..........
"you shouldnt be on here, its a footpath"
his reply
"well then, its a good job we're both walking then!"
Going back to the Anglian Water bylaws - doesnt it say excluding pedal cycle?
As I understand it if your on a public right of way - footpath it is as pointed out above a civil offence against the landowner. Its only riding on footways - the pavement - that is an offence under the road traffic act. Please note I'm not a legal expert / ranger so this is just my understanding.
I've fallen foul of the EA before - riding the footpath over the dam in Macc Forest. The balif was rude patronising and agressive. His Fffff-in big dog was just extremely aggresive in an almost rabid way. The bloke tried all manner of guff which may have worked if I wasnt a seasoned trail poacher at the time. Came very close to making a formal complaint against him.
Going back to the Anglian Water bylaws - doesnt it say excluding pedal cycle?
Yes - it excludes pedal cycles from "vehicle" restrictions, but there's also a specific clause that probably could be applied to exclude bikes from nice singletrack...
[i]12.2 No person shall cycle in any water park other than on roadways, routes or hard tracks provided.[/i]
I was comprehensively grassed up to the Peak Park Authority after posting pics of us riding [url= http://www.bogtrotters.org/downloads/stanage.html ]Stanage Edge[/url], but no action was taken despite incontovertable evidence:
[url= http://148.88.53.14/rides/2006/23apr/thumb/DSC_0157_.jp g" target="_blank">http://148.88.53.14/rides/2006/23apr/thumb/DSC_0157_.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
as far as I know rangers have no power of arrest so they can't know who you are unless you tell them. Just say you're me 🙂
I've got to be honest and say that most of the trails I use are cheeky. There seems to be an almost obsessive desire within bodies like the Ramblers [b]Ass[/b]ociation to keep footpaths all to themselves even though a lot of them are woefully under used. The way I see it, if I'm not doing any damage or putting walkers in danger I've got just as much right to roam as them (I even have a bell on my bike to let pensioners in shorts and long socks know I'm approaching so they can't complain I've come rushing up behind them).
As for EA jobs worths; if they start getting heavy just call the police and get them on the scene. If an EA officer has no rights to impose fines and is behaving in an intimidatory manner the plod will add a layer of officialdom that they won't want to have to deal with. I used to work alongside council enforcement officers and so I know that you should challenge everything they say and question their authority at every stage. Also remember that if you refuse to give your name or date of birth they can't issue a fine. But, never ever get offensive towards them.
So does that mean no walking across short FPs pushing the bike then? (legally speaking)
I know of one ride recently where we took a shortcut, and yes we did actually push the length of the FP, so we still could have earned ranger's/RA's/landowner's wrath if caught doing that?
What if you are carrying the bike on your shoulder?
But, given the nature of some SSSIs you could quite easily be deemed to be damaging them by riding over vegetation etc, or disturbing fauna. So it pays to be careful.
What if you are riding away from footpaths on illegally built trails constructed by mountain bikers through areas of rare plant colonies in a fragile environment SSSI like those that exist in my local woodland?
Send it to IMBA, contact CTC. Send all the details to STW, MBUK, MBR, WhatMTB etc and get decent coverage of it. Get some of them to contact the head of whichever organisation it was stopped your mate and ask for quotes as to why such action is being taken.
Sounds totally disproportionate and farcical.
Don't let the w8nkers get away with it.
Kieran (Labrat) at IMBA is a good guy to talk to. Also try Ian Warby at CTC. If they aren't the right guys then they'll know someone who is.
This sort of thing is exactly why (if they work 😉 MTB needs at least some vague form of representative body. Harder for whoever it is responsible to ignore them than it is to disregard you and your mate.
Please let us know what happens.
I encountered EO officers a few times in the Peak. They say "do you know this is a footpath?" My answer every time is "yes". As they aren't the land owners there is little they can do.
take intercourse and travel
that made me laugh 😀
If you've been using the footpath for 26 years and have not been stopped or challenged in that time, can't you apply to have it upgraded to a bridleway? Twenty year rule i think it is.
Going to be honest and its sad to say TBH but cheeky trails are wrong. Sorry, if it goes against the righteous STW'ers.
My mate works for EA, apart from accosting fish poachers I dont think they have any powers like that, I'll ask. In any case just tell em to get ****ed or call the police, police will be very unlikely to care.
the interpretation of the law does not allow you to have a bicycle about your person when on a footpath.
Good job I'm usually riding it then 😉
hora - MemberGoing to be honest and its sad to say TBH but cheeky trails are wrong. Sorry, if it goes against the righteous STW'ers.
Why? No, seriously, why? Bikes were on the original mass-trespass on Kinder, and 'rough riders' have been about much longer than the modern mountain bikers, so riding bikes off roads has been done for much longer than the average red-sock would have you believe. Given the limited damage compared to the hay-eating fraternity, I fail to see the problem.
Bear in mind that you're involuntarily a ambassador for the sport, and that your actions will reflect on others by all means, but don't kid me that an unhappy redsock will see much difference between you hooning down a BW or an FP. Nor for that matter, will they probably see much difference between you riding responsibly in either setting...
Zokes, you can't guarantee every mountain biker will behave responsibly nor can you guarantee than no one will be walking along a footpath on a night ride or early am thus making it open season/'allowed'/cheeky.
As such I do not recommend riding on them. Sorry. My Mother likes rambling/walking etc- has seen inconsiderate idiots on bikes on bridleways let alone footpaths. No. Please let walkers enjoy walking without the fear of someone riding down at any speed.
Plus if your talking live and let live, there are people on here who dont like motorcrossers/greenlaners or 4x4 vehicles in the countryside. Hypocracy.
How quaint this all is.
Just the other day me & a mate were out collecting 'donations' from random people. I'd stop them and ask for a fixed penalty and give them a reciept from my reciept book I got from Staples. You'd be amazed how many people pay up when I flash them my Singletrack subscriber card next to a plastic sheriffs badge in my wallet. If they refuse, my mate chases after them in his van. That usually mops up the 'runners'.
Pays a very good living
😆
Zokes, you can't guarantee every mountain biker will behave responsibly nor can you guarantee than no one will be walking along a footpath on a night ride or early am thus making it open season/'allowed'/cheeky.
Where was I guaranteeing it?
Frankly I don't care about your 'recommendations'. In 15 years of riding I'm yet to come to a consensus as to where I've had most grief from riding, be it either cheeky or legit. No, actually, I do know - it's the road!
Seriously - the only reason bikes don't have as much access to the countryside as walkers is because some of the more vociferous types get themselves organised and selfishly try to keep the countryside for themselves.
Sorry. My Mother likes rambling/walking etc- has seen inconsiderate idiots on bikes on bridleways let alone footpaths. No. Please let walkers enjoy walking without the fear of someone riding down at any speed.
Well, I'll let you all know next time i'm out walking, and you'd better all stay in doors. What an idiotic thing to say! Seriously Hora, poor troll.
As I gather you live north Manc way, are you telling me you've never ridden at Rivington. If you have, why? As pretty much all the descent stuff is usually busy [i]and[/i] 'cheeky' by your book, despite the mast road up and the descent down to Belmont being old drovers' routes, therefore having had horses for centuries, yet curiously are pedestrians and works traffic only...
Hora if there's one word YOU should not use EVER it's hypocracy.
I tend to think that greenlaner / 'crossers / 4x4s do FAR more damage than your average horse / biker / walker, mainly due to considerably more than just the 1Hp going through their wheels. I have no problem if the trail is well metalled and is able to take the extra traffic, but they rarely are and turn into a dry dusty lifeless desert in summer and a filthy quagmire in winter, thats not hypocracy, thats a fact.
Theres a long trail that runs from the centre of the Island to the West (The Tennyson Trail) which has had to be closed to motorised traffic due to the increased amounts of erosion DIRECTLY caused by motorsied traffic, oddly now you only have walkers / bikers and horses going along its beginning to "heal" again after 2 years.
Hora if there's one word YOU should not use EVER it's hypocracy
bigyinn - if there's one word you should never ever try to spell, it's hipocrisy 😆
Yeah sorry CK, been a long day.
Too late for a sneaky edit now you've blown my cover! 😳
I managed to scare a dog-walker on a FP the other day - felt guilty about it. Don't feel guilty about abstract/historical laws though.
Well, I'll let you all know next time i'm out walking, and you'd better all stay in doors. What an idiotic thing to say! Seriously Hora, poor troll.
Why is it idiotic? I have been out walking with my parents when mountain bikers came haring round a blind corner saw my elderly father in the middle of the path and locked up. They only missed him by luck not judgement.
Another elderly gentleman was not so lucky and had bones broken when out walking on a nearby footpath.
As I understand it, about 105,000 miles of 'trail' in UK.
Ramblers - can use 100% legally + right to roam in certain places
mtb, horses 21% (plus mtb have done awfully well for trail centres)
vehicles 3% (down from about 5% and falling)
Given that most 'mountain bikers' seem to think 3% access is unacceptable I fail to see how they can complain when somebody tries to limit them to their 21%.
Dogs have better access rights than mountain bikers do...
Once again, Hora spouts some unthoughtout nonsense and the thread is about him (and what a clown he is).
Getting back to the question of fines on cheeky trails... I too would like to see more detail about the FPN and the authority under which it was issued. My instinct would be to advise the fined not to pay as I suspect the fines will turn out to be unenforceable. I could be wrong though.
cuckoo... so if that incident had happened on a bridleway your thoughts would have been different?
Hurtling round a blind bend without any view of what's coming is a stupid idea, it's got nothing to do with it being a FP!
Access on a SSSI shouldn't be a problem, depends on the reason for designation of course. Lee Quarry isa SSSI and we have built trails there and just had the weekender there all with the OK of Natural England.
If you have been using the route for over 20years you can probably claim it. Check with your local PROW officer.
Never heard of a ticket being given out like this before, we normally just ask people to leave if they are in the wrong place and put plenty of signage up.
post up a picture of the ticket they issued, suitably scrubbed of personal details. It would be very interesting to see if they refer to it as a fine or penalty.
At best, it's an unenforceable invoice!
Cuckoo - MemberWhy is it idiotic?
Because he implies that [u]some[/u] riders may scare walkers by riding recklessly, therefore [u]all[/u] riders shouldn't ride anywhere where they might meet people, let alone the sacred footpaths. Somewhat missing the point that if riders as a whole ride with a bit more courtesy, then some pointless archaic law really shouldn't be an issue. I don't hear stories of walkers being mowed down in Scotland, where they seem to have treated the idea of access a little more pragmatically
"came haring round a blind corner saw my elderly father in the middle of the path "
Pretty much what I did, except I stopped in control with about 10 metres to spare. But I still scared the poor guy witless. Did apologise quickly before moving on and doooo feel guilty
Oh, and gusamc - how do you work that out, when walkers have access to hundreds of square miles of access land. Where, for example, do you suggest I ride [url= http://www.multimap.com/s/THA3zWaU ]HERE[/url]? (It's out of my back door, btw). Miles of footpaths and access land, criss-crossed with landrover tracks, yet bizarrely by yours and hora's 'ethics' (and an antiquated law) out of bounds. Perhaps I should just drive past all those mountains to that much vaunted centre of excellence that is CyB, eh?
Zokes - the whole history in scotland is different and the trails tend to be much more open.
The mountaineers have always used bicycles on the estate roads to get to the more remote mountains so there is some crossover and sympathy and the general pressure on the land is less.
I do also wander if the whole ethos of MTBing is less confrontational and more polite.
I do also wander if the whole ethos of MTBing is less confrontational and more polite.
Perhaps if [b]everyone[/b] was a bit more polite, the world would be a much better place. Apart from when i've nearly been killed by some out-of-control mutt, I never cast the first stone when out riding.
As for the history - I had always wondered why it was so different up there, but that's sheer ignorance on my part. One thing I do agree on is conflict management like the Snowdon agreement. Noone enjoys riding through 1000s of halfwits who've not quite worked out that Snowdon is actually quite a large mountain, and none of those halfwits enjoy being mowed down by some downhill hero. I use the term halfwits, as the sandals and bermuda shorts brigade are the only ones who ever cause problems riding on snowdon after 5 - most of the real walkers actually egg us on!
From what I remember of Alton Water everything west of the bridge at Tattingstone to the Mnningtree Road is out of bounds to cyclists. Though there is an old road runs down to the water at the North End of the reservoir. Anyone other than a police officer has to show their authorisation from the landowner according to the byelaws. It would appear the trails are shut after dark, by implication, as the byelaws require you to leave the water park by the nearest access point when directed to do so.
I may drift out that way myself tomorrow during the day to see what's going on.
Crank v Brookes (1980) has something about pushing a bike across a crossing and you being a pedestrian and not a cyclist thereby letting you push your bike on a footpath. Haven't read it all but this thread has some debate on it
[url= http://www.legalbanter.co.uk/uk-legal-moderated-legal-topics/55771-bikes-red-lights-dismounting.html ]Bikes, red lights and dismounting[/url]
And this site might be useful especially the "Giving your details and carrying ID" bit but again you'd have to know when as a cyclist you come under the Road Traffic Act or not.
[url= http://www.freebeagles.org/index.html ]http://www.freebeagles.org/index.html[/url]
but the best bit of advice if you're out in a group and someone asks for a name. Just shout out "Don't tell 'em Pike" 😀
"Your name shall also go in ze book!"
[img] 
[/img]
Hora you just come across as a sanctimonious prat. My riding footpaths in the countryside is far less damaging than horses, pedestrians, and particularly motorised traffic. I can show you photos of [i]real[/i] environmental damage, caused by individuals with legal access. Ramblers gained access through trespass, think of it as lots of individuals indulging in trespass to highlight highly restrictive rights of access denying legitimate country users the same rights of access.
Oh, and pop down to the Life Shop, I hear they have a sale on.
Zokes - I don't really understand the difference myself. I know from a previous discussions on here that the further north, the further from the road and the worse the weather the better ramblers and seem bikers get on.
As I said in the previous post bikes have always been used in Scotland by the mountaineers to get to the more remote mountains - infact thats a part of how I came to mountainbikes. Maybe that has made it seem more normal.
I think the lower numbers of people using the land has something to do with it - meet 6 people on your route its easier to be polite than if you meet 60. that works both ways. However even in the pentlands its very rare to get any confrontation - and they are right next to the city and heavily used.
The appreciation of the countryside and enjoying sharing it with others seems to be part of it.
It seems to me from the tales I hear that bikers are perhaps more confrontational down south than they need to be - perhaps in part borne out of frustration. I and others I ride with certainly attempt to be more than polite to everyone one we see. I get heartily sick of "ping ping" on the bell "thanks" "Lovely day" etc etc but I believe it is good PR so try to do it.
zokes - Member............I use the term halfwits, as the sandals and bermuda shorts brigade are the only ones who ever cause problems riding on snowdon after 5 - most of the real walkers actually egg us on!
Again this might be part of it - places we ride the burmuda short brigade don't get to.
to some extent its not really my business as these conflicts rarely rear their head where I ride but I feel that the bikers should be holier than thou and really go out of their way to be polite to other countryside users - be the polite ones and make alliances.
Has anyone tried going to ramblers club meetings and talking to the redsocks?
I dunno what the solution is but irresponsible behaviour and frustration from both sides seems to me to be key. Dialogue as the way forward?
If you've been using the footpath for 26 years and have not been stopped or challenged in that time, can't you apply to have it upgraded to a bridleway? Twenty year rule i think it is.
Unless you're riding a horse I don't think that's the case. I know there was an attempt to try and extend the right to bikes to upgrade due to unchallenged use, but I thought it fell foul of the relevant government department being reactionary idiots, just like everything else sensible proposed as amendments did.
I think the lower numbers of people using the land has something to do with it - meet 6 people on your route its easier to be polite than if you meet 60. that works both ways. However even in the pentlands its very rare to get any confrontation - and they are right next to the city and heavily used.
Of course one of the problems down here is that cyclists are forced onto a tiny fraction of the trails, inevitably resulting in more conflict than if we were allowed to spread out and choose to use those which make most sense (which are likely to be those with lower redsock density, if high numbers of redsocks is an issue).
Given my local riding is on an area which closely approximates the Scottish model (a big chunk is all bridleways, don't worry about what is and isn't legal on the rest of it), yet is very popular with redsocks, the secret is just to be considerate in your usage. Means avoiding peak time for walkers, and making sure you can always stop in time when rounding blind corners etc. By these means I've only had one conflict in 15 years of riding there - generally people are extremely friendly, getting out of your way, cheering you on and remarking on how superfit you must be as you struggle uphill! Ironically the one conflict was when night riding, which you'd think would be OK - I was also on a bridleway, which the coffin dodgers involved told me I shouldn't be riding on.
As a Southern rider who does ride 'cheeky' trails, in 21 years of riding down here the only confrontation was with a loudmouth who grabbed me by the throat when I pointed out he must be pretty idiotic for not knowing, as a council worker, that the path he had told me not to ride on had been part of Sustrans Route 4 for ten years. ****wit.
I'm just amazed that SFB has been so quiet thus far.. Is no one going to goad him into some sort of polemic rant..? 😉
Given that most 'mountain bikers' seem to think 3% access is unacceptable I fail to see how they can complain when somebody tries to limit them to their 21%.
Its 40yr old angry men not trying to assert their authority without actually doing it in the face of authority.
My riding footpaths in the countryside is far less damaging than horses, pedestrians, and particularly motorised traffic.
I'd laugh my head off at that. Cycling doesnt create errosion? So everytime you see mud you get off and tip toe round? Never been covered in dirt from a ride before?
Get off your high horse. There are enough access rights for mountain bikers. What do you want? The walkers to go away?
I have far more respect for ramblers than I ever will a mountain biker. Seeing 60yr+ walkers in the Lakes, with some 40yr IT-idiot thinking hes Steve Peat on his weekend off. Again. Pisses me. Another thing about this forum, everyone takes themselves far too seriously. It has changed over the years. Everyones aged and grown bitter through lack of achievement.
Afain, going off on a tangent but I dont see myself as "clcque"/a "mountain biker". I like to get out and ride, be within nature, the beauty. I most certainly dont want to be seen as some sort of warrior. I love saying hello to every walker and respect their access. I've no intention of a mass-trespass or solo trespass to gain more 'land'
Cycling doesnt create errosion?
Of course it does. So does walking. the point is. cycling creates no more erosion than walking (the difference is in impact pockets versus channelisation, if you can be bothered to go and read up on it - search for Thurstan and Reader), and indeed given the larger numbers of walkers cycling is actually *less* harmful to the environment overall.
wow
Actually I don't think there are enough trails for MTBers (however I do think they get a fantastic deal compared to vehicles, but then it's a crap deal compared to ramblers) - I think bridleways should be upped to about 75ish% of the total of 'trails'(leaving ramblers 25% of sole access of trails - plus right to roam etc etc etc and I think mtb should be allowed on the entire coastal path inc developments). In reality land I would VERY strongly echo the CountZero/aracer experience, if you go with a smile/hallo/bike behind and show consideration to other users (and the ground etc)you appear to be able to go where you want (*within reason). In 20 or so years of SE riding (Berkish) I've been challenged once and most irritatingly when I said 'Are you the landowner or an appointed factor thereof' he replied yes I'm the gamekeeper, we had a chat but ultimately there was nothing he could do, he had his orders/opinion and and I had my perspective - it was a very polite and calm chat, now I just watch for his landrover - what they eye don't see......
Last local explore involved footpaths and ended up using the local angling club route round a private lake - a few good eveings and a 'do you know where that goes' - a good time was had by all.....
I've only just seen this and haven't time to read through everything so sorry if it's been said already, but from G's 2nd post he says
I think its a footpath, but starts life as a bridleway
I was always led to believe once it's got bridleway status it can't be down graded to a footpath