Forum menu
If confronted by an irate farmer ask politely if he allows the local hunt to ride across his land. If he says no, then give him due respect and walk the rest of the way. If he says yes, then run him over repeatedly whilst laughing.
Trailwagger "If so would you care to educate me?"
Oh go on then. I know we're sucking eggs here but the general principles reach back to the Kinder Trespass. I can reference it but I'll assume you know a thing or two about it. Winding forward a few years, attitudes change, activities change, lifestyles change, laws regrettably don't (at least not so quickly) so we now find ourselves in the current situation where the desires and frustrations of the many outpace some very out of date and out of touch legal constructs.
I just ride all the trails around me and respect all other trail users.
I can't say I pay attention to it being a footpath, no access or bridleway- I just ride it.
99% of the time I never meet anyone else, and the 1% of the time I do I slow down say hello and smile. The rare times I encounter conflict I give as good as I get. If they are polite, I'll be polite and have a chat. If they go all guns blazing I'll be less polite.
I've had a local farmer try and run me off my bike because i took a genuine wrong turn from a Bridleway to a footpath (zero signage at a fork) and I've had people push me off my bike when I was at a standstill to let them past on a Bridleway. You encounter all sorts of hostilities for all sorts of reasons. Just do your bit and be mindful.
Oh go on then. I know we’re sucking eggs here but the general principles reach back to the Kinder Trespass. I can reference it but I’ll assume you know a thing or two about it. Winding forward a few years, attitudes change, activities change, lifestyles change, laws regrettably don’t (at least not so quickly) so we now find ourselves in the current situation where the desires and frustrations of the many outpace some very out of date and out of touch legal constructs.
Don't assume anything. This is all quite genuine. I know that its not law, and a civil matter of trespass but that's about the extent of my knowledge, so I will google Kinder Trespass and see what I can learn from it. thanks.
My point still stands though, just because you think the rules are outdated doesn't mean its right to blatantly ignore them. I could put up a pretty good argument for the national speed limit being outdated, but I doubt I would get much sympathy if I got caught speeding. I think my problem is mostly with the automatic branding anyone who rightly challenges you as a "****".
I think my problem is mostly with the automatic branding anyone who rightly challenges you as a “*”.
But they probably are though even if they are in the right. But i agree that doesn't mean you should be a right * back to them.
I think my problem is mostly with the automatic branding anyone who rightly challenges you as a “****”.
IME the ones who have an 'issue' just don't like bikes regardless of whether its a footpath, bridleway, dedicated trail centre etc. actually I'm not sure they like anything. the world seems a tough place for some.
Quite an interesting read, hopefully some of the restrictions will be lifted to create more access for everyone with regards to footpaths etc.
My favourite encounter was with a bloke (presumably landowner) who drove across the field/meadow that we were in, in his Landrover to tell us not to ride there as cyclists cause damage.
The thing is, if you increase the national speed limit the consequences of accidents will be more severe and more people will die. If people ride bicycles on paths nothing will change. It makes genuinely no difference to anyone whether you are there on a bike or on foot - the science shows that the erosion is roughly the same, wildlife are less bothered by bikes and generally it doesn't matter. So why follow rules that are so out of date if there is absolutely no victim?
Here's some science for it all, I've used this with some walkers and they either are interested and willing to change their view or are completely stubborn about it (I may have accused one of being a Brexit voter in light of how she acted when faced with actual evidence to contradict what she said).
Even in Scotland you get asshats that tell you the path isn’t for bikes.
IME, mostly tourists from England who aren't aware of the law. Even in the (comparatively) busy Pentlands the strongest reaction I ever got from walkers was sheer amazement when they saw me on the higher trails.
The thing is, if you increase the national speed limit the consequences of accidents will be more severe and more people will die. If people ride bicycles on paths nothing will change. It makes genuinely no difference to anyone whether you are there on a bike or on foot – the science shows that the erosion is roughly the same, wildlife are less bothered by bikes and generally it doesn’t matter. So why follow rules that are so out of date if there is absolutely no victim?
I tottaly agree, its ludicrous that you can walk somewhere but not cycle. Sveral studies have sugegsted that walklers cause more erosion than cyclists so that argument doesnt hold up.
What I am sayaing though, is that we should respect the laws/rules and regulations until such time as they are changed.
It is wrong for groups to pick and choose which rules they want to obey and which ones they dont.
My speed typing needs work.
Even in the (comparatively) busy Pentlands the strongest reaction I ever got from walkers was sheer amazement when they saw me on the higher trails.
In the Peak District, on a legitimate bridleway, a woman told me I shouldn't be here and when I pointed out it was a bridleway, bikes and horses are allowed etc she said "sorry, I meant it just looks incredibly difficult - you must be VERY good!"
Had a few instances of passive-aggressive: a woman who carried on striding towards me, swinging her two walking poles more energetically than needed saying "you're not supposed to be here as I'm sure you're well aware!" as she strode through me - basically forcing me off the path. Good job I'd stopped anyway. A few tuts, a few loud comments within the group, one person saying loudly to her friends "I'm sure we're walking on a footpath, aren't we?!"
But generally, no issues. I don't think most people care, especially once you get more than a mile from the car parks and the ones that do generally don't say a lot anyway.
I also pick and choose my times to ride carefully. There are some bridleways in places like the Lakes and Peaks that I won't ride on during busy times but plenty of trails that are fair game during weekdays, evenings, crack of dawn etc.
The simple problem is that our access laws are a long way behind the times.
The whole "footpath" "bridleway" and "Byway" segregation were as a result of those being the methods of travel available at the time, ie, a human powered, horse powered, or motor powered.
It's seems reasonably clear that had off road bikes been common at the time of that compartmentalisation, they would have most likely been lumped under "human powered" and hence been legally allowed to be ridden on footpaths.
This fits with the obvious 'impact' of those methods of transport, from a single human (100kg, and 200w) to a Horse and rider (1000kg, 747w) to motorised transport (>heavy and >powerful). Each of those segments has a corresponding impact to the land and it's inhabitants. Realistically, a human on a bike is no more damaging or unsightly than a human on foot and therefore i suspect, should our access laws be changed, would i suggest be expected to fall under foothpaths rather than Bridleways or Byways.
Interestingly and unfortunately, ime, the reception you get to riding on a foothpath, even when riding with complete consideration, is highly dependent upon the age of the person you meet. Almost without fail, meet a younger family, esp those with kids, and it's not uncommon to get a cheery hello and even perhaps a little cheer of encouragement, especially if riding something a bit techy at the time, but meet an older couple, and often the challenge is a lot less friendly. Why this is i'm not sure, perhaps the older generation remember when THEY had the whole place to themselves and hence see other users as intrusions, or perhaps old people are just fun sponges, but those delineations largely seem to stand ime.......
I have to go against the grain on this one. The rules say no bikes on footpaths. Why do you all feel so entitled, that the rules don’t apply to you?
It just causes conflict, and that conflict means that walkers (who have far greater numbers than us) will never allow a change in the access rights.
Because I spent 15 years obeying the rules in Scotland and generally having a shit MTB experience because I genuinely agreed with your POV.
then all of a sudden they realised the law was an arse and allowed free access. NOTHING had changed except the stoopid law. No baby robins or kittens died.
So I'm not going to make the same mistake for the next 20 years in England
Didn't walkers/ramblers get more access through their 'direct action'....
sheer amazement when they saw me on the higher trails.
Only ever had one guy be a dick when me and mctrailrider came down from Beinn Narnain. Like you most of the comments I’ve had are bewilderment at me riding up high.
then all of a sudden they realised the law was an arse and allowed free access. NOTHING had changed except the should law. No baby robin’s or kittens died.
This. And it's not even a proper law. Its a civil law requiring private action, which means even the police don't give a flying ****!
All those busy bodies telling you you can't ride somewhere are usually wrong. If its a civil matter of trespass, then its up to the discretion of the landowner. So unless they ARE the landowner, it's nothing to do with them.
It is wrong for groups to pick and choose which rules they want to obey and which ones they dont.
what about individuals? 😉
https://www.mbr.co.uk/news/welsh-footpaths-mtb-386429
Another piece on welsh trails on MBR, hopefully they will open access up to all
I understand the civil 'law' and differentiation between footpaths, Bridleways etc ... What is the position regarding local woods etc where there are commonly walked (and bikes) trails but no official designation? Guess I'm talking about 'common' land, council owned, the woods adjoining public parks, bits of green space between or on the edges of housing estates etc.
Is it still technically 'trespass'? And if so, presumably it applies equally to walkers?
Is it still technically ‘trespass’? And if so, presumably it applies equally to walkers?
Yes, thats my understanding anyway. There are a few "tracks" near me that are undesignated. So they are either 100% fair game for all non motorised transport or no one should be there at all.
Surely it’s all respect for other people and their use of the trail.
OP showed no respect what so ever.
Yes I ride cheeky trails, but crappy attitude leads to crappy attitudes towards mtb’s
The fact that everbody can only remember occasional incidents means that its clearly not an issue to most people, so why let the small percentage of *s spoil your day. As has been said, be polite, avoid making delicate areas worse and make sure your not one of the *'s.
Like AndyBrad says, there are one or two local landowners that we know are best avoided so we make sure we do. A friend of mine, when met with 'ITS A FOOTPATH' replies with a cheery 'not for long' 🙂
To answer the OP’s question, I made a snap decision to ride a shooters path along a ridge in the north Pennines, just to see if it was worth the trouble. After a hundred yards it was clear it was bobbins so I turned back. I hadn’t made it back to the gate before a Land Rover pulled up and an irate gamekeeper got out.
So - earful of grief for no gain (apart from the pleasure telling him his boss is a ****).
"I know its a footbath but its just too awesome not to ride it", "It would literally be a crime not to ride this path", "There are honestly hundreds of footpaths around here that no one would ever ride on"
If none of those work then its a lost cause.
OP showed no respect what so ever.
Harsh.
OP hadn't ridden like a dick or been abusive to the farm lady. Just ridden a footpath (and done what 90% of us on here do regularly)
“I know its a footbath but its just too awesome not to ride it”, “It would literally be a crime not to ride this path”, “There are honestly hundreds of footpaths around here that no one would ever ride on”
A friend of mine, out for a ride on Christmas morning, got the usual "this is a footpath, you shouldn't be riding here" from a family out for a walk.
He said "I'm riding it for baby Jesus, happy Christmas".
That apparently left them speechless!
I've had more people take offense at my presence on roads and mixed use paths than I ever have on footpaths.
He said “I’m riding it for baby Jesus, happy Christmas”.
Love that. Once you realise that considerate riding of a footpath is no-one's business except you and the landowner, you can have fun with the ramblers. Talking pretend forrin with excited gesturing can be entertaining.
My normal response to some random mithering that I shouldn't be on that footpath is the 'I know, crazy isn't it?'.
Smiling, stopping for folk, reassuring them that you have no intention of running them over, and thanking them for moving for you is the default though. Most people are nice.
Let's face it, I'm nearly 50, if I wait around for some arbitrary change in the law, I'll be needing an ebike to ride these trails. And those will probably have been banned by some other arbitrary law change.
Some interesting arguments being used here to justify riding footpaths, mainly along the lines of:
‘the law is outdated’,
‘I use my own judgement as to when to do it’
and ‘it’s really good fun so I do.’
All of which, as has been mentioned, could be applied to MXers on trails and speeding in a car. Of course we feel the consequences are different but the principle is identical.
I personally think that the Kinder Trespass can’t really be used these days to justify the entitled riding of footpaths - downtrodden working class people with one day off a week and no access to any local countryside because of the gentry can hardly be compared to stormtroopers on £6k bikes who’ve driven in fully expensed Audis to ride around taking photos for Instagram.
On the subject of damage, I have read a couple of studies which certainly concluded that a bike did no more damage than a walker, and less than a horse. I’m sure in the old ‘cross county’ days that was true. My issue these days is the fact that rooster tails, skids and crashing over rocks seems far more common, encouraged by every video, amazing modern bikes and body armour. Perhaps the videos are all filmed on private land or appropriate trails, but I do think that they encourage new riders to think that is what mountain biking should be, and how the bike should be ridden no matter where the ride is. To ride in this manner on a footpath is downright daft, but people do.
For the record, I used to ride on footpaths occasionally but became uncomfortable doing so 15 or 20 years ago, particularly as the local mtb groups and various authorities were working so hard to (successfully) extend the Sheffield/Peak bridleway network. I also became increasingly embarrassed by the damage being done by bikes, even on bridleways like Stanage Plantation the gouges in the rocks from chainrings and pedals are very obvious.
Well that was a lot longer and more curmudgeonly than I anticipated.
All of which, as has been mentioned, could be applied to MXers on trails and speeding in a car.
Both of which are criminal offences, unlike riding bikes on footpaths.
It is probably easier to decide not to ride footpaths when you have the eastern Peak BW network on your doorstep, though. You're not exactly short of good quality technical riding.
Well that was a lot longer and more curmudgeonly than I anticipated.
Don't apologise.
You are entitled to your opinion.
All of which, as has been mentioned, could be applied to MXers on trails and speeding in a car. Of course we feel the consequences are different but the principle is identical.
I personally think that the Kinder Trespass can’t really be used these days to justify the entitled riding of footpaths – downtrodden working class people with one day off a week and no access to any local countryside because of the gentry can hardly be compared to stormtroopers
I feel the classification is different but the principle is identical.
I too am uncomfortable with the roost image portrayed in the mainstream MTB media. Scratches on rocks however are mere evidence of passing traffic. Sure it's visual but it's no different to the wear associated with the passage of feet/hooves/crampons. The roosting and the wear and tear are the same regardless of the classification of the route on the map.
I’ve gotten more abuse for being on an ebike than for being on a footpath.
Damn right.
Cheeky trails? Oh yes! As long as its a public right of way, its fair game. However, the phrase "don't be a dick" has never been more true.
I've got miles and miles of decent footpaths on the IOW, plenty of bridleways too and yes I will ride them all!
Anyone whos ridden the coastal path between Shanklin and Ventnor will have encountered the Luccombe Loon. He loves it. He's even gone to the trouble of putting extra kissing gates and concrete steps to make you stop. If thos fail then he pretends to call the police and tells you they will confiscate your bike and sell it on the mainland. I've dedicated a couple of strava segments to him.
I usually debate with him for a bit for sport and then tell him that i'm heading to Ventnor, so could the police meet me there as it'll be easier for them too.
They never appear.
Around here the ROWs are very randomly arranged. You could be riding along a bridleway for a few miles that ends at a junction with a footpath. Nowhere to go (legitimately) other than turn back, or ride the FP. And there are many old hollow-ways, drove roads and farm tracks which have been used by all sorts of traffic for centuries but are now classified as FPs. We haven’t got the horsey background that some parts of the UK have, which means that almost everything got lumped in as a footpath.
Even so, I’ve never felt guilty riding where I’m not supposed to be, and have rarely been confronted.
just because you think the rules are outdated doesn’t mean its right to blatantly ignore them
What I am sayaing though, is that we should respect the laws/rules and regulations until such time as they are changed.
It is wrong for groups to pick and choose which rules they want to obey and which ones they dont.
Ever been drunk in a pub? Still technically a criminal offence.
Ever carried a ladder or planks across pavement? Yup, technically illegal too.
There are plenty of outdated laws in this country that millions fail to comply with on a daily basis because they are patently ridiculous, inapplicable to the way life has changed since they were introduced, and harming no one if they are ignored.
I ride where I like, with courtesy and deference to slower and more vulnerable trail and countryside users, and causing as little impact to the environment as I can manage. Anyone who has a problem with me enjoying the countryside in such a manner can safely be ignored. Ymmv.
martinhutch
It is probably easier to decide not to ride footpaths when you have the eastern Peak BW network on your doorstep, though. You’re not exactly short of good quality technical riding.
I actually think that the eastern Peak and Sheffield were poorly served by bridleways until the recent opening up of Burbage, Froggatt, Curbar and the Eastern Moors, thanks to great advocacy efforts. Riding from Sheffield involved a lot of road miles to link bits of bridleway.
When I was a kid I was out on the farm with my dad when we found a couple of rambles so far off the path it was interesting, they were adament they were right so we got them to show us where they were on the map, they were great at being confident but really couldn't explain why the wood behind they was not on the map in the place they were claiming it was (or the river)
scuttler
Member
I feel the classification is different but the principle is identical.
I too am uncomfortable with the roost image portrayed in the mainstream MTB media. Scratches on rocks however are mere evidence of passing traffic. Sure it’s visual but it’s no different to the wear associated with the passage of feet/hooves/crampons. The roosting and the wear and tear are the same regardless of the classification of the route on the map.
I’d still say it’s a bit disingenuous to liken an individual rider or two frequently riding footpaths for pure personal enjoyment to the organised politically motivated, publicised, single action Kinder Trespass. They had no other means of making themselves heard. We are lucky enough to have a plethora of ways to point our point of view forward should we want to, from Facebook to lobbying. Middle aged men enjoying themselves shouldn’t really hide behind this facade.
Do those who feel that they are politically motivated to ride footpaths also get involved in trail advocacy, trying to get more routes legalised for the good of all riders?
Apologies that I don't have time to write a direct reply, but I think this blog I wrote a few years ago addresses your point...
http://unduro.co.uk/thoughts/our-mass-trespass-is-already-happening/
I've become involved in MTB advocacy since, campaigning for increased access, but I still think it requires a shift of perspective.
For the powers that be to acknowledge that footpath riding is widespread and that the genie won't go back in the bottle - so let's make the rules reflect the reality and embrace the "public good" aspect of MTB.
I’m a farmer and mountain bikers that rides cheeky trails so I see both sides of the argument. Most farmers probably don’t give a monkeys about a mountain biker riding along a footpath as long as it doesn’t affect their livelihood or where they live. It’s a civil offence so most couldn’t be bothered/don’t have the time/ don’t have the money to pursue it. So if the footpath goes through the middle of the farmstead and you ride through then they might get a little annoyed just because it’s their private space, but if the path is over the back of that field, or across that moor, what’s the problem and most probably don’t care. Where farmers get really hacked is when it starts damaging his livelihood. Leaving gates open or riding that cheeky trail where people divert off the path because of a wet spot and ride all over a crop, which technically aren’t trespass but criminal damage. The other thing a farmer worries about is opening up further access, often MX bikes see tracks and follow them, or smart arse “I have rights, you know” types trying to establish permanent rights of way. The current law is stupid and access needs to be increased especially to bicycles as they do very little long term damage and do not chew up trails like horses. As others have mentioned it’s about having consideration, if we are considerate to the farmer or owner, his livelihood and property, don’t leave gates open, chase livestock down, or trash fences, most won’t mind, infact I bet deep down they are probably a little jealous that you are enjoying yourself, as they work on. There are of course cocks that will say get off my land for no reason, there are also cocks that thing it’s fine to leave a livestock gate open, works both ways.
I’ve been working with the British Horse Society on Project 2026 to record lost or under-recorded rights before the cut-off date. So far we’ve submitted 60 formal applications in County Durham with no sign of the supply of work drying up soon.
A large number of these routes are currently classed as footpaths but should be bridleways or restricted byways.
It’s a nonsense to say footpaths are only for walkers- the sub-clause which is so often omitted is “unless higher rights exist “.
Of course, all these hundreds of hours of research and form-filling could be saved by changing the law to make all rights of way available to all users.
Do those who feel that they are politically motivated to ride footpaths also get involved in trail advocacy, trying to get more routes legalised for the good of all riders?
No. Sorry. I don't.
I do contribute in other ways to society through my work, which tries to make things a little better for some of the more vulnerable members of our society. And at weekends I take care of the kids so that my wife can do similar (better) work with other disadvantaged sections of society. The time to campaign and 'be political' about Rights of Way, is, therefore, limited ... and I'd rather be out riding with the relatively small amount of personal time I have to myself.
But in any case, I kind of agree with this ...
I still think it requires a shift of perspective.
For the powers that be to acknowledge that footpath riding is widespread and that the genie won’t go back in the bottle – so let’s make the rules reflect the reality and embrace the “public good” aspect of MTB.