[Closed] "Horse riders and cyclists go to war over bridleways"

#Say hellooooo to horses

[img] [/img]

I posted a fairly detailed critique of mr Milton's claims of illegality [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/surrey-hills-would-be-a-shame-if-all-that-hard-work-was-for-nothing#post-5860865 ]on here[/url] a few weeks ago

Some of the other claims made are simply outlandish [i]"jumping ramps above horses' heads, around an established sunken horse track" [/i]

in addition, the 'hangout' for Mr Milton and his friends (Horseytalk dot net) where you can see some of their letters - there is one contributor who is properly fruit loop, and writes in 'stream of conciousness' style in caps lock, who seems to have a particular bugbear in quoting random interpretations of pseudo legal jargonese, and constantly repeating that riding bicycles offroad is illegal under Sched 7 CROW 2000 and S34 Road Traffic Act 1988, even though both these acts specifically refer to mechanically propelled vehicles rather than bicycles.

MTBers (or anyone else) tear arseing around a corner and spooking a horse is a bad thing - obviously.
Thing is

Some horses also struggle with kids on parents shoulders as apparently they see a person with two heads

Horseists are too big a lobby group to upset tho.

See horse riders frequently on my commute, we seem to get along ok, was only recently reminded of the importance of shouting hello (on here?) ie human sounds not a bell.

Old story - paper filling for The Guardian
Just ride sensibly
No need for militancy on any side - riders, horses, cars etc - just a bit of common sense

I always slow for horses whether in a car, on a bike or even running. It's just courtesy and common sense.

Horseists are too big a lobby group to upset tho.

but they have more right to the trails than a 29'er does

The bit I've never quite understood is that there are some horses who are incredibly docile and wouldn't notice if the bomb hit, they'd just get back to scratching themselves on the charred remains of a fence post. These are not the horses which people ride, instead they ride the ones who are the equivalent of that guy in the corner of a wetherspoons with facial scars, a twitch and a collection of knitting needles up his sleeve.

Surely horses can be bred which are both reasonably passive and still fun to ride?

but they have more right to the trails than a 29'er does

they are a bigger lobbying group coz they are more organised, mtbers probably outnumber them but are lazy/antisocial sods, I can live with that. One legit trail user have more right than another (ignoring the who gives way to whom bit) seems wrong.

and the "we've been here longer" argument doesn't wash, bikes have been on roads longer than cars but cyclists still get massively marginalised.

Have to say, this is a problem we have less of because our land access laws aren't designed to funnel all the traffic into a too-small network of trails.

[img] http://ducatiforum.co.uk/forum/attachments/stock-photo-2634771-hitting-a-nail-on-the-head-1-jpg.8074/ [/img]

#Say hellooooo to horses

but they have more right to the trails than a 29'er does

why?

they are a bigger lobbying group coz they are more organised,

The bit I've never quite understood is that there are some horses who are incredibly docile and wouldn't notice if the bomb hit, they'd just get back to scratching themselves on the charred remains of a fence post. These are not the horses which people ride...

They're the ones that most people buying a horse want to buy - "bombproof" is the word they tend to use in ads! Unfortunately stick a scared idiot on the top of said bombproof horse and the horse (being a very perceptive herd animal) notices that the animal on top of it is scared so there must be something to be scared of. Horses survive by running away - staying cool when your rider is not being cool is totally against all their instincts.

or else they have wealthier and more influnetial friends and neighbours

They're the ones that most people buying a horse want to buy - "bombproof" is the word they tend to use in ads! Unfortunately stick a scared idiot on the top of said bombproof horse and the horse (being a very perceptive herd animal) notices that the animal on top of it is scared so there must be something to be scared of. Horses survive by running away - staying cool when your rider is not being cool is totally against all their instincts.

That makes sense. I've only ever ridden horses as part of trekking groups and I guess they're used to having nervous idiots on board.

lemonysam: the docile ones are probably the lively ones from ten years ago but have been "put out to grass" to live out their days.

Horses have individual traits - one round us gets spooked by aubretia, probably its smell - others aren't bothered by petrol driven lawnmowers. Ideally the owner knows (most) of the traits of the animal they are riding but it may be that it isn't their horse so don't know how it reacts to novel stimulii.

why?

ninfan - Member

there is one contributor who is properly fruit loop, and writes in 'stream of conciousness' style in caps lock,

Does he call everyone zombie maggots, or accuse people of shooting him with lazorz?

and the "we've been here longer" argument doesn't wash,

This is Britain. There's a queue, you know!

Some horse owners do own large swathes of land and are in the right place to exercise a bit of leverage, but the majority of them are normal people. It's just the same as any other pressure group that the only voices you hear are the loud over-opinionated ones.

after 15 years riding around Surrey Hills I've only come across one spooked horse, even the rider then said she was trying to get it used to [u]people[/u]. I've never come across a militant rider on the trails, all of this hoorahh is down to about 3 people who seem to be getting a stupid amount of airtime. The article is old, it's referencing old issues that have been rectified (i.e. the blind spots have had fencing put around). Its a slow news day for Granuid..

Northwind - nah, he's better than that - here's a choice example, a letter to the county solicitor:

I HAVE THE LR DOCUMENTS WHICH ARE BY-WAY OF DIS-CREDITED LEASES.

STILL YOU FAIL TO DISCLOSE THE "PROPER" LEASE AGREEMENTS" FROM NT, WHICH OF COURSE THEY HAVE ISSED A DIS-CLAIMER.

READ THE APPLICATION BY JANE BOWDEN, THE APPLICATION ALTHOUGH MADE UNDER FALSE REPRESENTATION WAS ONLY FOR THE BARROWS.

AS THE LGO DO NOT INVESTIGATE FRAUD, THE CLAIMS BY ME HAVE NOW GONE BACK TO THE FRAUD SQUAD TO INVESTIGATE THE LEASEING OF COMMONERS RIGHTS FOR PROFIT.

AS THE SIGNAGE IS ALSO UNLAWFUL, STEPS ARE BEING TAKEN UNDER SCHEDULE 4 PARA 6..

CONTACT THE REDISTRATION AUTHORITIES HELEN GILBERT, SHE HAS STATED THERE IS NO, DEFINITIVE OWNER REGISTERED TO FRENSHAM COMMON CL87, THIS WILL BE THEAT THE CENTRE OF ANY COURT HEARING.

We should get him over here, he'd be a valuable addition to the community.

There are lots of horses ridden around the north downs where I live. Very few are skilled and courteous enough not to cause themselves all manner of problems.

Most seem unnable to control their beast which leads to panic, loss of bladder control and lots of yelling. This upsets the poor nag as it doesn't like it's passenger to yell or excrete onto it.

Others stand still and shout for the path to be cleared so that they can make the poor horsey run along quickly for a bit.

One woman (described harshly but accurately as a wrinkled old witch by my brother) wanted us to dismount and stand in the brambles and bracken so they could pass by on a country lane as, and I guote "this horse kicked at one of you cyclists last week so you'd better move!"

Quite rediculous really, if my bike randomly attacked dog walkers I'd be forced to destroy it! They should also be made to pick up all that poo.

Here in the rural idyll that is Ilkeston we are blessed with miles of bridleways, and an understanding community of horse riders. Never had a problem on the whole. Given that most of the horse riders where jodhpurs and strappy vest tops to show off their tattoos, it's often more traumatic for the cyclists when we meet.

Though occassionally when I see my mates haring round bends I wonder what might happen if there was a horse rider coming the other way.

Personally I think the person in "control" of the half tonne animal that can kick people to death bears the greater responsibility.

That being said Rule #1 still applies

Doesn't a lot of this fall into the category of just being courteous to other trail users?

When faced with horses, I normal slow down, and keep to a safe distance until the rider has noticed me and then pass or get off and wait for them to be clear. But then, I don't use Strava.

Only time I've had bother was when some madwoman started berating me about her horse being scared of bikes, while I was off the bike and sat on the wall by a gate having a drink. I did have to point out the southern section of the Towneley possibly wasn't a great choice of place to be riding it, then.

Edit:

Personally I think the person in "control" of the half tonne animal that can kick people to death bears the greater responsibility.

Agreed, but I've seen some pretty horrendous horse related injuries in the course of my job, and I'd rather not feel responsible for another one.

When faced with horses, I normal slow down, and keep to a safe distance until the rider has noticed me and then pass or get off and wait for them to be clear. But then, I don't use Strava.

As I Strava rider I aim for the heads, oh hang on I don't.

Back to rule 1
Don't be a dick

[quote=mwleeds ]A spooked horse gallops!

Could have done with some cyclists to spook some of the horses I've ridden.

[quote=chiefgrooveguru ]The bit I've never quite understood is that there are some horses who are incredibly docile and wouldn't notice if the bomb hit, they'd just get back to scratching themselves on the charred remains of a fence post. These are not the horses which people ride...
They're the ones that most people buying a horse want to buy - "bombproof" is the word they tend to use in ads!

Not that I've ever bought a horse, or am ever likely to, but IME those which have been described to me as "bombproof" or "docile" are just lazy, and could do with a bit of spooking (see above).

Then again whilst I haven't done much horseriding I'm not your typical middle aged woman out for a gentle trot - got mostly taught to ride on a retired top level showjumper which could shift a bit given enough space.

As I Strava rider I aim for the heads, oh hang on I don't.

I'd obviously missed the 😛 smiley off the end...

Back to rule 1
Don't be a dick

This

[/quotePersonally I think the person in "control" of the half tonne animal that can kick people to death bears the greater responsibility.]

Totally agree. Common sense applies to all trail users. What would possess a novice horse rider to take a scared animal down a steep narrow trail covered in tyre tracks?

I used to ride horses when I was younger.

I don't think you can say just control your animal like it is a dog. Most dogs are small people can control them with a lead. A horse is very big and can be spooked easily.

When I see them when I'm riding I always make sure I pass at a sensible speed and in a sensible manner. I know if I was on that horse it is what I would want cyclists to do.

Have to say, this is a problem we have less of because our land access laws aren't designed to funnel all the traffic into a too-small network of trails.

re bells for the rider, fair point but I think the best action around horses is what works for most or the norm. There's people that want you to do what only they seem to think is reasonable or normal but you can't let that affect how you react to the rest.
I used to ride horses when I was younger, while I also rode MTBs. Bells really aren't a help and will spook some horses, slowing down to say hi as you approach, saying hi again if they don't hear you, won't. Or if it does the horse and owner have issues and it's their responsibility to manage that. You won't have any problems as you slowed right down and gave space, right? )

I hate bells, and always say 'Hello' to other riders, walkers and horses (and BB robins).

It's about respect to other users. You would never drive fast or rev your engine when passing a horse in a car, so why on a bike.

I'm kind of sitting on the fence on this one.

I was riding on Pitch Hill a couple of years ago. There's a steep, rooty trail over there that leads down onto a bridleway (I think its called Root Of All Evil on strava). It's divided into two sections - one short, sharp descent, which then levels off, then there's a drop off in to the second section, which is full of roots and loose rocks down to the fireroad junction below.

I hit the drop off, and just as I committed I saw that there was a horse and rider down on the bridleway. Straight away I could see that the horse was startled, and so I managed to brake and kind of managed to lie the bike down without doing myself too much harm(actually managed to burp the front tyre clean off the rim in the process).

When I got up I could see the horse further down the bridleway with no rider. Then the female rider pulled herself out of a ditch which ran next to the bridleway.

Fortunately she was unhurt, and was actually blaming herself - saying that the horse had been easily spooked all day. However, I felt pretty crap about it as I felt she had fallen a long way from the top of the horse to the bottom of the ditch, and had she landed awkwardly, the situation could have been a lot worse.

Since then though, I am a bit more careful on blind singletrack, leading to fireroads. I'm a good enough rider, with good enough brakes to avoid hitting someone (I hope), but these things do get startled, and its not like controlling a dog.

Scott - one of the key factors there is of course that if a trail is properly made, and the trail and crossing point etc are designed to scrub speed and give adequate sight lines - then the risk of exactly what you describe is reduced.

Its the unofficial trails that have been 'ridden in' without planning or design that cause the problems, not the ones that have been designed to minimise them - and thats why this whole 'campaign' misses the mark entirely, as what you see is the landowner doing something to reduce the problems that are already there, not create new ones.

ninfan - yes, that is a good point. The trail I was on was certainly not a 'manufactured' trail and is more of simply a fall line.

Unfortunately this falls once again into that modern problem of not understanding the difference between "perceived" risk, and "actual" risk.

The horse riders perceive there to be a risk, that MTBers could cause an accident when someone gets hurt. And they are correct.

BUT, the actual risk includes the probability of it actually occurring.

So, to date, how many people have been injured by horses getting spooked by MTBers in the whole of the UK in say the last 20 years.

Until that figure is know, this is more hot air from people with too much time on their hands!

And then, we get to that thorny issue of personal responsibility. If you think it is too risky to ride your horse (or bike) for fear of getting hurt, then you must stop doing that. It is not for anyone else to make that decision for you.

Glad to hear you were all OK scott.

It always goes a long way if you show concern for others, and if we are seen as being proactive in minimising risk to other bridleway users in general, it will only improve the general publics perception of MTBers.

Not like those feking snowboarders!!!

As a lot of road planners have found, removing all "danger" spots from a road doesn't actually help prevent accidents! (people just drive faster)

By sanitising trails, it give out the message that someone else is responsible for controlling how YOU ride! If "potentially dangerous" locations are all sanitised with styles,gates or whatever, the users no longer need to pay attention. And we know where that ends up. It also leads to another reduction in personal responsibility, because it could now be "someone elses fault" that there was no sign, or style, or gate, or decent surface, or sightline or whatever!

Have to say, this is a problem we have less of because our land access laws aren't designed to funnel all the traffic into a too-small network of trails.

A direct consequence of user interest groups devoting themselves to campaigning [b]against[/b] the rights of others when they're supposed to fight [b]for[/b] rights for themselves.

And the right to "not be around people who enjoy the countryside differently" is not a right, it's just a flimsy semantic trick.

(Down with ramblers!)

I also have the same problem with bike bells as i do with car horns!

The purpose of a bell/horn is simple to say "I am here". But these days, people all too easily assume a ring or a honk is either "Get out of my way" or "you're a t**t!!". It is just about impossible to tell from the actual noise what is mean't.

Because of that, i always favour calling a cheery "hello" or "morning" above the ring of a bell. That way, you set the stage before you get their and it is much harder to other users to misconstrue your intent......

As a lot of road planners have found, removing all "danger" spots from a road doesn't actually help prevent accidents! (people just drive faster)

By sanitising trails, it give out the message that someone else is responsible for controlling how YOU ride! If "potentially dangerous" locations are all sanitised with styles,gates or whatever, the users no longer need to pay attention. And we know where that ends up. It also leads to another reduction in personal responsibility, because it could now be "someone elses fault" that there was no sign, or style, or gate, or decent surface, or sightline or whatever!

Good point well made.

[i]I was riding on Pitch Hill a couple of years ago. There's a steep, rooty trail over there that leads down onto a bridleway (I think its called Root Of All Evil on strava). It's divided into two sections - one short, sharp descent, which then levels off, then there's a drop off in to the second section, which is full of roots and loose rocks down to the fireroad junction below.

[/i]

When I read the article it sounded like Wolverns Lane and if so the 'route' on the west-side of the sunkern lane has been there for years. Good to climb as it keeps you off the (very) muddy lane and a laugh as a descent with only one blind-ish jump, which is off the BW.

I could be wrong.

WAR!!!!

[img] [/img]

WAR!!!!

[img] [/img]

A productive use of my Lunchtime I think...

I did have to point out the southern section of the Towneley possibly wasn't a great choice of place to be riding it, then.

*opinions differ YMMV
**BW so everyone should have equal rights according to my earlier post, but you seemed to be implying some MTB proprietary

I don't understand horses and am wary of them. I always slow down and make a point of making sure the horse and rider know I'm there with a friendly greeting.

My missus used to ride horses and her incite into just how easily spooked they are is fascinating e.g. a crisp packet on the ground that the horse had ridden round many times then suddenly took offence at causing it to bolt.

IMHO, they are big, dumb and undpredictable and it is the latter that makes me particularly wary. A kick from a horse REALLY hurts! 😯 I just assume that they are going to do the unexpected and give them a wide berth.

[quote=D0NK ]you seemed to be implying some MTB proprietary

I don't think he was at all - simply pointing out that it is well used by bikes (who have a right to be there), and presumably that there are other places you can ride your horse where you're not so likely to encounter them if they're a problem. I suppose at a stretch you could call it victim blaming, but it's not as if the bike riders are doing anything wrong.