Anyone got the link?
I can't find it on here- but that says more about my search skills
They weren't motoX bikes 🙄
They were road legal trail/enduro bikes 😉
'Twas I
Which you could use to ride MX, or maybe they were converted MX bikes?
Im off to ride my [s]mountain[/s][i]small muddy hill[/i] bike. Obviously not a mountain bike as i wont be riding on a mountain.
She has a very dirty head... Can't understand a word of it. Rubbish.
G
Yes thats the one with the guys riding moto X bikes
Thank you.
There's a RUPP that passes very close to a farmyard just to the NW of Bovey Tracey on the Eastern edge of Dartmoor and there's very dear old lady that works the farm who's life is made a misery at weekends by folk on enduro bikes..
I've passed by there on my small muddy hill bike countless times and encountered her close to tears on a number of occasions..
FWIW the lady in question has a much cleaner head than the lady in that video
jekkyl - was that you?
Extremely polite chaps and was disappointed that she did not produce her map. I have to say though I'm amazed that BOATS and Byways can go through farms with livestock. Common sense dictates that it can be distressing for livestock of any description, let alone the farmer.
Whereabouts was this? Wiltshire?
You [i]could[/i] use a twist and go scooter to ride MX, it would not be an MX bike.Which you could use to ride MX
Instruments, electric starts, lights ... [b]mirrors![/b] No, they were not.or maybe they were converted MX bikes?
CG, why distressing? Farms are full of noisy farm equipment..
CG You see cows in fields next to A class roads Dual carriageways and even motorways. Its a public highway.
yeah it's slightly different though surely?
If you're sat next to a river having a picnic miles from any traffic enjoying the peace and quiet, you're gonna notice if 2 or 3 bikes suddenly come blatting round the corner no..?
Quite interesting reading the comments on YouTube.
The majority of people complement him for dealing with the situation calmly and politely - but quite a few seem to go off on one, suggesting he should be shot or that a garrote trap should be set! 😯
I'm amazed that BOATS and Byways can go through farms with livestock. Common sense dictates that it can be distressing for livestock of any description, let alone the farmer.
Dam noisy brightly coloured things.
[img] 
[/img]
worth a repost, that's how to be an ambassador for your hobby.
Just watched this one of his:
That's proper banjo country right there!
even the tractor reasoning is silly.. no doubt the livestock are very very familiar with the comforting sound of Farmer Giles plodding sedately about the farm on his tractor..
these lairy buggers roaring towards you from the horizon may be a bit more intimidating perhaps..?
I'm pretty certain cows don't even like dubstep
Lambs, calves etc would be terrified if a large group came through. Pregnant livestock as well as sucklings could be affected by the stress. Pesky hormones at it again. Yes, those chaps would be cautious but not everyone is like them! Same applies to mountain bikes in this scenario.
Yunki, if you don't want to share your picnic with other (motorised) users, picnic on a footpath or bridleway, simples
cinnamon_girl: I agree about the potential for livestock distress - but that doesn't give them the right to block a right of way.
By the same token you can't put a herd of pregnant sheep in a field next to the M25 and then demand that it's closed so it doesn't upset them.
I know how can solve the livestock issue by not having them!
That's proper banjo country right there!
😯 What a mess and he was telling porkies re not knowing it was a right of way. Bang out of order.
Graham - rights of way needs to be brought into the 21st century for the benefit of both users and land owners. Conflict must be avoided by being respectful of each other's needs.
How is having cattle across a right of way respecting the needs of a user?
Daisy - I couldn't give a flying ****.. I'm just thinking of the poor old dear that I mentioned in my earlier post..
It's not me in the video, it was who initially linked it up I meant 🙂
Graham - rights of way needs to be brought into the 21st century for the benefit of both users and land owners. Conflict must be avoided by being respectful of each other's needs.
I agree - but saying "you can't use this road any more because I've put horses/livestock in that field" is [i]not[/i] an example of doing that.
That's just the same as blocking a RoW with a fence or putting up Keep Out signs.
Common sense dictates that it can be distressing for livestock of any description, let alone the farmer.
And yet there are many farmers that are happy to let organised Enduros go through their land/have MX meetings on their land.
Maybe the cash they get for it helps them to calm their livestock down again. 😛
How is having cattle across a right of way respecting the needs of a user?
Quite! Mind you, I reckon the most scared I've been is going through fields of pigs on foot. They squealed when I'd gone past, just to remind me of their girth size. 😀
Possibly on National Trails there should be an alternative path away from livestock. Thinking about the South Downs Way here as that's pretty busy all year and the cattle can be menacing.
I reckon he's on shaky ground... the path is here....
"Other route with public access". Not a BOAT or an RUPP.
What about farmers on Quad/motor bikes?even the tractor reasoning is silly.. no doubt the livestock are very very familiar with the comforting sound of Farmer Giles plodding sedately about the farm on his tractor..
Your/baby robbins/gay swans/pregnant livestock's/others issue is with irresponsible users, not 'MX' bikes in general.
I can think of plenty unfenced, tarmaced, public roads in the, Highlands that have sheep, cattle and even deer roaming across them. They don't seem particularly bothered by the traffic.
reckon he's on shaky ground... the path is here....
Did you read the YouTube description russianbob?
He had the [url= https://gloucestershire.firmstep.com/default.aspx/RenderForm/?F.Name=B75apJt4Qgo&HideToolbar=1 ]Gloucestershire County Council RoW map[/url] in his hand and has since confirmed with them that it is a right of way.
"Other route with public access"
The majority of which are unclassified county roads (ie highways maintainable at public expense with vehicular rights)
There are ongoing debates on this issue, as some counties claim otherwise, technically this type of road that carries rights but is predominantly not used by motorised vehicles is exactly what was supposed to have been recorded in the fifties and sixties as a RUPP, but that was never done properly. It's also known that some counties recorded roads on their list of streets to claim money from the government for construction and repair, but never got round to it, despite never forgetting to claim the money.... Whole thing is a mess basically.
Of course I didn't read the description. That would be like reading an instruction book. And in the video he said that he had the OS map. I just listen and look at pictures. Background reading? Research? What are they?
And actually not marked on the ROW map as any kind of right of way.
well, no, they wouldn't be, as they're roads not rights of way.
However they are therefore marked on road maps, leading to frequently hilarious scenes of cars and wagons getting stuck on the edge of a cliff or river 😈
And actually not marked on the ROW map as any kind of right of way.
If you zoom out a bit it is marked on the base OS map as an ORPA joining Little Shurdington to Cold Slad. When zoomed in it just appears as a road and track.
I'm amazed that BOATS and Byways can go through farms
The farms are the very reason they are there in the first place 😉
worth a repost, that's how to be an ambassador for your hobby.
+ 1 Absolutely.
If only everyone was this reasonable.
Farming is a bit more than a hobby you know....
I used that track years ago didn't think much of it.Much better riding up Greenway lane much more fun.Good videos.
i think i need to head down to Dartmoor with the CR and find those trails
The thing which strikes me about people posting examples of animals they've seen near to tracks with motorised traffic on them, and posting different arguments, is it still remains a biological fact that there can be problems caused for pregnant animals if they're startled/frightened.
I'm sure farmers on quad bikes will have thought of this, what with being farmers an' all.
Can't fault his demeanour, very switched on.
I carry an up to date OS map for this reason even if I know the trail is a BOAT, land owners can get quite unreasonable at times.
Some of them seem to think they can buy a property with rights of way going through it and then just shut them down, the simple answer is not to buy a property with rights of way on it and if you are silly enough to do so don't put livestock on said rights of way.
Easy isn't it.
The thing which strikes me about people posting examples of animals they've seen near to tracks with motorised traffic on them, and posting different arguments, is it still remains a biological fact that there can be problems caused for pregnant animals if they're startled/frightened.
Sheep will run away from people on foot, should we close all footpaths too in the run up to easter?
The thing which strikes me about people posting examples of animals they've seen near to tracks with motorised traffic on them, and posting different arguments, is it still remains a biological fact that there can be problems caused for pregnant animals if they're startled/frightened.
This is true, which is why the farmer should keep his pregnant animals in a different pasture. But in my experience as a horse rider, farmers very rarely consider any ROW across their land, be they footpath, bridleway or other. It is not that they are actively trying to keep people off, although some certainly are, it is just that they put the stock in the area which best suits, without thinking that people on horses, or motorbikes / quads may want to use those Rights of Way.
Maybe, just maybe, farmers would be advised not to put pregnant livestock in fields which have a public right of way across them rather than moaning when people use their quite legal right to access that route.
Maybe, just maybe, farmers would be advised not to put pregnant livestock in fields which have a public right of way across them rather than moaning when people use their quite legal right to access that route.
While a valid point, they do still have to run a business.
And they don't just put them in a field for 6 months and let them get on with it, they'll eat the grass in a few weeks and have to be moved onto the next field, to be replaced by a different animal or breed with a different diet. The farm I used to live on we had 2 breeds of sheep and cattle in rotation as they all had a preferance for different types of grass.
And you're getting dangerously close to 'victim blaming'. If it's the responsibility of the sheep/farmer to keep out of your way on the footpath, that's not so different from saying cyclists should keep out of the way of cars on the road.
russianbob, either your streetmap link is wrong, or you didn't see the NGR.
Path is here according to youtube description:
http://streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=392366&Y=216800&A=Y&Z=120
According to the OS map, its a long distance route, and "other route with public access", however, the public ROW map also linked on you tube page clearly shows no public ROW. It does state that [i]"This is not the definitive map but our attempt to show the data in an electronic format"[/i]
So in my eyes, the farmer was right.
And you're getting dangerously close to 'victim blaming'. If it's the responsibility of the sheep/farmer to keep out of your way on the footpath, that's not so different from saying cyclists should keep out of the way of cars on the road.
How is it even remotely close to "victim blaming" to suggest that if you KNOW you have a legal obligation to allow access to a field to walkers/horse riders/cyclists/motorbikes/elephants/whatever that you take appropriate steps to ensure that you don't leave pregnant ewes in that particular place then get all shirty when people actually want to access that field?
If these rights of way were imposed on people all of a sudden rather than them being historic, I'd be extremely sympathetic but these are not a surprise to the landowners and trying to play the victim is not really on.
According to the OS map, its a long distance route, and "other route with public access"
Yep he states in the YouTube description that it is an ORPA and says that to her in the video (about 3:10). It is marked as such on the OS.
Why would that make the farmer right?
My understanding was that ORPAs were fair game?
How is it even remotely close to "victim blaming" to suggest that if you KNOW you have a legal obligation to allow access to a field to walkers/horse riders/cyclists/motorbikes/elephants/whatever that you take appropriate steps to ensure that you don't leave pregnant ewes in that particular place then get all shirty when people actually want to access that field?
Because you're blaming the sheep/farmer for your disturbing them. It's your right to travel on that right of way, it's your responsibility to not be a dick about it, worry livestock, etc. The farmers responsibility in relation to this ends at not keeping agressive bulls (or tigers, or aligators if we're going down the jungle animal route) so that's it's safe for you, you should do the same and respect their property.
It's attitudes like that that're why we don't have Scottish style access laws in England. People are far too keen on their rights, not so much on accepting any personal responsibility.
Why would that make the farmer right?
Because its not a public right of way.
Motorbikes, pushbikes, horses and even pedestrians aren't allowed there according to the definitive map. If only it were in Scotland...
Because its not a public right of way.
Doesn't the P of ORPA mean it is a public right of way?
If only it were in Scotland...
Quite. As a Scot I find the English obsession with Rights of Way quite confusing!
Because you're blaming the sheep/farmer for your disturbing them. It's your right to travel on that right of way, it's your responsibility to not be a dick about it, worry livestock, etc. The farmers responsibility in relation to this ends at not keeping agressive bulls (or tigers, or aligators if we're going down the jungle animal route) so that's it's safe for you, you should do the same and respect their property.
Nobody is suggesting otherwise. However that's nothing to do with what is being discussed. I wouldn't suggest riding directly through the middle of a load of livestock but likewise I don't think saying, as you are, that we shouldn't go through the field at all is the answer.
Doesn't the P of ORPA mean it is a public right of way?
Not if its not on the definitive map. Ordnance Survey maps are just a guide and not always up to date, even online.
But they state very clearly on that page [i]"This map is not the Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way. It has no legal status."[/i]
None of the public roads are marked as a Right Of Way on that map, but they are obviously open to the public. Doesn't an ORPA fall under the same definition?
Seems to be very unclearly defined in law however this is the perspective of one county. (PS drill into streetmap 1:25000 and it goes green/white)
"In addition to showing Public Rights of Way, Ordnance Survey maps show public roads. Main roads are usually shown by blue, pink, orange or yellow lines. Minor public roads or Unclassified County Road (UCRs), which may not have a tarmac surface, are usually shown on modern maps by a string of green dots - ORPAs (see page 4 for symbol).
On older editions of Ordnance Survey maps, before ORPAs were shown, minor non-tarmac roads were uncoloured, they were ‘white’. This caused a great deal of confusion because private roads and tracks, which may not be used by the general public, were also shown white. The ORPA symbol on modern maps helps to reduce this confusion."
"UCRs are public highways but the law does not define what public rights they carry. They are simply public highways, which have never been formally classified. The County Council therefore works on a presumption that they carry the same rights as a Byway (see page 2) until proven otherwise.
Non-tarmac surfaced UCRs are usually shown
on Ordnance Survey Explorer Maps as
ORPAs (see above)."
Given the road structure in the map it looks road to me
Nobody is suggesting otherwise. However that's nothing to do with what is being discussed. I wouldn't suggest riding directly through the middle of a load of livestock but likewise I don't think saying, as you are, that we shouldn't go through the field at all is the answer.
I didn't say don't go through the field at all, I said be responsible for your actions. If you think that a bike might scare them, then walk it through, or (you said it not me, but I do agree with it) find an alternative route.
Same with dogs, same with 'MX' bikes, unless you're touched in the head you'd not take a dog through a field of sheep at lambing time?