- BBC Breakfast asking “Should cyclists be allowed on footpaths?”
…Some of the footpaths will no doubt be technically (if not legally) ridable too but I’m guaranteed to be able to put a ride together with bridleways and it will work. When in Scotland it is often not that easy. You just can’t tell from the map….
That’s half the fun real rough stuff… 🙂
(and why fat bikes are popular)Posted 10 months ago
I know landowners are meant to keep it clear, but they don’t.
They’re not allowed to block e.g with barbed wire, but its the local authority who have to clear overgrown tracks. Quite often they pay the local farmer to do the job.Posted 10 months ago
but its the local authority who have to clear overgrown tracks.
Actually I think responsibility to keep the public right of way clear of vegetation lies with the land owner or occupier …
“As the owner or occupier of land with a public right of way across it, you must:
make sure vegetation does not encroach onto the route from the sides or above, bearing in mind the different clearances needed for users of different types of route, for example by horse riders”
from the following:
When farmers ‘clear’ overgrown rights of way it is not unusual for them to deliberately use heavy plant repeatedly to churn it up ‘to keep the riff-raff out’.Posted 10 months ago
Eh! **** BBC and since when the **** did we give a shite what BBC discusses!?
I do most of my mtb’ing on footpaths using my enduraaaaaabrabike 🤪Posted 10 months ago
It’s all down to a bit of communication.
I was, admittedly, a bit lost and thought I might actually be riding on a footpath. A farmer in a tractor on the same track was trundling toward me, ‘Oh dear’ me thinks, ‘he might get grumpy’. He stopped and said hello, I asked if I was actually on a footpath and if it was OK to ride my bike on it. His reply was along the lines of, ‘Well, I drive this along it, be daft to stop you riding a bike, crack on.’Posted 10 months ago
What I never understand is why seemingly some landowners remove or disguise rights of way signing.
I see that a lot round my way.
Cheeky tactics like letting the sign become overgrown, let it fall over beyond sight etc etc.
When the rest of the area around the sign is trim and maintained but the exact location of the sign is a bramble/nettle nightmare.
I think opening up footpaths to cyclists will just result in more bad vibes between us and the ramblers. More encounters with an already sour bunch (generalising greatly) will only make it much worse IMO.
They see us as dicks and some are to be fair and its those few who give us all the bad name.
The temptation for trail sabotage will be heightened I guess, there will be ‘we were here first’ feelings for years and years, sparking some inevitable retaliation from the rambler extremists.
For the most part we can get away with cheeky excursions onto footpaths if we don’t come into contact with rambler or if we do, we stop/slow, say hi and just be the nice guy. Its worked for years with me with only a few minor bad encounters. Both of which I predicted correct when I saw the guy (you just know from their face, expression and demeanour) so I was armed with even more happiness and polite offerings before he started barking.Posted 10 months ago
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.