what if you arnt aware of any local bylaw?

My worst one was on a tour of Ben Lomond many years ago. We did the bridleway over the shoulder from Rowardennan and then dropped down to glen dubh past comer farm. There was a sign on the fence saying no cyclists but the altwrnative route was bloody miles round loch Ard and Inversnaid so we decided to continue.

I’ve ridden that way a few years ago. I’d heard stories about nutter at Comer farm who didn’t like cyclists. Thankfully it’s no longer an issue. I’d be amazed if they actually had the right to block your path like that though, although as you say its no really worth fighting over

And they go on to say:

Cycling UK believes that it is acceptable for cyclists to use footpaths, provided they do so in a manner which respects the safety of other path users and their peaceful enjoyment of the outdoors, and with regard for the environment and its ecology.

i think the best thing we (as in bikers) can do is take that statement and use it.

As an inexperienced mountain biker I used to go out with a crowd from Bury who were quite well organised, they had a jersey/shorts combo printed up by Riggi Cycles in Bury and called themselves Bury Mountaindales. This was in the days before baggy became fashionable, the entire group used to ride around dressed like roadies in flouro lycra. The stuff was good quality too; I’ve still got the jersey and it’s a good one.

We all went out for a ride from Helmshore, planning to go up the hill south of Haslingden Grane, I think it’s called Musbury Heights, to explore the old Lancashire stone quarry works. Anyway as we plodded up the hill a farmer appeared in a 109″ Series 111 and proceeded to chase us up the hill, the poor old Landy bouncing across the hill like a mad thing. Eventually he cornered us and got out to berate us, absolutely foaming at the mouth with indignation. Some of the younger lads crowded around and began to give him some lip, which I could see wasn’t helping so I strolled over and tried to calm him down. He even pointed to the tie rod on the front suspension, which had been bent back by hitting a rock and shouted: “See that? That was the last effin’ mountain biker I caught up here; I ran him over”. Yeah, well…

Anyway by talking calmly and being reasonable I got him to calm down and agree for us to walk off his land onto a track. I’ve since heard other stories about the farmer up there so Musbury Heights remains an interesting area that I only ever got to explore on foot.

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.

https://gov.wales/written-statement-government-response-taking-forward-wales-sustainable-management-natural-resources?fbclid=IwAR1AqvfD2q1B8RrP3ghqd4uZdPJVL0LANJe9yR9_Q7r4qN4uYUMeQAwycqk

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).

https://web.archive.org/web/20110129152202/https://www.imba.com/resources/research/trail-science/natural-resource-impacts-mountain-biking

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? 😉

Welsh Government announces proposals to change access rights for mountain bikers

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.