Disley Riders – Green Lane “No Cycling” signs

I’ve been riding up Red Lane and Green Lane from St Mary’s Parish Church in Disley for many years. Only in the last month or so have I noticed generic “No Cycling” signs hammered in to almost every post with what looks like roofing felt nails.

Rode up there on Thursday evening and most have been ripped of or smashed up in some way. I know its part of the Gritstone Trail, and marked on the OS as a footpath, except the bit across Long Lane from Buxton Old Road, but horses and bikes have been going up and down there for probably a lot longer than I’ve been riding it. Even the kissing gates are akin to the type that are horsey friendly (long pole to actuate the latch).

Whats the craic?

New home owner doesn’t like bikes, what about horses using the track, can it be enforced (maybe only civil matter of trespass), anyone had issues with any of the land or home owners?

I usually come down that way after riding through Lyme Park – pretty sure it’s a recommended cycle route, especially after they sanitised the section between the gates at the top. Was down there on the CX bike a few weeks ago.

pretty sure it’s a recommended cycle route

Recommended by who?

Even the kissing gates are akin to the type that are horsey friendly

Agreed but:

its part of the Gritstone Trail, and marked on the OS as a footpath, except the bit across Long Lane from Buxton Old Road

That last bit is the only bit that is bridleway on the definitive map.

Then again:

but horses and bikes have been going up and down there for probably a lot longer than I’ve been riding it.

Yep I’ve used it too. As far as I’m concerned it’s a track. Yes it’s on the definitive map as a footpath but it’s definitely a track that people can and do drive on (exactly like Red Lane from Lyme Park), so I’m going to ride my bike on it.

People have been challenged according to the local facebook chatter.

However they are clearly not official signs and should be completely ignored.

I’ve ridden that way for about 30 years, as have many around these parts.

be nice, say hi, ask why? If challenged

oh and the offence of criminal damage (nailing these signs to council property ) is far worse than the civil offence of trespass

Ridden it for years as well.

Red Lane > Green Lane to the summit, turn right and follow that gravel track into the top of Lyme Park or left and up to the road.

Never had any issues with riding it. Certainly up to Disley Kennels at the junction of Long Lane and Green Lane, it’s a track used by vehicles. Therefore it’s fair game for bikes at least up to there!

I don’t believe there is a law criminalising cycling on footpaths? Happy to be proven wrong.

I have a collection of those no cycling signs that used to sometimes appear when I lived in England.
Maybe the OP should start his own collection😁

Yes, I rode up it on Friday and noticed those fairly new signs had been removed. I seem to recall that they only appeared quite recently too.

I ride it quite often. Most of the folk I meet there seem friendly and I’ve never been challenged. I love being challenged these days… nothing to lose :-)

I rode up there on Thursday and there were about 10 no cycling signs from the Red/Green Lane junction all the way to the other end. Rode up there Sunday and only 1 sign left.

I’ve never been challenged or even had an issue with anyone on Green Lane. When the signs appeared I was surprised  it was a FP and not a BW given the gates are of the bridleway type.

It’s the same situation over near White Nancy in Bollington. The road that drops you into Ingersley Vale from round the side of White Nancy is tarmaced yet technically a FP. The guy who owns the house with ducks has started putting No Cycling signs up too.

I don’t believe there is a law criminalising cycling on footpaths?

Wait til someone tells Sunak that there’s votes in penalising cyclists.

I live at the top of Green Lane(ish). The signs are nonsense, put there by someone with too much time on their hands. Ignore them, and if challenged, smile and move on.

Also worth adding that the pretty much faultlessy-accurate barometer of local upset is the SK12 Facebook group. If there was any local ill-feeling to people cycling up there, you can absolutely rely on it being a hot topic on that group. It has never, and I mean never, been mentioned. Clearly no-one gives a shit apart from Disgruntled Sign Man (and it will be a man).

Thanks @IHN, at least a local knows what’s going on. As I’ve seen horses on it I thought it was a bridleway, especially since the ‘sanitisation’ at the top.

I guess putting up signs without permission from the landowner, is really littering and a bit of damage to the post you nail the signs to. Clearly the signs that have been taken down is by a conscientious litter picker.

Ah, pretty much as I thought then.. someone with too much time on their hands. It certainly won’t stop me riding it that’s for sure, I just wondered if there’d been any conflict or incidents.

Well all the signs have disappeared/been removed now. (not by me)

Can’t help think that it’ll become a game of new signs put up, shortly followed by them being removed.

Good to know.

What bike are you on Carlos? I’ll keep an eye out and say hello, I walk along there pretty much every day with a slightly worn out looking black and white dog :-)

@IHN Green Bronson. Sometimes Thursday nights, sometimes at a weekend. We all hate that small rise in the road just past the stables. it’s like they used extra sticky/grippy tarmac just on that bit.

I’ll keep an eye out

Take them out, replace with some ‘be nice say hi’.

Can’t help think that it’ll become a game of new signs put up, shortly followed by them being removed.

Sounds like fun, challenge is to remove all the signs without having to dismount.

I rode up there late afternoon today, no evidence of any home made signage other than “Please don’t feed the horses”.

No issues at all, only saw a couple of people walking a dog, they stood to one side and we said hi to each other. That was it.

Get a roll of stickers made up online that say “Yes Cycling” and stick them over any signs that should subsequently appear.

No issues at all, only saw a couple of people walking a dog, they stood to one side and we said hi to each other.

This is typical of every interaction I’ve had with walkers on there when I’m riding up our down it.

Anyway, the locals definitely currently don’t care, they’re all losing their shit over the digger and huge pile of hardcore and topsoil that’s appeared on Mudhurst Lane…

i dont know this route. I did have something similar near me, i had never noticed the signs before, and it had been a regular cycling route for many people. Its even a white road on the map.

But in this case, dig into it and it isnt actually a ROW at all.

Apparently, your best bet is to check the Local Authorities Rights of way records as that is the definative version of the truth. Even and OS map isnt proof of right of way (technically, as i understand it).

Im of the opinion that you need to know whether you are in the right or wrong, but once youve established with confidence you are in the right, you can confidently tell busy bodies to get stuffed.

our best bet is to check the Local Authorities Rights of way records as that is the definative version of the truth. Even and OS map isnt proof of right of way (technically, as i understand it).

This is correct, and in fact the definitive map DOES show Green Lane as a footpath. Hoever, we also need to remember that this shows the rights of way as recorded originally (back in the 1950s when someone said “oh I ride my horse there so make it a bridleway, but that bit can be a footpath”). The fact that something is recorded a a footpath simply means that the right to pass and repass on foot (and with usual accompaniments) has been proven to exist, but does not preclude the existence of higher rights: so, in the absence of a bylaw to explicitly forbid it, you CAN ride a bike there. As mentioned above, only the landowner or their appointed representative can then ask you to leave, and the worst that can happen is that you can be sued for damages. As the trail in question is used for motor vehicle access to Disley Kennels, you could reasonably offer a pound to cover a years worth of damage by all the cyclists thar use it in total, as the impact of bikes is negligible compared to cars and vans

Are the signs no cycling or are they the classic no no cycling?

can then ask you to leave,

And if I remember correctly you must leave by “the most convenient route” which is quite likely in the direction you were already going.

whether you are in the right or wrong

Just because you don’t have a protected right, doesn’t mean you are in the wrong. Far too many people assume that because something isn’t “legal” it must be illegal which is very, very wrong.

As the trail in question is used for motor vehicle access to Disley Kennels…

Indeed. Nearby Red Lane to Lyme Park is similarly marked as FP on the definitive map but is a track used by motor vehicles. Many such cases exist.

And if I remember correctly you must leave by “the most convenient route” which is quite likely in the direction you were already going.

Don’t they have to be the landowner or agent of the landowner too?

Had a local nimby/nutter round here pulling the signs down for a new cycle route. That was paid for through local government funding…
So local government upped the ante, and now the signs are official steel signs, bolted to steel posts on concrete bases in the forest. Rather than nice discrete plastic arrows attached to suitably located bits of scenery.

Local nimby is not happy. And everyone now knows who it is.

Back in the day when I rode a motorbike down trails (legally) there was an unhappy landowner used to potter about with an axe.

Nimby needs to up their game

Don’t they have to be the landowner or agent of the landowner too?

Correct.
Nimby Rambler etc actually has less right to tell you where you should / shouldn’t be riding than you have to just ride it.

Years ago riding with some friends we got accosted by some walkers – the usual stuff about you shouldn’t be here, you’re damaging the trails, we’ll report you to the landowner.

And the landowner stepped out of our little group and introduced himself, explained that yes, this was his land, he lived over there —> and if they’d like to pop round for tea and cake he’d be happy to explain why they were wrong and should just mind their own business.

🤣

Strangely enough they never took him up on his offer.

And if I remember correctly you must leave by “the most convenient route” which is quite likely in the direction you were already going.

Closest point, generally. Which, if you get stopped as you enter someone’s land, is back the way you came.