Right to Roam, open Access etc

mtbguiding – Member

@abeach, personally will ride FPs as long as I am 100% sure I ain’t going to piss someone off – my criteria for judging this includes time of day, time of year, day of week, popularity of trail, chances of doing damage to trail, and probably a few more that I can’t think of right now.

BUT… as a guide, I can’t take people on FPs, my insurance wouldn’t back me – so I have my hands tied which is pretty pants. And as a guidebook rider/magazine writer I can’t put FPs in routes, which means I can’t necessarily highlight the best places to ride in an area – again hands tied.

Fair point, hadn’t thought about that. I do think they should “do a scotland”. Lots of high level footpaths are gate/style free and cracking for riding on. Would be great to have them in guides etc

Interesting debate. Personally, I would be in favour of our southern cousins adopting a similar approach as up here in Jockland. Increasing access should spread the load across the country as opposed to concentrating it on the existing network of bridleways. Is erosion really that big a concern? If you work the land, are you really going to notice the difference between an inch of mud and two on a track that you use regularly? Is erosion caused by walkers any less offensive than that caused by horses and cyclists. For the most part, access legislation in Scotland works well in my humble opinion.

Land owners are not the sole guardians of the countryside. Scottish history over the last couple of hundred years shows how concentrating ownership in the hands of the few can lead to a monoculture environment. The land is a worked environment but that doesn’t mean the owners should have primacy. It is everyone’s responsibility to look after and improve the land for future generations. However, maintaining paths to minimise erosion should be well down the list of priorities. Reducing the application of pesticides, developing alternative energy sources, repopulating forests etc are of far greater importance.

I wonder if there is a STW equivalent forum for land owners? 😀

Sanny for PM

As I understood it there’s a mountain outside Edinburgh. Open access, well, opened it up. Trails got a bit damaged from over use. Cycling community banded together to self regulate itself. Trails healed. Issue went away.

One of the other reasons cited in, for example, Wales, is that it’s smaller than Scotland. True. But the open spaces are pretty similar. And it’s those that this is all about.

I’ve ridden plenty of bridleways in Mid-Wales that clearly haven’t seen use in donkeys years. Making MORE trails available is only going to spread the number of users out further and lessen the general impact.

I wrote this a couple of years back, which for me sums it up. There’s no real reason to exclude bikes from so much of the countryside, but there are very good reasons to increase the opportunities for physical exercise. 1 in 5 people in the UK have access to a mountain bike, so why not give them more places to ride it?

https://bristoltrails.tumblr.com/post/57865780053/better-safe-than-sorry

(PS Good to see the predictable “OK then I’ll come and do skids in your garden” argument wheeled out yet again.)