Home www.byways.org.uk

What is the REAL problem on RoW?

DEFRA it seems.

The Trampling Taliban only represent Ramblers and are opposed to all other users of RoW including Dog Walkers it seems! This is expected.

Ramblers have given the right to Ramble of Heath and Moor. They are the only user’s who may access 100% of the network

The CLA, Countryside Landholder's Alliance have member’s financial interests at heart. This is expected.

But surely other users have a right to some consideration from Government?

Some say that the CRoW2000 Act was the biggest recent crime committed on rights of way...............

The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common
But leaves the greater villain loose
Who steals the common from off the goose.

The law demands that we atone
When we take things we do not own
But leaves the lords and ladies fine
Who take things that are yours and mine.

The poor and wretched don't escape
If they conspire the law to break;
This must be so but they endure
Those who conspire to make the law.

The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common
And geese will still a common lack
Till they go and steal it back.

Edward Potts Cheyney.

Not only did they nick the commons and left the poor with only the roads under the Inlosures of the 18C and 19C,
but now the CLA have come back for the ruddy roads as well!

Vehicles in the Countryside

The use of motorised vehicles on Byways Open to All Traffic and rural unclassified roads stirs the emotions of many whom are involved in countryside recreation. The issue is often hotly debated and parties involved are often entrenched in their views.

There are principally three categories of vehicular highways at issue here. Byways Open to All Traffic, Roads Used as Public Paths (although vehicular rights are not conclusive) and rural unclassified or unclassified county roads which are often unsurfaced and sometimes referred to as white roads. These roads are commonly known as green lanes, which as a term, has no legal standing. Vehicles on these roads have the same rights as vehicles on other roads with a tarmac or metalled surface.

Walkers and riders meeting such vehicles often feel their presence in otherwise quiet rural areas is inappropriate and detrimental to their own enjoyment of the Countryside. Visible surface damage by vehicles often leads to calls for prevention of vehicular access.

Numerous surveys and projects have been undertaken relating to the issue which have shown that, apart from a small number of isolated areas, there is not actually a problem. It is considered to be a perceived rather than actual problem. Lawful public vehicular use is confined to only 5  per cent [sic 1.85%] of the rights of way network in addition many users belong to organisations which promote responsible use of green lanes and have codes of conduct which include voluntary restraint in the use of certain routes lanes.

Damage to the surface of lanes, as surveys show, is not always caused by recreational vehicular users. Much damage is as a result of use by agricultural or forestry vehicles and the damage would not be prevented by banning recreational vehicles. Much of the damage caused by vehicles has arisen, however, as a result of lack of maintenance by financially stretched Highway Authorities, and blame is not being apportioned to any party. Long gone are the days when lanes were let for grazing and the income used for maintenance, and when local councils employed a hacker, as they are known in some areas, who back-filled ruts.

The Institute believes that vehicular users should not be discriminated against and tat local authorities should work within current legislative constraints. Unsurfaced vehicular highways should be accurately recorded in definitive maps and, this includes recording rural unclassified roads as Byways where the legal criterion is met - carrying public vehicular rights but which are principally used by pedestrians and equestrians.

When genuine conflict arises consideration should first be given to management solutions such as surface improvements, clearance or drainage works and this may include voluntary restraint whilst surface vegetation recovers. There may be a role for dissemination of advice to non-vehicular users of the rights of vehicular users and vice versa. If all else fails then careful consideration should be given to the use of Traffic Regulations Orders. Which vehicles need to be excluded and to what time of the year a closure should apply are factors that must be addressed together with the question of effective policing. Clearly those whose business relies on the use of the way should not be excluded. The Institute does not support the extinguishment of vehicular rights under section 116 of the Highways Act, 1980.

As a realistic solution the Institute endorses the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions practical guide 'Making the Best of Byways' and welcomes a positive approach. The Department of Environment/Department of Transport document, however, proposing a change to legislation, whereby public vehicles would be excluded from unmetalled vehicular highways, is not welcomed and should not be supported until such time as an actual problem is proven.

In summary the Institute's view is that:

1. Vehicular users have every right to use public vehicular rights of way.
2. All public rights of way should be accurately recorded.
3. Responsible use is welcomed by all parties to reduce any potential conflict.
4. Highway Authorities should consider their maintenance responsibilities.
5. Where problems arise, consideration should be given to management solutions.
6. Traffic regulation orders should only be used as a last resort and after careful consideration.
7. Concurrent Reclassifications and Traffic Regulation Orders should not form common practice and TRO's should only be implemented after full investigation.

Other reports from all over the country have also concluded there IS NO PROBLEM.

One example, typical of many:-

Bedfordshire Outdoor Access Economic Benefits Analysis Improvement Plan October 2003

ADAS Consulting Ltd Market Research Report

The topic areas addressed by Bedfordshire County Council are as follows:

Needs of Walkers

To understand and prioritise the needs, views and issues facing walkers in relation to the use of rights of way and access to the countryside.

However, what it found was:-

Car users, who were thought to make up the bulk of visitors were more interested in getting straight to and from an attraction, particularly if travelling with children.

“Families tend to drive less than they used to. You can’t have screaming kids in the car for hours.” (Woburn)

 The ever increasing popularity of BBQ’s was cited as a reason by one rural pub for a decline in family days out to the pub during the hot summer days. More trade was often experienced on wet, gloomy days. Another larger pub very much geared up for family eating was however experiencing good trade all year.

 There was also some discussion about the greater importance of the “grey pound” as the number of families visiting the villages has decreased and the number of older visitors with a reasonable disposable income increased.

“It’s far more the grey pound, at the weekends you see noticeably less young people” (Woburn)

 The businesses often remarked on the lack of interest expressed in the countryside and wildlife by young visitors and families. The visitor attractions generated greater interest.

“There doesn’t seem to be a great interest in the countryside. People don’t seem to appreciate it” (Sharnbrook)

….

7.3 Types of visitor

The various businesses and stakeholders were aware of and had experienced many visitor types who benefited the economy to differing extents.

Walkers: A number of different types of walker were identified, ranging from the older rambler to the casual walker.

Ramblers regularly meet at one rural pub for a meal, and pubs along promoted linear or circular walks can benefit as walkers stop off on route. There was a feeling however amongst several rural businesses that serious ramblers spend little money when out in the countryside.

“Most don’t have any money on them so they’re not going to spend any” (Houghton Regis)

“You get the hardened walker who has no desire to find anything but a bottle of water and a sandwich. They don’t use us in anyway, shape or form in Woburn cup of coffee at the tea shop, cyclists will stop first thing and maybe have a bacon and eggs that’s another establishment and then get walkers who may have heard of Woburn because of the country house programme, something triggers it off and they come to Woburn then see footpath signs and do short walks.” (Woburn)

Cyclists: Cyclists were reported to sometimes block book a pub/restaurant or cafe for breakfast prior to a ride. Good use of a local shop was also mentioned.

Horse riders: Either locals or often city residents. The city residents often made use of local facilities after a ride.

Students: Students living locally supported village trade during the term.

Older age groups: The older age groups (excluding the serious ramblers) were sometimes believed to provide good business for pubs and shops, particularly as they had more time to spend in the village.

……..

7.4 Negative impact of access to the countryside

Although access to the countryside brought many benefits, there were also a number of drawbacks associated with both local residents and visitors making use of rural areas.

There was frequent criticism that access to the countryside brought problems of fly tipping and litter. Fly tipping which appeared to cause the greater problem was attributed to locals, but was thought likely to act as a deterrent to visiting the area and acted as a drain on the resources of the local council.

“There are always problems with people, look at the amount of dumped cars, dumped rubbish, dumped fridges” (Houghton Regis)

Visitors having picnics were reported to leave litter and dog fouling was regarded as a big issue and reduced the attractiveness of the countryside to potential visitors. One stakeholder suggested that local residents were more likely to leave litter than visitors. The Dunstable Downs was reported by one stakeholder to have a litter problem.

“A lot of trails are used by local people. I know it’s a generalisation but outside people generally come to the countryside for a specific purpose e.g. to walk, so generally they are more responsible about litter etc. Everyday walkers and dog walkers tend to leave more litter and dog fouling is a real issue” (Stakeholder)

Increased traffic flow through villages had a greater impact on some villages than others. Some villages were reported to be unable to cope with any increased traffic. Occasional incidences of traffic congestion were reported by stakeholders at the time of events, bank holidays and sunny weekends. Effective management of visitors was considered crucial to reducing potential problems.

Stakeholders reported that blocking roads and creating diversions was necessary for some events to reduce traffic congestion, but unfortunately created problems for some local residents who found it less easy to get to or from home. The diversions also removed the possibility of villages benefiting from passing trade.

“If they close the roads because there is an event going on I have to shut up shop because there is no trade” (Old Warden)

5.6.2 Horseriders

• Horse riders would like more circular routes, e.g. circuits related to sections of the Icknield Way passing places of refreshment, such as pubs. Facilities are needed at stopping places to tie up the horses and provide water.

• Some bridleways get muddy due to being churned up by horses, or damaged by motor vehicles. This leads to surfacing which is not ideal for horses. One solution would be to surface part of a path for walkers & cyclists and leave grass along part for horses, if the bridleway or track is wide enough.

• Overhanging vegetation should be cleared at a higher level so that riders can pass safely.

• Vehicle parking areas for unloading horses should be provided, separate from general public car parks.

5.6.3 Cyclists

• There is a shortage of off-road routes for cyclists. This is indicated by cyclists riding illegally along footpaths, in the absence of anywhere else to go.

• Better surfaces on bridleways would help cyclists – horses churn up the clay, which becomes either heavy mud or holes set like concrete.

5.6.4 Motorised users

• There are few BOATs available for use by motorists who love the countryside and want to enjoy the experience of driving off-road.

• Some byways which were surfaced were wrongly designated as bridleways, in the view of one respondent. It was also felt that the County Council did not do sufficient maintenance and sometimes threatened to close a byway to motor traffic, rather than maintain it properly.

5.6.5 People with limited mobility

• Most of the network is inaccessible for people with limited mobility, including wheelchair users, partially-sighted people, people with prams and buggies and young children. There was a feeling that little has been done in the past to provide for their needs. One example was mentioned, however of a route designed for disabled access at Maulden Woods. Three country parks in Bedfordshire have disabled access provision, e.g. toilets, but those country parks are busy places and can be difficult for people with disabilities.

• Smoother surfaces, gentle gradients and wide gates, rather than stiles are requirements. There was a feeling that more expertise is needed and that more

Page 10Bedfordshire Outdoor Access Improvement Plan Key Issues Report

research should be undertaken on which paths may be suitable for upgrading to meet the needs of this group. There is a lack of information and signage to show the nature of paths and which may be suitable in terms of surface, gates, etc.

• Bedfordshire County Council is aiming to do more for people with disabilities in the future, having commissioned a report on countryside accessibility by the Fieldfare Trust.

• There could be links with disabled accommodation for tourists, e.g. farm accommodation with disabled facilities might consider the creation of suitable paths, which could then be promoted to bring economic benefits to the farm as well as helping disabled people.

5.7.1 Landowners

• Most people thought that the network met the needs of landowners fairly well. 44% of respondents to the semi-structured interviews felt that the rights of way in the county met the needs of landowners and farmers fairly well or well (this figure is compared with 15% who felt that the needs of landowners were not well met).

• The main problem for livestock farmers is dogs being allowed to run amongst livestock, which upsets the stock and can get a dangerous reaction, e.g. from cows which feel calves are threatened.

• Landowners and farmers do not like people straying off the path and feel that more waymarking would help. They would prefer people to walk the headland (edge of field) rather than cut straight across through crops. This would also often be more interesting for people, because there is a great variety of wild plants and wildlife in the hedgerows.

• Horses often do not keep to bridleways and poach the fields. They sometimes ride along field edges to avoid going along an adjacent road – some farmers do not mind this, but others do.

• They are particularly concerned about security, crime and vandalism and fear that footpaths permit potential troublemakers to have easy access to their premises.

• They would like to see the network rationalised, to overcome difficulties for them, e.g. where there is duplication of routes, i.e. paths close together going in the same direction. Paths that end at a parish boundary should be closed. If the network were rationalised, so that little used paths were deleted, new links may be negotiated in return and more effort could be concentrated on maintaining the rest of the network.

• One felt that it would help to have an easier and less costly way to temporarily divert a path, e.g. when harvesting timber.

• Another respondent was not sure how best to maintain facilities like bridges: e.g. some put wire netting as a surface on a sleeper bridge, to make it safer for walkers, but this is not satisfactory for horses. They could do with advice on construction and maintenance of furniture and surfaces on public paths.

5.8 Conflicts of interest

• Many respondents had some experience of conflict of interest between users of paths. However, the feeling overall was that such conflict is not great and it should not be exaggerated. Often it is not a real problem. Some extreme users were felt to be simply antagonistic towards any other users. Reference was made to a survey by Reading University, which found that there was less conflict than people tend to make out.

• Education, signage and talking to each other, to understand their different needs and feelings, were felt to be important ways to ease any conflict. A particular success was reported to be the User Group set up about four years ago at Aspley Heath, heavily used for all sorts of different activities. All the different interests were represented and all are now a lot more aware of each others needs and there has been a big decrease in conflict. This could be replicated at other sites where there may be significant conflict.

• Problems for walkers can be caused by surfaces being churned up by horses, cycles or motor vehicles. Walkers like going through farm yards, as it is more interesting, but horse riders try to get bridleways diverted around farmyards. One respondent felt that more land is being used as paddocks, resulting in more fences and stiles. Some keen walkers dislike signs, information and improvements to footpath surfaces, because they feel it detracts from the natural experience.

• Horse riders find motor vehicles and walkers with dogs a problem, because they frighten the horses. They also felt that some cyclists could be selfish. BMX bikes have been a nuisance on Aspley Heath, but it was recognised that they need to be provided for. Horse riders do not like competitive events like orienteering, running, or timetrials on bridleways.

• Cyclists were felt by one respondent to be the most tolerant, because they appreciated that cycling was regarded by other users as low in the pecking order!

• Motorised users felt victimised and regarded as hooligans. Horses were believed to do as much damage to tracks as motor vehicles and farm vehicles are clearly responsible for some wear and tear to tracks. Most recreational drivers are responsible and clubs adopt codes of practice, e.g. never more than 6 motor cycles or 4 cars in a group. One respondent felt that other users did not realise that motor vehicles are legitimate users of BOATs, so it would help to have signs and education to inform people of what is legitimate.

• There is evidence of conflict between some landowners and path users. One respondent felt that younger farmers and landowners are more open minded. Education is needed on the rights and responsibilities of both landowners and path users.

5.10 Economic benefits

• Most respondents cited examples of local businesses which benefit from customers who use the rights of way network, e.g. B&B, livery stables, walking gear/clothes shops, newsagents, pubs, refreshments, car park charges.

• The Foot and Mouth epidemic demonstrated the large negative economic impact of withdrawing use of the rights of way network and its effects on use of the wider countryside.

• Farm diversification can be related to the paths – e.g. farmhouse B&B, livery and camping.

• There are health benefits for the economy, too: if people use the countryside, they are healthier and consequently more productive.

• Good pubs and cafes do well, serving good food, e.g. Katy's hot dog stand, and the Marston Vale Community Forest centre café. Some pubs do good business from walkers, e.g. the 'Live and let Live' in the Chilterns in a popular area for walkers: the pub closed twice and walkers have encouraged the pub to be reopened; it now has a restaurant. Harrowden & Shortstown were also given as examples: people walk from there on paths from Bedford and Cardington to the shops and pubs. Many people walk from Blunham to Great Barford by footpath to a riverside pub.

• Local shops do well in the prettier villages. Other local businesses do benefit, but do not always realise it.

• Another example is Danish Camp about 5 miles east of Bedford - on a new path/cycleway from Priory Country Park in Bedford to Willington (will be extended to Sandy or Great Barford) - a local resident spotted an opportunity and has developed a riverside cafe a year or so ago, next to the track, providing high quality facilities and great service - packed at weekends. He now offers cycle hire and putting green and is planning canoe and kayak hire.

• Stockgrove Country Park has a refreshment concession, providing about 2 jobs.

• People move into villages from towns, attracted by the path network, and contribute to the economy as residents.

• Some cyclists and ramblers spend money locally, especially on long routes, as they cannot carry much, however it is sometimes difficult because of the decline of rural facilities. There is a need for signs to local services from popular long distance paths, e.g. Greensand Ridge Path. If demand can be stimulated, then the private sector will supply services and facilities.

• Walkers should ideally be encouraged to make use of local facilities, rather than bring flasks and a packed lunch but they need information about what's available.

• It would help to provide businesses with market information, e.g. data on usage of paths, which could be used by entrepreneurs to identify business opportunities. Currently such information does not seem to be available.

• Horse riders use a lot of local services - blacksmiths, vets, saddlers, riding schools, livery stables, pubs and refreshments. Shows & dressage, e.g. Clapham, are big attractions, generating income for many businesses. Livery stables are a good opportunity for farm diversification, e.g. a farmer in the north of the county (Wootton) is trying to set up livery stables and self-catering accommodation. There could be a chain of such establishments along long-distance routes. There have been attempts on the Icknield Way to get accommodation provision. There is a shortage of riding schools because they are rated excessively and have onerous health & safety rules. A lot are going out of business, affecting the economy and leading to inadequately trained riders. Pubs could get more horse use, if they provide secure places for horses to tie up and get safe drinking water. Not many pubs or accommodation providers offer this service at present.

• Some felt that there was little economic benefit for the county, because Bedfordshire is not a tourist area in relation to the ROWs. B&Bs were not always believed to benefit much from walkers and riders, because there are few through routes, compared with places like the Lake District. There is potential for far greater links between tourism and access to the countryside, e.g. Icknield Way. Reference was made to the successful development and promotion of the Camel Trail in Cornwall – lots of facilities, cycle hire etc, where people can spend money locally. There is potential for Bedfordshire to develop its tourist industry, especially with the proximity to London. There is a dearth of accommodation in Bedfordshire. The local authorities don't do much to encourage tourism, except Mid Bedfordshire District Council. One idea is to have signs along the Greensand Ridge Walk saying where the local services are – post offices, shops, pubs, etc – and vice-versa, developing circular loops off the main path starting from the villages. There are also believed to be opportunities for farm diversification into stabling and pony trekking, to attract tourists.

• Motorised users of the path network also bring money into the community. They use a lot of fuel, which may be purchased locally. They may also often use local pubs and cafes. One respondent reported that on a Saturday recently, a group of five people spent £55 in a pub and £50 at a petrol station. In Mid Wales on a recent holiday, a group of three people spent £1,000 on food, accommodation and fuel. One rider deliberately bought a bike from a rural dealer rather than a city, spending £4,700.

Motorised users (can include farmers using a public vehicular right of way to get to their fields)

Byways are open to walkers, cyclists, riders and motor vehicles, however less than half the sample in each case mentioned these uses. Walking was the most frequently mentioned by 49%, followed by cycling 39%, whilst dog walking, running and horse riding were mentioned by just over 1/3 of the sample in each case. Only 23% mentioned off road vehicle use. A high proportion did not know (39%).

Overall therefore much work still needs to be done to increase awareness of the correct use of ROW amongst the general public, which will provide the public with greater confidence to use different routes. The greater problem appears to be potential under use of paths due to a lack of understanding rather than abuse of ROW by inappropriate use.

5.5 Use of the Countryside

Figure 19: How often if at all do you take part in any of these activities in the Bedfordshire countryside? Activities Take Part In

Respondents were asked to indicate how often, if at all they took part in various activities within the countryside in Beds. The question deliberately did not ask how often they used rights of way, as it was believed that few members of the general public would understand the actual definition of this phrase. It is likely therefore that use has been recorded on paths not officially designated as ROW or on highways within the countryside.

The survey data suggests that walking in the countryside was the most common activity under consideration, followed by cycling, running and then horse riding and off road vehicular use.

Walking:

88% of the sample of residents walked in the Beds countryside, with many participating on a regular basis i.e. most days 21%, once or twice a week 32%. Males and females were equally as likely to walk, although the females were significantly more likely at the 99% level to walk most days than the males (females 26%, males 17%). Although walking appeared popular across the age groups, the residents aged 35-54 years were more likely to walk in the countryside than the younger or older residents. Participation in walking tailed off dramatically amongst those aged 74+ (53% walked in the Beds countryside). There was a greater propensity to walk in the countryside amongst the AB social grades than amongst other groups (AB 97% walked in the countryside in Beds).

[96% Never ride a horse, 98% Never use an ‘off-road’ vehicle in the countryside. This is why Equestrians feel threatened as another minority user group, fearing ‘"Us next"’]

Figure 30: And how much would you agree of disagree with these statements?

"Not enough routes in Beds countryside for motorised users"

[82% do not disagree “there are NOT ENOUGH routes for motorised users in Beds”, 70% neither agree nor disagree.]

…

There was considerable evidence to suggest that fly tipping, abandoned cars and dog fouling are seen as major problems within the Beds countryside. This strongly supports the findings of the qualitative research amongst stakeholders and walkers. There was a high level of agreement particularly with the statement “tipping of rubbish and abandoned cars is a big problem”, but also “dog fouling in the countryside is a big problem”.

The walkers generally felt they were served well compared to cyclists and horse riders.

“There are more footpaths than bridleways. I would think horse people have an issue with not enough bridleways. We can use bridleways as well” (Ramblers Leighton Buzzard)

5.11 Conflict with Other User Groups

On the whole major conflicts of interest were not experienced.

Dogs, horses and youngsters on bikes were however cited as examples of conflict or at least annoyance.

“Horseriders tend to think they have the right of way” (Casual walkers Ridgemont)

“At Sandy Hills the Mountain and BMX bikes are building obstacles and are slowly taking over” (Casual walkers Ridgemont)

“If I had a moan about anything it would be dogs allowed to roam” (Ramblers Bedford)

“If you have a coffee break you find a dog trying to have a go at your sandwiches” (Ramblers Bedford)

The dog walkers appreciated that dogs need to be kept on a lead when crossing fields containing livestock and when passing horses on bridleways.

“If you know your dog will run and jump you have to act accordingly” (Dog owners Ridgemont)

A number of dog walkers were concerned that some landowners or users were anti-dog. Problems were thought to have arisen given continuing problems with dog fouling. In fact the ramblers and even the dog walkers themselves were unhappy about the extent to which owners were still not picking up after their dogs.

“All ramblers hate dogs” (Dog walkers Ridgemont)

“Most people working at the park are anti-dog. When I went to a meeting they just wanted to ban dogs because they ruin the park” (Dog walkers Ridgemont)

There was some criticism of children riding BMX and mountain bikes and causing a nuisance, however it was recognised by others that they had to play somewhere. Purpose built paths and obstacle courses were suggested to reduce damage to ROW and the level of nuisance caused.

“That’s another issue that there isn’t really anywhere for these different activities to take place whether its skateboarding, off roading or whatever” (Casual walkers Leighton Buzzard)

Some of the stakeholders were concerned that walkers could be frightened and thus put off walking by horses. The horses were also known to churn up footpaths. Another comment however suggested that most horse riders were courteous and caused no problem. Irritation was also expressed with SUSTRANS who were apparently replacing bridleway surfaces with hard surfaces suitable for cyclists, but unattractive and inappropriate for walkers.

Clearly few ‘ordinary’ users of RoW have any problem with motorised users, the problems and conflicts are not as severe as sometimes made out.

10 04-02-11

Home www.byways.org.uk