BBC: Should cyclists have access to more countryside paths?
Discussion
Anyone see this BBC News piece on the Breakfast News this morning?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36732927
Should cyclists have access to more countryside paths?
A campaign by British Cycling to get the government to at least look at the potential benefits and pitfalls of opening up the bulk of the rural footpath network to all cyclists. Pretty much looking to get the same rules for England as for Scotland.
"Rambling Clubs" are, predictably, very 'anti' this, but I can see benefits even for them. Bikes travel further than ramblers in the same amount of time, so more of the network will see regular use. Most sensible cyclists will want to push on, away from busy walking areas because it makes more sense. Complaints from ramblers can be pretty damned hypocritical too. Complaining that bikes "sneak up on them" and "don't yield the trail" are all well and good, but when roving mobs of pensioners in anoraks insist on maintaining their twelve-abreast formation, blocking the full width of a trail when they've had a 1/4 of a mile visibility of an oncoming bike, then they are as much a part of the problem as 'rogue' MTBers tearing down Rights-Of-Way at inappropriate speeds.
The story comes following a weekend I spent on the Wiltshire/Dorset border where I tried using a 'Bridleway' that turned out to be so badly maintained that it was barely passable on foot. The fact is that MTBers can be sufficiently motivated to cobble together a small group of volunteers and tools, so trails/footpaths in less accessible (on foot) places might well benefit from permitting cyclists to have free access in that they'd see more reporting of access issues, and perhaps some clearance of vegetation.
I should probably 'fess up at this point to being pretty selective in which 'Public Footpaths' I respect the rules for, and which I ride on anyway. I'll ride on footpaths where adjacent Bridleways are cut to shreds by equestrian types using them despite the ground being too wet to survive a pounding by horse's hoofs. I'll ride footpaths where adjacent bridleways are thronged with dog walkers who'd rather use the wide sandy bridleway than the narrow footpath (what's sauce for the goose, etc.). And I'll ride footpaths where I've NEVER ONCE seen a walker, and it's the only (semi) legitimate means to get from one bridleway or byway to another without taking a detour onto a busy road. What I ALWAYS do when I'm (mis) using a public footpath on my bike is stop, or even get off, when confronted with walkers on it. It seems to work and I've never had a 'near miss' with a walker, nor been faced with grumpiness or aggression from them.
In short, I think this is the right move. Open most of the public footpath network up to legitimate use by cyclists. It fits well with stated government policy to get the population more active, and I firmly believe that WE CAN SHARE THE TRAILS safely, and without issue.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36732927
Should cyclists have access to more countryside paths?
A campaign by British Cycling to get the government to at least look at the potential benefits and pitfalls of opening up the bulk of the rural footpath network to all cyclists. Pretty much looking to get the same rules for England as for Scotland.
"Rambling Clubs" are, predictably, very 'anti' this, but I can see benefits even for them. Bikes travel further than ramblers in the same amount of time, so more of the network will see regular use. Most sensible cyclists will want to push on, away from busy walking areas because it makes more sense. Complaints from ramblers can be pretty damned hypocritical too. Complaining that bikes "sneak up on them" and "don't yield the trail" are all well and good, but when roving mobs of pensioners in anoraks insist on maintaining their twelve-abreast formation, blocking the full width of a trail when they've had a 1/4 of a mile visibility of an oncoming bike, then they are as much a part of the problem as 'rogue' MTBers tearing down Rights-Of-Way at inappropriate speeds.
The story comes following a weekend I spent on the Wiltshire/Dorset border where I tried using a 'Bridleway' that turned out to be so badly maintained that it was barely passable on foot. The fact is that MTBers can be sufficiently motivated to cobble together a small group of volunteers and tools, so trails/footpaths in less accessible (on foot) places might well benefit from permitting cyclists to have free access in that they'd see more reporting of access issues, and perhaps some clearance of vegetation.
I should probably 'fess up at this point to being pretty selective in which 'Public Footpaths' I respect the rules for, and which I ride on anyway. I'll ride on footpaths where adjacent Bridleways are cut to shreds by equestrian types using them despite the ground being too wet to survive a pounding by horse's hoofs. I'll ride footpaths where adjacent bridleways are thronged with dog walkers who'd rather use the wide sandy bridleway than the narrow footpath (what's sauce for the goose, etc.). And I'll ride footpaths where I've NEVER ONCE seen a walker, and it's the only (semi) legitimate means to get from one bridleway or byway to another without taking a detour onto a busy road. What I ALWAYS do when I'm (mis) using a public footpath on my bike is stop, or even get off, when confronted with walkers on it. It seems to work and I've never had a 'near miss' with a walker, nor been faced with grumpiness or aggression from them.
In short, I think this is the right move. Open most of the public footpath network up to legitimate use by cyclists. It fits well with stated government policy to get the population more active, and I firmly believe that WE CAN SHARE THE TRAILS safely, and without issue.
Edited by yellowjack on Thursday 7th July 12:57
Additionally to my opening post...
...I'm also wondering out loud how this might affect the MOD who, in the south at least, seem to be waging war on MTBers on "their" land, despite the fact that their own website clearly states that there is "a presumption for public access" over the wider MOD training estate. If indeed the MOD are going to re-write the Aldershot Military Lands bylaws to specifically exclude cycling then the huge population which currently benefits from the MOD's maintenance of these wonderful green spaces will NEED access to the public footpath network in order to have anywhere to go for traffic-free recreational cycling.
...although I sense a degree of conflict between elements of the MOD, where some published documents seem to permit access on bikes...
https://hampshiretrailwatch.co.uk/cycling-on-mod-l...
...yet cyclists have been 'thrown off' (or maybe 'invited to leave' sounds more balanced?) MOD land and threats to confiscate bikes have been made. Which disturbs me somewhat as I'm pretty confident that taking away someone's bicycle would not be legal, especially if it wasn't being used to commit an actual 'crime'.
http://danah.milieuinfo.be/uploads/b153.pdf
...I'm also wondering out loud how this might affect the MOD who, in the south at least, seem to be waging war on MTBers on "their" land, despite the fact that their own website clearly states that there is "a presumption for public access" over the wider MOD training estate. If indeed the MOD are going to re-write the Aldershot Military Lands bylaws to specifically exclude cycling then the huge population which currently benefits from the MOD's maintenance of these wonderful green spaces will NEED access to the public footpath network in order to have anywhere to go for traffic-free recreational cycling.
Inside Defence Infrastructure Organisation blog said:
The MOD has a policy presumption in favour of public access wherever this is compatible with operational and military training uses, public safety, security, conservation and the interests of tenants. Part of the role of the Access & Recreation team is to ensure this compatibility, while maintaining the integrity of the MOD estate for its primary purpose, that of military use.
https://insidedio.blog.gov.uk/2016/05/16/the-mod-a......although I sense a degree of conflict between elements of the MOD, where some published documents seem to permit access on bikes...
https://hampshiretrailwatch.co.uk/cycling-on-mod-l...
...yet cyclists have been 'thrown off' (or maybe 'invited to leave' sounds more balanced?) MOD land and threats to confiscate bikes have been made. Which disturbs me somewhat as I'm pretty confident that taking away someone's bicycle would not be legal, especially if it wasn't being used to commit an actual 'crime'.
http://danah.milieuinfo.be/uploads/b153.pdf
Edited by yellowjack on Thursday 7th July 13:23
Would be a great positive move. I use to be responsible for maintaining a 10 mile stretch of footpath in South Wales I think I was the only person to ever walk it when I cleared it. Many footpaths are overgrown and hardly used because they are too far away from villages pubs etc, to go anywhere they are basically pointless too far to go from a to b on foot and no one wants to go for a walk then just stop turn round and go back people like loops, places to stop etc so if there is a foot path to no where longer than about 6 miles they never get used. If open to mountain bikes they would be used as so much more distance can be covered.
I use footpaths regularly - never see people walking on them, and it's mainly because they join two sensible roads or cycle-paths together neatly. You get used to walking where the ground is broken or boggy, and throwing your bike over stiles.
Footpaths tend to be much more usable than bridle paths; there's no way a bike can negotiate the ruts and holes left by horses' hooves. Plenty of footpaths near me also follow farm tracks etc so they're perfectly good riding surfaces.
As to whether or not cyclists should be permitted more access? Well, I've never had a problem thus far because I'm respectful and sensible. I don't like the idea of a legal footpath through the middle of a field of crops being turned into a cycle expressway (metaphorically). A review of whether some footpaths could be opened up to bikes is a good idea though; preferably not by the same people who designate national cycle network routes because they are often tortuous, obtuse, steeper than obvious alternatives etc.
Footpaths tend to be much more usable than bridle paths; there's no way a bike can negotiate the ruts and holes left by horses' hooves. Plenty of footpaths near me also follow farm tracks etc so they're perfectly good riding surfaces.
As to whether or not cyclists should be permitted more access? Well, I've never had a problem thus far because I'm respectful and sensible. I don't like the idea of a legal footpath through the middle of a field of crops being turned into a cycle expressway (metaphorically). A review of whether some footpaths could be opened up to bikes is a good idea though; preferably not by the same people who designate national cycle network routes because they are often tortuous, obtuse, steeper than obvious alternatives etc.
Tough call this, as both a mountain biker and a hiker when cycling I tend to stick to the rules most of the time but as others have said if traversing as small section of footpath between two bridalways simplifies devising a route then I'll normally do it. As mentioned on the odd occasion there are walkers I'll get off when passing and have never had a negative reaction.
But as a walker there are some paths that are just too small to be suitable for bikes. I've also no idea what it would do for erosion on some of the more popular mountain and hillside routes, these suffer enough but with the extra traffic bought from bikers I can only see it getting worse. I've never been a big fan of slabbed paths or compacted hob/crushed hardcore on mountain sides not very natural but sometimes the needs outweigh the detriment to the look of the area.
In Scotland it's a bit easier as the place is so vast there's never that many trails that are being heavily used at an given time.
But as a walker there are some paths that are just too small to be suitable for bikes. I've also no idea what it would do for erosion on some of the more popular mountain and hillside routes, these suffer enough but with the extra traffic bought from bikers I can only see it getting worse. I've never been a big fan of slabbed paths or compacted hob/crushed hardcore on mountain sides not very natural but sometimes the needs outweigh the detriment to the look of the area.
In Scotland it's a bit easier as the place is so vast there's never that many trails that are being heavily used at an given time.
I see two problems, the speed differential which has been mentioned but also the fact that regardless of whether the rules are relaxed and cyclists are able to use footpaths as well as bridlepaths, there will be some who wont know about the rules and be very aggressive if you cycle past or towards them. You could try to argue with them and state that the rules have changed and you are acting within the law but they will either be ignorant and claim you are lying or just want an argument because they now have to share the path. I've met a few walkers on bridlepaths and had issues with them claiming its a footpath.
The speed differential is the bigger issue but ramblers et al tend to stick to fairly well trodden paths close to roads and pubs despite the vast network of public footpaths in the Country. Therefore you could hammer down miles of footpath and not see a walker.
The speed differential is the bigger issue but ramblers et al tend to stick to fairly well trodden paths close to roads and pubs despite the vast network of public footpaths in the Country. Therefore you could hammer down miles of footpath and not see a walker.
Blanket allowance of bikes on footpaths would be a very bad idea IMO. I think what would work best is a new classification halfway between a footpath and bridleway which allows walkers and bikes but not horses. Some existing footpaths which are wide enough, link two existing bridleways or little used could be reclassified. Obviously that's more effort though.
Round here (Medway in Kent) they have changed the access rights to a lot of byways so that you need a permit and key to access them on a crosser or 4x4 as the land owners were having issues with the trails just being destroyed by green laners and people dumping stolen cars.
When I'm walking on a bridleway you accept that you might meet a bike or horse so you're on the lookout. When you have young kids, using footpaths avoids this danger. The last thing you want is your crazy 2 year old who wants to explore every tree and puddle meeting a bunch of MTBers nailing it down the trail.
I've been mountain biking for the last 20 years and never had any real issue with "only" being allowed to use bridleways, does seem to depend where you live though- round here there are loads and the chalk landscape means they don't really get too churned up but when I've been on holiday in places like cornwall you end up doing 20 miles of road just to link up 3 piddly little bridleways. I do ride the odd footpath for the same reasons as mentioned in the OP and dismount if you meet walkers, years ago you'd get loads of hassle from old rambler types but I think people are a lot more accepting of MTBers these days and the "old guard" of ramblers have all died off- my Dad got into mountain biking in the early 90's and he's 62 now and still at it.
Round here (Medway in Kent) they have changed the access rights to a lot of byways so that you need a permit and key to access them on a crosser or 4x4 as the land owners were having issues with the trails just being destroyed by green laners and people dumping stolen cars.
When I'm walking on a bridleway you accept that you might meet a bike or horse so you're on the lookout. When you have young kids, using footpaths avoids this danger. The last thing you want is your crazy 2 year old who wants to explore every tree and puddle meeting a bunch of MTBers nailing it down the trail.
I've been mountain biking for the last 20 years and never had any real issue with "only" being allowed to use bridleways, does seem to depend where you live though- round here there are loads and the chalk landscape means they don't really get too churned up but when I've been on holiday in places like cornwall you end up doing 20 miles of road just to link up 3 piddly little bridleways. I do ride the odd footpath for the same reasons as mentioned in the OP and dismount if you meet walkers, years ago you'd get loads of hassle from old rambler types but I think people are a lot more accepting of MTBers these days and the "old guard" of ramblers have all died off- my Dad got into mountain biking in the early 90's and he's 62 now and still at it.
Edited by lufbramatt on Tuesday 12th July 09:03
lufbramatt said:
Blanket allowance of bikes on footpaths would be a very bad idea IMO. I think what would work best is a new classification halfway between a footpath and bridleway which allows walkers and bikes but not horses. Some existing footpaths which are wide enough, link two existing bridleways or little used could be reclassified. Obviously that's more effort though.
Round here (Medway in Kent) they have changed the access rights to a lot of byways so that you need a permit and key to access them on a crosser or 4x4 as the land owners were having issues with the trails just being destroyed by green laners and people dumping stolen cars.
When I'm walking on a bridleway you accept that you might meet a bike or horse so you're on the lookout. When you have young kids, using footpaths avoids this danger. The last thing you want is your crazy 2 year old who wants to explore every tree and puddle meeting a bunch of MTBers nailing it down the trail.
I've been mountain biking for the last 20 years and never had any real issue with "only" being allowed to use bridleways, does seem to depend where you live though- round here there are loads and the chalk landscape means they don't really get too churned up but when I've been on holiday in places like cornwall you end up doing 20 miles of road just to link up 3 piddly little bridleways. I do ride the odd footpath for the same reasons as mentioned in the OP and dismount if you meet walkers, years ago you'd get loads of hassle from old rambler types but I think people are a lot more accepting of MTBers these days and the "old guard" of ramblers have all died off- my Dad got into mountain biking in the early 90's and he's 62 now and still at it.
I kind of agree with your first point. Plenty of footpaths are unsuitable, in their current form, to be shared with bikers in significant numbers. They are often super-suitable to be "gnarly single track" though... Round here (Medway in Kent) they have changed the access rights to a lot of byways so that you need a permit and key to access them on a crosser or 4x4 as the land owners were having issues with the trails just being destroyed by green laners and people dumping stolen cars.
When I'm walking on a bridleway you accept that you might meet a bike or horse so you're on the lookout. When you have young kids, using footpaths avoids this danger. The last thing you want is your crazy 2 year old who wants to explore every tree and puddle meeting a bunch of MTBers nailing it down the trail.
I've been mountain biking for the last 20 years and never had any real issue with "only" being allowed to use bridleways, does seem to depend where you live though- round here there are loads and the chalk landscape means they don't really get too churned up but when I've been on holiday in places like cornwall you end up doing 20 miles of road just to link up 3 piddly little bridleways. I do ride the odd footpath for the same reasons as mentioned in the OP and dismount if you meet walkers, years ago you'd get loads of hassle from old rambler types but I think people are a lot more accepting of MTBers these days and the "old guard" of ramblers have all died off- my Dad got into mountain biking in the early 90's and he's 62 now and still at it.
There are plenty hereabouts that, as you say, are plenty wide enough to cope admirably with mixed traffic. Some of our local 'public footpaths' are indeed wider, have more headroom, and are better maintained than nearby bridleways and even byways.Don't get me started on "Green Laners". These OLLI w
kers, mixed with unscrupulous tradesmen fly-tipping crap everywhere have put a lot of local BOATs beyond use by anyone without a jacked up, chopped down Range Rover and 'self recovery' equipment. As late as the early 1990s I could use most byways in an entirely unmodified five door MkIV Escort in dry weather. Then those retarded oafs began winching themselves through hedgerows and insisting on leathering it down the byways during bad weather, and suddenly they're the only ones capable of accessing them. Similar story with (some?) equestrians shredding bridleways and turning them to mud baths. They just don't seem to want to play nice.I wish more people walking on byways and bridleways would pay more attention. As I've said elsewhere, I regularly ride a section of bridleway which (unusually) is well-drained and in generally good condition. But I'm often forced to divert to parallel footpaths because the bridleway is choked with groups of professional dog-walkers who seem to delight in taking up as much of the path as possible.
Like you I don't seem to find much confrontation even if I do stray onto the odd footpath (usually in preference to riding on a busy adjacent road). I tend to find that sensible speeds approaching corners, generous application of brakes well ahead of reaching walkers, passing the time with a comment about the weather or admiring their dog/hair/anorak*, and generally coming across as a reasonable, sensible, willing-to-share-the-trail sort of chap helps. And it is a frustration that drives me onto some of these footpaths, in so much as I often can't get between bridleway sections without using them. As for hassle from old guard Ramblers' Association types? I had some a few rides ago. Him: "you're not allowed on here" Me: "eh?" Apparently it was 'his land' and he wanted me off it. The fact that I'd come to a stop resting my foot on top of a post marked with a Hampshire County Council "Public Bridleway" trail marker screwed to it was neither here nor there to him. Nor was the fact that I KNOW the land to be owned by the MOD. I got bored with our interaction and rode off, leaving him muttering to himself and pointing his stick at me...
*Not breasts. Never admire or pass comment on a random stranger's breasts. Nor legs. Apparently it's "not socially acceptable in theses enlightened modern times". Unless she's in a local Country Park car park and has deliberately flashed them at you
Fluffsri said:
Im not sure I would want access to footpaths. When thrashing about the countryside and nailing it down a footpath at 20mph meeting a family isnt going to be pretty. Im happy to stay as we are and tangle with horses and landrovers instead lol.
You are aware that families (and horses, and other bikers, and dog walkers etc, etc) are just as likely to be in front of you on a bridleway as they are on a footpath, aren't you?
I don't think it matters what sort of path or road you're on, or what sort of mode of transport you're using.... Unless you know for certain that there's nobody in front of you, you shouldn't be going so fast that you can't stop in the distance you can see to be clear. Even on trail centre paths which have specific "bike only" signage at every entry point, I've come across people walking a dog up the trail before now.
tobinen said:
I only caught a tiny bit of the feature this morning but I think it should be OK. All it needs are all sides to be considerate to each other, though I think that is the major challenge sadly.
The second sentence is the issue really. Near us is an area of open common land, also SSSI, walkers, dog walkers and horses are permitted, along with cattle grazing. Bikes, quads etc are banned, clearly signed at every entrance.Personally I don't have any issue with bikes, especially on the open areas, but problems arise on some of the narrow nadgery twisty paths through vegetation with reduced visibility. No problem again if speed appropriate but someone riding as if they're trying to set a time. !!!!!!!!
Having said that THE worst behaviour and stuff you attitude I've seen on this site came from ramblers. There are a few car parks around the perimeter, most for just a handful of vehicles, but the main one is for about twenty cars or so, accessed by a narrow lane. This ramblers group had met to go on a circular walk, most of it away from the common, had taken up most of the spaces, then when they returned up this narrow lane, sauntered up taking the full width, then stopped in groups to discuss the price of fish, still blocking up the lane, deliberately ignoring cars wanting to use the lane to enter or leave. Total set of ignorant bullies, ramblers, effing effers.
My colleagues and I went on a short ride incorporating a few miles of local towpaths last weekend. Although these aren't green lanes or other paths discussed here, they are shared with walkers so I noted the following.
Firstly, we're all out-of-shape IT professionals, so we're far from fast. Our normal day is to "drive" a laptop and for all of us, that's the most exercise we get unless we make an extra effort to go outside with our kids. That said, one hadn't ridden his bike in 8 years, one had never ridden more than 3 miles in one go, and another has has 2 heart attacks recently (he's in his early 40s).
Our short ride was 16 miles, about 50/50 roads/towpaths, and that was about as far as 3 of them could manage on a mixture of bikes and BSOs from the early 1990s onwards (I want to say early 1900s for one of them but that would be rude). Although I ride fairly regularly with my kids, I've not done a lot this year and I'm fat.
On our ride, all 6 of us would greet people with a friendly "Good morning" and a smile, and we each thanked them when they made way for us.
Most people smiled back and we exchanged a quick "Nice day" or some-such. ALL of the canal-boat people were friendly and happy.
Of the half dozen or so dog walkers we met a couple were just miserable - either ignoring us altogether or (in one case) actually grunted at the guy in front of me, causing me to frown and slow even more as I passed her to see if she wanted to engage me. She didn't. She looked away instead.
Most people tend to be very friendly towards one another, acknowledging the joy of being outside on a sunny day. We're not threatening to people because we're slow plodders. Perhaps if you're on a mission, and represent even a perceived threat to someone, they might be less friendly towards you.
Firstly, we're all out-of-shape IT professionals, so we're far from fast. Our normal day is to "drive" a laptop and for all of us, that's the most exercise we get unless we make an extra effort to go outside with our kids. That said, one hadn't ridden his bike in 8 years, one had never ridden more than 3 miles in one go, and another has has 2 heart attacks recently (he's in his early 40s).
Our short ride was 16 miles, about 50/50 roads/towpaths, and that was about as far as 3 of them could manage on a mixture of bikes and BSOs from the early 1990s onwards (I want to say early 1900s for one of them but that would be rude). Although I ride fairly regularly with my kids, I've not done a lot this year and I'm fat.
On our ride, all 6 of us would greet people with a friendly "Good morning" and a smile, and we each thanked them when they made way for us.
Most people smiled back and we exchanged a quick "Nice day" or some-such. ALL of the canal-boat people were friendly and happy.
Of the half dozen or so dog walkers we met a couple were just miserable - either ignoring us altogether or (in one case) actually grunted at the guy in front of me, causing me to frown and slow even more as I passed her to see if she wanted to engage me. She didn't. She looked away instead.
Most people tend to be very friendly towards one another, acknowledging the joy of being outside on a sunny day. We're not threatening to people because we're slow plodders. Perhaps if you're on a mission, and represent even a perceived threat to someone, they might be less friendly towards you.
FiF said:
Having said that THE worst behaviour and stuff you attitude I've seen on this site came from ramblers. There are a few car parks around the perimeter, most for just a handful of vehicles, but the main one is for about twenty cars or so, accessed by a narrow lane. This ramblers group had met to go on a circular walk, most of it away from the common, had taken up most of the spaces, then when they returned up this narrow lane, sauntered up taking the full width, then stopped in groups to discuss the price of fish, still blocking up the lane, deliberately ignoring cars wanting to use the lane to enter or leave. Total set of ignorant bullies, ramblers, effing effers.
You live near Yateley Common Country Park too? If so the main car park is out of bounds at the moment because the dam across the bottom of the lake is getting repaired, and the car park is fenced off for the contractors to use.yellowjack said:
... the MOD who, in the south at least, seem to be waging war on MTBers on "their" land
It's the same for Orienteering. Apparently DIO / Landmarc (the part of the MOD who manage Army land) are being pressured by a particular individual at Natural England with a lot of clout.Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff