Bob
26th February 2005, 04:27
“Inappropriate use of public rights of way” by mechanically propelled vehicles WILL be curtailed, said Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael, on releasing the results of the consultation document (Use of mechanically propelled vehicles on Rights of Way) issued by the Department for Food and Rural Affairs (DeFRA).
Mr Michael added “I have never sought to restrict EXISTING use of the established rights of way vehicular network and I am pleased that the findings of the DeFRA research report supports this view."
Note the word EXISTING. Part of the new proposal proposes the introduction of legislation to limit the basis on which new rights of way may be required for use by the recreational biker.
So how did this come about?
The Issue
The problem comes from a change in the law brought about by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act of 2000. Mainly intended as the springboard for the introduction of the ‘Right to Roam’ of hikers, the Act also introduced a 25 year “cap” on the map of rights of way open to recreational vehicles (such as motorcycles), so that on the 1st January 2026, identified rights of way would be the only routes open – any ‘slumbering rights’ being removed.
Only 4% of minor, unsealed roads grant access to recreational motorcycles. If any of these roads are left off the ‘map’ by the closing date (and undertaking the considerable research and lengthy application process to include such “Byways Open to All Traffic” (BOATs) falls to motor and motorcycling organisations and individuals), then the right to use them will be lost – for good.
To make the situation worse, it is possible that the application period could be reduced. The proposals do not affect existing properly recorded BOATs and seem to exclude from the cut-off ‘unclassified county roads’ , but the wording is such that there is no guarantee for unclassified roads, and they could fall into the class of “Restricted Byway”. This means the right of motorised vehicles to use them will be removed – and a cut-off date of one year from the introduction of legislation is proposed. If access to these unclassified roads is lost, then trail rider will have lost a significant proportion of the already limited space to pursue their hobby.
And the final blow? If the “map” is taken as the definitive document setting out Rights of Way that motorcycles can use, then nothing can be added to it. So any newly developed paths will be out of reach of the recreational motorcyclist – forever.
Government Action and the response by pro-bike lobbying groups
Given the widespread range of pro and anti-access points of view, the Government put out the consultation paper mentioned at the start of this feature. The closing date for this was in March 2004. However, the BMF, in conjunction with the Trail Riders Fellowship (TRF) and Land Access and Recreation Association (LARA) put forward a proposal paper to DeFRA, in support of the recreational motorcyclist.
This was supported by a delegation comprising Lembit Opik, the leader of the All-Party Motorcycle Group, the Motorcycle Industry Association, the BMF and MAG, who met with Mr Michael to discuss the consultation document. Notably, the Trail Riders Fellowship (TRF) and Land Access and Recreation Association (LARA) were absent, despite being invited.
I contacted LARA, who were somewhat less than helpful. LARA spokesman Tim Stevens: “Our suggestions were copious and extensive, and have been submitted through DeFRA for the Minister's consideration. LARA members are aware of what we have said. Our message to the irresponsible minority is the same message that I have for those irresponsible journalists who encourage a devil-may-care approach to the law, and illustrate all articles about trail riding with wheelies and motocross bikes - If you stop, you will be stopped.”
And they're one of our ALLIES remember!
The response from the Anti-Bike lobby?
When researching this, there was a clear intimation that pressure against recreational motorcycling had come from “A vocal and influential minority that wants motorcycles and cars out of ‘their’ countryside – full stop.” The largest organisation caring for the rambler is The Ramblers Association, so I spoke to Janet Davies and was pleasantly surprised to find their agreement that recreational biking has a place in their view of the countryside.
“We agree that space should be made available for off-road motorcycling. Landowners seeking to diversify their land management options could be encouraged to provide land for this purpose.”
“Better signposting, more clearly detailing areas that motorcyclist are allowed would improve matters, as there is a problem with illegal as well as legal activities. However, a lot of the problems with illegal usage are related to young men in urban fringe areas and it seems unlikely that they are going to be deterred simply by better signage. Physical barriers are usually needed plus better policing .”
“Local authorities should make far more use of traffic regulation orders to control vehicular use of byways open to all traffic, particularly in national parks.”
There was a sting in the tail, however “To improve the current situation, efforts should be made to prevent the illegal use of footpaths and bridleways by motor vehicles. The law should be changed so that it is no longer possible to claim rights of way for motor vehicles on the basis of carriageway rights established before the internal combustion engine was invented. “ Which brings us back to the consultation document issued by DeFRA.
The Government findings
Mr Michael states that “I am convinced that there is a need to promote legislation to change the basis on which public rights of way for mechanically propelled vehicles can be claimed. Mechanically propelled vehicles should continue to have a place in using and enjoying the rights of way network, but the ability to extend the network purely on the basis of historic use by horse-drawn vehicles should be curtailed.”
“I intend to issue guidance for local authorities and the police on how best to deal with illegal vehicular use. I will also shortly be issuing a revision to the publication ‘Making the Best of Byways’, which deals with the management of vehicles on rights of way.”
So how will the public right of way be decided?
Mr Michael: “A public right of way can be established through historical documentary sources, on the basis of long public use of a route, or through express dedication. Following a recent House of Lords ruling , there may also be instances where more recent illegal vehicular use may give rise to vehicular rights.”
This goes back to the original problem identified by the pro-bike lobby; this deals with existing rights of way – but does not allow, except with a lot of hard work and completion and submission of lengthy documentation, for new rights of way for the recreational biker. So potentially the permitted paths for bikers could diminish, as older pathways are lost for whatever reason.
What can the ‘man in the street’ do to assist?
At this point, these are the results of a consultation and have not been made law. If a positive image is put forward, then there has to be a chance that the proposals can be softened. So what can be done by the responsible recreational trail biker to put forward a positive image? The BMF issued the following as part of their briefing on the Rights of Way issue:
“The recreational motorcycling organisations have long pursued a policy of careful, responsible and sustainable use of minor highways and private land sites in the countryside. Innovative and successful schemes like the Lake District ‘Hierarchy of Trails’ programme, and the issue of ‘codes of conduct ’ advising on how to enjoy riding without causing damage or alarm, have been well received by land managers and other types of reasonable countryside users.”
“In truth, the motorcycling organisations are in complete agreement with the government that we should achieve a high degree of certainty as to which routes have vehicular rights, and then set about managing these fairly and effectively. There are some vehicular rights of way that cannot take a lot of motor use. The policy of the motorcycle organisations is that a fair and proportionate management regime should be applied to these – perhaps a season access restriction (as in the case of the ancient Ridgeway Trail, which was closed to motor vehicles for the first time in the Winter of 2004); in some cases a total motor access restriction. But the fact that some green lanes are not robust does not mean that all are likely to be spoiled by the passage of vehicles – far from it.”
“Most ‘green lanes’ in the sense that people use the term, actually have stoned surfaces (even if now under 100 years of mud) and are very resilient if given just a little periodic rough maintenance. This has been proved by the repair programmes carried out by motor enthusiasts on ancient highways across the country – such as ‘Dead Man’s Hill’ in the Yorkshire Dales.”
All parties contacted were in agreement with their condemnation of the minority of riders illegally using countryside not designated or designed for trail riding . The BMF, on behalf of motoring organisations said “We do not condone irresponsible and aggressive behaviour in the countryside. Our ancient highways are not motocross practice tracks, nor a battleground to be conquered. “
Janet Davies was blunt in her message “Don’t do it! You certainly shouldn’t break the law. And where use is permitted, riders should follow the codes of practice laid down by LARA.”
Mr Michael added “I have never sought to restrict EXISTING use of the established rights of way vehicular network and I am pleased that the findings of the DeFRA research report supports this view."
Note the word EXISTING. Part of the new proposal proposes the introduction of legislation to limit the basis on which new rights of way may be required for use by the recreational biker.
So how did this come about?
The Issue
The problem comes from a change in the law brought about by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act of 2000. Mainly intended as the springboard for the introduction of the ‘Right to Roam’ of hikers, the Act also introduced a 25 year “cap” on the map of rights of way open to recreational vehicles (such as motorcycles), so that on the 1st January 2026, identified rights of way would be the only routes open – any ‘slumbering rights’ being removed.
Only 4% of minor, unsealed roads grant access to recreational motorcycles. If any of these roads are left off the ‘map’ by the closing date (and undertaking the considerable research and lengthy application process to include such “Byways Open to All Traffic” (BOATs) falls to motor and motorcycling organisations and individuals), then the right to use them will be lost – for good.
To make the situation worse, it is possible that the application period could be reduced. The proposals do not affect existing properly recorded BOATs and seem to exclude from the cut-off ‘unclassified county roads’ , but the wording is such that there is no guarantee for unclassified roads, and they could fall into the class of “Restricted Byway”. This means the right of motorised vehicles to use them will be removed – and a cut-off date of one year from the introduction of legislation is proposed. If access to these unclassified roads is lost, then trail rider will have lost a significant proportion of the already limited space to pursue their hobby.
And the final blow? If the “map” is taken as the definitive document setting out Rights of Way that motorcycles can use, then nothing can be added to it. So any newly developed paths will be out of reach of the recreational motorcyclist – forever.
Government Action and the response by pro-bike lobbying groups
Given the widespread range of pro and anti-access points of view, the Government put out the consultation paper mentioned at the start of this feature. The closing date for this was in March 2004. However, the BMF, in conjunction with the Trail Riders Fellowship (TRF) and Land Access and Recreation Association (LARA) put forward a proposal paper to DeFRA, in support of the recreational motorcyclist.
This was supported by a delegation comprising Lembit Opik, the leader of the All-Party Motorcycle Group, the Motorcycle Industry Association, the BMF and MAG, who met with Mr Michael to discuss the consultation document. Notably, the Trail Riders Fellowship (TRF) and Land Access and Recreation Association (LARA) were absent, despite being invited.
I contacted LARA, who were somewhat less than helpful. LARA spokesman Tim Stevens: “Our suggestions were copious and extensive, and have been submitted through DeFRA for the Minister's consideration. LARA members are aware of what we have said. Our message to the irresponsible minority is the same message that I have for those irresponsible journalists who encourage a devil-may-care approach to the law, and illustrate all articles about trail riding with wheelies and motocross bikes - If you stop, you will be stopped.”
And they're one of our ALLIES remember!
The response from the Anti-Bike lobby?
When researching this, there was a clear intimation that pressure against recreational motorcycling had come from “A vocal and influential minority that wants motorcycles and cars out of ‘their’ countryside – full stop.” The largest organisation caring for the rambler is The Ramblers Association, so I spoke to Janet Davies and was pleasantly surprised to find their agreement that recreational biking has a place in their view of the countryside.
“We agree that space should be made available for off-road motorcycling. Landowners seeking to diversify their land management options could be encouraged to provide land for this purpose.”
“Better signposting, more clearly detailing areas that motorcyclist are allowed would improve matters, as there is a problem with illegal as well as legal activities. However, a lot of the problems with illegal usage are related to young men in urban fringe areas and it seems unlikely that they are going to be deterred simply by better signage. Physical barriers are usually needed plus better policing .”
“Local authorities should make far more use of traffic regulation orders to control vehicular use of byways open to all traffic, particularly in national parks.”
There was a sting in the tail, however “To improve the current situation, efforts should be made to prevent the illegal use of footpaths and bridleways by motor vehicles. The law should be changed so that it is no longer possible to claim rights of way for motor vehicles on the basis of carriageway rights established before the internal combustion engine was invented. “ Which brings us back to the consultation document issued by DeFRA.
The Government findings
Mr Michael states that “I am convinced that there is a need to promote legislation to change the basis on which public rights of way for mechanically propelled vehicles can be claimed. Mechanically propelled vehicles should continue to have a place in using and enjoying the rights of way network, but the ability to extend the network purely on the basis of historic use by horse-drawn vehicles should be curtailed.”
“I intend to issue guidance for local authorities and the police on how best to deal with illegal vehicular use. I will also shortly be issuing a revision to the publication ‘Making the Best of Byways’, which deals with the management of vehicles on rights of way.”
So how will the public right of way be decided?
Mr Michael: “A public right of way can be established through historical documentary sources, on the basis of long public use of a route, or through express dedication. Following a recent House of Lords ruling , there may also be instances where more recent illegal vehicular use may give rise to vehicular rights.”
This goes back to the original problem identified by the pro-bike lobby; this deals with existing rights of way – but does not allow, except with a lot of hard work and completion and submission of lengthy documentation, for new rights of way for the recreational biker. So potentially the permitted paths for bikers could diminish, as older pathways are lost for whatever reason.
What can the ‘man in the street’ do to assist?
At this point, these are the results of a consultation and have not been made law. If a positive image is put forward, then there has to be a chance that the proposals can be softened. So what can be done by the responsible recreational trail biker to put forward a positive image? The BMF issued the following as part of their briefing on the Rights of Way issue:
“The recreational motorcycling organisations have long pursued a policy of careful, responsible and sustainable use of minor highways and private land sites in the countryside. Innovative and successful schemes like the Lake District ‘Hierarchy of Trails’ programme, and the issue of ‘codes of conduct ’ advising on how to enjoy riding without causing damage or alarm, have been well received by land managers and other types of reasonable countryside users.”
“In truth, the motorcycling organisations are in complete agreement with the government that we should achieve a high degree of certainty as to which routes have vehicular rights, and then set about managing these fairly and effectively. There are some vehicular rights of way that cannot take a lot of motor use. The policy of the motorcycle organisations is that a fair and proportionate management regime should be applied to these – perhaps a season access restriction (as in the case of the ancient Ridgeway Trail, which was closed to motor vehicles for the first time in the Winter of 2004); in some cases a total motor access restriction. But the fact that some green lanes are not robust does not mean that all are likely to be spoiled by the passage of vehicles – far from it.”
“Most ‘green lanes’ in the sense that people use the term, actually have stoned surfaces (even if now under 100 years of mud) and are very resilient if given just a little periodic rough maintenance. This has been proved by the repair programmes carried out by motor enthusiasts on ancient highways across the country – such as ‘Dead Man’s Hill’ in the Yorkshire Dales.”
All parties contacted were in agreement with their condemnation of the minority of riders illegally using countryside not designated or designed for trail riding . The BMF, on behalf of motoring organisations said “We do not condone irresponsible and aggressive behaviour in the countryside. Our ancient highways are not motocross practice tracks, nor a battleground to be conquered. “
Janet Davies was blunt in her message “Don’t do it! You certainly shouldn’t break the law. And where use is permitted, riders should follow the codes of practice laid down by LARA.”