Where the bridleway ends...

Talk about anything.

Moderators: Bearbonesnorm, Taylor, Chew

woodsmith
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:49 am

Where the bridleway ends...

Post by woodsmith »

I'm sure we've all been in the situation where the status of our chosen trail abruptley changes from bridleway to footpath for no apparent reason ( I have heard that this often happened at parish boundaries when the definitive map was drawn). My question is, is it legal, lawful, permitted or whatever the correct term is to continue along said footpath pushing the bike?
I ask as I encountered a gamekeeper on a zealously " no public access beyond this point etc" signed estate at the weekend who tried telling me I'd need to turn around at the far end as there was no way through. Of course I ignored the officious tw@t and carried on over the footpath, as it happens pushing mostly due to the steepness.
User avatar
Boab
Posts: 2177
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2019 11:36 am
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Contact:

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Boab »

Add it to the Missing Links data, so it might stand a chance of getting corrected...
There are theories at the bottom of my jargon.
riderdown
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 9:57 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by riderdown »

If you believe higher rights should exist you can arguably exercise them but if they are trying to discourage access then put a claim in/ register on lost ways/ etc

There are a few around my way but everyone just rides them
User avatar
Bearbonesnorm
Posts: 23904
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: my own little world

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Bearbonesnorm »

I believe (but could be wrong) that it is legal to continue if you push your bike. I recall something to do with 'an aid to walking' ie a pushed bike is no different to a pushchair or pair of sticks.
May the bridges you burn light your way
fatbikerbill
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 6:25 pm
Location: manchester

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by fatbikerbill »

The joys of living in a country in large owned by the Duke of Westminster, or the Russians.

Bizarrely, to actually answer your question, it is actually illegal to walk a bike on a footpath.

But, sod that, I'm with you.
riderdown
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 9:57 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by riderdown »

Bizarrely, to actually answer your question, it is actually illegal to walk a bike on a footpath.
I believe this is an urban myth

If you know of a successful civil action I'm obviously wrong and will stand corrected

The bicycle is an example of Schrödinger's cat, it's a vehicle and not a vehicle dependent on circumstances
Lazarus
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 10:49 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Lazarus »

IANAL but i thought it was still open to debate with some arguing it was trespass [ civil offence] and others arguing it was ok to ride them eg

https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/campa ... h-trespass

I am not aware of any definitive answer/ clear cut case law.


Illegal = legally forbidden an actual law bans you
unlawful = no legal right as no law allows you.

I think its more likely to be unlawful than illegal - though its a pedantic point.
jameso
Posts: 5036
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:48 pm

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by jameso »

It seems to me to be a Q of whether a bicycle is a natural accompaniment on the footpath, or if the action is causing a nuisance.
If the footpath links 2 bridleways or roads it's natural to be walking a bike along there, right?
If you're not causing a nuisance while doing it (damaging crops?) I can't see any basis to tell you not to be there etc, not even from the landowner.
User avatar
Cheeky Monkey
Posts: 3915
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:48 pm
Location: Leeds ish
Contact:

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Cheeky Monkey »

I thought bikes were classed as "reasonable accompaniments" or at least had not been proven to not be (sorry for the tautology).

RoW legislation and the whole situation - bobbins :roll:
User avatar
Bearbonesnorm
Posts: 23904
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: my own little world

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Bearbonesnorm »

I thought bikes were classed as "reasonable accompaniments" or at least had not been proven to not be (sorry for the tautology).
That was my belief too.
May the bridges you burn light your way
Lazarus
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 10:49 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Lazarus »

Does that not relate to someone pushing a bike across a pedestrian crossing ?
I believe they were hit and the driver tried to claim they had no legal right to use the crossing as they were not a pedestrian. They failed

Not sure this created a precedent though
ScotRoutes
Posts: 8144
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:56 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by ScotRoutes »

* waves *
Lazarus
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 10:49 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Lazarus »

Waves back with just one finger :lol:
woodsmith
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:49 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by woodsmith »

From this long and interesting thread on STW, https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topi ... ath-legal/ , came this little nugget, https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hans ... w-clause-e

Does anyone with a better Google-foo than me know if this amendment passed into law?
User avatar
JackT
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:28 pm

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by JackT »

I encounter more and more of these, and I am increasingly taking the view that if it's fit for riding then I'll ride it, whether a BW or FP.

Only exceptions being trails in parkland and the like if they are very busy with pedestrians.

I feel very strongly that natural justice is on our side, that the FP/BW distinction is very artificial and so poorly and inconsistently applied as to be close to meaningless. Where there is a continuity that you describe, I think there is a strong case of the FP having been misrecorded (see the CUK's work on this on some paths on its West Kernow Way).

What's the worst that can happen? You get sued for trespass by the landowner? There are reasoned arguments in the other direction too: https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/campa ... h-trespass

It's a legal grey area, to be sure. Ride on, be considerate to other path users. If you're putting such a route into an organised event or a book, it's probably a bit different, as you may be asking for trouble by publishing it. Then again, it's interesting to have seen CUK taking a more assertive approach with the WKW.

If there are massive signs everywhere telling me 'no cycling', then I can't usually be bothered to risk encountering a landowner with a bee in his or her bonnet (call me a coward).

If you're walking a bike then I'm sure you're fine. The only time I've seen a sign saying "No cycles - whether ridden or pushed" is in Windsor Great Park. Thanks, Crown Estates!
User avatar
faustus
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2018 4:30 pm
Location: Newbury

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by faustus »

JackT wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:55 am
If there are massive signs everywhere telling me 'no cycling', then I can't usually be bothered to risk encountering a landowner with a bee in his or her bonnet (call me a coward).
Certainly agree with all of that. I've been using more and more of my local footpaths, partly to help link bridleways but also to expand my local horizons and stay off roads, and nearly all of them are very suitable for riding, some are stone surfaced farm tracks - so yes, the distinction is entirely arbitrary. I also find it increasingly odd that the distinctions of path use are so rigidly self-policed by (some) users, when I just can't get away from the view that i'm just another human travelling along, I just have a different mode of (very low impact) transport.

Perhaps because of this, I am starting to see some 'no cycling' signs as a bit of an invitation, especially if it is on a wide track that links up with another bridleway or road. I am conflict averse though, so i'll do my best to just ride by anybody I see and nod and smile politely. Be nice, say hi basically. If I do get stopped at some point i'll go out of my way to be polite and understanding. My hope is that by avoiding a confrontation then some might end up wondering why they are getting in a froth about nothing.
User avatar
RIP
Posts: 9007
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 7:24 pm
Location: Surfing The Shores Of Sanity Since 1959
Contact:

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by RIP »

There's an argument that we're helping to keep these RoW open and unblocked thereby actually benefitting walkers.

I don't care about any 'trespass' angle, and so long as we prevent damage by riding carefully, ie. no skidding etc, and always give way to walkers that seems reasonable.

Having said that one might not decide to ride, say, the footpath up Scafell Pike on a bank holiday, as that's just courting trouble.

I'm a bit of a goody two shoes and rarely use FP's I must admit, unless they're remote and overgrown.

Then again whenever I (re)read my various books about land 'ownership' I suddenly want to go and ride wherever I wish :smile: .
"My God, Ponsonby, I'm two-thirds of the way to the grave and what have I done?" - RIP

The sign outside the asylum is the wrong way round.....

"At least you got some stories" - James Acaster
lune ranger
Posts: 2380
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:52 pm
Location: Peoples Republic of Devon

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by lune ranger »

As time passes I am becoming less and less averse to riding on FP’s and uncategorised tracks where they are suitable. On Dartmoor some are way more suitable than BW’s.
I’m not hooning around, skidding or causes any nuisance.
Ironically the only conflict about my right to be on a given track is where I have been on a BW - including being stopped by a Copper on the road by Stanage in The Peak. He had observed me and a couple of friends ride down from the crag on the BW that goes down the middle at the plantation (afair) The copper thought it was a footpath and took my name as the ‘group leader’ - I was at the front and said he would report me to the NPA and I could expect to hear from them regarding my offence.
I was absolutely livid, he even refused to look at my map. It was only my job and my general sense of propriety that prevented my from loosing my sh1t with him completely.
If you are going through hell, keep going.
WSC
User avatar
PaulB2
Posts: 1952
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:32 pm
Location: Stafford

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by PaulB2 »

The one ROW oddity that amuses me locally is it's not possible to legally cycle to the start of the Millenium Trail / NCN 55. If you follow the sign posted route you get to the end of a road and then you're told to dismount and then walk the 300m or so down a gravel road and then dodge through a couple of bushes to get to the start of the path. Most people seem to ignore the dismount signs and just ride along the gravel road. The gravel road is a private road to a farm and I assume it's a permissive path where they've only given permission to pedestrians. These days I normally cut through a new estate they've built on the other side but even that requires me to ride across a mini pump track on one edge of a park and then through a kissing gate to get on to the cycle route.
User avatar
JackT
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 3:28 pm

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by JackT »

PaulB2 wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 2:57 pm The one ROW oddity that amuses me locally is it's not possible to legally cycle to the start of the Millenium Trail / NCN 55. If you follow the sign posted route you get to the end of a road and then you're told to dismount and then walk the 300m or so down a gravel road and then dodge through a couple of bushes to get to the start of the path. Most people seem to ignore the dismount signs and just ride along the gravel road. The gravel road is a private road to a farm and I assume it's a permissive path where they've only given permission to pedestrians.
I encountered an almost identical situation on NCN 54 between Wychnor and Barton-under-Needlewood, just north of Lichfield. Crazy. I think it would be worth introducing a law that states that if a FP ROW is habitually used by motorised vehicles (tractors and other farm vehicles. owners' vehicles etc) then by default it is open to cycling. I'd like to see this provision included in the current review of the access to the countryside in Wales, which looks to have dropped several of the most important reforms in this area, no doubt under pressure from landowners and the Ramblers Association, who are often quite sly in keeping cyclists off 'their' paths.
User avatar
Bearbonesnorm
Posts: 23904
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: my own little world

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Bearbonesnorm »

As much as I can rarely see why a bike can't or even shouldn't be ridden with care down a fp, I'm also somewhat torn on the subject ... my wish like many is that one day, we might have the same RoW access as Colin and Phil enjoy and taunt us with. However, there will always be a surprisingly large number of people who are dead-set against that ever happening for whatever misguided reason. With that in mind, I do sometimes wonder whether riding on a fp that carries a reasonable chance of 'conflict' (that conflict BTW may go unnoticed and simply be someone saying to themselves "bloody pushbikes, shouldn't be on here any way") provides those people with a degree of justification for maintaining the status quo (down down, deeper and down etc) because "they don't take any notice of the rules now, what will it be like when they can do what they want?"

As I say, somewhat torn which is a bit odd really, as my usual attitude to life is - 'f*ck em, what they gonna do tell me dad?'
encountered an almost identical situation on NCN 54 between Wychnor and Barton-under-Needlewood, just north of Lichfield. Crazy. I think it would be worth introducing a law that states that if a FP ROW is habitually used by motorised vehicles (tractors and other farm vehicles. owners' vehicles etc) then by default it is open to cycling. I'd like to see this provision included in the current review of the access to the countryside in Wales, which looks to have dropped several of the most important reforms in this area, no doubt under pressure from landowners and the Ramblers Association, who are often quite sly in keeping cyclists off 'their' paths.
What a good idea Jack :-bd
May the bridges you burn light your way
ericrobo
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:40 pm
Location: West Pennine Moors
Contact:

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by ericrobo »

I agree with JackT and Faustus on all this….

I see RIP may choose NOT to ride up the footpath to Scafell if it’s busy (it’s ALWAYS busy these day, not least because BBC North West Tonight have a clip singing the praises of the Lake District every couple of days, and generally promoting tourism and JOBS.. (if it creates jobs it must be good :mrgreen: )

RIP: hats off if you’ve ridden up Scafell, even bits of it :-bd

As my years advance (as does everybody’s reading this), I become more and more amused and bemused by this nit-picking tendency to enshrine what is simple simple (“Simple Simon met a pieman, going to the fair.. said Simple Simon to the pieman….yeeks :lol: better stop there..) into the most abstruse and complicated nit-picking =)) =))

The problem is not bikes on FPs or BWs or RUPPS or WREPS or whatever gobbledygook you wish to acronym it with (now Reg, there’s a cute new verb for you :-bd ), it’s vehicles polluting, and crashing into one another, and into people, bikes, and generally causing a lot of trouble (including lack of exercise which means well you know the rest).

So it should all be about fresh air, exercise…AND keep out of the NHS. They should write all that into a law (well it wouldn’t be just one law would it ? We don’t want the legal people going hungry :lol: )

And like the Nike advert (no, they didn’t invent this ) “Just do it”

(My guilty secret:
Image0E50269E-5DA8-43C9-90BB-4A7A3D6A76B5 by Eric Robinson, on Flickr
woodsmith
Posts: 1010
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:49 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by woodsmith »

Another frustrating area is open access land where walkers are free to yomp about anywhere yet bikes and horses are not allowed to utilise existing tracks on the the same piece of land. Clearly the Taliban, sorry, the Ramblers have far too much influence over any proposed legistlation. The British Horse Society are our natural , if slightly uncomfortable allies but cycling has predictably splintered into multiple organisations, each with their own agenda .
Lazarus
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 10:49 am

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Lazarus »

round my way there are at least 4 tarmacked roads that are classed as footpaths only and its daft we cannot ride them
User avatar
Bearbonesnorm
Posts: 23904
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:53 pm
Location: my own little world

Re: Where the bridleway ends...

Post by Bearbonesnorm »

if slightly uncomfortable allies but cycling has predictably splintered into multiple organisations, each with their own agenda .
You just made me think of something ..... are 'we' perhaps these days something of a cycling minority (I'm actually asking that as a genuine question). Many 'mountainbikers' I know who aren't bikepackers would have absolutely no interest riding on BW and nondescript tracks in the hills. Their riding very much takes place on purpose built trails and they'll drive miles to ride one but probably wouldn't cycle half a mile from home.

I do recall reading something many years ago and I forget where but the basic premise was that a large increase and uptake of trail centres and purpose built trails could ultimately lead to a loss of cycle access out in the hills ... a ghetto of their own making if you will, a bit like one of those all inclusive holidays at a fenced in, guarded compound :wink:
May the bridges you burn light your way
Post Reply