The question is regards OS maps and route planning in England/Wales. I always thought the black dashed line was a path that exists but was always unsure of whether it's allowed to be ridden as it's not necessarily RoW.
In this https://slowcycling.net/resources/osmaps-key/ the black dash is descibed as 'path that exists on the ground'. My curiosity is as to how one can determine whether it's rideable or more specifically, allowed to be walked/biked (terrain allowing for either/or). Anyone able to shed some more light, other than, 'can't ride it cos it damages the ground'... But then one could argue walking damages the ground equally and it should be left to the animals.
Sorry, not trying to be smart and it is for some honest route planning. I'm planning to take the bike (with my harness to carry it for a few miles and hence training for next years BB200 maybe) up by Pym Chair. This is above Kinder Scout and the black dashed line, I've witnessed it's existence and it's indeed a beautiful place. I just wanna be more informed before getting some self appointed folks telling me I shouldn't have brought the bike... etc etc.
Happy to be corrected, but it merely denotes a physical feature (path/track). The description in the linked article sums it up perfectly. It likely exists as a physical feature, but it has no bearing on it's legal status as a right of way, even if there's one nearby or following a similar route. You'll only know if it's physically 'rideable' when you get there.
In practice, these sometimes become the defacto right of way simply because everyone uses it to get from point A to B, rather than religiously following a line of a RoW as drawn on a map. If I know an area, and I know if this track or path is rideable, then i'll happily use it - on a bike or otherwise. If it's a track I generally consider it fair game for riding. I think what you're asking is just in the murky area between what a map represents and the on the ground pragmatic way of getting places..? Also, if you're carrying a bike on a footpath, it's all perfectly legal anyway...
Thanks Faustus. Yes, I plan to carry the bike on the footpaths for certain but these black dashes I just don't want yo start a debate with any (religious versions of) walkers. If I meet a park ranger then I suppose I'll gain absolute clarification anyway.
If you want the legal status consult the Definitive RoW Map and Schedule that should be held and maintained by the local authority. Usually available on line and/or through the RoW "team" (might not be called that in different Authorities). There are probably lots of nuances and provisos but that's my understanding. RoW law and practice is arcane and bizarre.
OS maps are just a good copy of a lot of common RoW info. Info shown on those maps can be wrong, sometimes due to age and RoW changes or inaccuracies (both leading to inadvertent inclusion and exclusion of RoW).
Having a bike with you is related to "reasonable accompaniment", I can't remember whether a bike is or isn't, but it's unlikely to matter whether you carry or push. If your back's bad then I suggest pushing
Ah the elusive black dashed line - In Scotland that's all you have on the OS, no ROW's or core paths are marked. On more occasions than I'd care to recall we went to follow such things, only to be led into a death march which made the other week look easy....
The other week (i,e, BB300) proved that a black dashed line on the OS doesn't mean a thing!
The Kinder plateau is all access land Shaf so you're fine pushing/carrying the bike. Realistically you're unikely to meet many/any people on that bit anyway unless it's the height of summer. I've ridden the black line - some fun trials-y bits of rock to get over and some peaty bog.
Thanks Andy. I first went up there during a scratch on a Peaks200 attempt. Was absolutely amazing and been meaning to get back. Indeed it was so quiet too
In Reverse wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 7:09 pm
The Kinder plateau is all access land Shaf so you're fine pushing/carrying the bike. Realistically you're unikely to meet many/any people on that bit anyway unless it's the height of summer. I've ridden the black line - some fun trials-y bits of rock to get over and some peaty bog.
Having said that, I prefer the approach of being sensible, avoid the busiest times and places, avoid very wet conditions if its muddy and boggy, be courteous to people, and then ride wherever seems sensible, rather than slavishly following legal technicalities... Basically, 'don't be a d1ck'...
Others have answered the "is it rideable (legally)?" question.
For the "is it rideable" question, aside from your own judgement based on study of contour lines, Google satellite view and your general understanding of the terrain in that locality, the best place to look is geograph.org.uk - it has a map viewer and you may find photographs of the path you're interested in. https://www.geograph.org.uk/mapper/comb ... 66/-3.1557 The map interface takes a bit of getting used to but there's a lot of useful material in there.
On the legal angle, I take a very relaxed view of cycling on footpaths. If it's a well used path that's thronging with walkers I'll ride slowly, or walk, and give way with utmost courtesy. Cycling got massively stitched up in the legislation in the 1960s that restricted off-road cycling to bridleways. Life's too short to wait around for access reform. Just do it. But be nice.
Ta you two. Yes, Geograph is ace and Rich (Shewie, big boss on the walkers forum but also frequents here these days) already suggested that for a different need I had. Excellent resource indeed
I should have added that, from a legal perspective, cycling on a track or path that isn't a ROW would come under the civil law of trespass, not the criminal law. Same as for wild camping. So the landowner can first ask you to leave, then and could potentially take you to court for the damages. Police would not be involved. Good explainer on from Cycling UK on cycling on footpath ROWs, and by extension, non-ROW tracks. https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/cycli ... e-off-road
JackT wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 1:33 pm
I should have added that, from a legal perspective, cycling on a track or path that isn't a ROW would come under the civil law of trespass, not the criminal law. Same as for wild camping.
I'd be delighted to be told I'm wrong, but I thought the PCSC bill had made some of these 'offences' criminal, albeit with the same need to prove damage by the complainant and I guess now CPS.
Here's a response from the National Police Chiefs’ Council when asked about legality of wild camping that may be worth quoting:
www.willcycle.com wrote:Will,
Thank you for your email regarding the PCSC Bill.
The Act creates a new criminal offence of residing with a vehicle on land without permission. The new offence will be committed when someone causes significant damage, disruption or distress. Whether a set of circumstances is considered ‘significant’ will be subject of the circumstances presented.
The Home Office have also published statutory guidance, and it is clear that the intention of the Act is not to interfere with the rights of those wishing to enjoy the countryside. The Statutory Guidance states: ‘The unauthorised encampments provisions are not targeted at rough sleepers, nor at those looking to access the countryside for leisure, such as ramblers and other groups. The provisions will apply to anyone who refuses to leave land and causes harm, meeting the conditions of the powers within this guidance’.
The NPCC have been working with a range of stakeholders to update the operational guidance for responding to unauthorised encampments, and will be monitoring closely the impact of the Act over the coming weeks.
You'll likely meet less walkers if you do the northern edge that looks down on to Ashop Clough.
My suggestion, ride up Ashop Clough, that in itself is fairly character building, get to Mill Hill, push up to the edge, then traverse back east, there are then a few interesting ways down.
To chip in to the 'legality bit', there is, I believe, a bylaw specifically banning cycling on footpaths within open access land in the Peak District. I seem to remember it being a response, years ago, to cyclists using Fps along the gritstone edges, which was damaging SSSIs and the like. This is from a discussion years ago on Singletrackworld:
The bye-law applies on National Park Access land, which is all clearly marked on the latest OS maps and sign posted out in the park with those little pictures of a walker. Pretty sure it covers all the National Trust land as well.
Outside of the access land I'm not aware of any over-arching law covering the whole national park (yet!).
I don't know of anyone every having had more than a stern telling off from a Park Warden though, can't see the Police ever getting involved.
Your black dashed line isn't a public footpath as such, so this probably doesn't apply.
