Bridleway coverage

[iwantanewbike]

Hi,

Just getting more into off-road rides and whilst I have a few local forests (Tilgate Park, Leith Hill, Deer's Leap and St. Leonards), I'm also quite interested in exploring on bridle ways.

I'm using a combination of OSM, OS maps etc. to plan routes and have also found this site:
http://www.bridlewaymap.com/

I've noticed that bridleway coverage is variable, e.g. West Sussex, Surrey, the North and South Downs all have very good coverage, however much of East Sussex, Kent and Hampshire is very sparse. I'm especially surprised there is virtually nothing cutting across the Ashdown Forest and there seem to be clear divides from county to county.

My question is, in order to promote active travel, what can be done to improve the bridleway network - is it fruitless to hope for a better, joined up network?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

My question is, in order to promote active travel, what can be done to improve the bridleway network - is it fruitless to hope for a better, joined up network?

Cock all. The land owners all over SE England did a cracking job of avoiding bridleways being created in the first place and would rather not have any new ones created, or footpaths upgraded to bridleway status unless there is something in it for them.

Most bridleways hereabouts are useless from an active travel/sustainable transport pov and see much more use for recreational/social riding by equestrians and off-road cyclists alike.

And speaking to the RoW teams at CC level is a waste of time, the LA is in the landowners' back pockets, and RoW are at the bottom of the LA's list of priorities.

Bikehike is a good site, includes online OS mapping.

 

[Pale Rider]

Around here land owners took advantage of the last foot and mouth disease outbreak to close some trails by blocking them.

These may not have been bridleways, but were established trails in regular use by mountain bikers.

Another problem was lack of use during the outbreak, the narrower - almost certainly unofficial - trails quickly become overgrown if not used.

 

[Tail End Charlie]

Thanks for putting that link, iwantanewbike, it's really helpful. Helps planning various thoughts of mine.

 

[Venod]

There are some very good Land Owners who welcome people using ROW and reinstate them if ploughed (as they should) but there is a substantial number of land owners who consider public access an inconvenience and are not very co-operative, I think in England we are a long way from the Scottish access for all model, its just not a priority for most people, but in my view it should be pursued as a matter of health improvement, but we all know the promise of the Olympic legacy has not materialised with cutbacks shutting down leisure centres & swimming baths, so ROW have little chance.

 

[SatNavSaysStraightOn]

I would also suggest that that map is wrong in many places as well. Looking at my current area I know of plenty of bridleways that are simply not marked on that map full stop. They are no even there as paths or anything similar.

Can I suggest this website... It works really well for all types of paths, bridleways, roads, permitted bridleways, permitted paths, byways and more. https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/shop/os-getamap.html?gclid=CLLQjaXdxcQCFWfKtAodaAIA5g

 

[ColinJ]

We are very lucky in Calderdale in terms of bridleway coverage. We have some really excellent gnarly trails to enjoy, as well as plenty of easier ones. Just down the road in Kirklees, the story is apparently very different though - very poor.

 

[surfdude]

young ED will be along soon with a "get off my land "

 

[Deleted member 23692]

A quick history lesson to counter some of oft spouted bollocks including some of that spouted in this thread thus far.

The current legally protected PROW network was defined in the early 1950 by every parish claiming the PRoW within their boundary that they could prove historic usage. some parishes were very through and some not so. To get routes added to removed from the map there had to be appropriate proof for the existence or non-existence of that public right. That's why you'll find routes dead ending or changing status at parish boundaries as there was no mechanism to cross check the claims. This disjointed approach gets even more comical at country boundaries. If anyone is to blame for the mismatch network we have today then point your fingers at parish, district, county council of the 50s and the gov of that time for creating a legacy is nigh on impossible to fully correct as they legal process to do so is expensive, long winded and uncertain in outcome. Hopefully the deregulation bill will makes things easier should it become law

Unfortunately bridleways should be maintained for horse traffic and not cycles, since the historic usage is for horse. The right to cycle on them is in reality only a concession and does not place any obligation for anyone to facilitate their usage (CA1968 S30). In other words you can use them but you can't expect anything whilst doing so, and every other legal user has priority over you.

So stop bitching about local authorities as they only have the legislation to work with. And if you think PRoW legislation is unworkable then don't even try to understand that behind cycleways

To get more bridleways find historical evidence to support a modification order - you've got 'til 2026 to get that claim deposited with your highway authority.

 

[Deleted member 23692]

One more thing - don't use open street map or any of its derivatives as by their crowd sourced nature are full of errors. I've just looked at the bridleway.com for areas I've working in professionally for over 20 years and its content and accuracy is laughable.

Most highway authorities (county/unitary councils) now have a PRoW map on their website - that will be far more accurate than anything else out there

 

[ColinJ]

To get more bridleways find historical evidence to support a modification order - you've got 'til 2026 to get that claim deposited with your highway authority.

That's the kind of thing that the South Pennines Packhorse Trail Trust is working on round here.

 

[Jody]

That's the kind of thing that the South Pennines Packhorse Trail Trust is working on round here.

and the same thing that Peak MTB etc is also working towards. Reinstating historic bridleways and upgrading some footpaths to bridleways.

 

[Jody]

Unfortunately bridleways should be maintained for horse traffic and not cycles, since the historic usage is for horse. The right to cycle on them is in reality only a concession and does not place any obligation for anyone to facilitate their usage (CA1968 S30).

Disabled users can place an obligation of trail maintenance on councils though under the accsess for all guidelines. The council is currently looking at flattening some good routes in the peaks.

 

[ColinJ]

Disabled users can place an obligation of trail maintenance on councils though under the accsess for all guidelines. The council is currently looking at flattening some good routes in the peaks.

That issue is a bit more contentious ... some local mountain bikers are very upset at the 'sanitising' of several routes which used to be very hard and technically challenging but which now just need a reasonable level of fitness to get over.

It is right that the public and especially the disabled should get as much access as is reasonable, but let's not blitz everything in sight to try and enable everyone to get everywhere.

A couple of examples from one of my MTB rides on the Mary Towneley Loop - what would you have to do to the trail to make it possible to get a wheelchair up this ...

Or this ...?

 

[Jody]

It is right that the public and especially the disabled should get as much access as is reasonable, but let's not blitz everything in sight to try and enable everyone to get everywhere.

This sums up my view ^

what would you have to do to the trail to make it possible to get a wheelchair up this ...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-HkyQvez9o&feature=youtu.be
Not much looking at what wheelchairs they are using. They look pretty nifty.

http://disabledramblers.co.uk/access-issues/report-on-chapel-gate-repairs/