Rights of Way issue

[ktmbiker58]

There is a bridleway, Whitminster bridleway 23, that runs from the main road to meet a track at the side of the Stroudwater canal, this part of the canal is due for restoration in the near future so the Glos and Sharpness canal will join up to the Stroudwater again. I have ridden this bridleway in the past and since I was passing it seemed like a good idea to pop down it, I got just passed the last property, Canal View, to find the bridleway obstructed by barriers - I have submitted all the details and photos to Highways. Could it be that someone doesn't want visitors to the canal once it is reopened going passed their property?

The section beyond the obstruction is in woodland and will quickly get overgrown if not used. I have checked and no stopping up order has been made.

Yes the bonfire is on the bridleway and there is garden waste dumped on the far side of the barriers, the nearest property does not own the land I've checked on their title plan.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Have you reported it to the council right of way officers?

 

[ktmbiker58]

Have you reported it to the council right of way officers?

Yep all done including uploading photos

 

[figbat]

What’s happens if you try to use it? Does someone approach you? You can always try on foot if cycling is not practical (although if there are no legitimate reasons to close it then it must be maintained to be navigable by whomever is permitted).

 

[Drago]

Yep all done including uploading photos

Balls in their court then. Because RoW is a mandatory function they are, in my experience, usually reasonably good at acting under such circumstances. At least up my end they are.

 

[ktmbiker58]

Fortunately bridleways are classed as highways (along with roads and footways) so hopefully there will be some action, excerpt from the Highways Act 1980:-

137Penalty for wilful obstruction.​

(1)If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence and liable to [F1imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or] a fine [F2or both].

I have found that the wooded area beyond the barriers is owned by a farmer local to me.

I have had an email stating my report has been forwarded to highways so lets see what happens 🤞

 

[craigwend]

Sometimes there may be a genuine reason for it being blocked, eg a hazard, earthworks, disease etc, usually a notice, unless taken off by scroats. Though you've done the right thing and process, so it's a waiting game now...

 

[Ajax Bay]

 

[figbat]

View attachment 784730

Looking at this, it looks like it’s a dead end bridleway anyway - where do you go at the end?

 

[Ian H]

Looking at this, it looks like it’s a dead end bridleway anyway - where do you go at the end?

Over the bridge and on to the towpath heading south, following the green diamonds.

 

[PeteXXX]

I would be inclined to unblock it & see what happens..

 

[ktmbiker58]

Looking at this, it looks like it’s a dead end bridleway anyway - where do you go at the end?

Yes it's a blind bridleway, it was probably originally a connection from the canal to the village, it was obstructed just after the property called Canal View which is just on the RHS on your map, it's all in hands of Highways.

 

[Ajax Bay]

Over the bridge and on to the towpath heading south, following the green diamonds.

The point @figbat is making is that, on a bike, there is no RoW beyond the end of the bridleway. Stonepitts Bridge accesses footpaths, and GsV suggests the track along the disused canal is not a 'towpath' and sections are unsuited to cycle traffic (at present).
I guess it is possible that the land owner has set to clear the bridleway (as responsible) and the barriers are there as a prudent (good practice) safety measure.
One assumes that the house owner has right of vehicular access but has no interest (nor responsibility) beyond their house entrance.

I think a bearded-sandal approach to RoW (never shall they be changed) is often not in the best interests of all concerned (but ftaod keeping RoW clear IS).
The solution (from this complete outsider's perspective - albeit I have been right past this on a 300) would be to get the farmer (if same) to agree to make the track from the canal heading NE a permissive bridleway, thus offering Whitminster straightforward access to the 'to be restored' canal (with an associated canal side cycleable track). And let nature have that bottom bit of woodland, S of the house and absolve the farmer of keeping it open (dead end for cyclists/horses) (the quid pro quo).

I have found that the wooded area beyond the barriers is owned by a farmer local to me.

Suggest the OP gives said farmer a call. Maybe all will be revealed.

 

[Ian H]

I suspect the end of the bridleway before the bridge is a mapping issue, but the green diamonds indicate a right of way ("recreational route") south on the canal.

EDIT: although, interestingly, it's not shown on Gloucestershire's online version of the definitive map. https://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/prow/rights-of-way-online-map/

 

[Mike_P]

Equally crazy the Starbeck branch of NCN67 along an old railway line is not shown as being any form of right of way on N Yorks website. Eventually got them to accept the email I had sent re exposed tree roots. Their procedure requires you to identify the location on their mapping but it refused to drop the "pin" on the location as it was not as far as the mapping was concerned a right of way.