This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Just seen in the tavy times there is an enquiry taking place on the 23rd November at the Princetown Village Centre. maybe worth attending to see whats happening.
Paul
Paul
In reply to Paul Trueman:
I shall be there, as will Frank Cannings and, I believe, Dave Turnbull to put the BMC case for re-opening climbing. It would be good if others turn up.
Frank has suggested that there is strong historical evidence that the easy chimney scramble to the summit has been widely used (as is the case with Hay Tor) by climbers and the general public for at least 60 years, if not much longer. Both he and I can remember climbing there in the 1950s, and we certainly weren't the first.
I shall be there, as will Frank Cannings and, I believe, Dave Turnbull to put the BMC case for re-opening climbing. It would be good if others turn up.
Frank has suggested that there is strong historical evidence that the easy chimney scramble to the summit has been widely used (as is the case with Hay Tor) by climbers and the general public for at least 60 years, if not much longer. Both he and I can remember climbing there in the 1950s, and we certainly weren't the first.
In reply to Iain Peters:
Hi Iain,
Not sure if it is dervided from speculation or heresay but did the Littlejohn or White SD&D guide not have a reference to the easy chimeny as being described as polished in Victorian times? I am sure there was a Victorian reference that would allow the reader to infer that climbing had been happening for a period of time prior to the first recorded Victorian climbs.
Hi Iain,
Not sure if it is dervided from speculation or heresay but did the Littlejohn or White SD&D guide not have a reference to the easy chimeny as being described as polished in Victorian times? I am sure there was a Victorian reference that would allow the reader to infer that climbing had been happening for a period of time prior to the first recorded Victorian climbs.
In reply to TMM:
It certainly was, and by locals' hobnails as much as climbers' tricounis. The ascent was a popular rite of passage for many locals from the surrounding villages and towns, and the whole area was famous for its wortleberries, ( a variety of blueberry). When the railway to Princetown was functioning, people from as far away as Plymouth would take the train up onto the moor. If ever there was a strong case for maintaining the traditional Dartmoor "newtakes" as Open Access land Vixen Tor is it.
It certainly was, and by locals' hobnails as much as climbers' tricounis. The ascent was a popular rite of passage for many locals from the surrounding villages and towns, and the whole area was famous for its wortleberries, ( a variety of blueberry). When the railway to Princetown was functioning, people from as far away as Plymouth would take the train up onto the moor. If ever there was a strong case for maintaining the traditional Dartmoor "newtakes" as Open Access land Vixen Tor is it.
In reply to TMM:
Indeed .. Folklore records ascents of Vixen Tor in the days of Pixies and Witches...see the following tale of the local hero verses the evil witch:
http://www.walkingdartmoor.co.uk/vixana.asp
> ... climbing had been happening for a period of time prior to the first recorded Victorian climbs.
Indeed .. Folklore records ascents of Vixen Tor in the days of Pixies and Witches...see the following tale of the local hero verses the evil witch:
http://www.walkingdartmoor.co.uk/vixana.asp
In reply to Frank Cannings:
Quite right Frank. I even used the story in a short article on Vixen Tor in a CC Newsletter!
Quite right Frank. I even used the story in a short article on Vixen Tor in a CC Newsletter!
In reply to Paul Trueman:
Anyone know if this is happening in the evening or daytime? Would like to try to come.
Anyone know if this is happening in the evening or daytime? Would like to try to come.
Is it finally time for the legal arguement over whether rights of way legislation can apply to a long established climb or scramble to be had?
I think this would make a suberb test case and well worth pursuing given the momentus impact a positve decision would have on the legal status of our pursuit.
I think this would make a suberb test case and well worth pursuing given the momentus impact a positve decision would have on the legal status of our pursuit.
In reply to Southern Man:
Tuesday 23rd November at 10.00am at the Princetown Village Centre, Tavistock Road, Princetown, Yelverton, Devon, PL20 6QE. The Devon County Council notice states: "it is likely that the Inquiry may last longer than one day" and "at the Inquiry, the County Council will present the evidence we have to support the route being a public footpath, including the user evidence provided ... It is very important to show that the public have used the Order route without hindrance. As this is a public inquiry, anyone can sit and watch the proceedings, with the opportunity to speak before the close of the Inquiry if they so desire."
>
> Anyone know if this is happening...
> Anyone know if this is happening...
Tuesday 23rd November at 10.00am at the Princetown Village Centre, Tavistock Road, Princetown, Yelverton, Devon, PL20 6QE. The Devon County Council notice states: "it is likely that the Inquiry may last longer than one day" and "at the Inquiry, the County Council will present the evidence we have to support the route being a public footpath, including the user evidence provided ... It is very important to show that the public have used the Order route without hindrance. As this is a public inquiry, anyone can sit and watch the proceedings, with the opportunity to speak before the close of the Inquiry if they so desire."
In reply to Frank Cannings: There is certainly some strange history to owning vixen tor, the previuos owner (who was quite nice) was almost pushed from the top of a bridge by her son as attempted murder (spotlight southwest-10yrs ago). nothing to add though.
In reply to wiwwim: bump
In reply to TMM:
If you live in the area there'll be a report on the first day of the public inquiry on ITV's the West Country Tonight at 1800. Later on this evening you'll be able to watch it from anywhere in the country via www.itv.com/westcountry-west
If you live in the area there'll be a report on the first day of the public inquiry on ITV's the West Country Tonight at 1800. Later on this evening you'll be able to watch it from anywhere in the country via www.itv.com/westcountry-west
In reply to Toreador:
"Presented with evidence from the Ramblers and the British Mountaineering Council, Devon County Council last year ordered that a right of way be recognised over the Tor."
So does that mean that at present we do have the right to climb there, but that the landowner is now seeking to have it withdrawn? I hadn't noticed last year's ruling having that effect, but perhaps I just haven't kept up?
jcm
"Presented with evidence from the Ramblers and the British Mountaineering Council, Devon County Council last year ordered that a right of way be recognised over the Tor."
So does that mean that at present we do have the right to climb there, but that the landowner is now seeking to have it withdrawn? I hadn't noticed last year's ruling having that effect, but perhaps I just haven't kept up?
jcm
I was at the inquiry all day yesterday and left at 5.10pm with it still running following a 30-40 min slot giving evidence and taking questions from the landowners lawyer.
It was something of a lesson in bureaucratic process. There was 40-50 members of the public present (including Frank Canning and Ian Peters)plus 4 or 5 people representing each side of the case: Devon County Council (+ the Ramblers rep) on one side - the landowners party on the other. The room (a badminton court in a council building of some form)alegedly had underfloor heating but was baltic and several people ended up sitting for the day in hats, gloves and jackets. The acoustics were also very poor; there were several adjournments in the morning during which heaters and sound system were shipped in.
The inquiry will take at least 3 days, possibly more. Yesterday was spent listening to evidence from the DCC Rights of Way officer about why the footpath modification order was being supported by the Council following by questions from both sides lawyers. 5 witnesses were then called and asked to explain how they had accessed Vixen Tor in the past; one chap had been going there since the 1950s. I was second last to be called and went on to explain the historic use of the site by climbers, the fact that no access difficulties had been reported to the BMC prior to 2002/3, and the route that climbers normally took to access the crag.
Today and tomorrow will involve hearing evidence from witnesses called by the landowners side. This will include a aerial photography expert who I understand will try to show that there was no (aerial) evidence of paths to the Tor in the 1960's & 70's.
The crux of it is that DCC have to prove that the path through the Vixen Tor enclosure was used by walkers on an unrestricted basis for the 20 yr period between 1956-76.
Frank Canning and Ian Peters will also be giving evidence today.
We will keep you posted.
Dave
It was something of a lesson in bureaucratic process. There was 40-50 members of the public present (including Frank Canning and Ian Peters)plus 4 or 5 people representing each side of the case: Devon County Council (+ the Ramblers rep) on one side - the landowners party on the other. The room (a badminton court in a council building of some form)alegedly had underfloor heating but was baltic and several people ended up sitting for the day in hats, gloves and jackets. The acoustics were also very poor; there were several adjournments in the morning during which heaters and sound system were shipped in.
The inquiry will take at least 3 days, possibly more. Yesterday was spent listening to evidence from the DCC Rights of Way officer about why the footpath modification order was being supported by the Council following by questions from both sides lawyers. 5 witnesses were then called and asked to explain how they had accessed Vixen Tor in the past; one chap had been going there since the 1950s. I was second last to be called and went on to explain the historic use of the site by climbers, the fact that no access difficulties had been reported to the BMC prior to 2002/3, and the route that climbers normally took to access the crag.
Today and tomorrow will involve hearing evidence from witnesses called by the landowners side. This will include a aerial photography expert who I understand will try to show that there was no (aerial) evidence of paths to the Tor in the 1960's & 70's.
The crux of it is that DCC have to prove that the path through the Vixen Tor enclosure was used by walkers on an unrestricted basis for the 20 yr period between 1956-76.
Frank Canning and Ian Peters will also be giving evidence today.
We will keep you posted.
Dave
In reply to Dave Turnbull, BMC:
Cheers for that, both the reporting back and actually being there.
Chris
Cheers for that, both the reporting back and actually being there.
Chris
I thought a footpath had to actually GO somewhere (as well as having been used over a period of time) for it to be designated a right of way? If access is refused to the tor, then surely there is no need for a footpath....I'm a bit puzzled as to why the county council have gone along with the climbers and tried to designate a public footpath to (and through!) the tor itself.
Confused,
Sx
Confused,
Sx
In reply to Sarah G:
The path goes to the Tor surely?
The path goes to the Tor surely?
In reply to Sarah G: 10 minutes with a map would yield any number of dead end rights of way, but simply going to look at the Tor is a reason for a path in itself. Though without looking it up, I think you are wrong about the need for a "functionality" test for a RoW
In reply to toad: Would a path to the Tor allow climbing on it? Presumably not (unless the path included the whole crag itself somehow).
In reply to Sarah G:
But if a public right of way is created, based on a continual use of a de facto right of way (as is possible under English law), then the Tor is no longer off limits...
> (In reply to Toreador)
> But if the tor is off limits......the path has no function.
>
> sx
> But if the tor is off limits......the path has no function.
>
> sx
But if a public right of way is created, based on a continual use of a de facto right of way (as is possible under English law), then the Tor is no longer off limits...
In reply to Paul Trueman:
we could always put up a fence around his house and let him wait 7 years to obtain access
we could always put up a fence around his house and let him wait 7 years to obtain access
-In reply to Dave Turnbull, BMC or others: Why specifically 1956-76?
To answer a coouple of the questions posted above:
What is being considered here is a 'footpath modification order'. If agreed this would add a loop in the existing footpath (which goes around the northern side of the enclosure from Merrivale south westwards). The loop would pass through the stoned enclosure (i.e. where the Tor is) and link up with the main footpath at the south west corner of the enclosure. The footpath would not necessarilly mean that climbing could take place; the landowners solicitor stated yesterday that if the modification was agreed then it did not mean that climbing, picnicing or anything else would be permitted within the enclosure.
On the question about 'why 1956-76', this is because DCC has to prove that access took place unchallenged for 20 yr period in the past. In 1976 some signs were apparently put up by the then landowner/tenant stating that it was private land, no dogs/picnics/camping etc. Because of this the period since 1976 cannot be used as a legal means for agreeing the modification order.
Rob Dyer will add an update to this when he gets back to the office; he was at the inquiry today.
What is being considered here is a 'footpath modification order'. If agreed this would add a loop in the existing footpath (which goes around the northern side of the enclosure from Merrivale south westwards). The loop would pass through the stoned enclosure (i.e. where the Tor is) and link up with the main footpath at the south west corner of the enclosure. The footpath would not necessarilly mean that climbing could take place; the landowners solicitor stated yesterday that if the modification was agreed then it did not mean that climbing, picnicing or anything else would be permitted within the enclosure.
On the question about 'why 1956-76', this is because DCC has to prove that access took place unchallenged for 20 yr period in the past. In 1976 some signs were apparently put up by the then landowner/tenant stating that it was private land, no dogs/picnics/camping etc. Because of this the period since 1976 cannot be used as a legal means for agreeing the modification order.
Rob Dyer will add an update to this when he gets back to the office; he was at the inquiry today.
In reply to Dave Turnbull, BMC: Hi Dave, many thanks for that info. That has clarified things.
For reasons I won't go into here I've never seen Vixen Tor as a completely black and white case. However I do hope that the current 7 year impasse is finally resolved.
For reasons I won't go into here I've never seen Vixen Tor as a completely black and white case. However I do hope that the current 7 year impasse is finally resolved.
In reply to Paul Trueman:
I have just got home from the inquiry. Both Frank Cannings and I were permitted (finally) to take the witness stand.
Frank read out his user evidence statement, which basically confirmed that he had visited Vixen Tor for the purposes of climbing and walking during the period in question (from the mid 50s to mid 70s) He was then cross-examined by the barrister for the objectors (The Alford family) who sought to question his memory. Fortunately Frank not only has a very good memory but can back it up having kept an extensive written record throughout his long and eventful climbing career.
I had asked to take the stand to exercise my right as a member of the public at a (surprise, surprise,) "Public" Inquiry, to recount my own experience of walking and climbing on the Tor for over 50 years.
My interpretation of the tactics used by counsel for the objectors is not to deny that the public have had access to Vixen Tor for over 60 years but to maintain that this has been a generalized access with no specific footpath routes being used, and that we, as climbers have wandered at will without sticking to one particular path. Counsel time and time again suggested to witnesses, including Dave, myself and Frank that we (and other users) had not solely used the access footpath as outlined on the DCC Order and map.
It's all very complicated, but I believe that what they hope to prove is that the "specific" path running from the NW boundary to the Tor and then SW down to a gate/stile does not have a history of regular use, as the public (including climbers) have been allowed (until 2003) to wander at will around the Tor, and that this had always been with the permission of past landowners and therefore could be revoked at any time.
What it all boils down to is whether the Inspector agrees with this analysis or that of Devon County Council whose witnesses have all testified to using the footpath as marked in the Order to access and pass through the Vixen Tor enclosure.
So where does that leave us as climbers? Very hard to say: If DCC win the case then a statutory ROW as per their Order will lead from the NW boundary wall to a point adjacent to the W side of the Tor and then downhill to the gate at the SW corner. Whether or not climbing will be permitted is a moot question. I very much doubt it. The RA on whose behalf DCC counsel is acting have only asked for this ROW to be ratified in law. They (RA) approached both Frank and myself and asked us to emphasise the access NOT the climbing. Naturally we couldn't fully comply and also give a truthful account.
I suspect that if the Inspector upholds the Objection then all public access to the Vixen Tor enclosure will be forbidden. It will then be a matter for direct negotiations with the landowners (The Alfords) to ascertain whether some limited form of access for climbing would be considered.
I cannot, at this point, even guess what the result of the Inquiry will be, but I remain reasonably pessimistic that from the climbing access point of view there are tough times ahead.
I must also add that a letter has been submitted to the Inquiry today (and dated 23 November 2010) from a local climber, well known for his perverse views on many aspects of the sport, by the name of Dennis Morrod. In his letter, which is available at the Inquiry, he fully supports the Alford position, justifying this by castigating all climbers for the proliferation of bolts around the countryside! It is, in my opinion, the letter of a madman, disguised as a sane and environmentally concerned observation on the vandalistic intentions of organisations such as the BMC. Were it confined within a climbing context, this public statement would be unmasked as an empty diatribe and summarily dismissed. However, the fact that it is available to be read, with its totally unfounded but implied suggestion that allowing climbers to operate at Vixen Tor will result in damage to the rocks, at a delicately poised public inquiry, where there are many non-climbers present, is potentially extremely damaging. Mr Morrod should be contacted at the earliest opportunity, but far more important his libellous claims about the intentions of all climbers and the BMC must be refuted at the highest level.
My apologies to the moderators for the length of this reply, but the issue is extremely complex, and the story is only half complete.
I have just got home from the inquiry. Both Frank Cannings and I were permitted (finally) to take the witness stand.
Frank read out his user evidence statement, which basically confirmed that he had visited Vixen Tor for the purposes of climbing and walking during the period in question (from the mid 50s to mid 70s) He was then cross-examined by the barrister for the objectors (The Alford family) who sought to question his memory. Fortunately Frank not only has a very good memory but can back it up having kept an extensive written record throughout his long and eventful climbing career.
I had asked to take the stand to exercise my right as a member of the public at a (surprise, surprise,) "Public" Inquiry, to recount my own experience of walking and climbing on the Tor for over 50 years.
My interpretation of the tactics used by counsel for the objectors is not to deny that the public have had access to Vixen Tor for over 60 years but to maintain that this has been a generalized access with no specific footpath routes being used, and that we, as climbers have wandered at will without sticking to one particular path. Counsel time and time again suggested to witnesses, including Dave, myself and Frank that we (and other users) had not solely used the access footpath as outlined on the DCC Order and map.
It's all very complicated, but I believe that what they hope to prove is that the "specific" path running from the NW boundary to the Tor and then SW down to a gate/stile does not have a history of regular use, as the public (including climbers) have been allowed (until 2003) to wander at will around the Tor, and that this had always been with the permission of past landowners and therefore could be revoked at any time.
What it all boils down to is whether the Inspector agrees with this analysis or that of Devon County Council whose witnesses have all testified to using the footpath as marked in the Order to access and pass through the Vixen Tor enclosure.
So where does that leave us as climbers? Very hard to say: If DCC win the case then a statutory ROW as per their Order will lead from the NW boundary wall to a point adjacent to the W side of the Tor and then downhill to the gate at the SW corner. Whether or not climbing will be permitted is a moot question. I very much doubt it. The RA on whose behalf DCC counsel is acting have only asked for this ROW to be ratified in law. They (RA) approached both Frank and myself and asked us to emphasise the access NOT the climbing. Naturally we couldn't fully comply and also give a truthful account.
I suspect that if the Inspector upholds the Objection then all public access to the Vixen Tor enclosure will be forbidden. It will then be a matter for direct negotiations with the landowners (The Alfords) to ascertain whether some limited form of access for climbing would be considered.
I cannot, at this point, even guess what the result of the Inquiry will be, but I remain reasonably pessimistic that from the climbing access point of view there are tough times ahead.
I must also add that a letter has been submitted to the Inquiry today (and dated 23 November 2010) from a local climber, well known for his perverse views on many aspects of the sport, by the name of Dennis Morrod. In his letter, which is available at the Inquiry, he fully supports the Alford position, justifying this by castigating all climbers for the proliferation of bolts around the countryside! It is, in my opinion, the letter of a madman, disguised as a sane and environmentally concerned observation on the vandalistic intentions of organisations such as the BMC. Were it confined within a climbing context, this public statement would be unmasked as an empty diatribe and summarily dismissed. However, the fact that it is available to be read, with its totally unfounded but implied suggestion that allowing climbers to operate at Vixen Tor will result in damage to the rocks, at a delicately poised public inquiry, where there are many non-climbers present, is potentially extremely damaging. Mr Morrod should be contacted at the earliest opportunity, but far more important his libellous claims about the intentions of all climbers and the BMC must be refuted at the highest level.
My apologies to the moderators for the length of this reply, but the issue is extremely complex, and the story is only half complete.
In reply to Iain Peters: In case some of you never have heard of Dennis Morrod then I suggest that you spend some time reading Mr Morrod's website http://mountainclients.typepad.com/
In reply to maresia:
He seems to have a Mountain Guides Tea Party agenda. From skimming through he seems to have a problem with being regulated but demands that everyone wears helmets. Whatever his problem (bolting at Cheesewring, possibly?), mispresenting the extremely traditional style of climbing at Vixen Tor is very unhelpful.
He seems to have a Mountain Guides Tea Party agenda. From skimming through he seems to have a problem with being regulated but demands that everyone wears helmets. Whatever his problem (bolting at Cheesewring, possibly?), mispresenting the extremely traditional style of climbing at Vixen Tor is very unhelpful.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
You would have thought that given his fiercely traditional stance that he would have been in support of access to a historical and solely trad venue.
The ramblings and rants on his site remind me of the retired busybodies that report you to the council if you leave your wheelie bin out for a nano second after the collection.
You would have thought that given his fiercely traditional stance that he would have been in support of access to a historical and solely trad venue.
The ramblings and rants on his site remind me of the retired busybodies that report you to the council if you leave your wheelie bin out for a nano second after the collection.
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
I have had dealings with Mr Morrod in the dim and distant past, as has Frank Cannings, concerning an accident at the Dewerstone in 1963 in which I was badly injured and my companion Mike Rabley was killed. He is always very selective about his facts.
I have had dealings with Mr Morrod in the dim and distant past, as has Frank Cannings, concerning an accident at the Dewerstone in 1963 in which I was badly injured and my companion Mike Rabley was killed. He is always very selective about his facts.
In reply to Iain Peters: Ah, only just realised that I didn't read your name correctly and that you aren't Iain Peter (ex-PyB) who will also be familiar with Mr Morrod.
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
Easily done, as I'm sure we both would agree! Good to hear that we also share DM's vitriol.
Easily done, as I'm sure we both would agree! Good to hear that we also share DM's vitriol.
In reply to Paul Trueman:
The 3-day Vixen Tor public inquiry this week (23-25 Nov) was adjourned and has been extended a further 2 days.
It resumes on 16 and 17 December 2010.
http://www.thebmc.co.uk/News.aspx?id=4023
The 3-day Vixen Tor public inquiry this week (23-25 Nov) was adjourned and has been extended a further 2 days.
It resumes on 16 and 17 December 2010.
http://www.thebmc.co.uk/News.aspx?id=4023
Sorry if this has been already been thought of and discounted, but has applying for Town & Village Green status over Vixen Tor been considered? I'm not sure it would give a right to climb, but it would certainly provide more recreational rights for most visitors than just a footpath.
Maybe this is the next thing to try even if the footpath claim succeeds?
Sam
Maybe this is the next thing to try even if the footpath claim succeeds?
Sam
In reply to Frank Cannings:
Just received a letter confirming that the postponed (due to weather) public inquiry will now resume on 19 January and will last for two days.
Just received a letter confirming that the postponed (due to weather) public inquiry will now resume on 19 January and will last for two days.
In reply to Iain Peters:
Goddamn this is so tense! Again, Iain, Frank, Dave, everyone at the BMC and on the "Good" side, thank you sooo much for all your efforts!
Hope to see u on the 19th
Tom
(The one with Dreds )
Goddamn this is so tense! Again, Iain, Frank, Dave, everyone at the BMC and on the "Good" side, thank you sooo much for all your efforts!
Hope to see u on the 19th
Tom
(The one with Dreds )
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...