This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/right-roam-britains-country-paths-disappe...
Personally, I have come across a number of footpaths that are completely overgrown and are un-navigable. I am not sure what the solution is, I suspect that they have become overgrown because of very little use and so when checked they are thought as not being worth maintaining.
it is the landowners responsibility to maintain these rights of way, and it looks like that there are a number that are shirking their responsibility.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/public-rights-of-way-landowner-responsibilities
I actually volunteer to help maintain the rights of way in the Parish where I live. We meet 2-3 times a year and schedule our own work based on our own personal experience of the condition of rights of way or of any reports from members of the public.
Is this they way forward? Will we see more groups like this springing up working alongside NGO's such as the BMC and the Ramblers?
Your thoughts Ladies and Gentlemen.
Personally, I have come across a number of footpaths that are completely overgrown and are un-navigable. I am not sure what the solution is, I suspect that they have become overgrown because of very little use and so when checked they are thought as not being worth maintaining.
it is the landowners responsibility to maintain these rights of way, and it looks like that there are a number that are shirking their responsibility.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/public-rights-of-way-landowner-responsibilities
I actually volunteer to help maintain the rights of way in the Parish where I live. We meet 2-3 times a year and schedule our own work based on our own personal experience of the condition of rights of way or of any reports from members of the public.
Is this they way forward? Will we see more groups like this springing up working alongside NGO's such as the BMC and the Ramblers?
Your thoughts Ladies and Gentlemen.
5
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
I think the idea of groups helping clear paths is a great idea. There is a route by us we can only run in the winter because in the summer it becomes impassable due to nettles, I wouldn't mind having a hack at them if I could.
I think the idea of groups helping clear paths is a great idea. There is a route by us we can only run in the winter because in the summer it becomes impassable due to nettles, I wouldn't mind having a hack at them if I could.
2
In reply to ceri:
I have been tempted to do the same, but I think it's better to work under the umbrella of an organisation, with its identity and insurance etc. Instead of there being a collection of rights of way vigilantes.
I have been tempted to do the same, but I think it's better to work under the umbrella of an organisation, with its identity and insurance etc. Instead of there being a collection of rights of way vigilantes.
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
Once a legal right of way, always a legal right of way. Is a well known maxim on rights of ways.
I'm lucky we live in a National Park and the responsibility for these lay with the park authorities.,
If I lived outside the park I'd be forming or joining a group to clear any difficult to access PROW.
Once a legal right of way, always a legal right of way. Is a well known maxim on rights of ways.
I'm lucky we live in a National Park and the responsibility for these lay with the park authorities.,
If I lived outside the park I'd be forming or joining a group to clear any difficult to access PROW.
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner: some LAs do maintain ROWs but most don't seem to and it is not the top priority for a lot of landowners, though sometimes that's a false economy as walker/riders will find their own way past an obstruction which widens tracks.
1
In reply to blackmountainbiker:
I completely agree. I live in deepest darkest Cornwall and the councils priority is the coastal path, as it generates lots of income into the economy.
I live just off Bodmin moor and the area would benefit greatly from becoming a bit of a walking location. If we didn't do the work as volunteers, the work wouldn't get done.
I completely agree. I live in deepest darkest Cornwall and the councils priority is the coastal path, as it generates lots of income into the economy.
I live just off Bodmin moor and the area would benefit greatly from becoming a bit of a walking location. If we didn't do the work as volunteers, the work wouldn't get done.
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
Where I'm originally from the situation is much better than when I was a kid in the 80s. A lot of infrastructure, stiles and signs, were put in during the Labour govt years, and landowners kept them clear. The infrastructure is still there but perhaps the clearing not done so well. Your local authority should have s footpaths officer shouldn't they?
Where I'm originally from the situation is much better than when I was a kid in the 80s. A lot of infrastructure, stiles and signs, were put in during the Labour govt years, and landowners kept them clear. The infrastructure is still there but perhaps the clearing not done so well. Your local authority should have s footpaths officer shouldn't they?
In reply to TobyA:
Am I right in thinking you were from Malvern? My mum was a bit of a ROW activist there in the 60s/70s.
Am I right in thinking you were from Malvern? My mum was a bit of a ROW activist there in the 60s/70s.
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
My wife and I regularly tackle some of the little known paths around where we live. Generally we have no problems (other than navigating), occasionally a footpath has been diverted or has become overgrown but is usually still passable. In many ways I prefer checking out the less popular paths. The high profile paths around the Peak are well maintained, well sign posted and busy. Whereas the little known paths are an adventure in themselves. You hardly see anyone except the odd (and I mean odd!) local, there might be a bit of bushwhacking and trying to guess which way the path is supposed to be going when the signs runout can be a challenge. But often you come across hidden gems, crumbling mansions, lost outcrops, one path took us through the farm of a wood carver and we ended up buying some of his work
My wife and I regularly tackle some of the little known paths around where we live. Generally we have no problems (other than navigating), occasionally a footpath has been diverted or has become overgrown but is usually still passable. In many ways I prefer checking out the less popular paths. The high profile paths around the Peak are well maintained, well sign posted and busy. Whereas the little known paths are an adventure in themselves. You hardly see anyone except the odd (and I mean odd!) local, there might be a bit of bushwhacking and trying to guess which way the path is supposed to be going when the signs runout can be a challenge. But often you come across hidden gems, crumbling mansions, lost outcrops, one path took us through the farm of a wood carver and we ended up buying some of his work
6
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
A machete is a two-edged sword, if you will.
> Instead of there being a collection of rights of way vigilantes.
A machete is a two-edged sword, if you will.
In reply to Dave Perry:
That is true and will remain so until, IIRC 2026. However after that day all footpaths not registered on the County Councils' definitive maps will be lost forever. There are currently hundreds if not thousands of unregistered footpaths, and this is what the Ramblers Pathwatch project is all about. That is to identify unregistered footpaths and get them onto the definitive maps before the cut off date.
The timing is proving to be very tight, compounded by the fact that as a results of the Cuts councils have drastically reduced their footpath staff, sometimes to just one Footpaths Officer and it is feared that the project will be so behind that many paths will be lost.
It's a terrible shame and really quite worrying.
> Once a legal right of way, always a legal right of way. Is a well known maxim on rights of ways.
That is true and will remain so until, IIRC 2026. However after that day all footpaths not registered on the County Councils' definitive maps will be lost forever. There are currently hundreds if not thousands of unregistered footpaths, and this is what the Ramblers Pathwatch project is all about. That is to identify unregistered footpaths and get them onto the definitive maps before the cut off date.
The timing is proving to be very tight, compounded by the fact that as a results of the Cuts councils have drastically reduced their footpath staff, sometimes to just one Footpaths Officer and it is feared that the project will be so behind that many paths will be lost.
It's a terrible shame and really quite worrying.
Post edited at 09:35
4
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
A bit up from there Rob, NW corner of Worcestershire, not far from Stourport. If you are on the Malverns, you can see the Abberley Hills quite clearly to the north which were my childhood stomping grounds once I started getting into to hiking.
There's a bench in a random field not far from my mum and dads with a dedication to a local chap who was the volunteer parish footpaths officer for decades. It's a grand view down to the Malverns with Abberley Hill rearing up behind you.
A bit up from there Rob, NW corner of Worcestershire, not far from Stourport. If you are on the Malverns, you can see the Abberley Hills quite clearly to the north which were my childhood stomping grounds once I started getting into to hiking.
There's a bench in a random field not far from my mum and dads with a dedication to a local chap who was the volunteer parish footpaths officer for decades. It's a grand view down to the Malverns with Abberley Hill rearing up behind you.
In reply to Trangia:
Interesting - what is an unregistered footpath then? I've always just figured if it's on the OS then I should be there and if it isn't I could get told off!
> That is to identify unregistered footpaths and get them onto the definitive maps before the cut off date.
Interesting - what is an unregistered footpath then? I've always just figured if it's on the OS then I should be there and if it isn't I could get told off!
In reply to TobyA:
It will depend. A dedicated footpaths / rights of way officer will be something of a luxury for most authorities.
> Your local authority should have s footpaths officer shouldn't they?
It will depend. A dedicated footpaths / rights of way officer will be something of a luxury for most authorities.
In reply to TobyA:
No the definitive map at the local authority takes precedent over the OS, although most of those shown on the OS probably conform with those shown on the definitive map. There are however, hundreds, if not thousands of rights of way out there which have been "lost", very often through lack of use, obstruction etc. Any attempt to get these put onto the definitive map will be time consuming, particularly if the land owner objects, and the process of showing that they have existed for a long time has to be gone through.
No the definitive map at the local authority takes precedent over the OS, although most of those shown on the OS probably conform with those shown on the definitive map. There are however, hundreds, if not thousands of rights of way out there which have been "lost", very often through lack of use, obstruction etc. Any attempt to get these put onto the definitive map will be time consuming, particularly if the land owner objects, and the process of showing that they have existed for a long time has to be gone through.
1
In reply to Trangia:
I think we've had since 1955 to register footpaths. Surely there can't be that many left to register?
I think we've had since 1955 to register footpaths. Surely there can't be that many left to register?
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
Some good work going on in the Calder Valley;
http://crows-coop.co.uk/
Some good work going on in the Calder Valley;
http://crows-coop.co.uk/
1
In reply to blackmountainbiker:
Highway's Authorities have a legal duty to maintain PROW and landowners must not block them by law. All authorities continue to maintain them but slashed budgets and decreasing staff/volunteers means they have to prioritise. with the results that the Ramblers survey is highlighting.
The false economy is that PROW provide the essential infrastructure for access to the countryside which generates massive social and economic benefits - unfortunately the government isn't that interested and the benefits don't directly accrue to the local and national departments that might pay for them
Highway's Authorities have a legal duty to maintain PROW and landowners must not block them by law. All authorities continue to maintain them but slashed budgets and decreasing staff/volunteers means they have to prioritise. with the results that the Ramblers survey is highlighting.
The false economy is that PROW provide the essential infrastructure for access to the countryside which generates massive social and economic benefits - unfortunately the government isn't that interested and the benefits don't directly accrue to the local and national departments that might pay for them
In reply to Trangia:
2026 is the date 'historic' paths must be registered by ie rights of way prooved by historic evidence eg tithe maps, early OS maps and other records. You will still be able to add rights of way by user evidence or creation.
2026 is the date 'historic' paths must be registered by ie rights of way prooved by historic evidence eg tithe maps, early OS maps and other records. You will still be able to add rights of way by user evidence or creation.
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
It's also worth noting that not everyone is that competent with mapwork.. or following signs.
At my last house a footpath ran up the driveway, through the farmyard, up the track and through the field behind the garden. Not much to be obstructive, but I did trim back the hedges further up the hill.
One morning I saw a chap wielding a pair of shears and a folding saw hacking away at the gorse bushes in our garden. I wandered out to enquire as to his intention, and was greeted with a speech about landowners maintaining PROW, the rights of the common man to walk on them and how obstruction was illegal etc etc. He then turned back to his work... I asked him if he could see the line of stiles and footpath signs leading up the hill and through the fields on the other side of the garden. He quickly backed down and apologised, but I do wonder if he would have hacked a tunnel through the dense gorse bushes and the blackthorn on the other side if I hadn't been at home.
It's also worth noting that not everyone is that competent with mapwork.. or following signs.
At my last house a footpath ran up the driveway, through the farmyard, up the track and through the field behind the garden. Not much to be obstructive, but I did trim back the hedges further up the hill.
One morning I saw a chap wielding a pair of shears and a folding saw hacking away at the gorse bushes in our garden. I wandered out to enquire as to his intention, and was greeted with a speech about landowners maintaining PROW, the rights of the common man to walk on them and how obstruction was illegal etc etc. He then turned back to his work... I asked him if he could see the line of stiles and footpath signs leading up the hill and through the fields on the other side of the garden. He quickly backed down and apologised, but I do wonder if he would have hacked a tunnel through the dense gorse bushes and the blackthorn on the other side if I hadn't been at home.
9
In reply to ceri:
A lot of public footpaths round my way become impassable in the summer. I just get out there and clear my way through them with secateurs and shears. Not the ideal solution, I know and it shouldn't be my job to clear these paths but it's the only way I get to walk them.
> I think the idea of groups helping clear paths is a great idea. There is a route by us we can only run in the winter because in the summer it becomes impassable due to nettles, I wouldn't mind having a hack at them if I could.
A lot of public footpaths round my way become impassable in the summer. I just get out there and clear my way through them with secateurs and shears. Not the ideal solution, I know and it shouldn't be my job to clear these paths but it's the only way I get to walk them.
1
In reply to Trangia:
So do I and a small folding saw - even our National park doesn't have the resources - even with a couple of hundred volunteer rangers to clear and keep passage free all the rights of way.
So do I and a small folding saw - even our National park doesn't have the resources - even with a couple of hundred volunteer rangers to clear and keep passage free all the rights of way.
In reply to Bulls Crack: They might have a legal duty to maintain them but many don't at all. Herefordshire are incredibly poor at looking after ROWs and it is pretty much left to landowners. I have experienced similar in Wiltshire and elsewhere. It's a great shame as some great paths are being lost forever.
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
Does anyone know of there is a West Penwith footpaths group? I'd like to join one when I return. There is this lot but they have a different purpose.
http://www.savepenwithmoors.com/
Does anyone know of there is a West Penwith footpaths group? I'd like to join one when I return. There is this lot but they have a different purpose.
http://www.savepenwithmoors.com/
In reply to Dave Perry:
A medium sized bottle of glyphosate is best around here especially in Spring. Has the advantage of being effective for a few years, particularly against nettles. Sadly not much use against trailers which seems to be the right of way obstruction of choice around here.
Hilariously neighbouring farmer, having blocked a path through a field for 18mths was compelled by court order to move it. This was carried out (under police supervision as the council worker feared for his safety). The following day it was back and due to some cock up the whole court process has to start again. I wonder how much longer these out of the way footpaths will remain: laws are irrelevant if they're not enforced.
> So do I and a small folding saw
A medium sized bottle of glyphosate is best around here especially in Spring. Has the advantage of being effective for a few years, particularly against nettles. Sadly not much use against trailers which seems to be the right of way obstruction of choice around here.
Hilariously neighbouring farmer, having blocked a path through a field for 18mths was compelled by court order to move it. This was carried out (under police supervision as the council worker feared for his safety). The following day it was back and due to some cock up the whole court process has to start again. I wonder how much longer these out of the way footpaths will remain: laws are irrelevant if they're not enforced.
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
We maintain ours. Would be nice if, in return, the dog walkers didn't actually put dog shit in our bins (right by the house and therefore trespassing) and, on one occasion, a bag of it left on our steps by the front door. Unfortunately I'm not making this up.
We maintain ours. Would be nice if, in return, the dog walkers didn't actually put dog shit in our bins (right by the house and therefore trespassing) and, on one occasion, a bag of it left on our steps by the front door. Unfortunately I'm not making this up.
5
In reply to Skyfall:
We maintain ours. Would be nice, in return, if some of the dog walkers didn't leave their dog shit all over the surrounding fields.
We're hedging the footpath of to concentrate the shit on the PRoW itself to keep the land from getting fouled. I suspect it means owners will just let them off the lead in the next field over instead.
> We maintain ours. Would be nice if, in return, the dog walkers didn't actually put dog shit in our bins (right by the house and therefore trespassing) and, on one occasion, a bag of it left on our steps by the front door. Unfortunately I'm not making this up.
We maintain ours. Would be nice, in return, if some of the dog walkers didn't leave their dog shit all over the surrounding fields.
We're hedging the footpath of to concentrate the shit on the PRoW itself to keep the land from getting fouled. I suspect it means owners will just let them off the lead in the next field over instead.
Post edited at 07:53
In reply to wintertree:
Yes hedging works well although we had a complaint that it "spoiled the view from the path" and the council were asked if the hedge could be removed. Thankfully the complaint was forwarded to me in an email marked 'LOL'.
> We maintain ours. Would be nice, in return, if some of the dog walkers didn't leave their dog shit all over the surrounding fields.
> We're hedging the footpath of to concentrate the shit on the PRoW itself to keep the land from getting fouled. I suspect it means owners will just let them off the lead in the next field over instead.
Yes hedging works well although we had a complaint that it "spoiled the view from the path" and the council were asked if the hedge could be removed. Thankfully the complaint was forwarded to me in an email marked 'LOL'.
3
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
They're not interested. I emailed them twice earlier this year about an RoW access issue, and they never even bothered replying.
> such as the BMC
They're not interested. I emailed them twice earlier this year about an RoW access issue, and they never even bothered replying.
1
In reply to blackmountainbiker:
Properly recorded rights of way cannot be lost from the legal record without a due legal process which is open and transparent, no matter how little they are used or how badly they are obstructed. One of the reasons for the 2026 cut off date for properly recording previously unrecorded rights of way is that paths that can be proven to have existed as public highways of one type or another 250 years ago can, currently, still be recorded (until 2026) and therefore protected from being lost. There is a big difference between potentially useful paths that become overgrown or blocked by fencing during ten year periods of low investment in local authorities, and paths that fell out of use 200 years ago because no-one used them then or has wanted to use them since.
Properly recorded rights of way cannot be lost from the legal record without a due legal process which is open and transparent, no matter how little they are used or how badly they are obstructed. One of the reasons for the 2026 cut off date for properly recording previously unrecorded rights of way is that paths that can be proven to have existed as public highways of one type or another 250 years ago can, currently, still be recorded (until 2026) and therefore protected from being lost. There is a big difference between potentially useful paths that become overgrown or blocked by fencing during ten year periods of low investment in local authorities, and paths that fell out of use 200 years ago because no-one used them then or has wanted to use them since.
In reply to Toccata:
I have been a bit worried if the hedge is going to upset some people, on the plus side it will give them a place to hang their their tributes to the dog poo fairy.
> Yes hedging works well although we had a complaint that it "spoiled the view from the path" and the council were asked if the hedge could be removed. Thankfully the complaint was forwarded to me in an email marked 'LOL'.
I have been a bit worried if the hedge is going to upset some people, on the plus side it will give them a place to hang their their tributes to the dog poo fairy.
1
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
the link is to a lot of UK on line Definativ mapping,
Sad to say the honeypot paths see lots of boots at the cost of others, and I often walk a extra yard to keep foot fall on the lees used.
RE the 2026 thing , how do you get it register ?/ the local council wrights of way officer in Oldham [ and it has some peak park within] has not been very effective in the past, with enquirers
http://www.rowmaps.com/
the link is to a lot of UK on line Definativ mapping,
Sad to say the honeypot paths see lots of boots at the cost of others, and I often walk a extra yard to keep foot fall on the lees used.
RE the 2026 thing , how do you get it register ?/ the local council wrights of way officer in Oldham [ and it has some peak park within] has not been very effective in the past, with enquirers
http://www.rowmaps.com/
In reply to wintertree:
Just found another blue bagged present by our house. And a bag of some walkers left over lunch. Seems we've turned into the local rubbish area instead of the rather beautiful spot it's supposed to be.
Just found another blue bagged present by our house. And a bag of some walkers left over lunch. Seems we've turned into the local rubbish area instead of the rather beautiful spot it's supposed to be.
1
In reply to Sam Beaton:
By lost I mean, lost, literally. Invisible on the ground because of fences and ploughing and overgrown hedges. I tried to follow a bridleway on my MTB in the Brecon Beacons NP the other day and despite me being in absolutely the right place, it was totally impossible to identify the ROW on the ground.
By lost I mean, lost, literally. Invisible on the ground because of fences and ploughing and overgrown hedges. I tried to follow a bridleway on my MTB in the Brecon Beacons NP the other day and despite me being in absolutely the right place, it was totally impossible to identify the ROW on the ground.
1
In reply to blackmountainbiker:
Even if the national park authority or local council there doesn't have a dedicated ROW officer any more it still has to carry out basic obligations in respect of the three problems you specifically mentioned; it knows it can't ignore problems like the ones you mention as it can be taken to court if it doesn't deal with them. If persistent requests to the relevant authority doesn't get you anywhere in a reasonable time frame then the local MTB group (if one exists) or the local British Horse Society rep can help you take things further.
Even if the national park authority or local council there doesn't have a dedicated ROW officer any more it still has to carry out basic obligations in respect of the three problems you specifically mentioned; it knows it can't ignore problems like the ones you mention as it can be taken to court if it doesn't deal with them. If persistent requests to the relevant authority doesn't get you anywhere in a reasonable time frame then the local MTB group (if one exists) or the local British Horse Society rep can help you take things further.
In reply to Sam Beaton:
If the local council are as inept as Derbyshire Dales DC then forget about that route. Peak District NP Authority are very good and DDDC seem to think they are absolved of responsibility, conveniently forgetting quite a bit of their ward lies outside the NP. I have been told, on a number of occasions, that DDDC does not have the resources to police every ROW, legal obligation or not.
> Even if the national park authority or local council there doesn't have a dedicated ROW officer any more it still has to carry out basic obligations in respect of the three problems you specifically mentioned; it knows it can't ignore problems like the ones you mention as it can be taken to court if it doesn't deal with them.
If the local council are as inept as Derbyshire Dales DC then forget about that route. Peak District NP Authority are very good and DDDC seem to think they are absolved of responsibility, conveniently forgetting quite a bit of their ward lies outside the NP. I have been told, on a number of occasions, that DDDC does not have the resources to police every ROW, legal obligation or not.
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
There's one group of public rights of way which are at greater risk of being lost than footpaths & Bridleways.
These are marked on the OS 1:25,000 maps with green dots and described in the key "other routes with public access", referred to on some slightly older maps as BOATS ( byways open to all traffic). These are also referred to as Green Lanes. On the older 1:50,000 maps they were marked as red dashes with a cross.
Later editions of OS maps have them recorded slightly differently I think.
The highways department simply refer to them as an unclassified road.
If these roads/tracks etc., are not also classified/listed as either a FP or a Bridleway then the local authority or the National Parks have absolutely NO remit to mark them or look after them in any shape or form. They are the responsibility of the highways department, and much to my surprise there is no legal obligation for the highways department to mark the start or finish or where they go to, erect gates, repair surfaces or remove obstructions. Our highways department simply tell me "they haven't the money to spend on them".
These public highways are often variably marked on maps and often are impossible to identify or follow on the ground. On some maps where they are marked there's absolutely no evidence of them on the ground, and one locally has no bridge over a stream and is totally impossible to follow even if you owned a tractor or 4x4. Even Off-Roaders are often unable to use these tracks as they are quite often impassible.
Its been depressing up north here, attempting to follow some. One here known as Bowman's lane has been effectively re-routed/blocked by the person who lives in a house at one end. The local highways department told me that; "As far as they were concerned, as long as he didn't obstruct the original route then he's free to put up alternative signage on his own property and ask people to travel his alternative route". When I complained again about the invisibility of the original route across what once was a farm yard, I was told the highways have no money to re-instate any such surface. Altering his signs is of course theft. Erecting my own signs, means I'd be putting them on his land/or the highway and he'd be free to move them as the signs were not owned by the highways department.
I don't know what can be done.
There's one group of public rights of way which are at greater risk of being lost than footpaths & Bridleways.
These are marked on the OS 1:25,000 maps with green dots and described in the key "other routes with public access", referred to on some slightly older maps as BOATS ( byways open to all traffic). These are also referred to as Green Lanes. On the older 1:50,000 maps they were marked as red dashes with a cross.
Later editions of OS maps have them recorded slightly differently I think.
The highways department simply refer to them as an unclassified road.
If these roads/tracks etc., are not also classified/listed as either a FP or a Bridleway then the local authority or the National Parks have absolutely NO remit to mark them or look after them in any shape or form. They are the responsibility of the highways department, and much to my surprise there is no legal obligation for the highways department to mark the start or finish or where they go to, erect gates, repair surfaces or remove obstructions. Our highways department simply tell me "they haven't the money to spend on them".
These public highways are often variably marked on maps and often are impossible to identify or follow on the ground. On some maps where they are marked there's absolutely no evidence of them on the ground, and one locally has no bridge over a stream and is totally impossible to follow even if you owned a tractor or 4x4. Even Off-Roaders are often unable to use these tracks as they are quite often impassible.
Its been depressing up north here, attempting to follow some. One here known as Bowman's lane has been effectively re-routed/blocked by the person who lives in a house at one end. The local highways department told me that; "As far as they were concerned, as long as he didn't obstruct the original route then he's free to put up alternative signage on his own property and ask people to travel his alternative route". When I complained again about the invisibility of the original route across what once was a farm yard, I was told the highways have no money to re-instate any such surface. Altering his signs is of course theft. Erecting my own signs, means I'd be putting them on his land/or the highway and he'd be free to move them as the signs were not owned by the highways department.
I don't know what can be done.
In reply to Dave Perry:
You get an application in to the local highways authority (with viable evidence) to add them to the definitive map before 2026.
UCR's are an oddity but they're not BOATs.... or necessarily ORPA's
Quite a good explanation here: http://www.gleam-uk.org/explanation-of-terms/
You get an application in to the local highways authority (with viable evidence) to add them to the definitive map before 2026.
UCR's are an oddity but they're not BOATs.... or necessarily ORPA's
Quite a good explanation here: http://www.gleam-uk.org/explanation-of-terms/
1
In reply to Dave Perry:
Learn to read a map like we did in the good old days?
> Its been depressing up north here, attempting to follow some. One here known as Bowman's lane has been effectively re-routed/blocked by the person who lives in a house at one end. The local highways department told me that; "As far as they were concerned, as long as he didn't obstruct the original route then he's free to put up alternative signage on his own property and ask people to travel his alternative route". When I complained again about the invisibility of the original route across what once was a farm yard, I was told the highways have no money to re-instate any such surface. Altering his signs is of course theft. Erecting my own signs, means I'd be putting them on his land/or the highway and he'd be free to move them as the signs were not owned by the highways department.
> I don't know what can be done.
Learn to read a map like we did in the good old days?
In reply to Bulls Crack:
I was recently challenged by a farmer-landowner while walking along an ORPA, very much a 'gerroff my effin land!' type of challenge. The (shouted and obscenity-riddled) explanation I received was that there was no RoW (as it had long expired due to lack of use) and that the OS map was wrong as it showed something that had ceased to exist decades ago.
So I paid a visit to the CC's RoW Dept and checked the Definitive Map. Nothing shown on the map, so the RoW Officer sent me to the Highways Department. Once there, a check of the List of Streets showed that the ORPA was in fact an UUCR, an UNSEALED, UNCLASSIFIED COUNTY ROAD which apparently is the new term for an UCR.
'Aha' I thought, 'the farmer was wrong', but then it was explained to me that virtually all the ORPAs marked on OS maps are probably UUCRs. As for rights of access along them, I was told that there is 'probably' a public right of access on foot along an UUCR, but if this was ever challenged it would need to be clarified in court. In addition, its status as a 'highway' is no indication that it carries vehicular rights, nor rights to ride either a horse or bike along it. Again, a judge would need to rule on this.
Any restriction on access along an UUCR imposed by a landowner would need to be legally challenged in court and the 'burden of proof' would be on the user/ plaintiff to find evidence to prove that they had a historical right to walk on it/ ride a horse or bike along it/ drive a vehicle along it, or whatever. Legal guidance given to all Highways Departments in England and Wales means that they must remain impartial throughout and simply state to the court that an UUCR is a highway maintainable at public expense but with unproven legal right of public access.
Legal action against a landowner would need to be made (and funded) by an individual and if unsuccessful due the judge being unconvinced by the evidence presented, then the judge would find for the defendant (the landowner) and award all the landowner's legal costs etc against the plaintiff.
As was explained to me, if an UUCR crossed land belonging to 5 landowners and they all decided to deny access, then legal action would need to be taken against all of them in order to resolve the matter. The cost implications of failure in such a situation would probably result in no legal action being instigated in the first place.
Considering the miles and miles of ORPAs/ UUCRs marked on OS maps, then the fact that there's no legally *guaranteed* public right of way along them, not even on foot, is very concerning indeed, especially as the legal status of each one would need to be decided by a court on an entirely individual basis.
> UCR's are an oddity but they're not BOATs.... or necessarily ORPA's
I was recently challenged by a farmer-landowner while walking along an ORPA, very much a 'gerroff my effin land!' type of challenge. The (shouted and obscenity-riddled) explanation I received was that there was no RoW (as it had long expired due to lack of use) and that the OS map was wrong as it showed something that had ceased to exist decades ago.
So I paid a visit to the CC's RoW Dept and checked the Definitive Map. Nothing shown on the map, so the RoW Officer sent me to the Highways Department. Once there, a check of the List of Streets showed that the ORPA was in fact an UUCR, an UNSEALED, UNCLASSIFIED COUNTY ROAD which apparently is the new term for an UCR.
'Aha' I thought, 'the farmer was wrong', but then it was explained to me that virtually all the ORPAs marked on OS maps are probably UUCRs. As for rights of access along them, I was told that there is 'probably' a public right of access on foot along an UUCR, but if this was ever challenged it would need to be clarified in court. In addition, its status as a 'highway' is no indication that it carries vehicular rights, nor rights to ride either a horse or bike along it. Again, a judge would need to rule on this.
Any restriction on access along an UUCR imposed by a landowner would need to be legally challenged in court and the 'burden of proof' would be on the user/ plaintiff to find evidence to prove that they had a historical right to walk on it/ ride a horse or bike along it/ drive a vehicle along it, or whatever. Legal guidance given to all Highways Departments in England and Wales means that they must remain impartial throughout and simply state to the court that an UUCR is a highway maintainable at public expense but with unproven legal right of public access.
Legal action against a landowner would need to be made (and funded) by an individual and if unsuccessful due the judge being unconvinced by the evidence presented, then the judge would find for the defendant (the landowner) and award all the landowner's legal costs etc against the plaintiff.
As was explained to me, if an UUCR crossed land belonging to 5 landowners and they all decided to deny access, then legal action would need to be taken against all of them in order to resolve the matter. The cost implications of failure in such a situation would probably result in no legal action being instigated in the first place.
Considering the miles and miles of ORPAs/ UUCRs marked on OS maps, then the fact that there's no legally *guaranteed* public right of way along them, not even on foot, is very concerning indeed, especially as the legal status of each one would need to be decided by a court on an entirely individual basis.
Post edited at 15:09
1
In reply to Dave Williams:
You're absolutely right that most ORPAs on OS maps are UCRs, and there is no guaranteed access on MTB or horse along them, but wrong on some other things there.
A UCR on the council's List Of Streets (the rough equivalent of the definitive map but for roads not paths) is definitely a public highway of some description with, at the absolute minimum, a public right of access on foot.
So basically they are theoretically protected in law to the same extent as rural public footpaths. The main problem in practice is that it is up to a council's highway department rather than the PROW department to maintain them and deal with obstructions, and they are very likely in the current financial climate to be prioritising roads and urban footways/cut throughs/gennels over rural UCRs.
You're absolutely right that most ORPAs on OS maps are UCRs, and there is no guaranteed access on MTB or horse along them, but wrong on some other things there.
A UCR on the council's List Of Streets (the rough equivalent of the definitive map but for roads not paths) is definitely a public highway of some description with, at the absolute minimum, a public right of access on foot.
So basically they are theoretically protected in law to the same extent as rural public footpaths. The main problem in practice is that it is up to a council's highway department rather than the PROW department to maintain them and deal with obstructions, and they are very likely in the current financial climate to be prioritising roads and urban footways/cut throughs/gennels over rural UCRs.
In reply to Bulls Crack:
Thanks for the Link.
UCRs may be an oddity but our Local Authority NYCC still use the term. There is no money in their budget and I was clearly told by their chief highways manager that they are at the bottom of their priority list with absolutely no obligation to sign, maintain or do anything else to them.
ORPA is a term used by the OS and has no legal meaning.
BOAT I was told by one of our full time park ranger is no longer used - However, :-
The real issue I guess is that footpaths, bridleways, restricted byeways generally get looked after as do our tarmaced classified roads. But the inbetween ones I've mentioned are just in limbo.
Thanks for the Link.
UCRs may be an oddity but our Local Authority NYCC still use the term. There is no money in their budget and I was clearly told by their chief highways manager that they are at the bottom of their priority list with absolutely no obligation to sign, maintain or do anything else to them.
ORPA is a term used by the OS and has no legal meaning.
BOAT I was told by one of our full time park ranger is no longer used - However, :-
The real issue I guess is that footpaths, bridleways, restricted byeways generally get looked after as do our tarmaced classified roads. But the inbetween ones I've mentioned are just in limbo.
In reply to An Exiled Northerner:
I contacted my MP, Robert Goodwill about this matter. His offices came up with this - "A Section 56 order"
This link - the ramblers organisation has a good explanation of what it is.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUK...
Happy xmas!
I contacted my MP, Robert Goodwill about this matter. His offices came up with this - "A Section 56 order"
This link - the ramblers organisation has a good explanation of what it is.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUK...
Happy xmas!
Post edited at 07:42
In reply to Dave Perry:
You have just helped me figure out some stuff about a bridge on our land and with whom the maintenance responsibility lies. Thank you!
> ... Section 56 order ...
You have just helped me figure out some stuff about a bridge on our land and with whom the maintenance responsibility lies. Thank you!
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...