Peak Horsepower – Written evidence

Summary

This evidence from Peak Horsepower, a bridleways group affiliated to the British Horse Society, relates to the use of land and rights of way section of the Draft Bill. Our evidence shows how an addition to the Bill to restrict motorised vehicle use of unsealed rights of way will achieve two of the key objectives of the Bill:

•              Making life easier for civil society and

•              Reducing bureaucratic requirements on public bodies.

Currently, the use of unsealed rights of way (often also known as green lanes) by motorised vehicles is causing severe damage to surfaces making them dangerous for horses and also for cyclists and walkers. There are further dangers when horse riders meet motorised vehicles on often narrow lanes where visibility is poor. We present evidence relating to these dangers in the Peak District National Park and how important these routes are for horse riders. We also give links to YouTube videos made by off-road vehicle users which illustrate just how the damage is caused and dangers created.

There is considerable public support for restricting the use of motorised vehicles on unsurfaced roads which the Peak District National Park Authority has recognised and is considering restricting traffic use on some routes. However, the legislation allowing Highway and National Park Authorities to restrict the use of motorised vehicles is cumbersome, time consuming and expensive. Each route has to be considered one at a time and, for the Peak District National Park alone, we estimate it will take between 15 and 210 years for traffic restriction orders to be considered on all of the routes with current levels of expenditure.  We also estimate that it could take 80 years in one Derbyshire District alone before the legal status of many lanes is determined based on current rates of progress. We describe the processes involved and how impractical and burdensome for participants they are.

By including in the Deregulation Bill the additions being put forward by the Peak District Green Lanes Alliance, the bureaucratic requirements on Highway and other authorities would be hugely reduced. Furthermore, because there is a lot of illegal use of Restricted Byways and bridleways by off-road vehicles and enforcement is made difficult because the status of many lanes is unclear, simplifying the classification as proposed would also make policing much easier because it is the surface, not an interpretation of historical use that will determine legality.

Proposed addition to Deregulation Bill

Peak Horsepower supports the following proposals:

•              Unsealed Unclassified County Roads (UUCRs) not on the definitive map and statement to be added as Restricted Byways to the definitive map and statement on the date of commencement.

•              Unsealed Byways Open to all Traffic (BOATs) to be re-graded as Restricted Byways on the definitive map and statement on the date of commencement.

Provision for access for property owners’ and emergency services’ vehicles should be included.

An additional benefit of such changes to legislation would be costs savings for Highway Authorities who have a legal obligation to repair damage caused by vehicles on unsurfaced roads. These costs run into hundreds of thousands of pounds a year in the Peak District alone.  For example, Derbyshire County Council (just one of seven separate highway authorities within the National Park) is spending £375,000 repairing damage to green lanes in the current year financial year and this expenditure is only scratching the surface of the problem. Comparable levels of expenditure on repairing off-roader damage are probably either already being incurred or are needed within the other six highway authority areas.

Introduction

Peak Horsepower, a bridleways group affiliated to the British Horse Society, was formed in 2010 to campaign for safe and enjoyable off-road riding in the Peak District National Park. The impetus for the formation of the group was the realisation that the interests of horse riders are poorly represented and not well understood by the Peak District National Park Authority (PDNPA) or the seven highway authorities within the national park. Peak Horsepower now has over 200 members (www.peakhorsepower.co.uk ) Our priorities are:

•              Seeking improvements to bridleways and by-ways to make them safe and ensure they are accessible to horse riders and free from obstructions.

•              Campaigning to restrict the illegal, dangerous and damaging use of off-road routes by 4x4 vehicles and trail bikes.

•              Developing long circular rides and linking existing routes.

Peak Horsepower works with other bridleway groups in the area and within forums such as the Peak District Green Lanes Alliance. Two of our members are also on the Local Access Forum.  Peak Horsepower also actively monitors the bridleway and by-way network in the Peak Park, informing the authorities where problems exist.

The problems caused by vehicle use of unsealed lanes

There are 4 types of rights of way: footpaths, bridleways, Restricted By-ways and Byways Open to All Traffic (BOATs).  Horse riders cannot use footpaths but can use the other rights of way. Footpaths make up almost 89% of the 5,176Km of rights of way in Derbyshire. Nationally, around 22% of rights of way have access for horse riders. In Derbyshire it is only 11% (569Km) and the network is very fragmented.1  Most horse riders operate within a five to ten mile radius of their base and need safe access to those rights of way which are close by.

1 http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/RoWIP%20Sections%201%262%20-%20Setting%20the%20Scene%20for%20Derbyshire_tcm44-21463.pdf

In addition, there are around 234Km of unsealed, unclassified roads (UCRs) also known as ‘green lanes’ in Derbyshire.  These are included on the County Council’s ‘list of streets’ but access rights are unknown. There have been many applications from users of off-road vehicles for these to be designated as BOATs and those claimed as BOATS are already being used by off-road vehicles.2  These green lanes have been historically very important for riders as they provide additional safe off-road riding and often link bridleways and Restricted Byways.

A combination of damage to surfaces and fears about encounters with off-road motor vehicles is driving many horse riders off the unsealed green lanes and BOATs of the Peak District. Some riders will dare to venture out onto their local unsealed lanes, but only when they feel confident that the chances of meeting 4x4s or trail bikes is low. Below we detail the nature of the problems.

Damage to surfaces

Inevitably, unsealed surfaces become damaged by motorised vehicles and this damage can make them unrideable. The degree of damage is related to the extent of use, the nature of the surface and the terrain. In the Peak District National Park (PDNP), the network of green lanes is very vulnerable to damage either because of the formation of deep and dangerous ruts in soft peaty surfaces or because the surface covering bed rock is thin and easily destroyed. Because of the hilly nature of the Peaks, once a surface has been broken up, the vehicle damage is then exacerbated by water erosion and the formation of deep gullies.

Peak Horsepower members have witnessed convoys of up to 18 4x4 vehicles on fragile green lanes and we regularly see powerful trail bikes gouging surfaces through excessive revving and wheel spin.

As the photographs included in this evidence show, once bed rock is exposed the surface is then composed of boulders and loose rocks often with big steps developing (Figures 1-6). A surface like this is dangerous for horses, which may trip and stumble, or even fall. If the horse falls, the rider may also be injured.  These routes also become difficult for cyclists and walkers to negotiate. When routes run over peat, tyres make deep holes and boggy ruts which become filled with water. Vehicles try to avoid these ruts so progressively wider areas of erosion form. The deep, hard ruts which remain in summer are equally impossible for a horse to negotiate safely as they are a serious trip hazard (Figures 7-8). Other surfaces, particularly on steep hills, degrade into sheer slippery rock which is also impassable on horseback.

Videos made by off-road vehicle users give the most graphic illustration of how damage is caused and dangers created. Peak Horsepower believes these are essential viewing to understand the problem and the links are in the footnotes to off-road use of several green

2 http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/RoWIP%20Sections%201%262%20-%20Setting%20the%20Scene%20for%20Derbyshire_tcm44-21463.pdf

lanes in the Peak District as follows: the Roych (part of the Pennine Bridleway)3; Chapel Gate4; Long Causeway5; Hollinsclough6; and Pindale7 . Many, many others are on the web.

Fig 1: Hurstclough Lane, Bamford                                                                Fig 2: Long Causeway, Outseats.

Fig 3: Jumble Lane, Sheffield.                                                             Fig 4: Washgate, Staffordshire.

Fig5: Swan Rake, Hollinsclough                                                               Figure 6: Brushfield

3 Roych Clough: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwR7Phrv1Ms; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbH-Puqk8Gc; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbsxvOiQUDw

4 Chapel Gate:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDTz3vpr90M; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7V5tl3yviQ

5 Long Causeway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJPahJ4xERQ  

6 Hollinsclough: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O64gNvlHyZQ; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQk-r3RoKPE

7 Pindale: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQk-r3RoKPE

Figure 7: Moscar Cross, Sheffield                                              Figure 8: Minninglow Lane.

Dangerous encounters

Narrow tracks with little or no space for escape when you meet a 4x4 or the sound of trail bikes approaching at speed around a blind bend herald the potential for an accident for horse and rider (see Figs 9 and 10). Because of the potential for such dangers, Peak Horsepower commissioned Ray Hipkin8 to conduct safety surveys of a sample of six lanes in the PDNP. He was asked to comment on risk levels for horse riders, off-road vehicles, off-road cycles, pedestrians and carriage drivers arising from the use of the sample green lanes by motor vehicles. Mr Hipkin is the Senior Health and Safety Advisor for British Eventing, Safety Advisor for British Show Jumping, and a Member of the Expert Witness Register and the Occupational Safety and Health Consultants Register. One of his reports is annexed to this evidence.  His general conclusions, which are part of all 6 of the surveys, include (at points 11-13):

“11. A horse has a natural instinct to flee from danger it perceives. The fact there is a rider sitting on the horses back is not always sufficient comfort if a horse hears or sees something which it believes will harm it. It identifies the need to flee from by using three main censes; what it sees, what is smells and what it hears. A rider can try to give comfort to the horse, but inevitably, if the horse thinks it is in danger it will want to flee. Hearing noise is an alert which the horse can then evaluate by seeing what is coming. This is helped by the rider being able to move out of the path of the vehicle to a distance where it has sufficient space. Noise that is ricocheting off of trees and banks together with a vehicle which cannot be seen will cause that fear. If a horse decides to flee, the rider is largely helpless to prevent it. You will know this from watching racing on television. A jockey can ask a horse to do something, but if it’s unwilling or decides to do something else, the horse will win.

12. Where the lane is enclosed by high banks or heavy tree presence, the noise volume is increased and becomes an issue before the vehicle is in sight. This is particularly so when considering motor bikes. I witness three very near miss incidents where motor bikes were driving at excess of 30mph with their heads down on bends where pedestrians and horses were oncoming to them. They failed to take any avoiding action and it was the skill of the horse riders that prevented them from falling off.   The pedestrians [myself included], one with a pushchair, just had to climb a bank out of the way.

8 See http://www.rayhipkin.co.uk/ for details of his expertise.

13. Anecdotal evidence and my observations led me to conclude that the lanes I visited are becoming too dangerous for horses and pedestrians because of the lack of care from other users. I am informed by Peak Horsepower that around 400 horses are based in and around the 6 lanes I surveyed. Given the hazards caused by vehicles when using these lanes, many horses are being exercised on tarmac road networks which introduce risks of a different kind. ”

Fig 9: Trail bikes at blind bends.               Fig 10: Land owners may fence tracks used by vehicles to prevent them trespassing and damaging their land.Horse riders are then trapped.

Environmental damage

Horse riders, like cyclists and walkers, enjoy using green lanes because they allow us to experience the countryside and nature in peace.  Many of the Peak District green lanes are ancient packhorse routes of historical and environmental importance that were never designed for the type of use they are experiencing now. The damage done by off-road vehicles physically damages the special and sensitive environments of the PDNP but also spoils everyone else’s enjoyment of it.

Vehicles not only damage surfaces, they also damage traditional dry stone walls and verges which are important features in the Peak District landscape and provide shelter for farm and valuable habitat for flora and wild animals. When vehicles become stuck on green lanes, stones are often removed from walls to help the traction of vehicles.  Once the cope stones are removed, rain can penetrate walls and they collapse. Livestock can then escape through the resulting gaps and farmers often replace the walls with wire fencing changing the landscape (e.g. Cherpit Lane).  The foundations of walls can also be undermined by vehicles eroding the track as has happened, for example, on the Roych on the Pennine Bridleway.

Long Causeway is just one of the many ancient unsurfaced ways in the Peak District being seriously damaged by off-road use.  £235,000 is being spent on repairs to it in 2012/13.9  This is the second round of highway authority repairs to the causeway. The route passes through a SSSI and Special Area of Conservation. As the following quotes from the PDNPA’s 2012 Management Plan for Long Causeway shows, the damage caused to routes actually adds to

9 http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/2013-01-29%20Prudential%20Code%2C%20Cap%20Prog%2C%20Treasury%20Mgt_tcm44-218993.pdf

off-road vehicle users’ enjoyment of the route at the financial expense and practical detriment of all other users:

“The highway surface on the inclined section leading up to Stanage Edge has been severely damaged, leaving deeply rutted channels, exposed boulders and abrupt rock steps. The current condition is so bad that passage in even 4WD vehicles is extremely difficult and appears to be possible only because of impromptu repairs such as stone ramps built up at the most uneven points. The difficulty is likely to present an incentive to some 4WD drivers.” 10

Public support for change

In 2004, ICM conducted an opinion poll for the Ramblers’ Association which showed that 87% of people think that recreational off-roading should be banned in national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty to preserve the peace and tranquillity of the countryside. 11  Almost 80%  said that 4x4s and trail bikes using rights of way in the countryside meant increased danger for walkers, cyclists and horse riders and that these vehicles were damaging the environment by introducing noise and pollution and damaging habitats. 69% said that meeting vehicles would spoil their enjoyment of a country walk.

Peak Horsepower do not believe that public attitudes towards off-roading will have changed since 2004 and that conflicts between off-road vehicle users and others are increasing.  As well as individual encounters and coping with the damaged eroded surfaces, it is clear from complaints to the PDNPA and from the evidence presented to public inquiries into contested BOAT claims that whole communities in the Peak District are being intimidated by off-road vehicle users, for example at Great Longstone 12, Hollinsclough13, Eyam, Pilsley, and Stoney Middleton14.   Public inquiries into contested BOAT claims in the Peak District are revealing local communities feeling besieged by dangerous driving and environmental damage by off-road vehicles.

The need to address the problem was finally recognised by the PDNPA in 2012 and it has said that it will now consider using ‘Traffic Regulation Orders’ on routes that have been or may be damaged by off-road vehicles.  Despite these good intentions, the current regulatory framework makes addressing the problem expensive and time consuming as we describe below. During the time it will need for the National Park Authority to protect all

10 PDNPA (2012) Long Causeway route summary. http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/272983/RS1209-Long-Causeway.pdf

11 Public opposed to trail bikes and 4x4s on 'green lanes'. Western Mail (Cardiff) March 23, 2004. http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Public+opposed+to+trail+bikes+and+4x4s+on+'greenlanes'.-a0114507499

12 See: Park Life, October 2022. http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/139466/Parklife-Oct2011.pdf

13 Peak District National Park Authority, March 2012 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/229751/vehicles-news-march12.pdf

14 Written and oral evidence to Planning Inspectorate inquiries FPS/U1050/7/58, FPS/U1050/7/66 and FPS/U1050/7/63

15 Peak District National Park Authority Strategy for the management of recreational motorised vehicles in their use of unsealed highways and off-road. February 2012. http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/227739/vehicle-strategy-Feb-2012.pdf

the lanes being damaged (probably decades), further damage will be done and horse riders, walkers and cyclists deterred from using the green lanes of the Peak District.

The regulatory framework

The PDNPA say there are around 300 different green lanes in the Peak Park which might have a right of way for motor vehicles.16  Under existing law, if motor vehicle rights have been claimed, each of these routes, whatever its length,  has to be considered by the relevant highway authority on an individual, case-by-case basis to establish whether or not the vehicle rights asserted do in fact exist.  

Until recently, Highways regulations said that if hundreds of years ago, a horse-drawn-cart could legally use a green lane, motor bikes and 4 wheel drive vehicles can legally use it today. However, the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, 2006 (NERC) stopped, with certain exceptions, all new ‘horse-and-cart’ based claims to upgrade public footpaths, bridleways and restricted byways to BOATS. Despite this change to the law, highway authorities still have to process and decide the validity of all outstanding BOAT claims on footpaths, bridleways and restricted byways if they were submitted before 20 January 2005.

A further complication is that unclassified county roads (UCRs) are not included in the NERC Act and remain subject to ‘horse-and-cart’ applications for BOAT status from off-road vehicle users keen to have UCRs upgraded legally for vehicle use. These applications are slowly being processed by the highway authorities and a high proportion of applications are succeeding. Meanwhile, many off-roaders drive on UCRs anyway, knowing that they are unlikely to be prosecuted until the precise rights of way status of any particular UCR has been established, which can take many years.

Restricting vehicle use

From 2007, the NERC Act gave National Park authorities the same power which highway authorities have had for some time: to be able to introduce traffic regulation orders (TROs) on BOATs and UCRs to ban or limit use of recreational 4x4s and motor bikes.  Department for Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (Defra) 2007 Guidance on the power of National Park Authorities to make TROs makes it clear that they can use TROs following proven damage to the environment.17   They can also use TROs to prevent danger, or the likelihood of danger, to non-vehicle users, and to preserve or improve the amenities of the area through which a lane passes.

However, the process of establishing a TRO is costly and time consuming. Since 2007, there has only been one permanent TRO established on a route in the PDNP (at the Roych) and an experimental TRO on Chapel Gate that was successfully challenged in the High Court on a technicality.  For a TRO to be established, the responsible Authority has to undertake a

16 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/looking-after/vehicles/green-lanes

17 DEFRA (2007) Public Rights of Way. Guidance for National Park Authorities making Traffic Regulation Orders under section 22BB Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. http://archive.defra.gov.uk/rural/documents/countryside/crow/npguid-tro.pdf

survey and prepare a report, consult with statutory consultees and then the public. It must also consider and respond individually to every objection received prior to making a decision to put a TRO in place. Responses can and do number in the thousands.

A case study of the history of the Chapel Gate TRO is given in the box below illustrating how expensive and time consuming the process has been for a route which indisputably requires protection. 

For 2013/14, the PDNPA has an Action Plan for 36 of the green lanes (up from 24 in 2007) that are among the worst affected by off-road use. 18  This is 12% of the total number of green lanes in the Peak District which PDNPA thinks could be proven to have motor vehicle rights based on the ‘horse-and-cart’ test. Many others are being damaged by off-road vehicles and are likely to be added to the Action Plan in the future. Only one permanent

TRO has been put in place in the Peak District – on The Roych in July 2013,19  some 6 years after the NERC Act came into force.  If each TRO takes 6 years, even for the remaining 35 green lanes in the action plan, and assuming that the solution needed to protect each lane were a TRO, it would take 210 years to restrict vehicle use and the damage it causes!!  On an a more optimistic assessment of progress at 2-3 TROs a year, a rate which takes into account the new resources committed by the PDNPA in the form of a full-time post to work on the TRO programme, of 2-3 TROs/year it will still take 10-15 years for those lanes currently on the Action Plan and 88 years for the other green lanes in the Peak Park. During this time, further damage and exclusion of other users will take place.  However, the full-time post is temporary and for two years only and there is no guarantee that PDNPA will be able to afford to continue it.

19 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news/current-news/recreational-vehicles-are-banned-from-a-peak-district-green-lane

20 Pictures not published here.

21 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/227862/MP0912-Chapel-Gate.pdf

Establishing the status of green lanes

If a green lane is classified as a bridleway or Restricted Byway, vehicles cannot use it and this is another way of restricting

22 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/318089/AP1303-Chapel-Gate.pdf

23 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news/news-archive/plans-to-protect-unsurfaced-rural-routes-from-damage

24 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news/news-archive/views-invited-on-proposed-green-lane-restrictions

25 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news/current-news/voluntary-one-way-system-to-help-drivers-stay-on-track

26 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/90301/lafbg100918-item7.pdf and http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/318089/AP1303-Chapel-Gate.pdf

27 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news/current-news/trial-exclusion-of-off-road-vehicles-on-country-track

28 http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/(4%206)%20Management%20of%20Green%20Lanes_tcm44-209719.pdf

29 http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/news/current-news/disappointment-at-chapel-gate-court-ruling

vehicle access. However, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs insists that the rights of way on each UCR must be established on a case-by-case basis. 30

The process of clarifying the rights of way status on each and every UCR will take many, many years.  For example, 144 applications for BOATs have been

lodged with the Derbyshire Dales District Council part of the Peak District since 2003. A decision (for or against) had only been made on 11 (10%) by the end of August 2013. 31  Off-road vehicles will use the lack of designation as an opportunity to use these routes and at the current rate of progress it will take around another 80 years to designate these routes in one Derbyshire District alone.

Often, even when the status of a green lane claimed as a BOAT has been determined by the highway authority, whether as BOAT, bridleway, public footpath or Restricted Byway, there will be objections leading to a Public Inquiry which takes further time and financial resources.

Economic costs

We cannot fully determine the costs of continuing to allow vehicles to have access to green lanes in the PDNP because budgets and reporting do not allow easy quantification. However, the costs must be in the hundreds of thousands annually because:

•              In 2012, the PDNPA recognised the problems that off-road vehicle use was causing and committed £100,000 of additional resources over 2 years including the appointment of a new rights of way officer.32  It is incurring significant legal fees and its Ranger service and other staff in the PDNPA rights of way team are spending increasing amounts of time working on the off-roading issue

•              DCC has allocated £375K to maintain unsurfaced lanes used by vehicles in the current financial year – just one of the seven highway authorities in the National Park33

•              Each year police resources are expended in preventing and investigating illegal use of lanes by off-road vehicles.

•              The highway authority bears the cost investigating and processing every BOAT inquiry made to it.

•              The Planning Inspectorate incurs the cost of public inquiries into BOAT claims where the determination of the highway authority is challenged.

The legislative change required

Rather than assessing routes on a case-by-case basis which has created the expensive

30 DEFRA. Rights of Way Circular (1/09) Guidance for Local Authorities. October 2009. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69304/pb13553-rowcircular1-09-091103.pdf

31 Register of applications to Derbyshire Dales District Council. Reviewed on 25th August 2013. http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/leisure/countryside/access/rights_of_way/register_of_application/register.asp?Select_a_District=Derbyshire+Dales+District&subDistrict=Search+by+district

32 Peak District Action Plan to prevent damage, BBC News, March 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-17510899

33 http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/2013-01-29%20Prudential%20Code%2C%20Cap%20Prog%2C%20Treasury%20Mgt_tcm44-218993.pdf

bureaucratic nightmare and allowed off-road vehicles to continue damaging the green lanes of the Peak District, and intimidate local communities, simply changing the classification of unsealed (unsurfaced) routes as Byways will solve the problem. There is already a statutory precedent for such a change, namely the reclassification of all Roads Used as Public Paths (RUPPs) as either footpaths or bridleways under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Specifically, Peak Horsepower supports the call for:

•              Unsealed Unclassified County Roads (UUCRs) not on the definitive map and statement to be added as Restricted Byways to the definitive map and statement on the date of commencement.

•              Unsealed Byways Open to all Traffic (BOATs) to be re-graded as Restricted Byways on the definitive map and statement on the date of commencement.

Provision for access for property owners’ and emergency services’ vehicles should be included

These changes would also make life easier for civil society because they would be able to enjoy the environment more safely and not have to engage in a decades long process of consultations and public inquiries on TRO and BOAT applications.

Our knowledge specifically relates to the Peak District but we know these problems are not restricted to this area. The simplest solution is to make these changes applicable to the whole country but one compromise might be to have this reclassification in only National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and on National Trails.

12 September 2013

Annex

Ray Hipkin CMIOSH OSHCR MBIAC MEWI

Health and Safety Practitioner

[Member of the Expert Witness Register and the Occupational Safety and Health Consultants Register]

Health and Safety Survey

This survey was commissioned by Peak Horsepower Bridleway Group to comment on possible conflict and risk levels to horse riders, off road vehicles, off road cycles, pedestrians and carriage drivers arising from the use of these lanes by motor vehicles.

Declarations

The conclusions and opinions stated in this report are solely those of the author. They were formed by observations and discussions with local people who are affected by the present arrangements, and those using the lanes for vehicle recreation purposes that I met and spoke to. Their views were given freely during individual discussions having been approached on a personal cold basis.

I have also had sight of emails between some of the parties, including Derbyshire County Council [DCC] where various opinions have been given based on the status of the lanes and their uses for the future.

I visited six lanes in all and will comment on each lane separately, although some common elements are relevant to all lanes reviewed and therefore I include these common elements at the start of all six reports.

About the Author

I am a Chartered Safety Practitioner with in excess of 25 years’ experience in advising and managing the risks involved in countryside management. I am registered as an expert witness and regularly give assistance to courts and tribunals on risk issues to the health, safety and welfare of people/vehicle/ equine interface. I also work as a facilitator for resolving interface issues and regularly assist planning enquiries on such matters.

I have worked with a number of different organisations across the spectrum and often have apposing interests and priorities.

One such organisation was the Trials Riders Fellowship, who are engaged in support activities at equestrian events. Clear guidance and operational rules were drafted and agreed so as to remove the risk of injury to all parties. It became clear to both the sporting National Bodies and the TRF that the use of motorbikes near horses requires careful management in order to prevent injury to either groups or the public. A discussion forum was formed and a Code of Conduct was introduced. I was the specialist safety and health advisor involved in those discussions.

I am subject to the legal codes of conduct placed on experts when providing evidence and opinions.

I am subject to the Code of Conduct for Practitioners who are listed on the Health and Safety Executive Register of Approved Practitioners.

I am retained as an advisor to British Showjumping, British Eventing and British Dressage as an advisor to event organisers and event managers to ensure they have effective advice when managing equine, public and vehicle interface at their events. I have managed events at international world class levels with in excess of 35,000 public, 9000 vehicles and 350 equine attendees. I am well versed in ensuring a correct balance is obtained.

Common Elements

Before I comment on the lane listed below, I think it worth reminding ourselves of some common factors which must be taken into account whether the broad use of these lanes introduces unnecessary risk for walkers, horses and riders, cyclists, motorcyclists and other vehicle drivers.

1.              I discussed the use of the lanes with local people, some of whom have a long history of use. Many of them say they will not now use the facilities they have grown up with because they have become “Dangerous and have been Hijacked” [this was a common local quote]. This is very sad and concerning. One local business person put it very clearly; “The location is now becoming an extension of the Urban environment which is extremely detrimental to the local environment and the lanes have become play grounds for inconsiderate drivers and motorcyclists”. They also report a reduction in the numbers of persons arriving for walking holidays.

2.              Local voluntary codes of use, where they have been introduced in other parts of the country, appear to be failing because the risk levels to all users and environmental impact cannot be effectively policed or managed. Some attempts have been made by local police service regarding road traffic legislation, but the success of that policing is very limited simply by the level of resource available.

3.              The same results can be said when considering limiting the effects on long term sustainability of the lanes or offer any serious deterrence to the inconsiderate user who is not concerned for the welfare of the environment or those using the facility.

4.              It is recognised by the Health and Safety Executive when commenting on a Defra guidance “Making the best of Byways” that voluntary codes of conduct do not work. They fail because the rules are not policed by those who have effective control of the lanes, and there seems to be scant regard for other users by some of the persons who have different priorities. These priorities often are unsustainable by the ecology or terrain they operate in. The HSE conclude that vehicle exclusion is necessary rather than just desirable. All six lanes reflect this view in many instances, some more than others.

5.              Although those motorcyclists I spoke to were members of TRF, and were very aware of the importance for speed control and responsible riding, TRF members only account for a small percentage of motorcycles used in off road pursuits. It is clear from what I saw and anecdotal evidence from horse riders walkers and TRF members, that the TRF Voluntary Code which they apply is not honoured by non-members or off road vehicle drivers. I understand that TRF have tried to educate other motorcycle riders but have failed.

6.              During my visits I encountered some extremely good considerate practice by off road motorbike users and off road 4x4 users. Sadly they were the minority. Most of the vehicle operators were driving at speeds which would cause risks to horse riders and walkers. They fail to give any consideration to other users other than themselves. The sad fact is, they seem only bent on the challenge of the terrain available not the enjoyment of the location they are in. This is borne out by the condition of many verges which are worn away, and the roots of trees exposed. Although I am not an ecologist I am sufficiently knowledgeable to predict that it is only be matter of time before this gives distress to the trees and tree loss in inevitable.

7.              By shear definition, this amenity cannot provide a suitable facility for what each group wants to use the lanes for. The challenges the off road users require is completely different to that required by pedestrian, carriage and horse riders. It is impossible to provide a facility that will give all things to all people. The driver of an off road vehicle, or the rider of a motorbike is seeking the thrill and challenge which is based partly on speed and also the terrain. The rougher the terrain, the better the experience. This is totally different for a walker or horse rider.

8.              There is evidence that DCC have made repairs and attempts to maintain some of the lanes, and where this is done, the effect is both visible and welcomed. It is however a factor that the improvements need to be reviewed as they have introduced risks to users which are not intended. I will highlight them in the various individual reports.

9.              It is an irony that if the lanes were maintained to the same status to those that have been repaired, they would not be as attractive to the off road users and many of the issues would not be present.

10.              In average country lane conditions, the meeting of a horse by a motor vehicle would require a minimum additional 5 metre [8 metres in all with the width of an average vehicle] space to allow a horse to be able to retreat away from an oncoming vehicle. It would require the vehicle to move quietly as possible towards the horse. The alternative is for the vehicle to turn off its engine which would allow the horse to pass by. It also requires clear vision for both parties to be able make its preparations.

11.              A horse has a natural instinct to flee from danger it perceives. The fact there is a rider sitting on the horses back is not always sufficient comfort if a horse hears or sees something which it believes will harm it. It identifies the need to flee from by using three main censes; what it sees, what is smells and what it hears. A rider can try to give comfort to the horse, but inevitably, if the horse thinks it is in danger it will want to flee. Hearing noise is an alert which the horse can then evaluate by seeing what is coming. This is helped by the rider being able to move out of the path of the vehicle to a distance where it has sufficient space. Noise that is ricocheting off of trees and banks together with a vehicle which cannot be seen will cause that fear. If a horse decides to flee, the rider is largely helpless to prevent it. You will know this from watching racing on television. A jockey can ask a horse to do something, but if it’s unwilling or decides to do something else, the horse will win.

12.              Where the lane is enclosed by high banks or heavy tree presence, the noise volume is increased and becomes an issue before the vehicle is in sight. This is particularly so when considering motor bikes. I witness three very near miss incidents where motor bikes were driving at excess of 30mph with their heads down on bends where pedestrians and horses were oncoming to them. They failed to take any avoiding action and it was the skill of the horse riders that prevented them from falling off. The pedestrians [myself included], one with a pushchair, just had to climb a bank out of the way.

13.              Anecdotal evidence and my observations led me to conclude that the lanes I visited are becoming too dangerous for horses and pedestrians because of the lack of care from other users. I am informed by Peak Horsepower that around 400 horses are based in and around the 6 lanes I surveyed. Given the hazards caused by vehicles when using these lanes, many horses are being exercised on tarmac road networks which introduce risks of a different kind.

Location: Mill Lane, Parish of Eyam SK221763 to SK229755

Date of Visit: 20th April 2013 Accompanied by Patricia Stubbs

Return Visits 22nd April 2013 Unaccompanied

Condition of Lane

I accept entirely that the finances available involved in maintaining this route has its limits and must be a factor when allowing the use of by motor vehicles. The cost of the repairs for the damage caused to this route and to the environment which supports this route will, if the current use continues, be ineffective and the lane becoming unfit for purpose. Effective control will only be achieved by controlling the elements which cause the most damage.

This lane has recently been repaired and there is evidence that the repairs were successful. This lane is only 1 vehicles width wide for the whole of the lanes length given the local farmer is about to fence his land to stop cyclists and off road vehicles abusing his land using it as a challenge course.

Residual Risks

1. The start of my review walk was enclosed where there are no available crossing points available to vehicles or carriages without large reversing manoeuvres. Many of the reversing manoeuvres would be around corners which were blind to other oncoming vehicles. The risk of vehicle impact with other vehicles, pedestrians and horses is high. The likelihood of motorbike impact on pedestrian and horses is also high due to the lack of forward views available to the motorcyclists and the lack of escape routes for pedestrians and horses.

2. The risk to carriage drivers is very high given the lack of escape routes available in many places and the difficulties involved in reversing a horse drawn carriage.

3. Tree or bush surgery has taken place to improve vision, but the height of the stumps left leaves a high risk of serious damage to vehicles, or person’s/horses legs should they encounter them. The grass would not have to be very high for the stumps to be covered and not visible.

4. The tree/bush surgery has now exposed vehicles/pedestrians / horses to a hidden drop into a ditch which would require assistance to retrieve the situation. Again injury or damage is inevitable.

5. There is also considerable concern voiced by the locals in Eyam regarding the speed and consideration given to them by those using the lanes for off road sport. A number of near miss incidents have been reported and one parent reported being forced up a neighbour’s pathway to get out of the way of a vehicle.

Comments

I cannot see how this lane can be considered as suitable for use by motor vehicles. Access only to properties is I believe the only vehicle use that can be considered. I believe the maximum capacity for this lane beyond the built up area would be cyclists, pedestrians and horses. Carriage drivers would also find it difficult to pass if they were to meet in some places on this lane. I also believe this will encourage the locals to use the pathway to the next village rather than driving around by road.