On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 6:16:05 +0100, iiiiDougiiii wrote
(in message <
[email protected]>):
>> Yes they can, when Tony decides they should and his puppets vote for
>> anything
>> he tells them to. The NERC bill passed in May (or was it April) removed the
>> right to drive on certain roads.
>
> What is wrong with:
>
> "The Act delivers our commitment to curtail the inappropriate use of
> byways by motor vehicles by putting an end to claims for motor vehicle
> access on the basis of historical use by horse-drawn vehicles. Some of
> the worst damage is happening in our national parks, which is why we
> have given National Park Authorities the power to make traffic
> regulation orders."
>
> As long as they don't ban cyclists.
Apart from that statement being based on a pack of lies and misdirection ? Up
here, the Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA) actually did a study,
and much to our surprise was vary honest and balanced - the jist was that
whilst 4x4 do cause some surface damage, it's isn't significant in most
cases, especially when taking into account the damage caused by other causes
(walkers and weather being the two main ones), and can be dealt with by
existing legislation and mangement. In other words, the LDNPA accepted that
no new legislation was needed - whilst still campaigning to have it !
And the Ramblers Association have a very well oiled lobbying machine that has
been working hard (and with a lot of success) to get laws passed to give them
access to everywhere and not have to share anything with anyone else - that's
really open minded for an organisation founded to campaign FOR legal access
rights.
And of course, as is the case with most laws designed to try and stop some
narrow definition of something, it's so full of holes and uncertainties that
it's going to be years before things have been sorted out - with us retaining
rights to use some roads that most of us haven't used much up till now
because we accept that they aren't suitable for lots of traffic, but losing
some roads that really do NOT suffer at all from our use.
And I'll finish with somthing that is probably news to most people - outside
of towns, and leaving out newly built roads, just about all the roads in the
country came into existence due to "historical use by horse-drawn vehicles".
Just to demonstrate how arbitrary things are, I'll give an example -
apologies to those who don't have a clue about where these roads are.
There are two roads known as Wrynose and Hardknott passes that link the
Ravenglass/Gosforth area to the Skelwith Bridge (Ambleside) area. These pass
over high ground, with steep gradients and tight corners.
There are two roads known as Garburn Pass and Stile End that link Town End
(Troutbeck Bridge), Kentmere, and Long Sleddale. These pass over high ground,
with steep gradients and tight corners.
In the 20s and 30s, all four of these roads were used by cars. They were of
similar character - steep gradients, tight corners, high ground, and
unsurfaced. In law, they were then, and still were until May this year,
legally of the same status.
Shortly before the way, Wrynose and Hardknott got covered in tarmac as a
means of making them easier to maintain. Garburn was next on the list but the
war got in the way. After the war there was no money and so Garburn got left
as it was. So the claim that it's ludicrous to claim vehiclular rights
because of historical use by horse and cart is itself ludicrous - since that
is exactly how the majority of our road network came into being. It's just a
case of some roads never got tarmaced !
The idiotic situation now is that Garburn may now be closed to vehicles - but
we do not know for certain until it gets tested in court ! It fits the
requirements (listed on the councils 'list of streets' and also marked as a
footpath or bridleway on the definitive map) to have vehiclular rights
removed - but it may also fit one or more of the exceptions and so retain
vehicular rights. But the way the law has been done is that there is no order
to be challenged - the only way to find out is to continue driving it, get
prosecuted (section 32, driving other than on a highway), and then argue in
court as to wheter any of the exceptions do apply !
Stile end stays open - it's a Byway Open to All Traffic (BOAT) - as does PART
of Garburn pass. Gatesgarth pass will now get more traffic as it too still
retains rights (it's a BOAT), but it's nature is such that we (responsible
4x4 drivers) accept that it isn't suitable for lots of use or at certain
times of the year.
Oh yes, and just for good measure, walkers ahve already been photographed and
reported to the police for continuing to drive part way along Walner Scar
road in order to park up before going and destroying Coniston Old Man !
In reality though, the people that the authorities really want to stop will
carry on using these roads (and also places they never should have anyway),
it's only those of us that have tried to be cooperative (and yes, we were
refused (ie actively blocked) offers to help with mainteinance of the roads).
Just another example of a vociferous minority clamouring to have something
banned because it's "not something WE think should go on", and succedding
because we have an authoritarian government that seems to enjoy telling
people what they can't do.
