One Show - Bridleway?

Yes, just watched it, also unsure, I do have sympathy for the land owners but I also dislike the one sided argument, i felt it was filmed to make the bridleway man look dour and miserable and it didn't give a balanced argument FOR the bridleway, and that Bruce woman obviously didn't watch the clip properly!
 
To a certain extent, I agree with the farmer. Whilst it may be the legal way to notify a land owner by just serving notice, whatever happened to common decency? If that is the way the BHS handles the creation of new bridleway routes, I think they will alienate land owners and cause far more problems than they solve.

I'm all for creating new places to ride, but surely it would be better for local BHS officers to work with local land owners to investigate how new rights of way can be created rather than just serving a land owner notice, p*ssing them off and then costing them money if they wish to appeal.

The TOLL ride scheme is a great example IMO of working collaboratively with land owners to create places to ride, and perhaps the BHS should look to try and adopt a similar way of working to create routes, rather than just enforcing the legalities.
 
I can understand the farmers frustration, the fact that he found out about the proposed bridleway through his land by a notice on his gate post, but I don't think he did himself any favours and was extremely rude. Without the work from the BHS and other bridleway groups we would not have a lot of the bridleways that we have now and in a lot of the country we do need more to avoid riding on the road. I wonder what tricks the farmer will have up his sleeve to try and prevent riders from using the bridleway should it be passed.
 
Neither side did themselves any favours at all. BHS could've said sorry, and state they will improve their communication etc. etc and the landowner could've been more civil and shaken with his fingers crossed behind his back.
 
The lack of hand shaking was SO rude! That alone really turned me away from the farmers point of view. Those who can't control their fury in situations like that...I don't know, I just don't want to acknowledge their point of view until they've calmed down.

Though I do understand why he's upset. I would not be best pleased to find a notice on my gate.
 
It needs to get BOAT s ridable and good crossing over busy roads, as a farmer and horse rider the BHS man seemed arrogant and un sympathetic and would put me off re subscribing to them, can't ride rough shod over peoples property and business
 
I thought the BHS should have contacted the land owner first of all to let them know what they were planning to do, but I still think the farmer would have acted in the way that he did. I think the farmer used the excuse of the BHS not contacting him directly in the first instance to be an obnoxious twit. Better communication from the BHS would not have gone amiss, but the farmer has done himself no favours either.
 
Didn't watch it but since when was it up to the BHS to determined new bridleways? Thought footpaths, bridleways etc were organised/overseen by county councils?
 
The BHS were extremely arrogant, it isn't hard to find a landowner but they left it to the council to do the dirty work. The farmer could have been a bit less rude but tbh it is very hard to stay polite when you have outside bodies informing you they want access across your land. There is no way the lady farmer should not have been allowed to divert the bridleway that went through their yard, why should motorbikes and horses be allowed through a working farm, it would be the farmer who would be brought to account if an accident happened. It is about time councils sorted out public access, there is no place for public access through farmyards, gardens etc but they make it incredibly hard to get a route diverted, I'm not saying shut but diverted even when it makes it better. How many times do we see on here about footpaths going through fields as opposed to around the outside. Having a footpath through the farm is one thing, a bridleway is a different kettle of fish as motorbikes are allowed to use them too, although i'm not sure why.
 
I didn't see it, but there seems to have been rather a lack of communication. I am surprised the County Council didn't write to the landowner, which is what usually happens.

As for creating new bridlepaths, for the second time today I will refer you to the Trails Trust in Mendip, who have created 80 new bridlepaths. They started by serving lots of notices on local landowners and it nearly ended in a riot, so they decided to look into a method to create new bridlepaths without alienating the landowners and do it in a spirit of co-operation not confrontation.

Motorbikes are not allowed on bridlepaths, only bicycles. It is up to the County Council to undertake the legal process, not the BHS.

As for the BHS and TROT - the BHS will not go there.
 
Landowners need to understand that if rights of way cross their land people will want to use them, even if they are not aware that such rights exist.

I think the programme was balanced and fair. The video filmed in Marlene Masters' farm was my own footage. I would have liked them to have asked Mrs Masters to clarify if she has a criminal conviction for assaulting a horse rider using the byway on her farm by pulling her from her horse.
 
Holly Hocks said:
The BHS weren't trying to determine new bridleways, they were trying to resurrect old ones.
Click to expand...

Still, the BHS has no legal right to go around and label where riders used to be allowed to ride though, it's a council issue. Not surprised landowners are getting snarky if they've just slapped with a poster on a gate.
 
I didn't watch the programme but reading the comments here this is what I think of the matter discussed. First of all I know there is a big demand for off road riding and not all horse owners/riders have access to it so what the BHS are doing about gaining more access is good. However there is a way to do this and how the BHS have on this occasion is totally off the rails. I can understand the farmers frustration and anger. If I was a land owner and this happened to me I would be thoroughly pee'd off. Also this underhand method is really not going to get many farmers/land owners on side to help with the demand of off-road hacking.
 
teapot said:
Still, the BHS has no legal right to go around and label where riders used to be allowed to ride though, it's a council issue. Not surprised landowners are getting snarky if they've just slapped with a poster on a gate.
Click to expand...

I agree with the poster on a gate issue - it's not good communication is it really? However if there was a bridleway there previously you have to ask why isn't it still there? Probably because farmers in the past blocked it up/grew crops over it and back then, nobody queried or enforced anything.
 
The law states that once a bridlepath, always a bridlepath. It doesn't disappear just because it isn't used.
If it is blocked by a fence or anything else there is a legal notice that can be served on the landowner to make him unblock it. This usually takes time, and how much depends on how vigorously the local council persue it. I am sure that the BHS representative would only have acted within the law. Maybe local riders were fed up with lack of action by the Council; it can be frustrating.

A bridlepath is a road. It doesn't belong to the landowner, they own the land underneath, just like the lane outside your gate. It is only an accident of history that the lane outside your gate is covered in tarmac and cars are able to run around on top of it and any bridlepath happens to cross over agricultural land. This is sometimes a hard concept for people to accept.

There is absolutely nothing good for a landowner to have rights of way over their land, no advantage at all, it is at best a bit of a nuisance and at worst a complete nightmare as people leave gates open or otherwise make a nuisance of themselves.
 
Last edited:
Holly Hocks said:
I agree with the poster on a gate issue - it's not good communication is it really? However if there was a bridleway there previously you have to ask why isn't it still there? Probably because farmers in the past blocked it up/grew crops over it and back then, nobody queried or enforced anything.
Click to expand...

We had a bridleway like that. It became unusable and no matter how hard we tried, no one would do anything about it. The old farmer was very good at keeping things clear, but he sadly died and another one took over who didn't care in the slightest. Last I heard YM and the others haven't used it in over a year!

Another farmer tried blocking access to a field, but I think he got a slap on the wrist after we made complaints as suddenly it was clear again.

On a different occasion (but same farmer as the first) once told me off for riding on land that I've always ridden on. Apparently, it's no longer a bridleway and I can't ride there. The sign was still up though :\

It's a tricky one indeed!!
 
We have the three shires way near us unrideable because motors have trashed then have to cross A6 on a blind bend these need BHS looking to improve them instead of trying to reinstate others and annoying farmers rather than working with them.
 
Elliesmemory1 said:
The farmer asked " Dont you have enough places to ride your horses?" Well no we dont.
Click to expand...

But that isn't his problem. It should be a consideration when buying a horse, where will I ride it? I think most farmers tolerate the public access that is already on their land and I fully understand, as a tenant farmer, their reluctance to allow more access routes on their land. Farming is a business and a footpath, bridleway does have an impact on how you can use your land.
On OS maps paths are often shown but are also misread as public paths/bridleways. It may be an 'old footpath/bridleway' but it doesn't always mean it was a 'public' one, as defined by the council.
 
Last edited:
We have some great paths near us that are old railway lines (thanks Dr Beeching!) that are not listed as bridle paths. I think there were murmurings from parish council busybodies a few years ago wanting to ban horses, but thankfully nothin happened about it. They don't cross anyone's land and are wonderful, well drained and with a great surface, I would fight to keep them.
 
jrp204 said:
But that isn't his problem. It should be a consideration when buying a horse, where will I ride it? I think most farmers tolerate the public access that is already on their land and I fully understand, as a tenant farmer, their reluctance to allow more access routes on their land. Farming is a business and a footpath, bridleway does have an impact on how you can use your land.
On OS maps paths are often shown but are also misread as public paths/bridleways. It may be an 'old footpath/bridleway' but it doesn't always mean it was a 'public' one, as defined by the council.
Click to expand...

A Right of Way is a right of way, it is nothing to do with whether it is "tolerated" or not, it is there and the public have the right to use it. The Definitive Map held by the County Council is the place to check the status of the path. The BHS are urging riders to look into the history as in 1949 many bridlepaths were recorded as footpaths and unless they are researched and added to the Definitive May they will never be re-instated after 2026. That is the reason why sometimes you look on a map and one parish will have lots and lots of bridlepaths and the next one hardly any at all. Logic would make you think that every parish would have originally had lots of bridlepaths too. It depended on how well the recording was done in 1949 when of course the idea of leisure riding was a long way in the future and horse were only used for work, and some hunting.
 
"A Right of Way is a right of way, it is nothing to do with whether it is "tolerated" or not, it is there and the public have the right to use it. The Definitive Map held by the County Council is the place to check the status of the path. "

So if you had a path through your garden, you would tolerate it but if they wanted to add another would you be keen? That is what I meant, I agree the public have a right to use it and I couldn't think of 'definitive map' so said council, but many people look at their OS and assume every path is a public one.

" in 1949 when of course the idea of leisure riding was a long way in the future and horse were only used for work, and some hunting."
Leisure is the issue, we want to pursue our leisure activities within a working/business environment where we expect the business owner to provide, free of charge safe access across land that in many cases will be taken out of production, also losing income. So, you can perhaps see why landowners are not keen.
 
jrp204 said:
But that isn't his problem. It should be a consideration when buying a horse, where will I ride it? I think most farmers tolerate the public access that is already on their land and I fully understand, as a tenant farmer, their reluctance to allow more access routes on their land. Farming is a business and a footpath, bridleway does have an impact on how you can use your land.
On OS maps paths are often shown but are also misread as public paths/bridleways. It may be an 'old footpath/bridleway' but it doesn't always mean it was a 'public' one, as defined by the council.
Click to expand...

But surely that is the farmers problem, if we should check where we should ride surely before buy a farm or land he should have checked rights of way.
 
Hairy Horror said:
But surely that is the farmers problem, if we should check where we should ride surely before buy a farm or land he should have checked rights of way.
Click to expand...

A 'right of way' is not necessarily a public right of way, the farm may have been in his family for generations with old bridleways, footpaths being used in the past for farmworkers but being out use for many many years this does not make them public footpaths.
 
I can see both points of view, we do need safer routes away from traffic to ride on but I have footpath up our drive and along two of our boundries next to thee field and paddock and the general public are not considerate of land owners at all! The litter alone just dropped on our drive over xmas and new year is awful.

In the programme there was reference to motor bikes and off roading on bridle paths, these two activities certainly cause a lot of damage, so do not help the situation.

Pity that bhs came over as so negative, they are doing such good work in supporting equine sports.
 
Last edited:
teapot said:
Still, the BHS has no legal right to go around and label where riders used to be allowed to ride though, it's a council issue. Not surprised landowners are getting snarky if they've just slapped with a poster on a gate.
Click to expand...

If it was a old closed bridleway the BHS has every right to take steps to have it opened as do I and any one esle interested the bridleway is a right if it's an ancient one getting them reopened is sometihing I am happy the BHS works to achieve this
I did not see the piece however having some experiance of bridleway work from what I have read its miles away from what i experianced the bridleways officers I knew tried to resolve issues without confrontation .
A bridleway is an old road and farmer may own the land but they don't own the bridleway and they have no right to prevent the public passing along a right of way which is an ancient right every person in this country has .
Who knows what the truth of the matter is is was the BBC and we all know you can't trust them in the journalistic field anymore
 
jrp204 said:
A 'right of way' is not necessarily a public right of way, the farm may have been in his family for generations with old bridleways, footpaths being used in the past for farmworkers but being out use for many many years this does not make them public footpaths.
Click to expand...
The route in question was not a footpath it is an old bridleway and surely once a bridleway always a bridleway. I can really understand the farmers frustration but why should it not be used as a bridleway just because he objects. To be honest we don't know the full story from either side, but if its marked out on map which it clearly is he has no leg to stand on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top