MissDeMeena
Well-Known Member
I've not read the whole lot, only the opening lines.. but looks good to me???
<font color="purple"> Thank you for signing this e-petition about amendments to the Highway Code.
The new edition of the Highway Code will not forbid riding horses two abreast under any circumstances. It will contain advice in rule 53 that horse riders should "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends", but this is not a legal requirement and it does not place any compulsion on riders to ride in single file. It remains their decision whether or not they follow this advice. The distinction between legal requirements and advisory rules is made clear in the Introduction to the Code.
Similar advice is contained in rule 39 of the current edition of the Highway Code, first published in 1999, which says "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file where the road narrows or on the approach to a bend".
We have discussed the concerns of the British House Society (BHS) with them and have agreed to keep the operation of this rule under review and to provide further advice on its operation in the BHS Riding and Roadcraft Manual.
The new edition of the Highway Code will not exclude horses from all cycle tracks. Rule 54 will advise that horse riders "should not take a horse onto a cycle track". This has been changed from the equivalent rule 40 in the current (1999) edition, which says "You MUST NOT take a horse on to a footpath, pavement or cycle track". This change is in recognition of the points made by the British Horse Society (BHS) during the 2006 consultation.
However, not all paths that are used by cyclists are cycle tracks, although they may be physically similar if not identical. A "cycle track" has a specific legal meaning as set out in section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980. Cycle tracks are generally shared with pedestrians but can also be segregated paths for cyclists and pedestrians. Cycle tracks provide a right of way for cyclists with or without a right of way for pedestrians. It is therefore appropriate to advise horse riders not to use cycle tracks and it is, indeed, an offence under section 129(5) of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 to ride a horse in a cycle track in Scotland.
Where paths are intended for mixed use, including horses, then they should be designated either as bridleways, all purpose highways or byways open to all traffic rather than cycle tracks. Where a local authority wishes to create a highway for horse riders, pedestrians and cyclists the correct choice of facility would be a bridleway.
The new Highway Code should be published later this year.
Thank you again for signing this e-petition.
</font>
<font color="purple"> Thank you for signing this e-petition about amendments to the Highway Code.
The new edition of the Highway Code will not forbid riding horses two abreast under any circumstances. It will contain advice in rule 53 that horse riders should "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends", but this is not a legal requirement and it does not place any compulsion on riders to ride in single file. It remains their decision whether or not they follow this advice. The distinction between legal requirements and advisory rules is made clear in the Introduction to the Code.
Similar advice is contained in rule 39 of the current edition of the Highway Code, first published in 1999, which says "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file where the road narrows or on the approach to a bend".
We have discussed the concerns of the British House Society (BHS) with them and have agreed to keep the operation of this rule under review and to provide further advice on its operation in the BHS Riding and Roadcraft Manual.
The new edition of the Highway Code will not exclude horses from all cycle tracks. Rule 54 will advise that horse riders "should not take a horse onto a cycle track". This has been changed from the equivalent rule 40 in the current (1999) edition, which says "You MUST NOT take a horse on to a footpath, pavement or cycle track". This change is in recognition of the points made by the British Horse Society (BHS) during the 2006 consultation.
However, not all paths that are used by cyclists are cycle tracks, although they may be physically similar if not identical. A "cycle track" has a specific legal meaning as set out in section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980. Cycle tracks are generally shared with pedestrians but can also be segregated paths for cyclists and pedestrians. Cycle tracks provide a right of way for cyclists with or without a right of way for pedestrians. It is therefore appropriate to advise horse riders not to use cycle tracks and it is, indeed, an offence under section 129(5) of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 to ride a horse in a cycle track in Scotland.
Where paths are intended for mixed use, including horses, then they should be designated either as bridleways, all purpose highways or byways open to all traffic rather than cycle tracks. Where a local authority wishes to create a highway for horse riders, pedestrians and cyclists the correct choice of facility would be a bridleway.
The new Highway Code should be published later this year.
Thank you again for signing this e-petition.
</font>
