msg	Sender	lines	Subject
1	TimLARA@aol.com	20	Re: Occupation Roads
2	TimLARA@aol.com	22	Re: Sarn Helen
3	Andy Bush [andy_bush@com	203	Paul Tyler GLEAM MP
	Majordomo		About the digest

------------------------------ [ Message 1 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970527 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 07:22:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Occupation Roads

Occupation Road:
A route used by a farmer, forester, etc, for access to land for exploitation
purposes.
The border between OR and UCR is vague, as some ORs were surfaced with public
money in the fifties so that the milk tanker could get through. And some were
originally proper roads that the farm was built alongside or around, now
dropped into disuse by the public. Given a choice of a site on a road, and
one on a bridleway, to put your new farm, which would you choose?
The term is also used to imply that there are no public rights for vehicles
along them but I believe that the real significance is merely a description
of the major use or function to which the route is currently put.

Hope this helps
Cheers, tim

------------------------------

From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 07:22:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Sarn Helen

VR ? Voluntary Restraint ? You must be joking.
LARA did not even know about the problem alleged. This National Park is well
aware of our existence, but they do not consider asking for our help - which
would be offered willingly, including volunteers to put any drainage etc
right, too, as we do in other NPs.

I shall be writing to the minister about this total lack of co-operation from
some of those set up to look after our access, and therefore PLEASE can I
have copies of the relevant paperwork. And details of exactly which bits 'the
Forestry' has churned up, including the details of those responsible (ie
Forestry Enterprise or some private operator, and who and where with phone
numbers etc). 

Sorry to be insistent, but I cannot fire the gun unless I have the bullets.

Cheers, tim

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 11:49:20 -0400
From: Andy Bush <andy_bush@compuserve.com>
Subject: Paul Tyler GLEAM MP

Hi Chaps,
        Make of the following what you will - no doubt more will come.

National Rights of Way Officer: Andy Bush, 19 Wildwood Glade, Hempstead,
Gillingham, Kent. ME7 3SX. Tel/fax. 01634-260495. andy_bush@compuserve.co=
m
18th April 1997

Paul Tyler Esq. CBE
MP for North Cornwall
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Copy to Church Stiles, Launceston, Cornwall.

Dear Mr Tyler
                Please could you confirm that the following quote
attributed to you is correct. If it is correct please could you supply an=

example or more of the type of damage you describe.

On agreeing to become an honorary member of GLEAM, Paul Tyler MP writes:
"Damage to Green Lanes ...is a problem I have encountered in a number of
parts of the country in my capacity of Rural Affairs Spokesman for the
Liberal Democrats .... It can be found in every part of the country, and =
I
congratulate you on GLEAM's initiative to raise the profile of the
problem."

If you are unable to respond or supply the supporting evidence I shall ha=
ve
to publish the fact.

Moreover I expect you to be able to prove that the damage you describe is=

caused by recreational vehicles and not as the DoE white paper and GLEAM
studies have shown, by horses and agricultural vehicles.

I trust that GLEAM have shown you their study which also supported the
findings of the DoE and every other study that damage to the network is
limited to a tiny minority of the network.

I trust that GLEAM have told you that they are less than 300 members who =
in
the main have vested interests in lane closures. The last MP who supporte=
d
GLEAM was made to look very silly and uniformed in the House when no less=

than the Minister of the environment corrected his erroneous ideas. We ha=
ve
not heard from him since.

In general all of GLEAMs ideas and assertions have been rejected by the
DoT, the DoE and 90% of all county councils. I assume they told you that.=

Did they mention that 82% of all county councils do not have any problems=

with the damage you mention. According to GLEAM figures anyway.

GLEAM used the offices of Berkshire CC to carry out the study, the county=

press office distributed the results in a press release. You should get a=

copy.

According to government figures, green laning has a zero accident rate an=
d
no one can recollect a vehicle hitting any one on a green lane.

You must be unaware of the substantial protection vehicular rights give a=

lane, and the benefit that protection provides to all users of the lane.

You appear to be seeking to sacrifice public rights in favour of your
friends=92 financial interests. Can you demonstrate otherwise?

Yours sincerely,

Andy Bush =

 =

His reply.

Thank you for your recent threatening letter. When you have had the
opportunity to consider carefully the implications of what you wrote,
perhaps you would like to write to me again in a less intemperate fashion=
,
and we can discuss the issue more sensibly.

 My reply

National Rights of Way Officer: Andy Bush, 19 Wildwood Glade, Hempstead,
Gillingham, Kent. ME7 3SX. Tel/fax. 01634-260495. andy_bush@compuserve.co=
m
23rd May 1997

Paul Tyler Esq. CBE
MP for North Cornwall
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Copy to Church Stiles, Launceston, Cornwall.

Ref PT/SAS/186 - Wheel

Dear Mr Tyler
                Thank you for your letter.

It is a sad but true reflection on society today, that the only letter yo=
u
were expected, and did reply to, was the one designed by experience to
ensure a response. Nice letters do not work, as you have demonstrated.

Also it is sad but true that people like yourself will make popularist an=
d
damaging anti minority statements, without feeling any moral obligation t=
o
provide supporting facts to back them up.

I know that you cannot try to substantiate your statements about
recreational vehicles. If you make a mistake (as per Hunter see Hansard) =
it
will look very bad. And because we have access to the facts, it is most
likely we will expose that mistake. And in any event if you are successfu=
l
in supporting your claims - you will be the first.

Studies in response to your type of anti recreational vehicle claims have=

been made by the DoE and others, including GLEAM themselves. But as you n=
ow
know - but did not before I suspect - they all support the fact that dama=
ge
to green lanes is limited to a tiny minority of the network and it is
caused by agricultural vehicles and horses.

Hence your need to resort to evasive tactics. I could refer to your reply=

as bluff and bluster. GLEAM use such counter productive emotive phrases i=
n
their publications to try and discredit me. And it is frankly pathetic fo=
r
an MP to resort to unspecified unpleasant consequences in order to try an=
d
frighten off challenges. It is also a high risk strategy for yourself.

However your interpretation of my letter as threatening indicates a
sensitivity about your involvement with GLEAM. An informed reflection wou=
ld
have revealed that my letter was not threatening in the slightest. The
intention to publish, which you perceive as a threat, is in fact the
fulfilment of my obligation to you under press code of conduct.

You must be aware that you cannot accuse people wrongly, and then demand
that they touch forelocks and ever so nicely beg your indulgence. Maybe
when the Liberals were last in power, that was true. You opened the attac=
k
with demonstrably false claims. You are experiencing only the response yo=
u
engendered. You may regard it as intemperate, but if you don=92t like
intemperate climates, don=92t start political fires until you have the fa=
cts
with which to extinguish them.

Imagine how powerful would have been a less reactive response, with even
one fact in it. Perhaps now that we have your attention, you could let us=

know what lanes are damaged as you say. I frankly do not expect that you
will.

The laners carry out green lane maintenance and repairs nationally. We
restore lanes whoever caused the damage, and whether so caused by machine=

or neglect.

You may wish to reflect further on the statements in my letter about the
methods employed by GLEAM. I can provide more examples of people who
supported GLEAM, but were not told all the facts pertaining to the issue.=

Also note the personal involvement and gains GLEAM members achieve by
restricting - one way or another - public access to public rights of ways=
=2E

In any event, it is ludicrous and naive for a politician to blame traffic=

for damaging roads. It is government responsibility to support access and=

maintain the roads. Read anything about roads, except anti access
publications, and you will see what I mean.

I have supported all my statements with facts and evidence. I challenge y=
ou
to do the same.

Yours sincerely,

Andy Bush =

------------------------------

  END OF * LIST DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 3 lines 300 [forwarded 0 whitespace 88]
 Output: lines 324 [content 181  forwarded 0 (cut  0) whitespace 88]