[ First Message | | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ Message 1 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Ian Boddison" <mbcx4ib1@mail1.mcc.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 13:45:12 BST
Subject: Warks E5221
I got to visit this lane yesterday (Wednesday) from the southern end.
Unfortunately it was going dark so I did not walk the whole route.
However, there is currently a pile of prickly branches dumped in the
enterance to the lane. It was not totally obvious (in the
almost dark) quite where the lane goes but there is plenty of
definate use by some vehicles - probably farm related.
Also there is a nearby single track road (tarmacced) that is closed
under RTRA84 s14. I do not know if the two lanes are related but
they are VERY close together.
Cheers,
Bod
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 2 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Rob Smith" <rob@archenland.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:32:47 -0000
Subject: RE: local plan
I'm glad to read that Cambridge is keeping up the equal struggle.
If you don't use your own legs to power what you travel by, then you are a
second class user. Bet they even give cyclists the right to run horses off
BW.
Building on RoW is a national pass time, and can be rectified, but the HO
doesn't like coming home to a smouldering pile of bricks where his illegally
place dwelling once stood. I am looking forward to having a go at our DP
when I can find time to get sight of it, there are a couple of issues
locally I feel need to be 'stirred up'.
Rob Smith
Mine's the blue 110
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 3 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Rob Smith" <rob@archenland.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:32:48 -0000
Subject: RE: (lack of) local plan again.
Go for it gal, these people deserve all they get.
Horse exhaust is too good for them, got any friendly chicken farmers?
Rob Smith
Mine's the blue 110
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 4 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Rob Smith" <rob@archenland.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:32:56 -0000
Subject: RE: Warks E5221
Prickly branches probably put there to deter the travellers who were living
on the lane, or to deter 'visitors' to said travellers...
Rob Smith
Mine's the blue 110
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 5 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 99 19:56 GMT0
Subject: Re: HA PROW Web pages
Hey!
Im getting a bit nettled about remarks such as
<<<<s - who, as previously stated, make little or no contribution to the
debate (in Hants),>>>
when DT specifically knows that I sought out authorisation from AB hisself
to act OBO AWDC in view of the fact that the _real, proper,
name-appears-in-the-mag_Hampshire Rep neither represents the AWDc nor can
be bothered returning my phone calls.
Maybe some of the other ordinary AWDC members who MUST be on this list
could phone AB and get him to shift his minions arses.
Since I live neither in Hants or Berks I do my best to meddle in both - so
kindly gimme a little credit.
73s and 88s
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)(who went straight from a night duty at 0730
to meet Chris Marsden this am at the PRO Kew to get involved in research)
Its now 5pm and I havent yet been to bed.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 6 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Charlietrf@aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 17:14:18 EST
Subject: Re: Categories of Access letter.
The following letter appeared in Farmers Guardian (5.2.99) re. P. Dransfield's
missive I posted earlier - well, I suppose someone was going to bite!:
"Muddled view.
Mr. P. Dransfield (Letter, FG January 22) muddles the Countryside Commission's
proposals regarding the reclassification of rights of way, and the CLA
reaction to them.
Let us put the record straight. There is no proposal to make footpaths open to
horses and cyclists - they will continue to be for people on foot. Nor is
there a proposal to convert all bridleways to Byways Open to All Traffic
(BOATs).
What the commission has proposed is that 'Roads Used as Public Paths' (RUPPs)
should be reclassified as BOATs. The CLA has strongly resisted this move,
arguing instead that RUPPs should be reclassified only as bridleways. They
would thus be open to walkers and riders, but not motor-vehicles (unless clear
evidence could be produced to show that they also carry vehicular rights).
Copies of the full CLA response to the commission's proposals are available
from me.
Jolyon Dodgson,
Regional Director,
North West CLA Office,
Burton,
Carnforth,
Lancashire."
Regards
Charlie.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 7 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Brian Lewis <brian@limb.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 22:22:09 +0000
Subject: Re: OS Explorers (Reply it is not us!! by the HA)
Hi Chris
This is the response I got from NYCC more or less the same as the one
from Lancs CC.
Has anyone got a reply from the O/S?
who does decide which ones go on the maps?
Can anyone give us an answer?
Dear Sir
NEW ORDNANCE SURVEY MAP - OUTDOOR LEISURE 2
I refer to your letter dated 3 April received on 9 April 1998.
I have investigated the circumstances in relation to the information
supplied to Ordnance Survey. A representative of Ordnance Survey visited
County Hall for a period of a week about two years ago. The Land Charges
1: 10,000 scale map books and the Unclassified Road Schedules were made
available during this period. Staff can recall the visit but not the
name of the person from Ordnance Survey. They were not asked to check
any of the information gathered by the Ordnance Survey or advise that
any routes shown on the Highways Register should be deleted from the
proposed Ordnance Survey map. you will need to establish from the
Ordnance Survey why this route was not included on their Outdoor Leisure
2 Map. Considering the substantial task in compiling the detailed
information I suggest that it is likely to have been a simple oversight.
I confirm that Ordnance Survey did not consult the Highway Authority to
verify the information shown on Leisure Map 2 prior to publication. In
fact, the Highway Authority does not have a copy of this Map and there
could also be other errors. This is a matter you may wish to discuss
with the Ordnance Survey and I would be interested to learn of their
response. I can find no evidence that the Highway Authority requested
the Ordnance Survey to delete any highways that are included on the
Unclassified Road Schedule held in the Land Charges Section.
A number of the eight routes specified in your letter have different
road number references on the Highway Schedules. They are mainly
recorded on the Highways Register as Green Lanes. The County Council use
this reference as a means of recording unsurfaced Unclassified Roads
recorded on the highways Register of highways maintainable at public
expense. The legal status of Green Lanes has been the subject of a
recent report to the Highways and Transportation Committee and this
report is now subject to widespread consultation. A further report will
be taken back to the Highways and Transportation Committee with the aim
of defining the legal status particularly in relation to the rights of
motor vehicles. I understand that you have carried out research on these
routes with regard to their use by motor vehicles. I would welcome
details of your research which would assist the Highway Authority in
establishing the exact nature of the rights that exist for motor
vehicles to use these routes.
I appreciate the voluntary restraint which your Group are exercising on
Green Lanes which are generally not constructed to cater for regular use
by motor vehicles. Please contact Reg King (Ext 2311) if you wish to
discuss in detail the routes recorded in your letter.
Yours sincerely
M O Moore
Director
Brian Lewis -
Juno
Richmond Road
Ingleton
CARNFORTH
Lancashire LA6 3AN
regards
Regards
Brian Lewis
UCR Rep
All Wheel Drive Club
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 8 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 18:16:52 -0000
Subject: Re: HA PROW Web pages
<<Presumably using a s116?>>
No. This lane has only recently been added to the Definitive Map following
a PI at which RA member gave vehicular user, as did the vicar. This was an
application by the landowner to remove the way as it had been added in
error!!
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 9 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 23:03:16 -0000
Subject: Re: 20 years of B&B
I heard today from within HCC that the leader of the, Council Freddy
Emery-Wallace, a councillor that neither lives or works (AFAIK) within the
County, has let is be known, on a number of occasions, that he wants
mountain bikes banned from Hampshire's RoW.
Capture leaving original. Found out what I woz doing wrong. There is an
option for font type. Default sets it to sans serif - changed it to serif
and all works better. Have done a 'leave original' edition and it puts
100kb onto the file size. Domani I'll do it the old way buy with the new
settings.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 10 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Codrai" <dave@codrai.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 23:29:53 -0000
Subject: Re: OS Explorers
>Has anyone got a reply from the O/S?
>who does decide which ones go on the maps?
>Can anyone give us an answer?
In the Ramblers Association magazine, Winter 1998 edition, there was a
letter, part of which read :
'Ramblers were delighted to hear that OS had finally agreed to show
unclassified white roads as "other routes with public access", as this adds
hundreds of miles of walkable routes for us to use. However, study of the
new maps in my area indicates that they are not all included.'
the editors reply was :
'OS replies: The principle has been adopted to show white roads as other
routes with public access, but the onus is on the local authorities to
provide the details. As Explorers are revised, we hope that more white road
information can be added.'
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 11 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:22:16 -0500
Subject: Re: 20 years of B&B
> I heard today from within HCC that the leader of the, Council Freddy
> Emery-Wallace, a councillor that neither lives or works (AFAIK) within
the
> County, has let is be known, on a number of occasions, that he wants
> mountain bikes banned from Hampshire's RoW.
These guys have this quasi judicial role that can cause them great personal
stress and turmoil. (not)
It might be worth taking to them a problem or three affecting lawful bikers
or vehicle users, to a) show the git, oops, sorry, that users suffer from
obstructions etc far more than he realises, b) to establish his
willingness to carry out is judicial functions of assertion and protection.
Remind him that we all have a duty to protect green lanes, - - - use them
or lose them - - - to the obstructors or 4x4 tractor damage.
cj
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 12 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:22:36 -0500
Subject: Re: OS Explorers (Reply it is not us!! by the HA)
> Hi Chris
> This is the response I got from NYCC more or less the same as the one
from Lancs CC.
> Has anyone got a reply from the O/S? who does decide which ones go on
> This is the response I got from NYCC more or less the same as the one
the maps?
> Can anyone give us an answer?
> This is the response I got from NYCC more or less the same as the one
Yes Brian, The OS can, here goes, one of three letters, and my letter to
them is appended from them.
They have not commented on the specifics, but have answered the policy.
Any comments from anyone on any reply? Not quite sure how they will
identify the omissions, unless of course we tell them.
Dear Mr Marsden
Please find a reply to your recent E-mail following from our Rights of Way
Co-ordinator.
Anne Patrick
Customer Information Adviser
----------
From: Thornton, Trevor
Subject: RE: Explorer Public Access info. policy
Date: 16 February 1999 10:50
Dear Mr Marsden
Thank you for your Email - Subject: Explorer Public Access info. policy.
Following representations from various bodies (County Councils, MBC's etc.)
over a period of time the decision was taken, some five years ago, to
identify Other Routes with Public Access (ORPA) on 1:50000 series mapping.
A
subsequent decision was made to also include this information on 1:25000
series mapping. The number and alignments of such routes would be based on
the information provided by the relevant authorities.
The majority of the information has now been collected from the
authorities.
Each authority were contacted prior to a visit by one of our Small Scale
Field Revisers. Therefore the information to be depicted on our mapping was
that which was made available at the time of collection. It was decided
that
once collected and processed the information from each individual authority
would be made available for inclusion on the next editions of the mapping.
It is therefore possible that some maps have been published with only
partial ORPA cover. However, it was considered more desirable to show
partial information than wait for the next edition, perhaps another five
years, in order for full cover to be available.
In deciding to show ORPA it was considered necessary to set certain
criteria to maintain clarity of the mapping. It was decided that ORPA
would
only be shown in rural areas. In addition ORPA would be ommitted from the
mapping where they coincided with existing roads containing colour fill or
Definitive Rights of Way. An ORPA will not appear on a map where it forms
part of a dual status route.
Any errors or omissions will be attended to prior to publication of the
next
editions.
In conclusion, only those routes supplied by the relevant authority have
been included on OS mapping, subject to the above criteria. No reference to
the exact rights or of any restrictions to the routes is supplied and the
caveat in the map legend notes this.
Thank you for your interest on this matter.
Yours sincerely
T. Thornton
Rights of Way Co-ordinator
----------
From: Byway@compuserve.com
Subject: Explorer Public Access info. policy
Date: 14 February 1999 20:20
Orleton Manor
Orleton, Nr Ludlow,
SY8 4HR
01 568 780 811
Customer Information Office,
Ordnance Survey
Romsey Road
Southampton
SO16 4GU
[spamkill: [Ii][Nn][fF][Oo]@ input: %s] Email: custinfo@ordsvy.gov.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 13 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:22:42 -0500
Subject: Warks E5221
> I got to visit this lane yesterday (Wednesday) from the southern end.
> Also there is a nearby single track road (tarmacced) that is closed
> under RTRA84 s14. I do not know if the two lanes are related but
> they are VERY close together.
The southern end is not the 'problem'. Was the pile of prickly stuff
completly preventing access? If so it's new. If not it par for the course.
Vehicular use carries along the old railway line, easy to do in the dusk.
The bit to walk, and watch, is the north, after the entrance to the tarted
up Hice. wooden fence with gate, should not be locked. It is not quite
wide enough for a carriageway if I remember correctly.
Travellers, of the more traditional type were on the grass opposite the
lane, and with horses tethered on chains along the lane. Not a problem,
when I visited last.
Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 14 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:14:51 -0000
Subject: Re: OS Explorers (Reply it is not us!! by the HA)
<<which are generally not constructed to cater for regular use
by motor vehicles. >>
True. They were probably well maintained to withstand the far more onerous
punishment metered out by hooves seeking grip to haul up to a ton or more
on solid wheels with a smaller contact area/higher ground pressure .....
vomit.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 15 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:58 -0000
Subject: Re: HA PROW Web pages
Re-name thread "light blue touch paper" - but it could be dark blue judging
by the big bite I got.
<<<<<<s - who, as previously stated, make little or no contribution to the
debate (in Hants),>>>
when DT specifically knows that I sought out authorisation from AB hisself
to act OBO AWDC in view of the fact that the _real, proper,
name-appears-in-the-mag_Hampshire Rep neither represents the AWDc nor can
be bothered returning my phone calls.>>
That brought a big grin to my face. Come on MD. That was a two edged wind
up. But seriously when are you going to attend a meeting in Hants - for
the full session?
;-))))
You're doing a grand job. And you respond to e-mail, which is more than RC
does.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 16 -> | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
END OF * LIST DIGEST
Input: messages 15 lines 859 [forwarded 32 whitespace 0]
Output: lines 597 [content 486 forwarded 32 (cut 0) whitespace 0]
[ First | | <- Digest 990219 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]