[ First Message | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ Message 1 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 04:23:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
> > gave)
> > and Roman Road.
> Is it valid to object without ever having been near the lane in question?
A) Yes, If you might ever want to use that lane.
B) or any other lane in the county, cos they are giving the green light to
anyone to obstruct any UCR and BOATs if they really want to.
C) If the chumps go and stick themselves and their silly obstruction on the
telly on Countryfile, after the HA admit it IS a public road then they
deserve to have a pot-shot taken at them
D) the HA have done bugger-all to assert and protect (and they do not deny
it) anywhere in the county
E) users are mobile, so use RoW some distance from home, so should have
redress.
F) It's amazing how lanes some distance away can suddenly become YOUR
problem, I did not ask to be included in the lying distorted misleading
reporting of Hart-Davis and Gardiner in the Independent, but it's resulted
in a damn good complaint to the PCC!
So pick any one of those I suggested, or anything else you can think of,
and fax write or email the scheming, conniving, yellow bellied, derelicters
of duty, (friends of the criminal obstructor ian brown), at the top of
the management at Hereford! (The workers are doing their job)
Otherwise don't bother looking for old roads in Hereford, or they will have
obstructed or ploughed the rest of them up!
> > But it is a lot of work. There is no easy way. But still its all good
> > fun.
> Personally, I'd rather be out there driving the lanes than having to
fight
> for their continued existence. Still, whatever floats your boat, as they
> say :-)
Wouln't we all, but it not till you try, that you see you can't.
Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 2 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 06:39:21 EST
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
In a message dated 10.3.99 00:10:18 GMT Standard Time, geoff@cix.co.uk writes:
<< there are some bad humans that have the power to remove our statute give
right to use.>>
They have no such power, AIUI. That the rules are being badly enforced by
the local authorities such that we *are* losing our rights to use the
lanes seems to me to be prima facia evidence that we are fighting the
fight the wrong way.
>>
Ah but they do. The law is, as you say, logical (mainly), but it is applied by
'the establishment'. This allows their preferences to be followed, rather than
even-handed stuff (witness recent Police criticism - they are only doing what
they think the establishment wants). As evidence of this, the law itself is
designed to keep you and me out of the process. eg Only the HA can act to
enforce the removal of obstructions, and only the Parish Council or Court can
force them to act. Thus, they do not say Oh, an obstruction, we must act. They
say Oh, an obstruction, but only those 4x4 lot want it removed, so its best to
do nothing.
There is a sort of fall-back, just for appearance sake - the Ombudsman, but he
is really only looking for corruption, not failure to do a duty, and in any
case he is toothless.
One answer might be the 'Rights of Way Czar' idea of Roger Ward (CoCo), and
that is what the Meacher 'Local Access Panel' might turn into. This will need
a range of more active and available members than we have got, currently. LARA
is prepared to train up the volunteers, but we cannot identify them from HQ.
That can only be done by clubs locally. So, lads & lasses, get to it - please.
Cheers, tim LARA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 3 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 06:39:26 EST
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
In a message dated 10.3.99 09:26:16 GMT Standard Time, Byway@compuserve.com
writes:
<< If the chumps go and stick themselves and their silly obstruction on the
telly on Countryfile, after the HA admit it IS a public road then they
deserve to have a pot-shot taken at them >>
It might make a useful chance for a campaign - all that volunteers need is the
address of the chief executive of the council, the identity of the lane (GRs,
parish) and the date of the TV programme.
Dear Sir
Public Road, Grs xxxx-xxxx, Parish of Yyyyyyyyyyy
I saw on Countryfile that a gate has been erected across this acknowledged
highway, completely obstructing it for all users. Please let me know in detail
what action is being taken to make the road available to the public, and when
I might be able to use it.
Yours faithfully.
A few letters like that might convince them that the countryside is not just
needed by White Disco Man (and he can be disregarded as he is only a 4x4
user).
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 4 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 06:39:23 EST
Subject: Re: GLEAM attitude to TROs, the New Countryside Agency
In a message dated 10.3.99 00:30:36 GMT Standard Time,
doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
<< Re: the Countryside Agency>
Will someone with a better (quieter? less loud??) view on RoW summarise
the position of the new body?
>>
The answer is - Wait & See.
There are clues, though.
The new Chairman is a Somerset landowner. Awfully nice chap, you understand,
but that is how the Govt see the leadership need being filled.
The new vice-chair is a County Councillor, ditto.
There are three parties to access - landowners, managers, and users. The
system will be led by a landowner and a manager.
Is there a parallel, I wonder - was Goebbels put in charge of the Synagogues?
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 5 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 99 11:48 GMT
Subject: Re: Suzukis in Berkshire
This saturday OK? Time to be confirmed, please let me know any time which
is NOT convenient and we'll work around you...
73s and 88s
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 6 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 10:57:39 -0000
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
<<Is the AWDC the only group in Hampshire able to represent non-motorcycle
motorists? What about the ARC groups, GLASS, MSA clubs, etc?>>
SCOR = 1 meeting; GLASS = 2-3 meetings; ARC + MSA = 0 meetings ..... over
last
ten years. I am not decrying any of those who attended. But note TS's
comment on TROs. Counter to MDs assertion that he attended one I will
correct the dear chap by saying he attended a liaison meeting - not a
decision making event.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 7 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 11:06:30 -0000
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
Geof
Muddy lane is yours. I hope you gain the learning experience you claim to
be seeking. I was in that position some fifteen years ago. I fought
loud and hard for a lane just round the corner from where I lived. I told
these lack luster nit-wits in local gov. what their duty was and what they
had to do according to the law. They smiled and applied to the court under
s116. No probs. I went to the court and told the magistrates that the
lane was needed and was used and they thanked me and stopped it up.
Hopefully the realisation of the subtle difference between the users
interpretation of s130HA80 and the construction placed on that same notion
by those with the power will be less painful for you. It has long been
held by user reps that more will be achieved through cooperation than
confrontation.
I will now crawl back into my ivory (coloured) tower (that is shaped like a
shoe box) and peer up at those who know there rights and know what they are
not prepared to tolerate. Enjoy!
PS - should you ever get to drive Muddy Lane you should not that the
'sunken way' is not just that, but the remains of gravel extraction. The
line of the way is on the western edge of the hollow.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 8 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Scott <scotbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:27:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Suzukis in Berkshire
I'll be around all day, except about 11:00 - 1:30. I don't mind
rearranging this if need be (it's only shopping!).
Cheers, Scott.
---Michael Dyer <doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> In-Reply-To: <bulk.1650.19990301031139@Land-Rover.Team.Net>
> This saturday OK? Time to be confirmed, please let me know any time
which
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 9 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Brian Lewis <brian@limb.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 15:43:41 +0000
Subject: Re: AWDC E Berks Rep.
In message <bulk.1104.19990309125335@Land-Rover.Team.Net>, Michael Dyer
<doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk> writes
>Mick Dyer
Good luck with the area
Regards
Brian Lewis
UCR Rep and North Yorkshire RoW rep
All Wheel Drive Club
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 10 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Scott <scotbot@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:53:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Suzuki SJ's
---Dave Codrai <dave@codrai.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >> On the basis, I suppose, that anyone using a Suzuki more than 10
miles
> >They should be prosecuted for even thinking of buying it! Better
off with
> >two bikes strapped together!
> Take the mick all you want but for about 18 months I had a 109" for
towing
> and other work related stuff and a SJ 410 for off road use, with
very little
> modification, e.g. the right tyres, they will go places Land Rover
drivers
> can only dream of, even 90's, on road they equal Series vehicles for
speed
> but have interesting extra's like comfortable seats, heaters that
work,
> stereo's that can be heard etc, if I had to go back to leaf springs,
> horrible thought, and the only criteria was off road ability I would
buy
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 11 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Dave Haynes <dave@darklite.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 16:31:50 -0800
Subject: Re: Suzuki SJ's
Off-roading at a private site near Salisbury, I saw a Suzuki dissappear off
into a bombhole,
so I followed it in. When i got to the bottom, I looked up to see the exit
track had two
trees, just far enough apart for a Suzi to fit through. Only problem was, I
was driving my
Rangie! I lost both mirrors and 're-modelled' the curves of the passenger
side!
Oops!
Moral - Look before you engage low box ?
:-Dave
Scott wrote:
> sure that its better than a LR though), economical, and extremely
> manouverable (very small turning circle and narrow width).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 12 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: davidg@hwcces.demon.co.uk (David Goode)
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 12:59:40 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
> There is no effective way of stopping TROs 116s.
True, but if you make them work hard on each one it makes it less of
a perceived easy option and maybe does have a long term effect. It
would be difficult to prove that this works, but prove doesn't come
into this very often.
David Goode davidg@hwcces.demon.co.uk
Environmental Services Dept
Hereford and Worcester County Council
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 13 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 14:51:04 -0000
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
CJM wrote:
<< cos they are giving the green light to
anyone to obstruct any UCR and BOATs if they really want to.
<< cos they are giving the green light to
Please note that despite the title of the originating mail this is not
related to Hampshire.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 14 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:25:31 EST
Subject: Green Lane Saved by LARA Volunteers
Not very often we have good news to report, but here goes:
Thanks to the opposition of LARA members, and our active co-operation with the
HA, Warwickshire CC, a lane due to be stopped up for ever is reprieved. WCC
were particularly influenced, they say, by the helpful attitude shown by some
objectors, who offered alternatives for management, and by the successful
application, on a nearby route, of LARA Voluntary Restraint.
Particular thanks to Chris Marsden, Richard Hawker, Ian Boddison, and the
various more local users who have helped us with this initiative.
All who responded should get a letter from WCC saying this.
I have been asked to ensure that E5221 is not used by 'hordes of Camel
Trophyists'. The HA have explained to the local bungalow owner that his
attempt to deprive the public of rights has inevitably brought the route to
the attention of potential users, but we all agree that a celebratory drive-
through to the strains of We shall Overcome at 3 am would serve no-one's
interests. No, the Flight of the Valkirie won't do either.
Another nearby lane at Aston Cantlow, very popular with local dog-walkers, is
also presenting problems. I have suggested that a strip alongside the
'difficult' section could be reserved for walkers, just like a footway, with a
couple of steps at each end to make sure that even cyclists would stick to the
'main' route. The route is, I am told, plenty wide enough for this. Would
local users be prepared to help in setting out and making the steps, etc? I
think nothing more than vertical boards with gravel between is necessary.
The locals have said 'prove it is a road' but the HA say that it certainly is.
I reminded the HA that there were two ways to 'prove it' a direct BOAT
application, then everyone would know, and the Crown Court. If the latter, it
would count as a legal event, and that should lead to BOAT as well. They
agreed to ask the locals if this outcome was what they really sought...
I also suggested that sensible management of use of both lanes would include
'Unfit for motors' signs - rectangular, blue, non-threatening, as in the
Highway Code.
Any comments?
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 15 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Bod" <bod@bod1.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 11:03:45 -0000
Subject: Re: RUPP 35 Finchampstead 'Warren Lane'
>I know where you mean now. Aren't there private houses down there? How will
>they fare if the road is classified as a bridleway?
Probably better than if they were Public Houses.
A private house is likely to be granted an easement as part of the
reclassification whereas customer to a Public House.....well I guess they
shouldn't be driving!
Cheers,
Bod
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 16 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Bod" <bod@bod1.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 22:10:56 -0000
Subject: Tractor Damage to Lanes (was: Re: Independent/ PCC)
>I sent Howard's 'Somme' photos with 8 proofs of tractor damage highlighted
>to PCC today.
A useful discussion was had at last night's Manchester GLASS meeting about
the reasons why folks blame recreational users for agricultural damage to
lanes.
I think it was Dave Wilson who pointed out that the average person or
average walker would not know what size their car's tyre was.
Moreover they would not have a clue how big a LandRover tyre is - not even
close enough to be able to guess.
It was therefore suggested that we take a wheel and put into a rut then
photograph it. When it is obvious that the rut is five times wider than
the tyre and nearly the depth of the tyre's diameter then it should be
obvious that it was not a LandRover's tyre that caused the damage.
It seems that, in most cases, folks are all too ready to blame recreational
use for lane damage when, in fact, the cause is much more likely to be
agricultural. This is distinct to directing the blame at recreational
users even though the cause is known to be agricultural. In the
first case it is simply ignorance but the latter is really a concerted
effort to provide negative publicity for leisure use. This is not
generally the case and therefore by carefully educating the public we can
generate a substantial swing in public opinion.
The whole discussion was prompted by last week's Stockport RoW users forum.
I asked during the meeting if any of the people present (including council
officers) were aware of any specific case of lane damage caused by
recreational lane use. Not surprisingly none of the walking group
representatives could identify any instances within Stockport MBC.
However, Geoff Funnell (RoW Officer) had received reports of lane damage to
a BOAT and the damage had been suggested to him to be caused by recreational
vehicles.
After the meeting he put his opinion to me privately. He believes that
the damage is deliberate and is caused by the anti-vehicular land owner.
He has also had reports of said landowner driving his tractor up and down
the lane repeatedly during the night with no reason (other than to damage
the lane).
I am hoping to have a look later this week to see what state this route is
in.
The route is BOAT 140, Black Lane.
SJ 9849 8734 to SJ 9922 8748
Cheers,
Bod
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 17 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Bod" <bod@bod1.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 11:29:03 -0000
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
>Is the AWDC the only group in Hampshire able to represent non-motorcycle
>motorists? What about the ARC groups, GLASS, MSA clubs, etc?
GLASS has a rep in Hampshire (Colin Cranstone).
It is my understanding that Colin has very little spare time during the day
to attend forums and other such meeting due to business commitments.
Like so many other areas it is generally the busy people that take on jobs
like area rep and those with the time have the time simply because they do
not want to take on the commitments.
I also understand that Colin is possibly to get an assistant soon who will
have a more active part in the day-to-day RoW dealings within the county.
On a more general point - RoW forums, PIs, and the rest of the things that
have a scheduled time are usually during the day when most people work.
It is only a very small percentage of people who can easily make regular
daytime meetings. The only user forum I know of is Rochdale - it is also
one of the best represented and one of the most useful. And yes - I do
think the three are connected.
Cheers,
Bod
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 18 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Rob Smith" <rob@archenland.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 19:28:25 -0000
Subject: RE: Suzuki SJ's
I could add another, about the driver but that would be impolite...
Rob Smith
Mine's the blue 110
> From: TimLARA@aol.com [mailto:TimLARA@aol.com]
> Sent: 09 March 1999 22:36
At least it shares the LR characteristic of leaking in the rain...
> Tim
> Sent: 09 March 1999 22:36
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 19 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Rob Smith" <rob@archenland.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 19:28:29 -0000
Subject: RE: Green Lane Saved by LARA Volunteers
I sure enjoyed the walk along E522, despite the water being a bit deep and
fast to swim the river bit. One day in the summer a nice QUIET rumble along
might be in order, provided that the gates, and other bits of 'furniture'
are out of the way...
As for the 'Unsuitable for motors' sign.....
But SO inviting of a good lane?
Seriously (for once?) I'd be prepared to shovel gravel for a few hours to
ensure that the route could be used sensibly.
Rob Smith
Mine's the blue 110
> From: TimLARA@aol.com [mailto:TimLARA@aol.com]
> Sent: 10 March 1999 18:26
> To: row@playground.sun.com
> Subject: Green Lane Saved by LARA Volunteers
> Thanks to the opposition of LARA members, and our active co-operation with
the HA, Warwickshire CC, a lane due to be stopped up for ever is reprieved.
WCC were particularly influenced, they say, by the helpful attitude.....
> I also suggested that sensible management of use of both lanes would
> Sent: 10 March 1999 18:26
> To: row@playground.sun.com
include 'Unfit for motors' signs - rectangular, blue, non-threatening, as in
the Highway Code.
> I also suggested that sensible management of use of both lanes would
Any comments?
> Cheers, tim
> Sent: 10 March 1999 18:26
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 20 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 15:06:01 -0500
Subject: Re: GLEAM attitude to TROs, the New Countryside Agency
> >From p59, Annex 2 - 'Summary of Comments from National Organisations
whose
> Views We Invited', in RoW in C21st - Conclusions and Recommendations.
Am I missing out on something? Is this a recently issued doccy?
CU tomorrow.
I will be meeting Ian Taylor, Glass there, Have you got any takers for your
seats?
(Tim I will be leaving about 7.30 ish, Are you going down M5 or A49?)
> (GLEAM) 'Currently, TROs often do not work in practice - even where HAs
> are prepared to use them'.
> So how come the most GLEAM-heavy CCs are the ones most TRO-happy? Shum
> mishtake shurely?
We told them that!
> Re: the Countryside Agency>
> Will someone with a better (quieter? less loud??) view on RoW summarise
> the position of the new body?
> mishtake shurely?
I was sent a mail very recently saying, and I hope she won't mind me
repeating:-
" > my opinion is that
> there is no chance of any of your suggestions being given a fair
consideration by the new Countryside Agency under the chairmanship of
> Ewan Cameron and with Mr Wakeford as Chief Executive - which is what we
look to be getting. I personally don't see much hope of an
> Access Bill getting through Parliament if it has any teeth at all.
However, if you don't ask you don't get and it must be worth lobbying.."
I replied:-
"What's the chance of a meeting with these guys and Roger Straight-Batting
Ward, along with CTC, BHS, BDS, LARA, TRF, GLASS to put the sensible
moderate users point of view. "Look we can all sit round a table and talk,
can you?
Ewan Cameron? Serial Path blocker he was described as! Ex CLA. I see
troubles ahead."
This may not help, but is it of interest?
cj
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 21 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "David Wright" <Dave@oscroft1.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 00:02:50 -0000
Subject: Re: Suzuki SJ's
What a load of #ollocks!!!!!
##############################
From: Dave Codrai <dave@codrai.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: 09 March 1999 20:57
Subject: Re: Suzuki SJ's
>>> On the basis, I suppose, that anyone using a Suzuki more than 10 miles
>>They should be prosecuted for even thinking of buying it! Better off with
>>two bikes strapped together!
>Take the mick all you want but for about 18 months I had a 109" for towing
>and other work related stuff and a SJ 410 for off road use, with very
little
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 22 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 16:22:59 EST
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
In a message dated 10.3.99 18:54:20 GMT Standard Time,
bod@bod1.freeserve.co.uk writes:
<< On a more general point - RoW forums, PIs, and the rest of the things that
have a scheduled time are usually during the day when most people work.
It is only a very small percentage of people who can easily make regular
daytime meetings >>
Yes, this is a serious and long-standing problem. Guess which groups include
those who can get there in the day? You got it, farmers and tramplers.
We - all of us - need to be geared up for the new Local Access Forums*, and
pressing for them to meet in the evening.
* As promised by Meacher along with Open Trampling.
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 23 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 16:22:53 EST
Subject: Re: Tractor Damage to Lanes
In a message dated 10.3.99 18:54:10 GMT Standard Time,
bod@bod1.freeserve.co.uk writes:
<< After the meeting he put his opinion to me privately. He believes that
the damage is deliberate and is caused by the anti-vehicular land owner. >>
What a shame the chap lacks the integrity to say so out loud.
Funny how keen such folk can be to repeat anti-motoring opinion, but not pro.
It is just as well no-one needs to assert or protect anything, ennit?
Tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 24 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 16:22:49 EST
Subject: Re: RUPP 35 Finchampstead 'Warren Lane'
In a message dated 10.3.99 18:50:30 GMT Standard Time,
bod@bod1.freeserve.co.uk writes:
<< A private house is likely to be granted an easement as part of the
reclassification >>
I know of no power than anyone has to grant an easement over the land of
another. In any case, reclassification is about Public rights, and is paid for
with public mobney, so they doubly have no business doing any such thing.
Unless I have missed something fundamental?
Cheers, tim
PS The Ride of the Valkyrie doesn't count either.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 25 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:16:22 -0500
Subject: Green Lane Saved by LARA Volunteers
> I have been asked to ensure that E5221 is not used by 'hordes of Camel
> Trophyists'. The HA have explained to the local bungalow owner that his
> attempt to deprive the public of rights has inevitably brought the route
to
> the attention of potential users, but we all agree that a celebratory
drive-
> through to the strains of We shall Overcome at 3 am would serve no-one's
> interests.
A modest bit of assertion, with prior warning might be helpful in the
driest time in the summer?
I was drafting a reply to Warwick last night, about several un-answred
questions AND the locked gates (as recently as last Friday)
I went into the HA office at Warks today and asked for the LoS, after a few
blank looks, a bit of persistence, I was told I could have a copy of the
map! Quite surprising. (N Yorks please note!) There are several roads
that seem 'improbable' As ORPA has been omitted from OS maps as previously
reported, I wonder if anyone is aware of all the UCRs in Warks?
I wonder if the reception would have been quite the same if I had gone in
with check shirt, muddy hobnail boots, and a few 'no mud too deep' motiffs
(or even giving my name) would have elicited such a helpful response as a
polite respectable gent in a suit, file of papers an County
Letter-headings?
Also I think the positive attitude of the next door L/O was crucial,
without it we would not have heard about it until too late.
No green lanes should be closed. Who can say now they will never be
required.?
Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 26 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:16:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Lane Hordle
> << cos they are giving the green light to
> anyone to obstruct any UCR and BOATs if they really want to.
> Please note that despite the title of the originating mail this is not
> related to Hampshire.
Confirmed, it is what is happening in this County, Herefordshire, and I
suspect a few other round here. They are paying lip service to asserting
on the obstructions, quite possibly due to the realisation of whata dire
mess they are in, after getting 4 x s56s in one day, after they anounced
Roman Road TRO 'consultation'
We do need to update titles from time to time. I try to make it clear, but
not always succesful.
cj
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 27 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:16:26 -0500
Subject: Re: RUPP 35 Finchampstead 'Warren Lane'
> A private house is likely to be granted an easement as part of the
> reclassification whereas customer to a Public House.....well I guess they
> shouldn't be driving!
Can the reclassification process grant an easement? Surely by negotiation
from L/O only?
Whilst they may well be prepared to do that in preference to a BOAT, that
is subjective etc and is to be decided by the public rights found to exist.
Why shouldn't customers drive to the pub? Just so long as they do not drive
away later!
cj
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 28 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:16:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Hants - Muddy Ln/Upper Lye
Tim said:-
> Dear Sir
> Public Road, Grs xxxx-xxxx, Parish of Yyyyyyyyyyy
> I saw on Countryfile that a gate has been erected across this
acknowledged
> highway, completely obstructing it for all users. Please let me know in
detail
> what action is being taken to make the road available to the public, and
when
> I might be able to use it.
> Yours faithfully.
> A few letters like that might convince them that the countryside is not
just
> needed by White Disco Man (and he can be disregarded as he is only a 4x4
> user).
> A few letters like that might convince them that the countryside is not
Yes indeed, a helpful suggestion.
The lane in question is best described in a copy of a s56 Notice FROM the
council. This IS the same lane. The gate being close to the surfaced road
at Upper Lye NGR SO 394 658
Here are the results of two s56's; they changed councils in the
middle..........
Hereford and Worcester County Council
Ref. M/AT/M29/EAC
A Turner
11 February 1998
Dear Mr Marsden
UPPER LYE - LEYSFIELD ROAD
Thank you for your letter and Section 56 Notice of 9 February.
The County Council admits that the way in question is a highway
maintainable at the public expense and that it is the highway authority
liable to maintain it. It is not agreed, however, that the way or any part
of it is out of repair.
Yours sincerely
Andy Turner
PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY MANAGER
______________________________
To Herefordshire County Council,
County Hall, Bath Street, Hereford.
TAKE NOTICE that I, Christopher John Marsden of Orleton Manor, Orleton,
Near Ludlow, claim that the way described in the Schedule hereto is a
highway maintainable at the public expense.
AND TAKE NOTICE that a portion of the said way between the County Road
U92409 at grid reference SO 394 658 and the point at which the said way
joins the road from U92015 to U92408 at grid reference SO 388 662 and being
a distance of seven hundred metres or thereabouts is out of repair.
AND TAKE NOTICE that I hereby require you pursuant to sub-section (1) of
Section 56 of the Highways Act 1980 to state:
(a) whether you admit that the said portion of way is a highway
maintainable at the public expense, and
(b) whether you admit that you are the authority liable to maintain the
said portion of way.
Dated 6th May 1998
CHRISTOPHER JOHN MARSDEN
SCHEDULE
Public Carriage Road known as Leysfield Road in the parish of Aymestry as
shown on the Parliamentary Inclosure Award for Aymestry and Kingsland, in
the County of Hereford.
_________________________
To:
Mr. Christopher John Marsden
of Orleton Manor,
Orleton,
Ludlow,
Shropshire1
SY8 4HR.
On 11th May, 1998, you served on the Herefordshire Council as highway
authority a notice under the Highways Act 1980 Section 56(1) requiring the
Council to state whether the Council admits that the way described in the
schedule is a highway and that the Council is liable to maintain it
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Council admits that the way is a highway and
that the Council admits that the Council is liable as highway authority to
maintain it
Date: 27 May 1998
SCHEDULE
The way from Upper Lye Village, at the southern end, at grid reference
S0394 658, at its junction with U92409 to the Camp at grid reference S0388
662, in the Parish of Aymstrey
Authorised Officer
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 29 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 99 00:08 GMT
Subject: Re: Green Lane Saved by LARA Volunteers
<<<<<<<<, but we all agree that a celebratory drive-
through to the strains of We shall Overcome at 3 am would serve no-one's
interests. No, the Flight of the Valkirie won't do either.>>>>>>>
Why not the Beatles track......'Why don't we do it in the Road'........?
73s and 88s
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 30 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 99 00:08 GMT
Subject: Re: GLEAM attitude to TROs, the New Countryside Agency
Hi CJM
<<<<<w', in RoW in C21st - Conclusions and Recommendations.
Am I missing out on something? Is this a recently issued doccy?>>>>
Came in teh post with my invite to tomoroows bash
<<<<CU tomorrow.
I will be meeting Ian Taylor, Glass there, Have you got any takers for your
seats?>>>>>>
None :-(( He's welcome to a few of mine.
BTW apparently NO-ONE is allowed to speak but GLEAM might try...if so I
might well be able to use it later, please tell me the name of any
interrupter you might recognise.
<<<<<<(Tim I will be leaving about 7.30 ish, Are you going down M5 or
A49?)>>>>
Sorry, not looked at the exact route yet, deffo the M4 west tho'.
<<<<This may not help, but is it of interest?>>>
Its all background, tvm...
73s and 88s
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 31 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 99 00:08 GMT
Subject: Re: AWDC E Berks Rep.
Thanks Brian....any spare Kevlar underwear you no longer need will be
welcome down here.....
73s and 88s
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 32 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 99 00:08 GMT
Subject: Re: Tractor Damage to Lanes
I will be setting up a comparitive photoshoot 'somewhere in Berkshire' on
Saturday....10x8 glossys may be ordered from me FOC so long as the
application is accompanied by a tenpound note.
Seriously, I'll have a go at digitizing them and they will be freely
available...
73s and 88s
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 33 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Tom Murkin" <tom@riverside-repairs.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 01:56:59 -0000
Subject: Letter From MP (Was Re: EDM letter to MP - advice please)
Here is the Letter I recieved from MP Jackie Ballard today. Does it justify
a reply or would that just be a waste of time? If so any ideas on what to
say? At least I have her email address now.
Thanks
Tom
JACKIE BALLARD MP
HOUSE OF COMMONS
LONDON SWIA OAA
Tel. 0171 219 6247
Fax 0171 219 3962
Please quote reference
on all correspondence JBIDC/4873murkin 8
March 1999
Mr T Murkin
Riverside
Bull Street
Creech St Michael
TAUNTON
TA3 5PW
Dear Mr Murkin
Thank you for your letter of 28 February about the Early Day Motion
concerning the threat to green lanes by recreational vehicular traffic.
I understand the criticism you are making of the Motion but feel that, if
you re-read it, it talks about the use of vulnerable green lanesby motorised
vehicles for recreational purposes. I have in the past had complaints from
constituents about green lanes being churned up by off-road vehicles so that
they are difficult to pass by walkers and I accept that this will be the
exception rather than the rule.
I do not know whether you have been in touch with the Access Section at
County Hall to discuss with them appropriate areas where you can take your
grandfather and if you have not done so would suggest that this would be a
good idea. You are right in thinking that I have not read the document
"Making the Best of Byways", but I will do so. I am sure you will appreciate
that Members of Parliament cannot be experts on every subject and sometimes
we respond to what appear to be legitimate concerns of our constituents,
without perhaps thoroughly checking out the alternatives, and I will
certainly take your criticisms seriously and look into this issue more
deeply.
Thank you for taking the trouble to write to me about this.
Yours sincerely
y~CM; ~ C'
Ja~e\Ballard
M~er of Parliament for
Taunton Constituencv
Advice surgeries held around the constituency on Saturday mornings.
Telephone the constituency office for details.
Constituency Office: 10 Belvedere Road, Taunton TAl lBW Tel. 01823-337874
Fax 01823-323075 email jackieballard@cix.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 34 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
END OF * LIST DIGEST
Input: messages 33 lines 1635 [forwarded 154 whitespace 0]
Output: lines 1230 [content 980 forwarded 154 (cut 0) whitespace 0]
[ First | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990311 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]