 |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| ..... |
This post is not being displayed .
|
.....
Quote Me Happy
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Karma :  
|
 Posted: 21:58 - 23 Mar 2010  Post subject: Roy Hattersley is a slack-cocked bumfairy |
 |
|
Now this is a bit of a long read and it will probably wind you right up like it did me, but this shows what sort of ignorance we're up against.
Try and get as far as the TRF's response - I think they've done well to prepare a calm and measured response and is an example of some of the work they do.
Let's see if The Observer prints anything resembling a correction this Sunday.
Here's what he wrote in Sunday's The Observer
| Quote: | Until a couple of weeks ago, Chertpit Lane was just another Derbyshire footpath and bridleway – a couple of miles of rough walking through the spectacular landscape of the Peak District National Park. Now it has come to symbolise a cause, as the scene of the first battle in the war to save the national park from the ravages of "off-road" motorcycles and 4x4s.
Off-road motoring is literally wearing parts of the Peak District away. Yet it is being increasingly accommodated by authorities who have a duty to preserve the landscape of a national park which attracts almost 20 million visitors each year – virtually every one of them looking for clean air, clear skies and healthy exercise; not petrol fumes, the noise of revving engines and rutted roads.
Peter Wood, a farmer in the Peak Park like his father before him, grieves over "ancient trails completely wrecked" by "men with no feeling for the countryside". He might complain about the way in which damaged roads add to the problems of rearing sheep and cattle on the high ground of Longstone Moor. But his real concern is the future of the Peak. Although he is a down-to-earth man, each item in the inventory of destruction clearly causes him pain. Black Harry Lane was once "full of flowers in the summer and green all the year round". Now the top soil is stripped away, leaving nothing but a rubble road which is impassable for horses and a struggle for hikers to climb.
As a boy, Wood used to be taken on nature walks down Chertpit Lane. He expects it to go the same way as Black Harry Lane. For years, Chertpit Lane was a restricted byway from which motor traffic was excluded. A month ago, thanks to a decision of Derbyshire County Council, it was opened to all traffic. The process which legalised motor vehicles scrambling along what was once a "green road" combined tragedy and farce.
Legislation that was intended to protect the rural environment was implemented in a way which encouraged off-road drivers to extend their activities and claim that the harm they do had been legitimised. The 2006 Natural Environment Act extinguished the right of motor vehicles to use every footpath which had ever been open to any sort of wheeled transport in England and Wales. But, during the "consultation period", the government agreed that applications could be made up until January 2005 for some to be kept open to off-roaders.
So the garage door was locked after the motorcycles and the 4x4s had bolted. Hundreds of applications beat the deadline. One was in the name of Geoffrey Henton, a resident of Whitwell, 50 miles from the Peak Park. Asked why he chose to make that particular claim, he replied with admirable frankness: "We all decided to put one in." The "we" were members of The Trail Riders' Fellowship who, in the words of one council official, "adopted the scatter gun approach" in their attempt to make rural Derbyshire reverberate to the sound of motorcycles. Together with other "off-road" organisations, they have proved remarkably successful. In all, 231 claims have been made in Derbyshire alone. Seventy-six have a real chance of succeeding.
Other counties face similar invasions. Not all of them see them as a danger. Hampshire has 180 applications to open green roads to traffic – described by a council official as "the exercise of legal rights". They are being processed at the rate of six to eight a year. That explains why – five years after the act was passed – rural England is starting to fight back.
The desecration of the first few green roads was meekly accepted. But as the numbers have grown, year by year, the extent of the devastation has become intolerable. It is worst in the hilly national parks – Exmoor, the Lake District, Northumberland, North York Moors and the Peak. And it is likely to become even worse as off-road organisations grow more confident that their claims will be upheld. The Chertpit Lane decision is an unhappy precedent.
Like every local authority, Derbyshire is short of money. Yet it employed staff to prove that Chertpit Lane should be open to motor traffic because "on the balance of probability" it was once used by horse-drawn vehicles. The evidence, accepted by a public inquiry, included information from the Enclosure Plan of 1824, Greenwood's 1825 Map of Derbyshire and the Tithe Plan of 1847. The final judgment might have been invented as a satire on the law's absurdity. It amounted to a glorious non sequitur. Almost 200 years ago, hay carts passed down Chertpit Lane. So it must now be opened up to Land Rovers and Harley-Davidsons. Amenity, ecology, convenience and safety were ignored – despite the council's 2005 conclusion that the track was "too narrow for four-wheel vehicles".
The Peak Park Planning Authority's stated aim is to "balance" the demands of off-roaders with those of hikers and horse-riders – an objective which makes up in piety what it lacks in reality. Their interests cannot be reconciled. Legal or not, off-road motoring tears the countryside apart. If, as the authority's strategy document claims, "the aim is to ensure that the national park will not be damaged for future generations", its obligation is not to "manage the routes" which the off-roaders use, but to do all in its power to minimise their presence within its boundaries. Off-roaders destroy every green road on which they drive.
High on Longstone Edge, the distant view is of green hills and greener valleys stretching for mile after mile towards the horizon. The immediate prospect is grassland scarred with tyre tracks and pathways with potholes a foot deep.
In defence of opening more green roads to traffic, the Peak Park Authority stresses the importance of distinguishing between users who "flagrantly disregard the law", and men and women who pursue a legitimate claim to enjoy the tranquil countryside in super-charged Land Rovers. Its officials claim that "the illegal use of the most damaged sites has decreased" – hardly surprising if more and more green roads are open for legal, though equally destructive, off-roading. Derbyshire police welcome co-operative efforts to "reduce the impact of irresponsible off-roading for local residents".
Few Peak residents have noticed the improvement and evidence contradicts the optimistic generalities. A fortnight ago, just after the fightback started, South Yorkshire police confiscated a couple of motorcycles on the Sheffield approaches to the Park. But that is only nibbling at the edges of the problem. Every weekend prohibition signs are destroyed and walls are pulled down by the brutish fringe who follow the organised groups which advertise their respectability.
Half a mile away from Black Harry Lane, the Great Double Dyke – English Heritage Scheduled Monument 31229 – bears witness to the havoc wreaked by the tearaways. Two parallel ditches have marked the boundary between Ashford and Hope land since local families bought it from the Danes in AD926. But they have barely withstood the ravages of the motorcycles and Land Rovers which have driven down and across them.
Giant stones now block the entrance to the dykes from motorcyclists who want to use them as race tracks. The sign announcing their historical importance is brand new. It was replaced after enraged off-roaders pulled it down.
Last Saturday morning, the Grindleford Gallop – a charity event organised by local schools – came down Chertpit Lane. Six hundred walkers and runners made their way south. Four motorcyclists rode north against the tide. It is not hard to imagine what would have happened on a road, in parts only 2m wide, if the news had got abroad that it was open to every vehicle that wanted to race.
It is fear for the future, as well as love of the landscape, that has made the tranquil majority fight back. Led by John Poulter, a retired tax inspector who is therefore immune from charges of intemperance or irresponsibility, the quiet people are monitoring off-road behaviour in 13 Peak District parishes. Council and Peak Park decisions are being examined for evidence of error or maladministration. There will not be a parish meeting or residents' forum in the whole area that does not have "the dangers of off-roading" on its agenda.
Last Wednesday a gathering covering five villages lambasted the council for not identifying protected roads and the police for failing to prosecute when protected roads are violated. The campaigners are people who rarely demonstrate and never rebel but care. That is why it is likely to succeed. |
And here's what the TRF had to say about it
| Quote: | When an article in a reputable national newspaper begins with both a factual inaccuracy and an internal inconsistency in the opening sentence, the reader can only hope that it will improve as it goes on.
Sadly, that was not the case in Roy Hattersley’s latest splutterings on vehicular use of non-tarmac roads in the Peak District National Park.
As no one at The Observer appeared willing to check Mr Hattersley’s work before it went to print, I will list his factual errors, which I’m sure you will wish to correct in the next edition.
Paragraph one: Cherpit Lane is, as the name suggests, a lane. It is not, as Hattersley, asserts a footpath and bridleway. Indeed a right of way cannot be both a footpath and a bridleway.
Paragraph two: “Off-road motoring is literally wearing parts of the Peak District away.” The point is that the right of way in question is a road. It has a rough stone metalled surface apart from one stretch of sealed tarmac.
Paragraph four: The Derbyshire County Council decision to award byway status to Cherpit Lane is based on evidence of motor vehicle use dating back 26 years, and historical evidence of vehicular use dating back to the 17th century. Part of this evidence describes the route (prior to the invention of the motor vehicle) as “a miserable, pot-holed and lonely road to travel upon” by horse and cart. Hattersley can hardly blame these 18th century pot holes on his (mythical) trail riders on Harley-Davidsons and supercharged Land Rovers
Paragraph five: The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act of 2006 (to give it its correct name) post-dates the January 2005 deadline for byway applications. This is therefore clearly a retrospective change in the law: just the sort of retrospective change that Hattersley’s former colleagues in the House of Commons are now complaining so bitterly about when it applies to their expenses claims. Hattersley also omitted to mention how he voted when the NERC bill (and the preceding Countryside and Rights of Way Act of 2000 which gave a deadline of 2026 for rights of way claims to be made) were before Parliament.
Paragraph six: It was because most county councils had failed in their legal obligation to classify all rights of way correctly that the TRF began to realise that they would have to do the legwork of historical research: safeguarding the many ancient roads that would otherwise be at risk from annexation by landowners. At the time, the Ramblers Association seemed more interested in winning the ‘right to roam’ than it did in defending existing rights of way. All this valuable work was self-funded by the TRF: in contrast the Government threw £15 million at its ‘Discovering Lost Ways’ project and achieved nothing. DLW was abandoned by the Government in 2008 in response to vigorous lobbying by landowners’ groups who were perhaps afraid that it would discover how many lost ways had been annexed by their members.
Paragraph seven: In spite of the prejudices of the likes of Hattersley, most county councils realise that the TRF has done them (and the public) a favour by taking on a task in the public interest.
Paragraph eight: Hattersley seems blind to the major causes of upland erosion in the areas he mentions: walkers. In the Yorkshire Dales for instance, the National Park has been forced to spend 25 per cent of its annual budget on repairing the damage done to just one footpath: the Three Peaks. This now has an artificial surface throughout its length with much of the material required being airlifted into place by helicopter: so much for the clear skies and clean air Hattersley was banging on about back in paragraph two. And there is no suggestion that any of this damage was caused by anything other than the boots of walkers.
Paragraph nine: With the exception of motorways and bypasses, our right to use most of the highways (a term which includes footpaths, bridleways and byways as well as sealed roads), is based upon the kind of evidence that Hattersley describes as absurd. If the route, which should be of 30 ft width as set out in the relevant enclosure act, is too narrow then that may be because one of the landowners now complaining about the TRF’s success has annexed some of it.
Paragraph ten: This is not about ‘off-road’ motoring. The routes concerned are roads: and in the case of Cherpit Lane, one with a stone or tarmac surface throughout its length. The National Park cannot preserve the Peak District in aspic: 20 million visitors a year make that impossible, as does the need of farmers, quarrymen, the tourist industry and other businesses to make a living.
Paragraph twelve: While the NPA is able to distinguish between what is legal and what is not, it seems Hattersley is not. He is railing against legislation which he, as the unelected Baron Hattersley of Sheffield, had more opportunity than most to influence. Perhaps he could tell your readers how he voted during the CROW and NERC Acts’ passage through parliament.
Paragraph thirteen: Sadly, the efforts of the TRF and other responsible user groups to educate and reform the ‘problem’ element are constantly undermined by the likes of Hattersley and the ‘we don’t like it, so let’s ban it’ brigade. “If we can’t ride/drive anywhere, we will ride/drive everywhere,” is the argument frequently put forward by them
Paragraph fourteen: Perhaps Hattersley should ask some Peak District farmers what they think of people who allow dogs to roam over the moors: attacking wildlife and stock at will. This is a subject of which he has rather more than second-hand knowledge: in 1996 he was fined after his dog savaged and killed a goose in a public park.
Paragraph fifteen: Hattersley clearly supports the Grindleford Gallop, which by his own admission sees 600 people running down the lane which he claims is only two metres wide. He says they met four motorcyclists coming the other way: and asks what would happen if more motorcyclists had been ‘racing’ on the lane. Well, it’s illegal to race motor vehicles on the public highway so that eventually is covered by law, but it’s plain that, on the day, the Gallop was the bigger intrusion. A lone walker trying to climb the lane may well have found an encounter with 600 runners very intimidating.
Paragraph sixteen: The TRF welcomes the efforts of local citizens to monitor illegal off-roading in the Peak District: in fact, it is doing so itself in response to a request by Peak District Rangers. However, it is to be hoped that Mr Poulter’s band of self-appointed countryside guardians (or is that observers?) are fully conversant with the workings of the law or they may find themselves in trouble for a variety of offences.
In conclusion:
• The TRF maintains a Code of Conduct, which can be viewed on its website www.trf.org.uk to ensure that its members use the countryside in a safe and sustainable manner. It works with local agencies all over the country, including the Peak District, to that end.
• The TRF is keen to educate those using motorcycles in the countryside to do so in a legal, responsible and sustainable manner. It works with local agencies all over the country, including the Peak District, to that end.
• The TRF will vigorously maintain, defend and assert its right to use the unsurfaced roads of England and Wales on road-legal motorcycles.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
  |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
| tatters |
This post is not being displayed .
|
tatters
Exxon Valdez
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Karma :
|
Posted: 22:03 - 23 Mar 2010  Post subject: |
|
|
Saw it last night on the TRF forum, must try and get me one of thoses "off road Harley Davidsons" 
Typical clueless spiting cunt 
Yes l know Harley davidson made offroad bikes in the past but there rare as hens teeth
____________________
Past:NRG50,AF1125(x2),NSR125RR,ZZR250,CX500,VFR400,KR1S,ZZR600(x2),CB400N,YZF1000(x2),KH125,Z200,FX400R,CBR954RR(x2)GPZ500S,GT550,VFR750F(x2),RD350N,XR650R,CBR600F,CB250,KDX250,YZF750R,CRM250,400EXC,KLR650,TTR600RE,DR350S,R100GSPD,RGV250,VMAX1200,DL650,KZ750 Present:G650XC,C12,CRF450X,1190ADV |
|
| Back to top |
 |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Joenitro |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Joenitro
Spanner Monkey
Joined: 10 Sep 2008
Karma :  
|
| Posted: 22:18 - 23 Mar 2010 Post subject: |
|
|
A wonder what would cause more erosion - 600 walkers or 4 trail bikes. It is a road after all. By his logic maybe we should rip up all the tarmac in the countryside so it doesn't spoil the tranquility.
The man's a nob  |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| silky666 |
This post is not being displayed .
|
silky666
Captain Rulebook
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Joenitro |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Joenitro
Spanner Monkey
Joined: 10 Sep 2008
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Imonster |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Imonster
World Chat Champion
Joined: 18 Oct 2006
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| silky666 |
This post is not being displayed .
|
silky666
Captain Rulebook
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Thom |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Thom
World Chat Champion
Joined: 24 Oct 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| ..... |
This post is not being displayed .
|
.....
Quote Me Happy
Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Thom |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Thom
World Chat Champion
Joined: 24 Oct 2007
Karma :
|
| Posted: 18:55 - 25 Mar 2010 Post subject: |
|
|
Some of them get ridiculously defensive.
Whats worse is he argued "You are NOT one of us otherwise you would know better!" - I'm afraid mate, I am infact a walker, thankfully not whatever you are.
The point he pushed me off is when i showed him where we were on the map - and showed him the map key
And i'll give you this, heather doesnt half itch!
____________________
Current Bike: 1996 Yamaha TRX850 (The Japanese-Ducati One).
Previous Bikes: 1990 Honda NSR125 'Rothmans' (The smoking one), 1990 Suzuki GS500e 'Caf? fighter' (The loud one), 1987 Kawasaki GPX400r (The quick one), 1997 XJ600s Diversion (The reliable one), 2000 Kawasaki ER-5 (The spontaneously combustive one) |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Imonster |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Imonster
World Chat Champion
Joined: 18 Oct 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 14 years, 224 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
 |
|
|
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.10 Sec - Server Load: 0.12 - MySQL Queries: 16 - Page Size: 90.57 Kb
|
Help & FAQs
Search BCF
Members
Groups
Events Calendar
rating
rating