(...Previous)

                                           
    Routes do become rutted, but the claims that 30ins deep ruts are caused by recreational vehicles are nonsense.  Clearly only agricultural traffic could cause such damage.  These assumptions can be confirmed by a report from the Countryside Commission to the Environment Committee in April 1995, which stated
"Damage by recreational activity is heavily exceeded by industrialisation, farming and urbanisation".  (Bush, 1995, p129)
As the DETR more recently states after considering consultation to ban vehicles,

"At the extreme, a heavy agricultural tractor towing a large wide trailer at perhaps 15-20 mph represents the worst case situation for wear and tear."  (DETR, 1998, p5).

    It is not only farmers though, the forestry commission also uses heavy machinery on tracks as do the utility providers who often dig up the surface to lay cables etc. but seldom do they repair the surface back to its original condition. Damage to rights of way may be punishable in court as it is covered under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 although seldom are people caught, let alone punished.  Damaged rights of way can also be temporarily closed by a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) by the Highway Authority, under Section 1 of the Road Traffic Act 1984.  Such orders impose regulations such as restricting vehicle types, days of allowed use and others including complete exclusion.  TRO's are very hard for vehicle users to appeal against and very costly for Authorities to apply, due to the lengthy procedures that have to be completed in applications.  TRO's may be applied for periods of between 6-18 months, depending on the circumstances.  There are problems with Authorities using them to reduce BOAT's status to footpath/bridleway without public hearing, apparently using them as an instrument of policy.  In some cases barriers may be erected, but in all there should be clear signs giving details of the order.  An alternative is the Voluntary Restraint preferred by LARA.  They may have no legal force, but compliance is through co-operation with users.  Compliance is good as users are involved in decisions, rather than having restrictions imposed upon them from Authorities.  The procedures and restrictions that may apply are similar to TRO's, but signs indicate voluntary restraint and no barriers are erected.  Voluntary Restraints are far cheaper than TRO's, which saves money that can be better-spent maintaining/reclassifying other rights of way. 

However probably the worst damage as perceived by the public is done by vehicles speeding along lanes, as other users and residents see brightly coloured aggressive looking vehicles adorned with roll bars, lights and winches and instantly take a dislike to any other vehicle users they may subsequently come across.  Dealing with such public perceptions is one of the off road fraternities hardest problems, and confrontations do occur regularly on rights of way, as well as in public debate arenas such as public enquiries.

Back