Access for all

[alexandra kaley]

Hi,

Can anyone help me identify work going on in the South Downs to promote an 'inclusive access' policy. I am particularly interested in projects which aim to promote access and use of the south downs for those with physical or leaning disabilities.

If anyone knows of/is involved in any work like this your info would be greatly appreciated.

 

Many thanks

Alex

[Peter Fancourt]

Maureen Comber reinforces the point that all rights of way could benefit by being multi-user. I entirely agree with her on that point, but why restrict the 'multi use' by excluding motorised users? If we're serious about making the countryside open to all classes of user then why the exclusion?

In anticipation of all the usual objections to this being trotted out can I say that I've heard them all, ad nausium, and, whilst I agree there is a very small number of anti social motorised users who ruin the reputation of the vast majority, that is no reason to punish the law abiding and careful majority for the miss deeds of the minority.

If that were to happen on the tarmac surfaced roads the whole population would all be banned from driving because of the crimes of those committing motoring offenses. Public football matches would be illegal because of a few trouble makers.

True, all embracing, multi use access, regardless of gender, race or creed? Yes, why not, that's what the SDNP should be all about.       

[Maureen C Comber]

'Why restrict the multi-use by excluding motorised users?'

Simply because motoring is no longer compatible alongside more vulnerable road users.  The health and safety risk is obvious.   In addition it is noisy and polluting.

[Peter Fancourt]

"No longer compatible"? Only in your opinion... Entirely compatible in my opinion.

"Health and safety risk"? Would you, please, tell us all how many accidents have occurred between motorised vehicles and other users, anywhere, and at any time since records began.

Noisy? The few motorised vehicles who use the Byways are no more noisy then the numerous large groups of chattering walkers. Polluting? the same few motorised users are probably less polluting than the cars used to carry walkers to their chosen point of access to start their walk. I am in no way criticising walkers, far from it, I have been one all my life but joint disease restricts the distance I can manage now!!

If this were an issue then you would have to close all public car parks, supermarket car parks, narrow country lanes and high streets in order to extinguish, what is, a far higher risk to the health and safety of the public.

I have a further question; why do you appear so prejudiced against a very minor user group?

Access for all? Or lip service?   

[Maureen C Comber]

To answer your last question first.  It is indeed lamentable that to engage in discussion leaves one open to  accusations of prejudice or phobias.  However that can only be the case if such was an opinion rather than fact.

I believe some 4,000 have been killed on the UK's roads last year  They have not been the victims of non-motorised users.

It is a pity that when motorists have the use of 100% of the country's roads they still want more and cannot be content to enjoy the countryside in a more sustainable way.  

[Peter Fancourt]

My mistake! I should have been more specific. I meant 'how many accidents have occurred between motorised vehicles and other users ON PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY'. I know I didn't say that but I'm sure most people would realize that it's Rights of Way we're discussing here.

As you seem to want to avoid the question, and in order to save you more research, I can answer the question for you as follows. To the best of my knowledge there has not one reported accident between a legal motorised user and any other user on a Right of Way anywhere in the UK since records began. So, getting back to the original point, where is the health and safety risk?

Now we seem to have disposed of the myths of health, safety, noise and pollution it only leaves me to again apologise for offending your sensitivity but in mitigation I did say "APPEAR so prejudiced"

As you now confirm that you are not predjudiced [a fact that I never seriously doubted] maybe you'll now agree that motorised users have a place in the SDNP and a right to use the less than 1.8% [overall the UK] of the Rights of Way that have vehicular rights.

Further more, in a spirit of the fairness that I'm sure you feel toward everyone, would you not be prepared to agree that a slightly larger % of the Rights of Way might be extended to motorised users? You started this discussion recommending a larger share for horses, a plea I would wholeheartedly support, so why not similar for the smallest user group of all?  

[Maureen C Comber]

I don't know the answer to the number of accidents which may have occured on ROW.  If it is very low it is probably because they have gone unrecorded or that the byway was so mashed up by vehicles no one else could use it with any degree of enjoyment.

No apologies needed. I have long ago lost any sensitivities and am quite happy to have this conversation with you.

No I am not prepared to agree with any motorised use, let alone extended use of the ancient highways, with any group, large or small.  It is simply not about persons but pragmatism.

People need some space where they can be free from the ever present dangers of motor vehicles.  Rights of Way could offer us that.

I wonder what Alex thinks as it was she that started this stimulating discussion?

[Peter Fancourt]

The number of accidents is very low; numbers don't get much lower than zero!!

As for accidents not being reported I just don't believe even one would go unreported let alone your inference that there might be many

As for walkers & horse riders not using Byways that's nonsense, I meet hundreds of walkers and dozens of horse risers when I'm out on the Byways and they seem happy and friendly and able to cope with the terrain well enough because generally it's in reasonable condition or they would choose to walk on the other 98.2% [overall the UK] available to them. I do agree agricultural machinery does take it's toll on the surface in places.  

I notice you're still on about the dangers of motor vehicles in spite of the fact that I've demonstrated with statistics that no danger exists.

I notice that you're now recommending a total ban of all vehicles from all R of W's. I thought, correct me if I'm wrong, that one of the fundamental duties of the SDNP was to ensure and protect the rights of access for all user groups and you're trying to totally disenfranchise the smallest of them all.

I can only liken your approach it to a schoolyard bully with a big bag of sweets beating up the smallest kid in the playground to take away his one sweet.

It may have escaped your notice but the only way some classes of our community can access the countryside is by motor vehicle, and before you suggest mobility scooters, they are totally impractical and carry the stigma of disability and separation instead of inclusion as part of a group.

Not about people but about pragmatism?? The SDNP access policy is all about people!!

So you are, in effect, trying to prevent people with disabilities having the same freedom of access as those without the disability. I'm not sure how that sits with Alex's original topic!

I'm not sure which user group you represent but I would welcome the opportunity of a direct face to face conversation on this because your arguments are getting more and more tortuous and you obviously have a completely distorted view of my use of the R of W's and those like me.

I'm not sure I'll every change your mind but we might part with a better understanding of each others pastimes and points of view.

[John Vannuffel]

Liz,

 

Any stile or gate erected on a right of way, without approval of the relevant Highway Authority, that isn't recorded on the definitive statement for that route, is a nuisance at common law.

 

If there was a gate previously and that has now been chaged to a stile then this meets the legal definition of an obstruction to the highway.

 

The Disability Discrimination Act has now been superceeded by the Equality Act. This legislation also places the Public Sector Equality Duty on Public bodies, such as SDNPA.

 

 

[Sylvia A.Jones]

One of the most delightful places in the South Downs is just one mile from my home

in East Ashling - Kingley Vale Nature Reserve at West Stoke.  Teeming with wildlife and with a good car park for those not arriving on foot.  The nature trail will take you to the thousand year old Yew trees, and for those who wish to climb to the top of the Downs, you can look at the splendid views and see why King Charles 2nd in flight,;paused here, drew rein and said "This is surely worth fightling for!

The path from the perimeter of the Reserve from rthe parking area was improved some years ago by a Heritage Lottery fund making it suitable for wheelchairs and buggies.

The Reserve is approached through Ashling Woods which are the most wonderful sight at bluebell time and well worth an excursion just to walk through that wonderful swathe of blue.  We and our B&B guests are so lucky to have all this within walking distance.   SYLVIA JONEs, Englewood B&B

[Tim Squire, SDNPA]

Other forum members may be interested in the reply to an earlier inquiry in this discsussion from Liz Robinson about a particular footpath as it may help to clarify the situation in other similar cases:

Hello Liz

You refer to a path which is now not available to you because of some obstacles being installed on the path. West Sussex County Council are responsible for managing the RoW in this area. I think you are saying that there are stiles on the path that now make it unusable by members of your walking group. Stiles are the responsibility of the landowner. If there are stiles on a path the County Council cannot force a landowner to remove them but they will take opportunities to remove stiles where they can. They may offer to instal a gate as a replacement if this is needed for stock control.

You can contact WSCC RoW Team via their website.

http://www.westsussex.gov.uk/leisure/getting_around_west_sussex/footpaths_and_bridleways.aspx

They also have a series of Easy Access walks.

http://www.westsussex.gov.uk/leisure/getting_around_west_sussex/walking_cycling_horseriding/walking/easy_countryside_trails.aspx

The SDNPA may be able to work with WSCC on projects which aim to improve RoW. Working with landowners, path users and the council to make a path more accessible by removing physical barriers such as stiles and steps is something we can investigate. WSCC may be able to help you in the first instance but if it looks like being a bigger project then I can put you in touch with the local SDNPA ranger who will be able to advise.

Regards

Tim Squire

Rights of Way and Access Officer

South Downs National Park Authority