Home |

Latest News

How to report illegal vehicle use

Posted 1 February 2012

We get lots of enquiries from people who have encountered 4x4s and motorbikes driven and ridden illegally – either because the green lane is forbidden to recreational motor vehicles, or because the users were riding and driving dangerously. Enquirers want to know to whom they should report the law-breaking. The following list of contacts should help.

First, though, how can members of the public be sure that the vehicles encountered had no right to be there? If the route is shown on the ordnance survey map as a bridleway, footpath, or restricted byway, the vehicle users were breaking the law. Similarly, if the route, no matter what its designation, has been closed to recreational vehicles by means of a traffic regulation order (TR0), recreational vehicle users were breaking the law. Routes prohibited by TROs should have a sign posted at each end.

The status of green lanes marked on OS maps with rows of green dots is contested. They may, or may not have rights for vehicles, and until their status is established, it is not worth reporting vehicles – unless the route has been closed by a TRO, or unless the vehicle users were driving dangerously.

Reports of illegal green lane use should, ideally, be accompanied by:

An Ordnance Survey grid reference locating the site of the encounter

A note of the status of the route (eg bridleway; route closed by TRO)

Registration numbers of the vehicles encountered

Photos – preferably shots that will help to identify offenders

The names and addresses of all the people who saw the illegal activity.

Information, if relevant, about the danger and distress caused by the vehicles.

It is not always easy to supply all these details. Not surprisingly, law-breakers are coy about posing for photographs, and they commonly deface their number plates, making them hard to read (itself an illegal practice). But digital cameras and mobile phones are potent weapons in the hands of members of the public who are fed up with the illegal destruction of the fabric and tranquillity of green lanes. People making reports may be required to give a witness statement, but this can be taken at the complainant’s convenience, sometimes by telephone. When submitting reports, complainants should request both an acknowledgement and a crime number. This will ensure that the report is followed up.

WHO TO CONTACT WHEN MAKING A REPORT OF LAW-BREAKING:

FOR THE DALES NATIONAL PARK

PC HARRY CARPENTER who is stationed at Settle and covers the whole of Ribblesdale.

Telephone: 0845 6060247

e-mail: Harry.Carpenter@northyorkshire.pnn.police.uk

SGT STUART GRAINGER, Response & Reassurance Team, Leyburn Police Station

Telephone: 0845 6060247 Extension 4573

e-mail: Stuart.Grainger@northyorkshire.pnn.police.uk

MARK ALLUM, Recreation Manager of the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority

Telephone: 0300 4560030

e-mail: Mark.Allum@yorkshiredales.org.uk

(Mr Allum sends on complaints to the Police, but it is better to report direct to the relevant Police Officer and copy Mr Allum into your email or letter)

FOR THE NIDDERDALE AREA OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY (AONB)

SGT STUART GRAINGER, Response & Reassurance Team, Leyburn Police Station

Telephone: 0845 6060247 Extension 4573

e-mail: Stuart.Grainger@northyorkshire.pnn.police.uk

PC BILL HICKSON, Pateley Bridge Police Station (covers the AONB)

Telephone: 0845 6060247 Extension 3074

e-mail: Bill.Hickson@northyorkshire.pnn.police.uk

PAUL BURGESS, head of the AONB

Telephone: 01423 712950

e-mail: nidderdaleaonb@northyorks.gov.uk

FOR BOTH AREAS (as a last resort)

North Yorkshire County Council

Telephone: 0845 0349599

e-mail: paths@northyorks.gov.uk

Illegal off-roader convicted

(Posted 20 Jan 2012)

The Craven Herald (19.1.12) reports that a quad-biker who was attempting to ride along Dacre Lane, Otterburn, on a section with no vehicular rights, was reported to the police by three local members of the public, following a disagreeable, and, it seems, scary encounter. In court, the rider pleaded guilty to a charge of inconsiderate driving. His denial of the more serious charge of dangerous driving was accepted by the court. The report says that the rider was fined £365 and had seven penalty points added to his licence. It is encouraging that members of the public are persistent, and brave enough to confront illegal vehicular users of green lanes and report them to the police. It is encouraging, too, that the police and the courts took the complaint seriously.

Two new pages on our website

(posted 19 January 2011)

We have extended the website by the addition of two new pages. One is called ‘Frequently-asked questions.’ It sets out 13 of the commonest questions that we are asked, and our responses. The other new page is ‘Glossary’. Here we set out definitions of the key terms that crop up in all discussions about green lanes – UCRs, BOATs, The List of Streets, NERC……… and many more.

Who does the damage to green lanes?

(Posted 19 January 2011)

4x4 and motorbike users rarely, if ever, admit that they cause damage to green lanes. Their habitual strategy is to attempt to shift the responsibility for causing damage on to farmers, who are supposed to have taken heavy equipment along the lanes, or on to the weather, for producing rainfall that washes out lanes that would otherwise remain in good condition, or on to highway authorities, for failing in their duties to engineer and maintain green lanes to a standard capable of withstanding the regular passage of 4x4s and motorbikes. We can now test these assertions by seeing what happens to green lanes on which traffic regulation orders prohibiting recreational vehicles have been imposed. The two images below are of Long Lane, the green lane that runs from Clapham to Selside. The pictures were taken from the same spot. One was taken before the imposition of the TRO. The other was taken a few months after the order came into force. The only difference in the possible source of damage is the presence of 4x4s and motorbikes before the TRO was imposed, and their absence when the TRO came into force. Everything else - the weather, agricultural use, maintenance – has remained constant.

There can be no doubt that the damage was caused by recreational 4x4s and motorbikes, and that when they were prohibited, the track began to recover. True, there are still ruts beneath the grass, which will take some time to level off, but to most observers, the state of this green lane is greatly improved. The general conclusion is plain: if you want to improve the condition of green lanes without spending huge amounts of money on turning them into routes capable of withstanding vehicular traffic (and thereby transforming their essential character), simply prohibit 4x4s and motorbikes. The lane will then be given a chance spontaneously, naturally to regenerate. And obviously, the amenity of the non-motorised public will be considerably enhanced.

Deadman’s Hill: Traffic Regulation Order imposed

(Posted 19 August 2010)

‘Deadman’s Hill’ is the name given to the green lane that starts just north of Scar House Dam in Nidderdale (OS 067772). It runs westward to Lodge, and then turns sharply north to ascend and cross the watershed between Nidderdale and Coverdale. It descends to Arkleside. The route has been pretty much devastated by 4x4s and motorbikes and is now virtually impassable, at the summit, on horseback, on a mountain bike, or on foot. Lower down, vehicles have started to open up a parallel route in order to get round the crater that their activities have caused. At the summit, vehicles have carved out two additional, unsightly routes that stray from the right of way. In addition to the damage, the noise of vehicles reverberates around the fells, destroying the peace and tranquillity that used to be a feature of this remote area.

Along with local residents and the Friends of the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, we have been campaigning to have this route closed to recreational vehicles. We are pleased to report that North Yorkshire County Council have just imposed a traffic regulation order (TRO), prohibiting recreational vehicles. The order came into force on 16 August, and will remain in force until 15 February 2012. It is encouraging that the highway authority has responded to complaints and concerns about the damage and nuisance caused by 4x4s and motorbikes. The news would have been even more encouraging if the TRO had covered the whole of the route. The section that runs southwards from Scar House Dam, across the moor to Middlesmoor is in slightly better condition than the Deadman’s section, but the steep section down to the dam is badly damaged. Yet more encouraging still would have been news that the TRO will be permanent, following the model pioneered by the Dales National Park Authority. But the Deadman’s TRO is only temporary, and has been imposed not on general environmental and amenity grounds, but because the route is deemed (rightly) to be out of repair. The problem with orders of this sort is that it lays on highway authorities an obligation to repair the route, within the period specified by the order, and re-open it to vehicles. The cost of repairing Deadman’s Hill to a standard capable of withstanding regular, unrestricted use by 4x4s and motorbikes will be huge, and, in the forthcoming dearth of public funds, it is not clear that scarce money, which might be spent on keeping North Yorkshire’s ordinary road network in repair, should be devoted to a remote green lane, in order to facilitate the recreation of 4x4 and motorbike users. And the scale of the work needed puts the project beyond the capabilities of voluntary work parties. But suppose that repairs could somehow be carried out: as soon as the temporary TRO is lifted, 4x4s and motorbikes would return to the route. Indeed, probably more 4x4s would use it, for it is at present too damaged for most 4x4s to get through. If the route is repaired and re-opened, the damage and nuisance that is at the heart of the matter would swiftly re-commence. The only long-term solution is a permanent TRO on the whole route, from Middlesmoor to Arkleside, on environmental and amenity grounds. The amenity of vehicle users is not to be set aside lightly, but in this case, their pleasure in riding and driving along a remote green lane that came into existence to serve cattle, plus the occasional horse and cart, and which has not been fundamentally adapted to accommodate modern motor vehicles, is not as precious as the amenity of those who farm the area, and those non-motorised visitors who go to the head of Nidderdale seeking peace and tranquillity.

Still, half a loaf is better than no loaf at all. The prohibition on recreational vehicles for the next eighteen months is to be welcomed.

Stockdale Lane: confirmed as a bridleway

(Posted 3 August 2010)

Stockdale Lane starts a mile to the east of Settle. It branches off from High Hill Lane, and runs eastwards, parallel with Gorbeck Road, for approximately 4 miles, to emerge on the tarmac road above Malham Cove. (From 836631 to 892640) It has a spur that links with Gorbeck Road, making the ‘Settle Loop’ of the Pennine Bridleway. Stockdale is on the definitive map as a bridleway - ie a route open only to horseriders, pedal cyclists and pedestrians. Years ago, a member of the TRF – the motorcyclists’ group – put in an application, on the grounds of alleged historic horse-and-cart rights, to have this bridleway acknowledged as a route open to motor vehicles. (Under the archaic rules that applied in this case, discovery of centuries-old horse-and-cart rights automatically guaranteed rights for present-day motor vehicles.) The NERC Act set a cut-off date for such applications. The Stockdale application beat the cut-off date and therefore had to be pursued to a conclusion by the National Park Authority. YDGLA members conducted their own research into the history of the route and submitted their findings to the Park Authority. The National Park’s conclusion (and our own) was that no evidence of public horse-and-cart - and therefore motor vehicular - rights of way could be found. The applicant did not accept this conclusion: he exercised his right of appeal to the Secretary of State for adjudication.

Meanwhile, the ‘Winchester Judgement’ was handed down by the High Court (on 29 April 2008). This judgement clarified the law concerning applications – such as the Stockdale application –that had beaten the NERC cut-off date. The judge ruled that in order for any such application to be successful in preserving motor vehicle rights (if there were any to be preserved), the application had to have been made in strict compliance with the regulations governing applications. Before Winchester and the NERC Act, the only question that the authority had to consider was ‘Are there historic horse-and-cart rights (and therefore modern motor vehicular rights) on Stockdale Lane?’ The Authority’s answer to this question was ‘No’. Winchester added a second, question: ‘Does the application pass the Winchester test – was it made in full compliance with the regulations?’

The result was that the Secretary of State, to whom the Stockdale appeal had been referred, had to apply two tests. First, could historic horse-and-cart rights be shown to exist? If so, second; was the application properly compliant? The case languished for over two years, during which time vehicle users, taking advantage of the uncertainty, rode and drove along the route.

On 2 August 2010 we were informed that the applicant had withdrawn his appeal. We do not know why. But, whatever the reason, the conclusion to this saga is that Stockdale Lane is now confirmed as a bridleway. This is welcome news. Coupled with the recent decision to impose a traffic regulation order on Gorbeck Road (see below ‘Gorbeck Road: safe at last’), the withdrawal of the appeal on Stockdale Lane means that a large and beautiful area between Ribblesdale and Malhamdale will be freed from the damage and nuisance caused by motorbikes and 4x4s. The legal status of both routes is now beyond dispute. The ‘Settle Loop’ of the Pennine Bridleway can now flourish as it was intended to. Very soon, the only legal motor vehicles to be met on this network of green lanes will be the few used by farmers. Recreational vehicle users who defy either the confirmed bridleway status of Stockdale Lane, or the traffic regulation order imposed on Gorbeck Road, will be breaking the law.

Gorbeck Road: safe at last

(Posted 12 July 2010)

At its meeting on 8 July 2010, the Access Committee of the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority resolved to impose a permanent, 7 days a week, 12 months a year, traffic regulation order (TRO) on Gorbeck Road, the green lane that runs between Langcliffe, in Ribblesdale, and Langscar Gate, in Malhamdale. Unless something unforeseeable happens, this order will bring the saga of Gorbeck Road to a successful conclusion. (See the postings below for the full background.) At the Access Committee’s meeting, members, most of whom had been on a private visit to the green lane, resolved, with just one abstention, and no opposing votes, to impose the order, on the general grounds of the amenity of the area and the protection of the special qualities of the National Park. The order comes into force on 23 August 2010.

It is just over a year since the National Park Authority was challenged in the High Court by vehicle users who objected to four TROs, including one on Gorbeck Road, that had been imposed by the Authority. The vehicle users’ challenge was successful, and the four TROs were quashed. However, it turned out, in parallel developments, that two of the routes in question had no end-to-end vehicular rights in the first place, and that a third, Stockdale Lane, is indubitably a bridleway. This left just Gorbeck Road, its TRO quashed, once again vulnerable to damage and nuisance inflicted by recreational motor vehicles. Vehicle users took full advantage of the lifting of the TRO, and the malign impact of a year’s unrestricted 4x4 and motorbike use is clearly visible, especially on the eastern section of the route. At the same time, during the year following the High Court’s ruling, the Park Authority went back to the start, and conducted a whole new route assessment and a public consultation, both designed to comply with the court’s ruling. The result is the new TRO imposed last week.

This is obviously good news for Gorbeck Road, for those who farm the pastures through which it passes, and for those horseriders, cyclists and walkers who use the route in order to experience Gorbeck’s essential peace and tranquillity. But the news is good too for other national park authorities who are contemplating exercising their powers to impose TROs. Last year’s High Court action by the vehicle users, which seemed such a setback at the time, has turned out to have been a blessing in disguise, for it has tested the law and has shown authorities exactly how they must proceed when they seek to protect their green lanes from recreational motor vehicles.

Change of address

(Posted 27 May 2010)

Please note that our postal address has changed. Our new address is PO Box 159, Otley, LS21 9BT

Gorbeck Road: a permanent traffic regulation order finally in sight?

(Posted 23 April 2010)

Long-suffering Gorbeck Road, the superb green lane that runs from Langcliffe, eastwards to Langscar Gate, above Malham, has been in the wars for years. Originally, its status was undetermined, and offroaders, believing that the route had vehicular rights, regularly used it, turning sections of it into impassable bogs. Then, at a public inquiry, public vehicular rights were indeed confirmed. Next, the route was chosen to be part of the Pennine Bridleway. The Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority, with overwhelming support as expressed in a public consultation, then imposed a permanent traffic regulation order (TRO), prohibiting recreational motors from the route. With the route closed to vehicles, a great deal of money was spent on bringing the route up to the standard required by the Pennine Bridleway. Then, last June, vehicle users took the Park Authority to the High Court, claiming that the TROs on Gorbeck, and 3 other routes, had been improperly made. They won, and the orders were quashed. (See postings below.) The Authority has responded by going right back to square one. It has re-assessed the management needs of Gorbeck Road afresh. The result is that the Authority has just put out to public consultation a proposal that a full-time, permanent TRO should once again be imposed on the route. For the full details of the proposed order, and of the way in which the public may respond to the proposal, see the Authority’s website:

http://www.yorkshiredales.org.uk/index/looking_after/access_to_the_countryside/green_lane_management/traffic_regulation_orders.htm

There is now a real prospect that poor old Gorbeck Road will be given the permanent protection that it needs. The damage that has been inflicted by the vehicles that have taken advantage of the quashing of the first TRO will have a chance to heal, and the peace and tranquillity that can reasonably be expected on this remote green lane will be re-established. Vehicle users may respond to the public consultation by arguing that a seasonal, winter-only, TRO will suffice, but the non-motorised public are likely to support the proposal made by the Authority by arguing that only a full, twelve-months-a-year prohibition will secure the protection that Gorbeck Road needs.

Further reflections on the High Court TRO case

(posted 27 June 2009)

The dust is now settling, following the Judge’s decision to quash 4 traffic regulation orders imposed by the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority. (See item below, posted on June 20). As might be expected, LARA, the motor-vehicle users’ group, is jubilant, and their website (laragb.org) includes a photograph of one of the successful litigants, rejoicing at the prospect of 4x4s and trailbikes once again motoring along Gorbeck Road. However, LARA’s jubilation is tempered: they set out a caution about the legality of using the other three routes included in the High Court judgment – Harber Scar Lane, Arncliffe Cote, and Stockdale Lane. LARA say that the right to take motor vehicles on these routes may have been affected by the NERC Act, and that any vehicle-user who is considering driving or riding along the length of the routes should first consult both his or her motoring organisation, and the highway authority, before doing so. This caution is understandable. LARA has to make sure that its advice is watertight: after all, it might be cited in court by a vehicle user who has been prosecuted for driving or riding the length of any of these three lanes. YDGLA’s view is more forthright. We consider that the NERC act certainly has affected the BOAT applications for the 3 routes, and has affected them lethally. Vehicular use of the 3 routes is illegal. Our reasons are as follows.

At present, one of the 3 lanes, Arncliffe Cote, has a very short section that is indubitably a BOAT. Another, Harber Scar Lane, has a short section that may be a BOAT. The third, Stockdale Lane, is bridleway throughout. Two of the three, therefore, have no end-to-end vehicular rights, and Stockdale Lane has not one inch of vehicular rights on its entire 4 mile length. LARA says, rightly, that there are BOAT applications in the pipeline, seeking to have the status of all three recognised as BOATs. What LARA does not say, though, is that these applications are non-compliant, following the Winchester Case, which established that BOAT applications that do not comply exactly with the regulations cannot secure motor-vehicular rights. The non-compliance of the 3 applications leaves the applicant with just two further shots in his locker if he insists on pursuing his case for vehicular rights throughout the length of the three routes. First, he can argue that between May 2001 and May 2006 the main lawful use of the routes was use by motor vehicles. If fired, this shot will fall ludicrously short of the target. An attempt last year, using a similar shot, to secure a BOAT on a section of Moor Head Lane, was a dismal failure. (See below, ‘An important provision of NERC is tested’.) The second, desperate shot would be to try to argue that vehicular rights on the 3 routes were created by virtue of legal public motor vehicular use before 1930. The chance of this shot hitting the target is zero. The conclusion, therefore, is that despite the three BOAT applications that are lodged in the system, the non-vehicular end-to-end status of the 3 routes will not change. Anybody who takes a vehicle along the full length of any one of the routes is breaking the law. When prosecuted, the defendant would have the impossible job of proving that he had a right to be there, and any motoring organisation that came to his legal aid would be wasting its members’ money.

So, of the four TROs that the judge quashed, 3 have no continuous vehicular rights anyway. It may not, therefore, be necessary to remake the defective TROs.

What about the fourth green lane, Gorbeck Road? Here, a remade, 24/7 TRO will certainly be needed, for the route does have vehicular rights. The new TRO should not prove too difficult to secure. Indeed, the High Court judgment makes it easier for the authority to see precisely what is needed when orders are contemplated. In this sense, expensive and time-consuming as it was, the High Court action will turn out to be useful: National Park authorities up and down the country will now know exactly what to do as they prepare to exercise the TRO-making powers given to them by NERC. In the case of Gorbeck Road, the whole consultation exercise can be run through once more, but this time, every party that has a hand in the consultation – Park officers, Authority members, members of the Green Lanes Advisory Group, the general public – must be briefed about the need publicly to perform the balancing act required by section 122 – the section over which the Park Authority stumbled, first time round. And it should be easy to show that in the case of Gorbeck Road, the balance comes down on the side of a prohibition on all recreational motors.

Overall, then, the prospect is much brighter than might have been imagined when the judge issued his ruling. True, 4x4s and motorbikes will, for the time being, return to Gorbeck Road, as they are legally now entitled to. The public, who responded at a rate of more than 3 to 1 in favour of the now-quashed TRO, will be incredulous, but they can take comfort from the likelihood of the eventual re-imposition of a TRO that meets the High Court’s requirements. As for the other three routes, only foolhardy off-roaders will risk riding or driving along them, and, given both the vigilance of National Park rangers, and the militant state of public opinion, they will be reported to the police, and, it is to be hoped, successfully prosecuted.

YDGLA’s initial reaction to the High Court’s judgment was that 4x4 and motorbike users had won a small rearguard action in a war that they are bound to lose in the end. Our revised view is that although we wince at the costs, from the public purse, that the Dales Park Authority will have to stump up to pay the costs of the High Court action, in the long run, the case will come to be seen as contributing very useful guidance on the way in which off-roaders can be prohibited from intruding into the countryside. Public opinion has now decisively swung against the presence of motor vehicles on remote tracks in national parks and in the countryside generally. Vehicle users will, for some time, be able to use the law to obstruct the implementation of orders that give expression to what the public wants, but they cannot prevail indefinitely, and the more long-sighted of them know it.

A Setback in the High Court.

(Posted 20 June 2009)

Back in May 2008 the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority made 8 traffic regulation orders, prohibiting recreational motor vehicles from some of the most beautiful and sensitive of the green lanes in the Dales. These orders were challenged by the 4x4 and motorcycle users’ lobby group, LARA. The case eventually came to court and was heard in the High Court in Leeds on June 2nd and 3rd (2009). The judge issued his decision on June 19th. He quashed 4 of the 8 orders. The four are: Arncliffe Cote, Harber Scar Lane, Stockdale Lane and Gorbeck Road.

The judge’s decision turned on a small, but decisive point of law. Section 122 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act lays on authorities an obligation to balance their duty to ‘secure the ….movement of vehicular and other traffic’, against their obligation to take into account matters that might override their duty to secure the movement of traffic (eg environmental matters, or matters of public safety – indeed any matters that appear to the authority to be relevant). The judge held that there was no documentary evidence that the authority had publicly and explicitly performed this balancing act. The Park Authority had argued that in declaring that the TROs were made ‘for the purposes of preserving amenity and conserving the natural beauty of the area’, it had implicitly fulfilled its duties under section 122. The judge was not persuaded. Visible, documentary evidence of the performance of the balancing act is what was required, and the Park Authority could not supply it.

Where does this judgement leave the four superb green lanes that are, seemingly, once again under threat from motor vehicle users? The news is not as bad as it seems. Away from the High Court there have been encouraging, concurrent developments that substantially moderate the impact of the judge’s ruling.* Of the four routes, only one, Gorbeck Road, has proven motor-vehicular rights. To prohibit 4x4s and motorbikes once again from inflicting their unwelcome presence on Gorbeck Road, the Park Authority will have to remake a TRO, in ways that will accommodate the judge’s ruling. This is entirely feasible, and highly desirable, given the money that has been spent on repairing the route and bringing it up to the standard necessary for the Pennine Bridleway – money that will have been wasted if motor vehicles get back on to the route and ruin both its fabric and the sense of peace and tranquillity that has reigned there during the period of the TRO.

In the cases of the other three routes, none, it is now clear, had motor vehicular rights, throughout its length, in the first place. This means that although the TRO signs will have to come down, 4x4 or motorbike users will still be breaking the law if they go ahead and use the full length of the routes. If offenders are prosecuted, they will have the insuperable task of proving that the route they were using has motor vehicular rights.

Whether motorised users will venture on to these 3 lanes, and, if so, whether they will be prosecuted, remains to be seen.

* The ‘Winchester Case’, which established that applications for motor vehicular rights must comply exactly with the requirements of the relevant legal provisions. The Winchester Case sent numbers of non-compliant Dales BOAT applications gurgling down the plughole. Winchester liberated three of the four green lanes in the High Court judgment from the threat of motor vehicular access.

An important provision of NERC is tested at a public inquiry in the Dales: a bad result for recreational vehicle users.

The NERC Act, in general, extinguishes motor vehicular rights on green lanes. But there are a number of exceptions, and one of them was tested at a public inquiry, on 1 July 2008, into the status of a section of Moor Head Lane, near Helwith Bridge. A short central section of the lane is a Restricted Byway – that is to say, a route that has no public rights for motors. Relying on one of the exceptions provided by NERC, a group of motorcyclists attempted to convince the inquiry that motor vehicles had been the main users of the route for the five year period from May 2001 to May 2006. If they had succeeded in showing, on the balance of probabilities, that this was the case, the restriction on motor vehicles would have had to be lifted: the route would have had to be reclassified as a public motor-vehicular route. However, the NERC 5-year-main-use test is extremely difficult to pass, for it is a comparative test: the motorcyclists had to show that motorised use of the route exceeded non-motorised use of the route, during the 5 year period. To make such a comparison, plausible figures for both types of use had to be supplied. But the only evidence presented by the motorcyclists was a sheaf of forms on which individual members of the TRF – the motorcyclists’ association – had testified, from memory, to their own, periodic use of the track. No evidence was supplied by them of the level of non-motorised use. YDGLA presented the inquiry with its own evidence, gathered from its members, which showed that, contrary to the motorcyclists’ assertions, non-motorised use of the lane had been extensive. The Inspector issued his report on 29 July 2008. He concluded that the comparative test had failed, and that the disputed section of Moorhead Lane should remain as a restricted byway. This may seem an arcane area of highway law, but it is important. Recreational vehicle user organisations, nationwide, are gathering testimony from their members of their use of green lanes during the five year period. They seem to believe that this testimony is capable, on its own, of establishing that the main use of any particular route was vehicular and that, therefore, the route should be acknowledged as a public, motor-vehicular route. The Moor Head Lane enquiry indicates strongly that their belief is misplaced. The only way in which the ‘5-year-main-use’ exception can be tested is at inquiries where the applicant presents a convincing balance-of-use analysis of the 5 year period. The production of analyses of this sort, however, is virtually impossible. The chances of records of use of the disputed route having been kept by all users, when there was absolutely no reason, at the time, for them to have been kept, are vanishingly small. And the chances of vehicle users having secured access to those records that, against the odds, were kept, must be zero. But the 5-year-main-use test requires applicants to produce such records. The Moor Head Lane enquiry demonstrates the futility of attempting to secure rights for motor vehicles in the absence of the necessary comparative evidence.

Traffic regulation orders in the Dales National Park: good news, tempered by a worrying development

A ten league stride was taken by the Dales National Park Authority’s Access Committee at its meeting on 17 April 2008. It voted to authorize the imposition of full, 24 hour, 7-days-a-week traffic regulation orders on eight of the most vulnerable green lanes in the Dales. (Ling Gill, Arncliffe Cote, Stockdale Lane, The High Way, Gorbeck Road, Cam High Road, Foxup Road, and Harber Scar Lane.)

The results of the public consultation, which were laid before the committee, and which informed the committtee’s decision, were plain. For every vehicle user who objected to the proposed orders, there were more than three members of the public who supported them. Moreover, while the opposition to the orders came exclusively from vehicle users, the support for them came from a wide range of Dales opinion – from farmers, cyclists, parish councils, the Yorkshire Dales Society and many others.

A further stride was taken at the subsequent Access Committee meeting, on 22 July 2008, when a further 5 TROs were imposed. (Mastiles Lane, Long Lane [Clapham to Selside] , Horsehead Pass, Carlton to Middleham High Moor, Barth Bridge to Garsdale.)

However, LARA, the umbrella group representing vehicle users, has issued a High Court challenge to the first batch of TROs. The case - which will be a test case - will probably be heard sometime before the end of 2008. The rules of the High Court mean that details of LARA’s challenge, and the Dales Authority’s response to it, have to be kept confidential by the 2 parties, so we do not know the details. One thing is clear, though. The ruling by the High Court will set a precedent. It will establish the way in which traffic regulation orders must be imposed. Watch this space.

Traffic Regulation Orders in the Dales National Park

Under the NERC Act, National Park Authorities were given the powers to impose traffic regulation orders on green lanes. Hitherto, the powers had lain with highway authorities. The Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority is currently working its careful way through a public consultation on the possibility of imposing orders on 15 of the most sensitive routes - 8 in one batch, and 5 in another. It is too early to be sure how this consultation will turn out, but it is encouraging to see the Authority exercising its new powers. The first results should be visible by the summer of 2008..

A real breakthrough: the NERC bill passes into law

The two chief provisions of the NERC Act, which came into force on 2 May 2006, are these:

1. Public motor vehicle rights are extinguished on all routes that are on the definitive map as bridleways or footpaths (with a few exceptions, noted below.) This means that if an up-to-date Ordnance Survey map shows that a route is a bridleway or footpath, recreational vehicle users have no right to be there. If they do ride and drive on footpaths and bridleways they are open to prosecution. This provision of NERC brings much-needed clarification to the map, and it gives protection to footpaths and bridleways from challenges by motor-users: they can no longer claim that these routes have underlying vehicular rights.

2. National Park Authorities will have the power to impose Traffic Regulation Orders, prohibiting recreational motor vehicles from green lanes. (Formerly, these powers were retained by Highway Authorities and were only rarely used.)

Exceptions: If a properly-completed application for a vehicular byway (BOAT) was lodged before 20 January 2005 it will be processed under the old, ‘horse-and-cart’ rules, which offer vehicle users the prospect that motor-vehicular rights may be confirmed on the claimed routes. All applications lodged after 20 January will be treated as applications for restricted byways – ie routes that bear rights for pedestrians, pedal cyclists, equestrians, and essential motor vehicles (eg farm or emergency vehicles) only. There are a number of these exempted applications in the Dales.

There is, however, a weakness in the Act. Routes that are ‘Unclassified County Roads’ (UCRs) – that is to say, publicly-maintainable routes whose exact status is uncertain - are exempt from the Act. How many UCRs will eventually have to be recognised as bearing rights for motor vehicles is unknown. There are over 100 kms of UCRs in the Dales. In the absence of clarity about their status, it is likely that opportunistic 4x4 drivers and motorcyclists will insist on using them.

More good news – this time from Blubberhouses Moor

English Nature has produced a report on the state of this vast moor in the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The report shows that the damage to the moor caused by recreational vehicles is so severe that if the moor were to be closed to them for five years, parts of the damaged sections would still not have had time to regenerate. In the light of this damning report, and with the support of a number of recreational vehicle user groups – whose support we welcome and salute -, the highway authority has imposed traffic regulation orders on all the byways that criss-cross the moor. The signs and the barriers were installed in early October 2005. Considering its proximity to the huge urban centres of Leeds and Bradford, Blubberhouses Moor used to be a very remote and peaceful place, with grassy tracks winding across the heather. The tracks are now morasses, and at the weekends, before the TROs were imposed, the noise of motorbikes echoed across the moor. It will take time before the beneficial effects of the TROs are seen and heard, but already the number of vehicles traversing the moor has fallen substantially. The TROs promise that both the fabric and the ambience of the moor will eventually be restored.

Experimental traffic regulation orders in the Dales: still in place.

The eighteen-month experimental traffic regulation orders (ETROs) that were imposed, in March 2004, on 4 badly-damaged green lanes in the Craven area of the Dales came up for their first review in July 2005. A bulky and painstaking report on the effect of the orders was prepared jointly by the National Park Authority and North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC). The report shows that:

· Compliance with the orders has been good. Motorbike use of the lanes, for example, has dropped by 90%.

· The rutting of the lanes caused by recreational vehicles has not yet healed, but even so, the lanes look better. They are grassing over well.

· The damage caused by recreational vehicles is much more serious and extensive than that caused by agricultural vehicles.

· The quality of the Dales that users of the lanes value most highly, after scenic grandeur, is peace and tranquillity. This quality returned to the 4 green lanes when recreational vehicles were prohibited.

· Nearly half of the respondents in the perception surveys carried out during the experiment said that recreational vehicles should be prohibited altogether from green lanes in the National Park.

The ETROS were due to expire in September 2006, a month or so before responsibility for the making of TROs in the Dales National Park passed to the National Park Authority. There was, therefore, the prospect of a gap opening during the interim which would have been filled by the return of 4x4s and motorbikes to the 4 routes. However, NYCC made fresh orders on the routes that will bridge the gap. How quickly the Park Authority will be able to make the 4 orders permanent remains to be seen. But there is no doubt about what the general public wants. Here are three indicators:

· In March 2004, ICM Ltd carried out a public opinion survey on countryside issues. They found that 87% of the population favour a ban on recreational vehicles on rights of way in national parks and other protected landscapes. Only 8% want vehicles to be permitted to use such routes. (5% don’t know.)

· In July, YDGLA submitted a petition to the chairman of North Yorkshire County Council. 4,000 people - chiefly residents of, and visitors to the Dales National Park - had signed their name to a call for legislation, local or national, to prohibit recreational vehicles from the Dales National Park and the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

· In the report on the impact of the ETRO scheme, virtually half (49%) of respondents to the perception survey wanted recreational vehicles banned from all green lanes in the national park. The report on the ETRO scheme analyses the individual written submissions that were sent in. Of the 193 who wrote in, 183 supported the scheme. 111 writers, from the total of 193, wanted the orders to be made permanent. 55 said that they wanted the scheme to be extended across the park.