Public Footpaths - cycling?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
thirdcrank
Posts: 29041
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby thirdcrank » 22 Jul 2020, 10:03pm

pwa wrote:... Deliberately dropping litter isn't a criminal offence ....


Just to show I'm paying attention

87 Offence of leaving litter. E+W

[F1(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he throws down, drops or otherwise deposits any litter in any place to which this section applies and leaves it.

(etc)


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/87

pwa
Posts: 12480
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby pwa » 23 Jul 2020, 5:13am

thirdcrank wrote:
pwa wrote:... Deliberately dropping litter isn't a criminal offence ....


Just to show I'm paying attention

87 Offence of leaving litter. E+W

[F1(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he throws down, drops or otherwise deposits any litter in any place to which this section applies and leaves it.

(etc)


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/87

Civil of criminal?

My point is simply that whether an offence is criminal or just civil, it is still an offence.

Also , anyone who finds it acceptable to cycle on Public Footpaths must have very low standards when it comes to the acceptable width of shared use paths, unless their Public Footpaths are wider than usual. Most Public Footpaths around here are quite narrow.

thirdcrank
Posts: 29041
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby thirdcrank » 23 Jul 2020, 6:21am

(5)A person who is guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/87

Jdsk
Posts: 1242
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby Jdsk » 23 Jul 2020, 8:15am

pwa wrote:My point is simply that whether an offence is criminal or just civil, it is still an offence.

Are we talking about England... what do you mean by a "civil offence"?

Thanks

Jonathan

PaulaT
Posts: 117
Joined: 20 Dec 2018, 6:41pm
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby PaulaT » 23 Jul 2020, 8:27am

Jdsk wrote:
pwa wrote:My point is simply that whether an offence is criminal or just civil, it is still an offence.

Are we talking about England... what do you mean by a "civil offence"?

Thanks

Jonathan


Generally the difference between a civil and a criminal offence is that you can be jailed for the latter.

thirdcrank
Posts: 29041
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby thirdcrank » 23 Jul 2020, 8:38am

In England and Wales, we have two parallel legal systems.

The criminal courts deal with allegations of criminal offences on behalf of society as a whole. If a defendant is convicted, then they receive a sanction which may be a punishment, including imprisonment, or some other disposal such as supervision AKA probation.

The civil courts deal with private legal actions between parties (who may be a public body.) The cases generally involve civil wrongs or "torts." The relevant tort in this thread being trespass on land. Civil court decisions may include some form of compo, or an order to do something or desist.

Before anybody starts, there are all sorts of trespasses which have been made criminal offences eg trespass on the railway.

Some things which were previously offences like yellow line parking have been taken out of the criminal justice system sometimes described as "decriminalised."

PS Something may be both a criminal offence and a tort. From a road users' POV causing a crash may be both an offence eg dangerous/ careless driving, and a tort eg negligence. Back to trespassing on land, that could become criminal if the trespasser was guilty of theft or criminal damage.
Last edited by thirdcrank on 23 Jul 2020, 11:07am, edited 1 time in total.

Jdsk
Posts: 1242
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby Jdsk » 23 Jul 2020, 8:41am

PaulaT wrote:
Jdsk wrote:
pwa wrote:My point is simply that whether an offence is criminal or just civil, it is still an offence.

Are we talking about England... what do you mean by a "civil offence"?

Thanks

Jonathan


Generally the difference between a civil and a criminal offence is that you can be jailed for the latter.

That's not how the words are usually used. To avoid confusion it's probably best to keep "offences" to the criminal law, and use "wrongs" elsewhere.

Jonathan

Edited: Crossed with thirdcrank's.

ChrisButch
Posts: 990
Joined: 24 Feb 2009, 12:10pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby ChrisButch » 23 Jul 2020, 1:11pm

Rather than the niceties of historic legal distinction between the various categories of (mostly rural) Public Rights of Way and (mostly urban) roadside footways, surely the main consideration for cyclists intending to ride on paths should be the social distinctions. By this I mean the predominant user groups for each category and the uses to which the paths are put: which are mainly recreational in some cases, especially rural, and mainly practical in others, especially urban. So, for instance, on urban footways a cyclists needs to be particularly careful about mitigating the sensitivities of the blind, infirm, and elderly: but on rural PRsOW, it's the territorial expectations of walkers/ramblers/hikers (and each of these terms has its own baggage!), equestrians and, especially on urban fringes, dog-walkers. And even on rural PRsOW, there are significant usage differences between the mostly confined paths across the enclosed, cultivated lowlands and the open paths in the mountains and moors, where erosion control is important.

pwa
Posts: 12480
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby pwa » 23 Jul 2020, 2:53pm

ChrisButch wrote:Rather than the niceties of historic legal distinction between the various categories of (mostly rural) Public Rights of Way and (mostly urban) roadside footways, surely the main consideration for cyclists intending to ride on paths should be the social distinctions. By this I mean the predominant user groups for each category and the uses to which the paths are put: which are mainly recreational in some cases, especially rural, and mainly practical in others, especially urban. So, for instance, on urban footways a cyclists needs to be particularly careful about mitigating the sensitivities of the blind, infirm, and elderly: but on rural PRsOW, it's the territorial expectations of walkers/ramblers/hikers (and each of these terms has its own baggage!), equestrians and, especially on urban fringes, dog-walkers. And even on rural PRsOW, there are significant usage differences between the mostly confined paths across the enclosed, cultivated lowlands and the open paths in the mountains and moors, where erosion control is important.

Lots to consider there. The Public Footpaths where I have no concerns about (as a walker) sharing with people on (mostly MTB) bikes are those across commons where it is easy for all parties to divert to one side to give each other room. Those where my concerns are greatest include (near my home) narrow paths descending steeply into valleys incised into the sea cliffs, with vegetation restricting path width, and with the worry that any bike coming downhill towards me might not be fully under control. So on purely practical and safety grounds there are indeed distinctions to be made.

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17480
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby [XAP]Bob » 23 Jul 2020, 3:14pm

pwa wrote:Also , anyone who finds it acceptable to cycle on Public Footpaths must have very low standards when it comes to the acceptable width of shared use paths, unless their Public Footpaths are wider than usual. Most Public Footpaths around here are quite narrow.


Or finds it acceptable to cycle carefully along short cut through paths, some of which are too narrow to get off and push. It's not like you have any more energy as a cyclist than you would as a pedestrian carrying a reasonably heavy bag of shopping.

Those short cuts, whilst technically not permissible, open up a massive array of minor roads which are far more pleasant to cycle on.


The path I taught my kids to cycle on is technically not a bridlepath (at least not as far as the OS maps are concerned) but it is far wider and better surfaced than any shared use path hereabouts. I've never had anyone complain about people cycling on it, even when I was doing speed trials along it on the trike. Lateral visibility is excellent for 20-30 yards on both sides all the way, so there is literally no chance of being surprised by anyone/anything except things overtaking you.

Similarly I used to ride the footpath to the hospital (though that one might be a bridleway, I'm not sure), and the footpath (absolutely not a bridleway) to go to the path beyond.
The 'long way round' is a very long way, and involves a pretty steep hill - to the extent that I now wheelchair that path to the hospital, in preference to driving there, for almost anything I need there. I'd push over for a minor procedure and get collected by car rather than parking for the duration.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

thirdcrank
Posts: 29041
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby thirdcrank » 23 Jul 2020, 3:25pm

What we eventually come back to is who will ensure compliance?

pwa
Posts: 12480
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby pwa » 23 Jul 2020, 3:26pm

thirdcrank wrote:What we eventually come back to is who will ensure compliance?

And we know the answer. :lol:

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 49410
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby Mick F » 23 Jul 2020, 5:06pm

thirdcrank wrote:What we eventually come back to is who will ensure compliance?
The answer is no-one at all.
As I said, I've wrapped my hand in with this issue.

Down the Public Footpath (note the capital letters!) with the doggie this afternoon and never saw a soul, but the tell-tale hoof prints and the MTB tyre tracks are there, and renewed since last time I was there.

The "younger generation" are a different breed to we "older generation" and they don't follow the rules that we follow. 'twas ever thus maybe?

They have the countryside opened up for them with trails and paths and off-road routes and the NCN all open for the them.
Go back to when I woz a young adult, we obeyed the rules and cycled on roads ........ because that's all there were for riding on.

Having all this on a plate these days, means that Public Footpaths are just the same as all the other off-road routes.

I'm going to just let it happen, because all I'd be doing instead, is banging my head against a wall.
Mick F. Cornwall

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 3318
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby Bmblbzzz » 23 Jul 2020, 5:11pm

Mick F wrote:The "younger generation" are a different breed to we "older generation" and they don't follow the rules that we follow. 'twas ever thus maybe?

Yes. Young people have always become old people. :D

pwa
Posts: 12480
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Public Footpaths - cycling?

Postby pwa » 23 Jul 2020, 6:45pm

Mick F wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:What we eventually come back to is who will ensure compliance?
The answer is no-one at all.
As I said, I've wrapped my hand in with this issue.

Down the Public Footpath (note the capital letters!) with the doggie this afternoon and never saw a soul, but the tell-tale hoof prints and the MTB tyre tracks are there, and renewed since last time I was there.

The "younger generation" are a different breed to we "older generation" and they don't follow the rules that we follow. 'twas ever thus maybe?

They have the countryside opened up for them with trails and paths and off-road routes and the NCN all open for the them.
Go back to when I woz a young adult, we obeyed the rules and cycled on roads ........ because that's all there were for riding on.

Having all this on a plate these days, means that Public Footpaths are just the same as all the other off-road routes.

I'm going to just let it happen, because all I'd be doing instead, is banging my head against a wall.

Forgive me if this has already been discussed, but who owns the land, and do they permit horse and cycle access? If they do, then no-one is doing anything wrong. A landowner can always allow access types above and beyond what the law requires. That is called "permissive access".