Cycling the Wainwright Coast to Coast walk?

[Zulu Eleven]

As a member of a cycling walking and equestrian household, I'm quite frankly horrified at the proposal. This is a great iconic walking route, invented by a walker who would be equally horrified at the suggestion that any part of it apart from the road sections be a shared use route. It must be one of the most unsuitable routes for this kind of use.

Well, first, let’s be absolutely clear - the call has been for a braided route which offers a full west to east route for horse-riders and cyclists along the Wainright route corridor - in many places shared use is entirely appropriate, I. Some places alternative options are undoubtedly called for - however about 1/3 of the existing route is already on shared use paths (bridleways etc), and around another third is on wide moorland vehicular tracks that probably should be. And it’s also fair to point out that the author himself was largely opposed to the idea of making it an official walking route - specifically encouraging people to view it as “a” coast to coast walk, not “the” coast to coast walk - plus, indeed, there have been a number of significant revisions and deviations to his original route, made by both him and his successors, for a variety of reasons (and indeed the proposed NT route introduces several more),

So if the idea of being ‘purists’ to his original route has already fallen by the wayside, why not permit a few braided options and minor variations that can make the route enjoyable to a wider range of users, improve the routes sustainability and enhance the economic value to the regional economy? As it happens, one of the National Park authorities involved had already commissioned a whole report on the feasibility of introducing multi user options as a way of maximising the benefits of the route, so we can’t even say that this concept was particularly alien or ‘offensive’ to those involved

So far as I know it is the only walkers coast to coast route in the north, wheras cyclists have loads of routes, including the largely off road route between Liverpool and Hull.

I am assuming you mean the TPT, which clearly has an entirely different audience than the sort of mountain bikers who would use the wainwright or wheel rights coast to coast - same with the C2C

Well, there’s already Hadrians wall National trail, so it isn’t, in fact, the only one in the North - so do we really need another walking route? Again, the audience for the Wainwright is quite different from the audience for the Hadrians route, that’s how diversity works, right. Of course, we could take this to its extreme, the wainwright route already exists, so why do we want to improve it and upgrade it to NT status? Is that because NT status secures additional funding and resources to ensure it is of high quality, with accessible furniture (gates etc) and well waymarked - which in itself would open the question of why cyclists should really expect any less than that themselves (particularly when only two of the fifteen existing National Trail are bikeable)

Some cyclists appear to be completely unaware of how much anger this sort of proposal causes amongst walkers. I live within a mile of the South Downs Way, where I am very much aware of there are huge difficulties between the two user groups. Quite a few walkers avoid the South Downs way because of this.

I’ll postulate that there’s a significant difference between ‘some walkers getting angry about it’ and their anger being rational or justified. I can point you to a number of walkers who get angry about me cycling down the 5 metre wide tarmac public footpath on the farm down the road - and their purple faced rage when I gleefully point out that I actually have the landowners permission to do so is a sight to behold. Regardless, to quote a key legal judgement on the issue - “There will always be individuals who will be unwilling to take any risk of an accident or incident with a horse or bicycle and would only feel comfortable walking on a footpath i.e. a path which is used only by pedestrians. Their reluctance to use a bridleway may be understandable but it does not objectively demonstrate that user as a bridleway constitutes a public nuisance.”

I would feel less angry if Cycling UK were doing anything to campaign on the issue of lost rights of way, most of which are byways or bridleways. Equestrians and walkers have done huge amounts of work to add new routes to the map, where as, if there are any cyclists active on this issue, they are keeping very quiet.

Well, CUK head office has submitted over 100 miles of rights of way claims, and works closely with Rambers and BHS on the issue, but as you rightly say, few cyclists are active on the issue - frankly most of them seem to prefer to get out and ride their bikes. There are a number of complex social and demographic issues at play there (eg age and phase of life of many MTB’ers, by way of comparison to ramblers), but getting riders involved has, so far, been a bit like pushing water up a hill.

[Zulu Eleven]

Some follow up on this


The 'wider benefits' report, commissioned by Yorkshire Dales National Park as part of the preparatory work for the Coast to Coast NT proposals has (belatedly) been published this week:


https://www.yorkshiredales.org.uk/wp-co ... -FINAL.pdf

significant comments here - given the context of what CUK and BHS challenge was based on, are the reports recommendations that:

"The study has also identified alternative links with existing routes for cyclists and horse riders, which minimise use of tarmac. Development of alternatives and loops are key to making the Coast to Coast a multi-user route. This is particularly important for mixed ability parties. A bridleway coast to coast route, (Haverigg to Whitby linking existing bridleways) has previously been identified. It is undeveloped, but could become an alternative multi-user route."

And that in order to maximise the economic and social benefits, the new route should:

Conduct an in-depth assessment and make Variation Orders
where necessary post-designation to improve the route and create greater opportunities for those with limited mobility, horse riders and cyclists.
 Test and promote alternative Coast to Coast routes (all or in part) for horse riders, cyclists and mixed ability parties, where they exist.
 Review the detailed proposals for the Haverigg to Whitby bridleway route as a potential ‘tandem' Coast to Coast for horse riders and mountain bike users.

it even commented that:

In 2008, a bridleway route was identified from the Lake District coast at Haverigg to the North York Moors coast at Whitby (see orange route on Map 3.2). The two county councils and three national park authorities across Cumbria and North Yorkshire commissioned Asken Ltd to undertake a feasibility study into the creation of an intermediate mountain bike route. The resulting proposal joins up existing bridleways, is largely off tarmac, and is just over 200 miles long. Importantly, it was designed to have a broad appeal, being suitable for ‘intermediate’ mountain bikers; it also does not compete with or duplicate existing coast to coast cycle routes. At the time of the study in 2008, implementation was fully costed at between £250,000 – £400,000, relatively cheap as most of the route was already designated bridleway and existed on the ground. The main physical stumbling block, as with Wainwright’s route, was the crossing of the Vale of Mowbray, though it proposes using an existing underpass to cross the A19. (See Appendix 2 for further details of the route).

So.... Perhaps CUK and BHS had a point about Natural England not consulting on multi-user options for the route after all

[Jdsk]

Cycling UK: "Government commits to explore options for multi-user Coast to Coast National Trail":
https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/gover ... o-dvRmqiSI

Jonathan