cleanorbust Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Laird is correct in saying that the Right to Roam laws do not encompass the use of vehicles (pedal or motor powered) in England. You can run, climb or walk on uncultivated land but that's about it. But then if any riders do choose to ride illegally during the event, be it on or off road, then sadly I don't think they will trouble themselves with poring over what the law says or indeed take instruction from an esteemed source such as this forum. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted October 20, 2015 Report Share Posted October 20, 2015 #30 You misread the post you referred to. I did not have time to attend the start / finish area. Unfortunately once again some seem to be misinterpreting or misquoting my posts. The right to roam does include taking photographs or being accompanied by dogs (subject to certain restrictions) I never suggested that the right to roam included vehicular access. Many of the scott sections on right to roam areas are actually adjacent to footpaths and bridleways. You can take a horse or MTB on a bridleway. I have ridden the scott quite a few times, observed and flag collected and away from scott time cycled or walked quite a bit of it. I pretty well know every inch of he course. Never once have I been challenged about being on any part of it and there were quite a few walkers and MTBs who were also enjoying the areas unhindered. There are many excellent sections not in the programme with no viewing problems or access issues. Areas where their have been problems include riders not sticking to the course, excess spectator numbers and vehicles and careless parking at the programme sections. I can remember when riders support vehicles blocked the road to Orgate / Telfit and Cold knucles, similarly Washfold has been given up as a result of traffic problems. Last year there was adverse comment from people not connected with the trial regarding trial traffic blocking of the road at Bridge End. Several years ago a competitor swore at a landowners son and was rightly excluded. In many ways the scott is a victim of its own success. I am not going to name names on this forum but I am pretty certain a least some of those who have used motorcycles to access parts of the course where they should not have done will be reading this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleanorbust Posted October 20, 2015 Report Share Posted October 20, 2015 Sorry if I misinterpreted your earlier post - almost anyone who has ridden the Scott several times has my respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laird387 Posted October 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2015 "Mr. Landowner. any chance our Trial could run across your land?" "Okay, but only riders and officials. I don't want public tramping over it" "No problem. We'll publicise that before the event" One year later... "Mr. Landowner. any chance our Trial could run across your land again?" "I told you last year I only wanted riders and officials, but there were loads of public there too, so no." Go figure... Hi, We lost several of the very best British Experts sections in the Llandrindod area precisely because of this problem. Later, when I was very much involved with creating the Arbuthnot Trial, we lost a complete portion of the course when trail riders, nothing to do with the event, were riding round the course when stopped by one of the landowners outside his home and queried as to what right did they feel they had to be there - their answer was primitive, they took their trail bikes into his garden and performed 'doughnuts' in his flower beds and lawn......... I appreciate they were not part of the trial - but neither are awkward spectators...............simple answer, respect everybody else's rights as though they were your own. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 #30 You misread the post you referred to. I did not have time to attend the start / finish area. Unfortunately once again some seem to be misinterpreting or misquoting my posts. The right to roam does include taking photographs or being accompanied by dogs (subject to certain restrictions) I never suggested that the right to roam included vehicular access. Many of the scott sections on right to roam areas are actually adjacent to footpaths and bridleways. You can take a horse or MTB on a bridleway. I have ridden the scott quite a few times, observed and flag collected and away from scott time cycled or walked quite a bit of it. I pretty well know every inch of he course. Never once have I been challenged about being on any part of it and there were quite a few walkers and MTBs who were also enjoying the areas unhindered. There are many excellent sections not in the programme with no viewing problems or access issues. Areas where their have been problems include riders not sticking to the course, excess spectator numbers and vehicles and careless parking at the programme sections. I can remember when riders support vehicles blocked the road to Orgate / Telfit and Cold knucles, similarly Washfold has been given up as a result of traffic problems. Last year there was adverse comment from people not connected with the trial regarding trial traffic blocking of the road at Bridge End. Several years ago a competitor swore at a landowners son and was rightly excluded. In many ways the scott is a victim of its own success. I am not going to name names on this forum but I am pretty certain a least some of those who have used motorcycles to access parts of the course where they should not have done will be reading this. when did you ride the scott? What years? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 To that question dear Nigel I will give the same answer as Rolls Royce used to give when asked about the HP of their cars. The answer is an "Adequate" number. I wished I had ridden it more and would advise all to give it a go, or several whilst they are still young / fit enough. Will I attempt it again ???? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldilocks Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Sherlock dabster foiled again Edited October 21, 2015 by baldilocks 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english electric Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Sherlock dabster foiled again 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 ..not that at all, I just dont belive hes done it and still such a ****. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english electric Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 ..not that at all, I just dont belive hes done it and still such a ****. I rest my case I assume it would go something like this if they ever met. just concerntrate on rick and vivs interaction ignore the rest. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted October 22, 2015 Report Share Posted October 22, 2015 Not only done it Nige, but finished it on cable operated drum brakes, the descents off Kexwith moor and down the mud rut in rotten wood were a bit sporting though, to say the least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted October 23, 2015 Report Share Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) Oh so you did it in the 80's. Edited October 23, 2015 by nigel dabster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english electric Posted October 23, 2015 Report Share Posted October 23, 2015 you do realise dadof2 that a lot of the flak is self inflicted. I am sure there are more easier ways to prove your point than the way you have gone about it in your previous post sums it up 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john.b Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Dadof2, can you please delete your last post please. I find it offensive that you are posting information regarding locating Scott sections that are supposed to be out of bounds to spectators. As an observer of one of those sections mentioned and also a member of Richmond Motor club I feel you have jeapordised the future successful running of Trial by posting such information. Many thanks John.B DADOF2. YOU ARE RISKING THE FUTURE OF THE SCOTT TRIAL! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyboxer Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Dadof2, can you please delete your last post please. I find it offensive that you are posting information regarding locating Scott sections that are supposed to be out of bounds to spectators. As an observer of one of those sections mentioned and also a member of Richmond Motor club I feel you have jeapordised the future successful running of Trial by posting such information. Many thanks John.B DADOF2. YOU ARE RISKING THE FUTURE OF THE SCOTT TRIAL! Well said Dadaof2....................what motivates you? Judging by the larger number of spectators last Saturday, the Trial is already getting maybe too popular and this is hard enough for Richmond MCC to administer, without you publishing details of exact locations of 'no spectator' locations This will only get more people wandering over the Moors, roaming everywhere which will aggravate the NPark and landowners 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.