Devon TRF Group Forum

KronreifTrunkenpolzMattighofen · Devon's Best

Definitive Map Review - Gittisham

wackyracer · Powermonger!!

Thats the Bridleway "Lanscore lane" Nice lane although I've never ridden it wink

Ends up in a field at the lower end before crossing the tarmac road into another bridleway, has tarmac evidence on the surface, never ridden that either wink

Was once a lane though with horse and cart use for sure

Pete · Expert

Devon TRF claim lane 123 this ex RUPP has very strong historic evidence of vehicular usage and only failed to feature on the list of streets due to a dispute between neighbouring parishes about whose map it should feature on and who should foot the bill for repairs. I was saddened by reading the mountain of evidence contained in the DTRFG paper archive as it is a cracking lane indeed and a crying shame that another restricted byway is what will result from the parish review because it is not on the list of streets.

Tribey · Expert

The review on this one (actually the Ottery Parish but strangely not including our claim lane C-124) concluded last week, but oddly they dated their report today (3rd Nov)

The 52 page report is here

for a change, the status on this lane remained the same, as a Bridleway.

In the report, I felt several of our arguments of why this should be a road, such as the fact how it was recorded on old maps and records, being excluded from FA maps, and being similar in appearance to other now roads in the area etc, all things which the committee dismissed or made their own assumptions and different conclusions.

In relation to our submitted user evidence, the committe argues ''Evidence of use by the public during that period to support the claimed upgrade is forms relating to use on motorcycles by six people. However, as any evidence of use with mechanically vehicles dating from 1981 or later, when the route was recorded as a public bridleway, would be unlawful (unless with the permission of the landowner), it cannot give rise to a public right of way under Section 31. '' saying the user evidence has no value because we shouldn't have been riding a bridleway. It would be different for whities of course, but that has other issues.

In addition, there is always the paragraph ''Several comments have been received by members of the public, all strongly objecting to the proposed upgrading of the route. The theme of all the objections is the potential nuisance and danger that motorised vehicles would cause to walkers and horse riders, along with the physical unsuitability of the lane for vehicular traffic and potential damage that they may cause to the surface. It is perhaps notable that none of the objectors refer to motorised vehicle use on the application route itself but refer to existing problems on nearby uUCRs. '' so there are no actual complaints of us riding this lane or causing damage to it, despite us riding it, is the only positive I take.

In addition to Landscore Lane, Claim lane C-122 remains a bridleway, whiteys 192-283 and 192-101 remain whiteys.

chriscole · Clubman A

Thank you Ray for the update, not what we would choose to hear but sadly all but inevitable