to think that horse riders shouldn't be given equal access to woodland paths as walkers etc?

[Yeahreally]

Read this article in the Guardian and it kinda made my blood boil: www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/12/give-horse-riders-equal-access-to-english-woodlands-say-campaigners

IMO the spokesperson for the Trails Trust is completely ignoring the safety issues at play here. I have no issue with horses but they are big animals and can cause injury if spooked. So is it really sensible to allow them on all pathways of whatever size where runners, cyclists and people just walking their kids or dogs might be? How exactly do you give them a suitably wide berth on a narrow path?

Being a bloke, I'd be massively interested in the MN view on whether there is some sort of inequality issue at play (ie. because riders are more likely to be women there are being disproportionately affected by the current restrictions)? The argument that current laws were unfair because "They (riders) don’t want to walk, they don’t want to cycle.They feel safe in the countryside on a horse,” is incredibly weak and massively ignores how this affects other path users.

I don't understand haring through woodland on a bike the magic is in hearing smelling and seeing nature. Enjoy it get off the bike and chill

^ this 100% I am fed up of being pounced on by unruly dogs

YABU

Cyclists are far more dangerous to pedestrians on footpaths, than horses. Many cyclists are disrespectful of shared footpaths, and of course, there are more of them.

Is part of the reason for specifically not allowing horses in some woodlands that the paths would need to not only be wide enough but also high enough? Thinking more about woodland paths we use, the vertical clearance often isn't much more than head height in places. And quite commonly places a tree has come down which a walker may be able to get over or around.

Plenty of bridleways and horses around here, tbh doesn’t bother me, basic respect by all parties and no issues. I think some footpaths could be reviewed and given access to horses, others though wouldn’t fit a horse down as it’s a thin sliver between two large hedgerows.

So it really depends on suitability. If a path is suitable I don’t see why not

depends on the path, where it’s relatively wide and either paved, or compacted I get what you are saying as it attract casual riders which is where I see problems, on the more rugged bridle ways I rarely encounter a cyclist and normally at that point they are a committed one and normally very respectful

Of course it would be taking something away. Footpaths are for walkers only. Not bikes, not horses, walkers. By making them available to horses (and cyclists) you are taking that away from walkers.

Just because bridle ways are disappearing is no reason to go after spaces meant only for walkers.

They chew up the pathways making them all but impassable in wet weather and with hard ankle twisting ruts in dry weather.

this!

Also, I'm happy to move over into the brambly edge to keep my dog out of the way of horses on bridleways. It's nice to be able to walk on a footpath without having to think about doing this - you don't need to move so far from walkers. (My dog is always on lead and under control plus I pick up his poo and keep him away from walkers so he's not one of those "out of control" dogs people don't like).

Good God get a grip. We aren't the only animals on the planet.

Not sure how that's relevant at all.

There are roads and cycle ways that cyclists can go, if you are going to use that arguement.

Tbh I don’t find they chew up the ground, however in areas where it does get messy are areas that are muddy and swampy to begin with and taking horses away wouldn’t change that.

During lockdown walkers increased substantially. Some thought it meant they could do as they liked pl as plastic water bottles and snack litter profliterated. Cycling also. The rules of thoughtfulness were ignored as was signage. Their entitlement was staggering. Polite signs put up by the council or others didn't apply to them. Most have disappeared but a hard core remain

I’m not in love with horses tbh, but I’ve never had any problem with riders at all, indeed they’ve never been anything than utterly courteous, whether I’m walking or whether I’m driving, and I like to think I am likewise to them. I think there’s a strong understanding and culture among horsey people that they are moving about on these large animals that can be intimidating and that things can occasionally go tits up quite badly.
My only gripe is with the hunt who completely ruined a system of paths through a local wood, which went from being grassy and level to being swampy potholed trench warfare scene.
But even the hunt, who are in almost every other way a bunch of entitled, inconsiderate cuntbags are always neurotically polite when I bump into them on my rambles.

Which, in keeping with the general theme of this thread, is NOT something that can be said of the great majority of countryside cyclists, whether MAMILs or dickheads on mountain bikes, who are at best oblivious, clueless townies with their heads up their arses, and at worst can be genuinely very dangerous.

’They chew up the pathways making them all but impassable in wet weather and with hard ankle twisting ruts in dry weather’

This ^

in areas where it does get messy are areas that are muddy and swampy to begin with and taking horses away wouldn’t change that.

Horses with riders are a lot heavier than people on foot! It’s like letting lorries use a rough lane. They break down the surface a lot faster.

Yes true but an occasion few horses vs repeated lorry’s on an unsuitable road is not a compatible case

Agree with the horse riders I bump into when walking. Same with the hunt. Absolute twats for what they do and damage they cause but always very polite to people

even a single lorry on a muddy road does that so yes, it is entirely comparable.

Tbh I don’t find they chew up the ground, however in areas where it does get messy are areas that are muddy and swampy to begin with and taking horses away wouldn’t change that.

it's not about taking horses away.

Not adding horses won't add deep hoof prints which subsequently set into rock hard deep ruts. I've come across this on many bridle paths.

Plus they shit everywhere

Yes, because a big pile of horse shit is so very difficult to spot and avoid, and the countryside so otherwise delightfully free of the dung of large herbivores. 🙄

Realistically, there aren't that many and the numbers are dropping, many have been chopped about, shortened or closed, or blocked or are accessed via lots of road work and don't go anywhere in particular.. and they are shared use paths too.

Extending the network of paths riders can use is an attempt to get riders off roads and to get more people using these facilities all year round.

What is so difficult about sharing? You're far less likely to get knocked over by a horse than say, a cyclist!

What is so difficult about sharing?

Lots. It's why we have separate spaces for many things.

I saw a friend get kicked by a horse recently. A freak set of circumstances that spooked the horse and it was nobody's fault but it happened. This was a riderless horse in a field so not the same as one with a rider on but we are frequently told on "horse v car" threads that we need to be very careful around horses as they can be unpredictable and are several tonnes of shod muscle. So, saying "oh, you're more likely to be knocked down by a cyclist" is really rather silly. I will definitely think at least twice before walking along a footpath through a horse field again.

I don't think horses are a problem. And I don't think cyclists are generally a problem either (there are a few exceptions, sometimes just being stupid rather than entitled, like the woman who nearly cycled into me last week because she was distracted by the swans on the canal!).

For me the biggest menace is out of control dogs. But there is no political will to deal with them because "everyone" loves dogs.

If a path is designed for use by horses and or bikes, they should have priority. if it is designed primarily for pedestrians, they have priority. And if people keep left, there is space for everyone. It should not be hard.

Bellend