Jump to content

is a towpath a right of way? [in England]


Wittenham

Featured Posts

I had a search of the forum, but could not find a straight answer.  What is the legal status of a  towpath and who controls it?  This is in the context of a discussion with [permanent] moorers about managing the speed and type of traffic passing the moored boats. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most towpaths are not RoW but some are.

 

As far as I'm aware no legislation controls the speed except in specific circumstances such as the tow path being a public highway.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wittenham said:

thanks both, and does that mean the CRT could - if they wanted - introduce any kinds of restrictions/prohibitions on using the towpath?  For example "no cyclists on weekends", [to be clear, I am not proposing this].

What a bloody good idea.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wittenham said:

thanks both, and does that mean the CRT could - if they wanted - introduce any kinds of restrictions/prohibitions on using the towpath?  For example "no cyclists on weekends", [to be clear, I am not proposing this].

 

Not exactly.

 

A lot of the upgraded towpath funding has conditions attached that they can't place unreasonable restrictions on cyclists, and a chunk of the DEFRA grant requires access to be available to the general public.

 

The answer to whoever you are having the discussion with is that they need an offside mooring if they don't like the towpath being used by other people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory yes, although two factors spring to mind.

 

1. the right to cycle on the permissive paths was part of an agreement with the Gov when CRT was set up

2. Restriction need to be set in law - CRT never enforce the current byelaws so are hardly likely to set new ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, StationMaster said:

1. the right to cycle on the permissive paths was part of an agreement with the Gov when CRT was set up

many thanks for the quick answers... I like the offside mooring suggestion!  And i agree that a law that is not enforced/unenforceable is pointless.  

 

On the above, would anyone have a readily available reference?  I am happy to ask uncle google, of course, but if it is available, thanks in advance.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Not exactly.

 

A lot of the upgraded towpath funding has conditions attached that they can't place unreasonable restrictions on cyclists, and a chunk of the DEFRA grant requires access to be available to the general public.

 

The answer to whoever you are having the discussion with is that they need an offside mooring if they don't like the towpath being used by other people.

A lot of the towpath on my local canal has been handed over to Sustrans and is part of the National Cycle Network

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a permanent moorer, in fact I no longer have a boat at all. I have to say, however, when I did have a boat I used to get annoyed by the lack of thought shown by most (not all) cyclists on the towpath. This is probably not what the OP had in mind when they started this thread and I'm sorry if I'm hijacking it but I see the same lack of thought by cyclists in plantations, footpaths (note the name - bit of a clue) and even on the open roads.

A large proportion seem to think it OK and even funny to hold up a stream of traffic, swerving out into the road when an overtake becomes possible. I still don't understand why they think wearing black lycra is not only fashionable but will protect them from all harm, especially early mornings and late evenings. On my motorbike I wear hi vis and ride with a dipped headlight, personally I prefer to be visible to other road users and treat them with respect.

 

Rant over (sorry!)

  • Greenie 2
  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Wittenham said:

many thanks for the quick answers... I like the offside mooring suggestion!  And i agree that a law that is not enforced/unenforceable is pointless.  

 

On the above, would anyone have a readily available reference?  I am happy to ask uncle google, of course, but if it is available, thanks in advance.

 

 

 

This was where I took my quote from https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/cycling/cycling-faqs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Wittenham said:

I have a feeling Alan de E will be able to give me the chapter and the verse.

Only in as much (as C&RT say) the majority of the towpaths are not PROW's they are simply 'permissive' this means that legally C&RT can withdraw their permission or apply conditions at any time they wish.

 

HOWEVER

 

C&RT have 'given away' control of many of those permissive rights by having accepted millions of pounds of money from 3rd parties (Sustrans, local Councils etc) on condition that they keep access open for cyclists and pedestrians.

I believe the latest payment they have been given is £4.5m to upgrade (tarmac) 10 miles of towpath.

 

The other problem is that to continue to get the DEFRA grant of ~£50m per annum they have to achieve certain KPI (Key performance Indicators), one of which is the number of visitors using the towpaths.

This number has to increase every year to retain the grant, over the last 8 years the figures have got totally ridiculous with the last reported figure (2019/20 Company accounts) being 677,000,000 visits

 

In reality whatever the legal situation C&RT can do nothing to control the users of the towpaths.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Screenshot (48).png

Edited by Alan de Enfield
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cycling used to be banned on the Bridgewater and some of the notices are probably still there. I don't think it ever stopped people cycling, though. Motorbikes are still banned on the towpath, as are electric scooters.  Look,  there goes another one.

Cyclists and escooters are banned on the pavement  too, and short of hitting the riders with a shovel, it's no longer worth getting stewed about it.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

If only one could.

I think it is ridiculous that Pdf's are banned from this forum.

No other forum I use has such limitations.

its not uncommon to ban PDF's on forums as PDF's often contain copyright material... it is annoying though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Only in as much (as C&RT say) the majority of the towpaths are not PROW's they are simply 'permissive' this means that legally C&RT can withdraw their permission or apply conditions at any time they wish.

 

HOWEVER

 

C&RT have 'given away' control of many of those permissive rights by having accepted millions of pounds of money from 3rd parties (Sustrans, local Councils etc) on condition that they keep access open for cyclists and pedestrians.

I believe the latest payment they have been given is £4.5m to upgrade (tarmac) 10 miles of towpath.

 

The other problem is that to continue to get the DEFRA grant of ~£50m per annum they have to achieve certain KPI (Key performance Indicators), one of which is the number of visitors using the towpaths.

This number has to increase every year to retain the grant, over the last 8 years the figures have got totally ridiculous with the last reported figure (2019/20 Company accounts) being 677,000,000 visits

 

In reality whatever the legal situation C&RT can do nothing to control the users of the towpaths.

 

 

 

 

 

 

677000000 visits in a country with a population of 67000000 including Wales, Scotland and NI (areas with huge canal. mileage) 

Surely either a misprint or a misreading? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bobgrif said:

677000000 visits in a country with a population of 67000000 including Wales, Scotland and NI (areas with huge canal. mileage) 

Surely either a misprint or a misreading? 

 

Nope, that is what they have said verbally and is confirmed in a written legal document (the company accounts) for which I actually did a screen grab in post #13

 

 

And then you wonder why I have nothing but contempt for the organisation, - the couldn't even lie straight in bed !

 

In 2018 they spent £500,000 MORE on raisng donations that they achieved in donations YES - THEY LOST £500,000 in one year.

In the first 6 year of their operation they spent £5,500,000 more in raising donations than they achieved in donations.

 

If they had done absolutely no fundraising they would have had £5,500,000 more to spend on maintaining the canals.

 

There are so many more examples of mismanagement.

 

After 30+ years on BW / C&RT waters I have finally accepted defeat, have been beated down & just had enough and have gone to waters where the shower have no authority,

 

 

 

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Nope, that is what they have said verbally and is confirmed in a written legal document (the company accounts) for which I actually did a screen grab in post #13

 

 

And then you wonder why I have nothing but contempt for the organisation, - the couldn't even lie straight in bed !

 

In 2018 they spent £500,000 MORE on raisng donations that they achieved in donations YES - THEY LOST £500,000 in one year.

In the first 6 year of their operation they spent £5,500,000 more in raising donations than they achieved in donations.

 

If they had done absolutely no fundraising they would have had £5,500,000 more to spend on maintaining the canals.

 

There are so many more examples of mismanagement.

 

After 30+ years on BW / C&RT waters I have finally accepted defeat, have been beated down & just had enough and have gone to waters where the shower have no authority,

 

 

 

Just managed to zoom up the image you posted on my mobile phone (a bit tricky!) 

 

I'm gobsmacked at the numbers and am trying to work out how they can be accurate particularly since CRT state that it is a survey of the public. I'd love to see the sampling methodology for this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Steve56 said:

A lot of the towpath on my local canal has been handed over to Sustrans and is part of the National Cycle Network

No it hasn't been 'handed over'. CRT still own the towpath, but in many areas they have accepted money from the local authorities (not Sustrans, who don't have any money of their own) to pay for upgrading.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.