I WAS disappointed to see a two page spread featuring the claims of a body called "The Friends of the Ridgeway" and a supporting leading article.
What alternative views or enquiries did you make before deciding to support the claims?
For instance the exhaustive and no doubt expensive public enquiry did not reject the proposed banning of motor vehicles "principally because at that time vehicles were not seen to pose any safety hazard" as was claimed. Safety was a minor point, quickly dealt with. Damage to the surface was accepted to have been caused by agricultural vehicles, which of course could not have been banned.
I yield to no one in my affection for the Ridgeway. Like many others I have walked its length more than once and frequently enjoy walks on different sections of it. In my experience motorised use is minimal. The Code of Respect agreed by the Ramblers Association, The CPRE, the NFU, the Countryside Commission and other worthy bodies, works.
Since the last enquiry many miles of footpaths and cycleways have opened, such as the Tarka Trail and lengths of coastal paths.
I have enjoyed several of these but I do not know of any similar free provision for off-roaders. As for the suggestion that an enterprising landowner could provide alternative sites for free? Next to your house? In other rural areas?
Sadly this appears to be yet another example of a small fraction of the populace seeking to deprive the public of long-established rights.
P B STANBURY
Mill Lane, Swindon
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article