How effective is the TRF in keeping the UK's green lanes open?

Discussion in 'Europe' started by Pampera, Dec 20, 2013.

  1. Pampera

    Pampera Been here awhile

    Jan 31, 2007
    Very, and that's according to our bitterest opponents!

    This is take directly from a submission to Parliament from the leading 'anti' group in the Peak District: the Peak District Green Lane Alliance.

    It explains how they are being frustrated by the TRF at every turn.

    Gorbeck Road, a Byway Open to All Traffic in the Yorkshire Dales: cost the National Park Authority £10,700 in legal and other fees but excluding staff time in a 6 year-long, eventually successful, attempt to impose a TRO on this 4-mile unsealed way which is part of the Pennine Bridleway.
    Chapel Gate Derbyshire: the Peak District National Park Authority (PDNPA) has been trying to get a TRO on Chapel Gate for several years. It has taken so far large amounts of staff time, a High Court case and significant legal fees and costs. The TRO is still not in place and PDNPA may well face a further legal challenge from organizations representing drivers of 4x4s and motor bikes.
    PDNPA is currently spending over £100k a year on trying to get just five TROs in place and so far has managed to achieve just two. At this rate of progress it would take PDNPA several decades to get TROs in place just on the 36 unsealed routes which are currently causing it most concern.
    East Meon Hants and Chute in Wiltshire: TROs were eventually successfully brought in on these two lanes only after lengthy public inquiries. The inquiries were initiated by the highway authorities concerned in order to avoid the risk of expensive legal challenges. The inquiries were run by the Planning Inspectorate and paid for by the highway authorities.
    Derbyshire County Council: has a policy which commits it to using TROs to exclude motor vehicles from unsealed lanes wherever necessary but has told us that in the light of PDNPA’s struggle to get any TROs in place, it has no intention of using them. As there is no statutory duty to use a TRO, local communities and non-vehicle users have no redress. As GLEAM pointed out in its written evidence to the Committee, this is a nationwide problem.
    Costs and legal risks: the costs and risks involved for any highway authority trying to use a TRO to exclude motor vehicles are proving prohibitive.

    Aren't we doing well!

    Don't delay, join today:
  2. Harty

    Harty Bloody Good Bloke!

    Mar 29, 2010
    Devon, UK
    I believe the TRF coffers are getting low and don't see why the TRF increases it's annual fee an extra tenner. When was the last time the fee was increased? Not in the past five years since I've been a member. 3000 members = an extra £30k in the fighting fund.
  3. Pampera

    Pampera Been here awhile

    Jan 31, 2007
    A small increase was made two years ago, which people could avoid if they paid by Direct Debt.

    It's been decided not to make an increase for next year, because we need members and appreciate that times are quite tough for most people. We've slashed the running costs by no longer printing and posting the Trail magazine, but doing a (rather better) electronic version instead.

    Donations to the TRF fighting Fund are very welcome, some of the TRF groups have been raising £000s from work they do at horse trials etc.

    But, what would be really good would be if every member could recruit another member...and DOUBLE our subscription revenue.

    Make it a new year resolution!
  4. GPS

    GPS Been here awhile

    Apr 23, 2007
    North Wales
    You'd think the local authorities would use the money wisely and keep the green lanes open to increase tourism to the areas. Thus generating money for each authority and the communities instead of decreasing the amount of visitors and money spent. Surely, they should look at generating as much money as possible, and not just for the short term but for future generations!

    In the small county where I live there are no lanes open to motor vehicles (due to the NERC bill) but there are plenty of footpaths for the ramblers (but the stereotypical rambler doesn't spend much (if any money) in the community that they visit and as a result the tourism in this area (as in many other areas) is on its knees. Although I think its unfair to put all the blame onto the ramblers, as the NIMBY's are nailing just as many nails into the trail riding coffin.

    I know that the TRF do a fantastic job with their limited funds but we need more members so that we can make a bigger stand and have a bigger say in what happens in our parliament.

    My costs to enjoy Trail riding have increased dramatically in the last year or so (having to travel to where the lanes are) and I'll continue to ride in this country for as long as I can. But as you can see on this forum more and more people are going abroad to ride (my wife and myself included), be it for the weather, adventure, culture or peace of mind that you'll be unhindered in your past time. If only the UK government and the EU could wake up and change the law so that it benefits all user groups and not just one.

    Anyway Rant over.
    Enjoy the rest of you holidays and RIDE
    Keep up the good work TRF. :clap
  5. Timpo


    Jan 6, 2007
    Downtown Wombatislava, England.
    I will definately be renewing my membership for 2014 and I also encourage as many people as possible to do so.
    I think the TRF has a very important future.


    PS. Why is the bleating submission by the PDGLA being sent to Parliment?
  6. NKL

    NKL Been here awhile

    Oct 25, 2011
    Kent, England
    Not very