# Anti-motorbike barriers to be removed from National Cycle Network



## dodgy (30 Nov 2016)

According to Carlton Reid over at BikeBiz http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/an...be-removed-from-national-cycle-network/020388

They're a bloody menace, but I'm not sure what it will be like without them, will motorbikes become an actual problem rather than imagined?


----------



## Sharky (30 Nov 2016)

I would be happy for them to be removed. The ones on the cycle path alongside the A2 are so narrow, that you can't cycle between them without stopping and that's on a normal bike. Couldn't even consider using the pathway on my tandem trike with my autistic daughter.


----------



## I like Skol (30 Nov 2016)

Manchester leading the way 

The barriers on the Fallow field loop never seemed to be a problem for me but I only ride a 'normal' bike. The ones that really wind me up are the tall ones that lean inwards to narrow at the top. These are a total menace and are not even wide enough for my shoulders to fit through, never mind the bike handlebars!

This kind of thing -





Although there doesn't seem to be any set standard on the width and some are worse than others. I have actually felt as if I have slightly jarred my neck and shoulders on some occasions after negotiating/man-handling me and bike through some of these.


----------



## Phaeton (30 Nov 2016)

This is the difficulty isn't it, I like to ride down the towpath of the Chesterfield canal at Worksop I have suggested this to my daughter & SIL but they have one child in a trailer the other on a tag-a-long so can't ride down there. But once they get removed I can see the local kids tearing up there on bikes & quads & churning the track up so bad making it unrideable.

EDIT:-




I like Skol said:


> This kind of thing -
> View attachment 152980


We also have some of those, the only way I can get my bike through is standing it on the rear wheel & lifting it over.


----------



## I like Skol (30 Nov 2016)

Phaeton said:


> This is the difficulty isn't it, I like to ride down the towpath of the Chesterfield canal at Worksop I have suggested this to my daughter & SIL but they have one child in a trailer the other on a tag-a-long so can't ride down there. But once they get removed I can see the local kids tearing up there on bikes & quads & churning the track up so bad making it unrideable.


Perhaps a couple of 'officers of the law' in attendance with a bike crusher would soon alleviate the problem. They wouldn't have to catch many for word to get around and the pool of unlicensed and unlawful bikes to be diminished.


----------



## Phaeton (30 Nov 2016)

I like Skol said:


> Perhaps a couple of 'officers of the law' in attendance with a bike crusher would soon alleviate the problem. They wouldn't have to catch many for word to get around and the pool of unlicensed and unlawful bikes to be diminished.


They have an active squad in the area doing just that, unfortunately all that appears to have done is make the situation worse, there are now more of the "yuff's" joining in the game, to see who can outrun them the longest.


----------



## raleighnut (30 Nov 2016)

I get a bunch of problems getting the trike through some of em, ditto when I used to tour with the trailer.


----------



## I like Skol (30 Nov 2016)

Phaeton said:


> They have an active squad in the area doing just that, unfortunately all that appears to have done is make the situation worse, there are now more of the "yuff's" joining in the game, to see who can outrun them the longest.


So we are stuck with them then, at least in some areas, or is there a better solution?


----------



## Pale Rider (30 Nov 2016)

Strictly speaking, this is a lobbying effort by Sustrans to encourage the owners of the paths/barriers - often a local authority - to remove them.

I'm sure we'd all like to see fewer barriers, but the risk of more skulduggery is not an easy one to manage.

A few years ago, Durham County Council removed most of the barriers on their stretch of the C2C path.

The publicity at the time said the barriers would be reinstated if there was a noticeable increase in unlawful users.

As far as I can gather, that has not had to be done so barrier removal appears to have worked in that instance.


----------



## Phaeton (30 Nov 2016)

These are the type that they have on the towpath, a real pain in the artichokes


----------



## raleighnut (30 Nov 2016)

Phaeton said:


> These are the type that they have on the towpath, a real pain in the artichokes



Yep a real 'pain in the bum', there is one of those on the section of the 'Cloud Trail' (NCN 6) on the way to Derby that uses a stretch of towpath.


----------



## Phaeton (30 Nov 2016)

Will this do?


----------



## KneesUp (30 Nov 2016)

I like Skol said:


> So we are stuck with them then, at least in some areas, or is there a better solution?


Weight sensitive bear traps?


----------



## raleighnut (30 Nov 2016)

Phaeton said:


> Will this do?




Not with that 'stone cutting' blade in.


----------



## I like Skol (30 Nov 2016)

raleighnut said:


> Not with that 'stone cutting' blade in.


It doesn't stop most site workmen......


----------



## raleighnut (30 Nov 2016)

I like Skol said:


> It doesn't stop most site workmen......


They need one of these fitting,
http://www.googleadservices.com/pag...ahUKEwj97q7Np9DQAhVMK8AKHX38AHwQwg8IIA&adurl=
Then the 'jobs a good un'.


----------



## Phaeton (30 Nov 2016)

raleighnut said:


> Not with that 'stone cutting' blade in.





raleighnut said:


> They need one of these fitting,
> http://www.googleadservices.com/pag...ahUKEwj97q7Np9DQAhVMK8AKHX38AHwQwg8IIA&adurl=
> Then the 'jobs a good un'.


It would have a similar blade in it at the appropriate time, that was a libary picture, not the actual item


----------



## Inertia (30 Nov 2016)

Phaeton said:


> These are the type that they have on the towpath, a real pain in the artichokes


Luxury! I dont have a picture of the ones near me handy, but imagine smaller than that but with a kissing gate in the middle instead of the barrier. The only way to get a bike through is to stand it up vertical and walk it through. PITA


----------



## Drago (30 Nov 2016)

They're a pain, effectively rendering routes wheelchair inaccessible.


----------



## mjr (30 Nov 2016)

dodgy said:


> They're a bloody menace, but I'm not sure what it will be like without them, will motorbikes become an actual problem rather than imagined?


Not unless they already are. So-called "anti-motorcycle barriers" are no such thing. If you know the history of hybrid bicycles, then it's pretty obvious why they can't work: early off-road bicycles were basically bicycles with motorcycle handlebars, which is part of why flat bars have the same ⅞" (22.2mm) bar diameter, rather than the 15/16" (23.8mm) traditional drop bar diameter - that's actually very useful when you want to fit switches for dynamo electrics because classic motorcycle controls fit.

Anyway, that means that there are plenty of motorcycles around with narrower handlebars than the typical 600mm width bars on hybrids. IIRC, there's even one of the Honda Goldwing models with narrower bars!

Most motorcycle barriers seem to be installed incompetently, too. I know several sets where scramblers just motor through the treeline nearby, while legitimate users who stick to the track are either blocked completely (wheelchairs and mobility scooters) or occasionally injured as they try to ride through the barriers.

These barriers also disproportionately block the sorts of people most likely to be encouraged by cycle tracks: those on hybrids, roadsters, tricycles and other more upright bikes. Roadies with narrow drop bars can just ride straight through most of them, but we're often used to riding on the roads if the track's substandard anyway.

The only solutions to motorcycle abuse are policing and making the cycle tracks so busy that they lose all attraction to the nobbers because they can't get up any speed and get videoed and reported to the police almost every time.


----------



## Brains (30 Nov 2016)

The solution used around these parts by the off road motorcyclists is to have one of these in you tool kit




Costs about £15 and will remove most anti-motorbike gates in a couple of minutes.
One set of local gates were removed 3 times in 3 months.
The council have given up replacing them

The solution is not gates, but to upgrade the path with tarmac and a kerb on any area where going off road may be a good idea. This way the path becomes 'boring' for off road scrambling (but better for the cyclists and other wheeled pedestrians)


----------



## Milkfloat (30 Nov 2016)

As far as I am concerned the sooner they are gone the better. But the headline is very misleading.


----------



## Jody (30 Nov 2016)

They have been removed from a few areas of the Chesterfield canal loop I do and we haven't had any nuisnce motor bikers. Its great not haing to stop and shimmy through with handlebars at an angle. However most of the local scrotes now ride pit bikes so they can go under/over any barrier put in place.



Phaeton said:


> These are the type that they have on the towpath, a real pain in the artichokes



I find those frustrating but its a good test to get round them without dabbing a foot.


----------



## mjr (30 Nov 2016)

Jody said:


> I find those frustrating but its a good test to get round them without dabbing a foot.


Good test of what? Do obstacle courses encourage people to cycle?


----------



## Phaeton (30 Nov 2016)

Jody said:


> I find those frustrating but its a good test to get round them without dabbing a foot.





mjr said:


> Good test of what? Do obstacle courses encourage people to cycle?


Balance, control skills, have you ever seen trials cycling? There are more than one type of cycling to which to encourage people to enjoy


----------



## Jody (30 Nov 2016)

mjr said:


> Good test of what?



Bike control/skill obviously



mjr said:


> Do obstacle courses encourage people to cycle?



No of course they don't. But neither does the sight of a 15 year old on an unlicensed and uninsured MX bike doing in excess off 40+ on a shared use path. You may not have had much of this behaviour where you live but not so long ago South Yorkshire and surrounding areas were blighted with it. It seems to be a dying trend but is still prevalent in some areas.


----------



## mjr (30 Nov 2016)

Phaeton said:


> Balance, control skills, have you ever seen trials cycling? There are more than one type of cycling to which to encourage people to enjoy


Not really appropriate for a SUStainable TRANSport network, though.



Jody said:


> But neither does the sight of a 15 year old on an unlicensed and uninsured MX bike doing in excess off 40+ on a shared use path. You may not have had much of this behaviour where you live but not so long ago South Yorkshire and surrounding areas were blighted with it. It seems to be a dying trend but is still prevalent in some areas.


And which is completely irrelevant to these barriers because that MX bike can get through most barriers which bicycles can *because they have basically similar handlebars*. I'm sorry if South Yorkshire hasn't got effective policing of its cycle tracks, but making them inaccessible for disabled users is not a fair or effective alternative.


----------



## Phaeton (30 Nov 2016)

mjr said:


> And which is completely irrelevant to these barriers because that MX bike can get through most barriers which bicycles can *because they have basically similar handlebars*.


You really have no clue what you are talking about have you





These are the same as on your bike are they?



mjr said:


> I'm sorry if South Yorkshire hasn't got effective policing of its cycle tracks, but making them inaccessible for disabled users is not a fair or effective alternative.


We're not arguing with you, we agree with you, are you actually reading what we type or is there a hidden agenda we don't know about


----------



## Jody (30 Nov 2016)

mjr said:


> And which is completely irrelevant to these barriers because that MX bike can get through most barriers which bicycles can *because they have basically similar handlebars*.



Appreciate the bit about disabled users but handlebars are not the same as a bicycle. For a start they are wider and second they are double clamps (on the fork) which means they can't turn more than (about) 35/40 degrees. they only way to get a bike through it by lifting the handlebars higher than the gate. Given the weight of a crosser it makes it very difficult.


----------



## I like Skol (30 Nov 2016)

mjr said:


> Not really appropriate for a SUStainable TRANSport network, though.


Since when has my cycling preferences been restricted by, or had to conform to some idealogical standard dreamt up by SUSTRANS? I actually enjoy the challenge of getting around the tight u-bend type restrictions, balancing, hopping and making sure the panniers don't catch are all part of the ride experience.



mjr said:


> And which is completely irrelevant to these barriers because that MX bike can get through most barriers which bicycles can *because they have basically similar handlebars*. I'm sorry if South Yorkshire hasn't got effective policing of its cycle tracks, but making them inaccessible for disabled users is not a fair or effective alternative.


You get it, I get it, most of the users get it but apparently project managers and planners of such cycle paths the length and breadth of the country don't see the problem. Why is this?


----------



## Drago (30 Nov 2016)

Because they don't ride bikes of any kind, and don't have Wives in wheelchairs?


----------



## jarlrmai (30 Nov 2016)

Around 50% of the ones on the cycle-path I rode from Warrington to Altrincham were easily bypassed on a motorbike


----------



## RichK (30 Nov 2016)

I'm not sure on this one, having been involved in a head on collision with a yoof on a motorbike (on NCN5)


----------



## Shut Up Legs (30 Nov 2016)

I like Skol said:


> Manchester leading the way
> 
> The barriers on the Fallow field loop never seemed to be a problem for me but I only ride a 'normal' bike. The ones that really wind me up are the tall ones that lean inwards to narrow at the top. These are a total menace and are not even wide enough for my shoulders to fit through, never mind the bike handlebars!
> 
> ...


What on earth is that!? A whippet-lean roadie with matching bike might be able to squeeze through it, but everyone else would have trouble. Also, it doesn't cater for larger bikes, e.g. tandems, bakfiets, recumbents, etc. Whoever designed that obviously does no cycling.


----------



## dodgy (30 Nov 2016)

Shut Up Legs said:


> What on earth is that!? A whippet-lean roadie with matching bike might be able to squeeze through it, but everyone else would have trouble. Also, it doesn't cater for larger bikes, e.g. tandems, bakfiets, recumbents, etc. Whoever designed that obviously does no cycling.



Lots of them around here, the angle of lean is adjustable, hence every single one is at slightly different severity, therefore you can't take it for granted that you might make it through at slow speed. So badly thought out, and the ones that are suffering are those in most need of help.


----------



## mjr (30 Nov 2016)

Phaeton said:


> You really have no clue what you are talking about have you
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not THE SAME but SIMILAR - measure the diameter, width and so on. People really did use some motorcycle handlebars on bikes. See, for example, https://hadland.wordpress.com/2012/06/30/did-brits-invent-the-mountain-bike/



Phaeton said:


> We're not arguing with you, we agree with you, are you actually reading what we type or is there a hidden agenda we don't know about


...writes someone who seems to be reading "the same" where I wrote "similar"?


----------



## mjr (30 Nov 2016)

I like Skol said:


> Since when has my cycling preferences been restricted by, or had to conform to some idealogical standard dreamt up by SUSTRANS?


It isn't. You're quite free to do whatever agility tests you want between consenting adults off the main routes, but the context of this is removing such torture devices from the Sustrans NCN.


----------



## Drago (30 Nov 2016)

I think the problem with these obstacles is that they prove to be an impediment to many legitimate users, while doing little or nothing to address illegal motorcycle use.


----------



## I like Skol (30 Nov 2016)

mjr said:


> It isn't. You're quite free to do whatever agility tests you want between consenting adults off the main routes, but the context of this is removing such torture devices from the Sustrans NCN.


I don't see that type being a barrier to wheelchair access, not like the type I pictured, but I would have to consult with affected user groups to confirm this before I would ever elect to install one.


----------



## mjr (30 Nov 2016)

I like Skol said:


> I don't see that type being a barrier to wheelchair access, not like the type I pictured, but I would have to consult with affected user groups to confirm this before I would ever elect to install one.


They do consult... and then install the bloody things anyway, in my experience!

The towpath ones in the picture, if those are typical 100mm-deep pavers under/around them, seem to be set with a gap only 700mm wide and contain two zero-radius right-angle turns. There will be some types of wheelchair that can't make that corner.


----------



## Drago (30 Nov 2016)

Or the wheelchair can, but the person pushing it can't.


----------



## dodgy (1 Dec 2016)

How about this one, been like this years, I've contacted the LA and also Sustrans - nothing. Not that bad if you know it's coming, but what about first timers?


----------



## mjr (1 Dec 2016)

dodgy said:


> How about this one, been like this years, I've contacted the LA and also Sustrans - nothing. Not that bad if you know it's coming, but what about first timers?


When you say "nothing" do you mean you had no reply? Are you sure your reports are getting through? Log it on www.fixmystreet.com as that usually hits home.


----------



## Phaeton (1 Dec 2016)

dodgy said:


> How about this one, been like this years, I've contacted the LA and also Sustrans - nothing. Not that bad if you know it's coming, but what about first timers?


Does the gate open?


----------



## dodgy (1 Dec 2016)

I don't think they see it as a problem, I should have explained. I guess nobody has died yet.


----------



## dodgy (1 Dec 2016)

Phaeton said:


> Does the gate open?



Only when unlocked.


----------



## Inertia (1 Dec 2016)

I like Skol said:


> I don't see that type being a barrier to wheelchair access, not like the type I pictured, but I would have to consult with affected user groups to confirm this before I would ever elect to install one.








This is one similar to the ones I have to navigate, the shape for bikes doesnt allow some bikes through (No chance with panniers), good luck getting a wheelchair through.


----------



## Phaeton (1 Dec 2016)

Inertia said:


> This is one similar to the ones I have to navigate, the shape for bikes doesnt allow some bikes through (No chance with panniers), good luck getting a wheelchair through.


That's evil worse than the ones I have to go through, are they just on entry/exit or along the track as well


----------



## I like Skol (1 Dec 2016)

Inertia said:


> This is one similar to the ones I have to navigate, the shape for bikes doesnt allow some bikes through (No chance with panniers), good luck getting a wheelchair through.


That is a piece of engineering. Actually, I take that back, it is a piece of fabrication with very little consideration to engineering, design or purpose. It is a truly horrendous item and I suspect a result of a situation where the fear of the crime is massively over shadowing the possibility of the crime!


----------



## Inertia (1 Dec 2016)

Phaeton said:


> That's evil worse than the ones I have to go through, are they just on entry/exit or along the track as well


Its on the track, you walk down steps, under the bridge and are hit with that. Unlike the pictured one there is a locked gate next to it whch runs up to the canal.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (1 Dec 2016)

I like Skol said:


> Manchester leading the way
> 
> The barriers on the Fallow field loop never seemed to be a problem for me but I only ride a 'normal' bike. The ones that really wind me up are the tall ones that lean inwards to narrow at the top. These are a total menace and are not even wide enough for my shoulders to fit through, never mind the bike handlebars!
> 
> ...


Those sort are a PITA also locally those annoying ornamented blocks in the ground by the supposed bike cutout at the entances to Clayton Vale.


----------



## Inertia (9 Dec 2016)

Had a nice surprise this morning, not. The one I talked about earlier is the only one I have to dismount for until today. There is a similar barrier further back on the towpath but it doesnt reach to length of the path so there was a gap to the side of it I could ride through instead of dismounting. The operative word being was..someone has made an addition.


----------



## mjr (9 Dec 2016)

Inertia said:


> There is a similar barrier further back on the towpath but it doesnt reach to length of the path so there was a gap to the side of it I could ride through instead of dismounting. The operative word being was..someone has made an addition.


Non-reflective wood? That's only a matter of time before someone crashes into it in the dark hard enough to break it.


----------



## Jody (9 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> That's only a matter of time before someone crashes into it in the dark hard enough to break it.


----------



## raleighnut (9 Dec 2016)

Jody said:


>


Even easier,


----------



## mjr (9 Dec 2016)

Jody said:


>


Surely no-one would leave obvious saw marks on it when a crowbar or large enough rock could look like crash damage.... sorry, I mean when someone will probably have crashed into it before anyone could?


----------



## byegad (11 Dec 2016)

I gave up on Sustrans some years ago. As a recumbent trike rider, due to intermittent balance issues, the barriers made most paths in my area impassable. Add to that 'surfaces' that can be a quagmire and signing that is woeful, and I'm now using those nicely (Well mostly nicely.) tarmacadamed cycle paths, beautifully signed and directly routed things called roads!

Experience of being a Sustrans Ranger tells me the anti motorcycle barriers are easily circumvented by yoofs on motorbikes by smashing down a couple of fences and mmoto-crossing an odd field, not something open to most cyclists and a big no, no for a recumbent trike rider!

As for County Durhams experiment in barrier removal, I'd guess the people objecting to it were the same ones who walk dogs on 10m strings on the ex-Railway mixed use paths that are a feature of the Durham area. They also objected to cyclists using the Spennymoor-Bishop Auckland path and wanted barriers put in to keep cyclists* out.

*N.B. Cyclists, not motorcyclists.


----------



## Drago (11 Dec 2016)

The moaners should be superglue to a wheelchair, see how they then like motorcycle barriers.


----------



## Inertia (12 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> Non-reflective wood? That's only a matter of time before someone crashes into it in the dark hard enough to break it.


heh, well I cycled in this morning and couldnt see it as I rounded the corner, when I got close it woudl appear it had a crash with a saw and a spade over the weekend


----------



## Jody (12 Dec 2016)

I hope it wasn't you @Inertia


----------



## Inertia (12 Dec 2016)

Jody said:


> I hope it wasn't you @Inertia


me? no!


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (12 Dec 2016)

Round here the motorbikers kick a nearby fence down. At Wombwell there's 4 foot wide custom made areas next to the bars for horses to get through.


----------



## mjr (12 Dec 2016)

Jody said:


> I hope it wasn't you @Inertia


The people to describe such changes are almost never the people to do it, in my experience of some barriers where I'd say I'm about 90% certain that I know who removed them. They left others to discover them and acted surprised when told. This is quite similar to the scoundrels who erect such barriers "officially", who never seem to announce in advance that they're going to fark a route for wheelchair users, tricyclists or people with child trailers (depending on barrier type).

I wonder what made the parallel lines in the dirt. It makes me think this may have been a bit more heavy-duty than a cyclist with a hand-saw and someone who felt they had a legitimate right of access with something bigger.


----------



## Drago (12 Dec 2016)

The Forestry Commission have done a load of logging in our local forest. While doing so their huge machines churned up a public footpath, rendering it marginal on foot, and utterly impassable to those in a wheelchair.

I emailed them to complain, and their response was a politely worded F off. The highway authorities/landowners simply don't give a sheet.


----------



## Alan O (12 Dec 2016)

I have to say I'm torn on this. I use the Loop Line in Liverpool, which is part of Route 62, for cycling, walking and taking my Mum out in her wheelchair.

The only barrier that's difficult is the one at our usual entry point - it's one of those tall ones with the sides angled inwards. I can just get the wheelchair and myself through, but the chair handles often scrape the sides (and I have to be very careful with my knuckles). Different types of barriers at different points along the route take a bit of manipulation, but we can get through easily enough.

So removal would make things a bit easier for us.

But against that, I cycled along it at the weekend, through one section that has no motorcycle barriers - and it was full of kids on little loud motorbikes.


----------



## Drago (12 Dec 2016)

But the point is that the barriers present little obstacle to unlawful activity, while having a major impact on lawful activity.


----------



## mjr (12 Dec 2016)

Alan O said:


> But against that, I cycled along it at the weekend, through one section that has no motorcycle barriers - and it was full of kids on little loud motorbikes.


...which I trust you reported to the police?

I also don't see how mini motorcycles would be stopped by anything that allows a bicycle through.


----------



## Alan O (12 Dec 2016)

Drago said:


> But the point is that the barriers present little obstacle to unlawful activity, while having a major impact on lawful activity.


That's a fair point in many situations. However, in this case the barrier-protected sections were free from motorbikes (and almost always are) and the unprotected areas weren't (and often aren't), so the barriers here do seem to be sufficient obstacles. The entry points are mostly quite restricted anyway, and at most of them there just isn't a way round the barriers - at my usual entry, there's strong steel fence either side of the barrier up as far as the walls/houses each side.

Of course, it's possible that were there barriers to all sections they'd find the few places where they can get round them and still use it. But I do use the whole length of the Loop Line, and motorbikes are far less of a problem now than the plague they were a few years ago - though admittedly, I don't know how much of that is down to the barriers themselves and how much down to other measures (including cycle police patrols during the summer).

My thoughts are that motorbike barriers are probably worthwhile in areas where there is a genuine problem, as there certainly was/is here in Liverpool - but used as a "one solution fits all" to the entire length of cycle routes, I think they're overkill.


----------



## Alan O (12 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> ...which I trust you reported to the police?



I confess I didn't - I should have done.



mjr said:


> I also don't see how mini motorcycles would be stopped by anything that allows a bicycle through.



There were a couple of mini bikes, and several 125cc-ish bikes. But the point was they *were* in the unprotected section and not in any protected sections.


----------



## mjr (12 Dec 2016)

Alan O said:


> I confess I didn't - I should have done.
> 
> There were a couple of mini bikes, and several 125cc-ish bikes. But the point was they *were* in the unprotected section and not in any protected sections.


And my point is that possibly the obstructed sections (for they are not protected by those barriers - unless you mean protected against some cycling) simply have people who give enough of a fark to report them to the police, as well as agitate for evil barriers.


----------



## Inertia (12 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> The people to describe such changes are almost never the people to do it, in my experience of some barriers where I'd say I'm about 90% certain that I know who removed them. They left others to discover them and acted surprised when told. This is quite similar to the scoundrels who erect such barriers "officially", who never seem to announce in advance that they're going to fark a route for wheelchair users, tricyclists or people with child trailers (depending on barrier type).
> 
> I wonder what made the parallel lines in the dirt. It makes me think this may have been a bit more heavy-duty than a cyclist with a hand-saw and someone who felt they had a legitimate right of access with something bigger.


I did annoy me but not enough to knock it down. 

Im not sure if you would need anything too heavy duty. It looked like a solid job bu tit was just stuck into the earth. Someone had dug a big hole where one post went so once that was done Im guessing it fell apart easily. 

I wondered who had done it in the first place, would a council really just erect a wooden fence like that or was it some local who built it?


----------



## Alan O (12 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> And my point is that possibly the obstructed sections (for they are not protected by those barriers - unless you mean protected against some cycling) simply have people who give enough of a fark to report them to the police, as well as agitate for evil barriers.


In many cases, yes, I think that is indeed true. There was certainly agitation here from people whose houses back on to sections of the loop line to get action to stop the motorbikes. In this case I think it was justified by the results, but I can accept there will be cases (possibly even the majority) where it isn't. For me the biggest mistake is to see barriers as a "one size fits all" solution, and there's certainly plenty of ham-fisted overuse of them.


----------



## mjr (12 Dec 2016)

Alan O said:


> For me the biggest mistake is to see barriers as a "one size fits all" solution, and there's certainly plenty of ham-fisted overuse of them.


Whereas for me, the biggest mistake is to see barriers as ANY sort of solution, rather than the illegal, discriminatory use-deterrent that they are. What's needed is policing, including people who report abuse to the police. Sadly, it's easy to mistakenly conclude that barriers are the reason why an area has no moto abuse, rather than the people who pushed for them, who are probably also reporting the largely-unaffected abuses.


----------



## Alan O (12 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> What's needed is policing, including people who report abuse to the police.


Well, that's where were certainly do agree - I'd much rather see effective policing (including the community, yes - the police can't do it all unaided) and no barriers anywhere. It was remiss of me not to report it at the weekend - I shall do in future.


----------

