• Welcome to the Land Rover UK Forums

    You are currently viewing the site as a guest and some content may not be available to you.

    Registration is quick and easy and will give you full access to the site and allow you to ask questions or make comments and join in on the conversation. If you would like to register then please Register Now



Big Landy Fan
I've found this report on the web:

"Report of a research project on motor vehicles on byways open to all traffic"


The report was commissioned by DEFRA. The research was conducted by FaberMaunsell Ltd. and took place during 2003/2004. The report came out in January 2005.

I quote, from the Conclusions, Page 117 (my emphasis):

Effects of use
The condition of byways reflects in part the effects that different users have on them, but the condition is also affected by the level of maintenance. There was no evidence of widespread damage to the byway network from motor vehicles, whether they were recreational vehicles or using byways for land management or access to dwellings. However there were sections of byways that had been damaged by vehicles, usually where there was poor or no drainage or soft ground. There was some evidence of the beneficial effect of motor vehicles on some byways where use could prevent ways from becoming overgrown and thus impassable by motor vehicle and other users.

It is a whopping report, 168 pages of thorough, detailed work and I haven't been through all of it, but it would seem to be the perfect thing to quote to the Ramblers, back at DEFRA themselves, and all the other anti's. And the best thing of it is, it's DEFRA's own report!

I'm wondering why I've never heard this report mentioned in the Land Rover press - perhaps I've just missed it?
Wow! If the rest of the report is half as positive as that, The Gurkha is dead right that we can use it to quote back at DEFRA. It might also act as a big stick when dealing with the woolies. Add to that all the good stuff CRAG can demonstrate and the codes of behavior GLASS promote, it doesn't seem quite as hopeless and forgone as it did.

By using all of the above in a coherent, well organised and well argued point of view, we may be able to negate more than half the Ramblers objections. Since our argument seeks to break their objections down on practical, demonstrable matters of fact, it would leave them with the bare bones of an emotionally based, 'just because' sort of case.:D

Thanks for finding that Gurkha - well worth the trawl.

Top Bottom