I'm absolutely furious!

On Mon, 9 May 2005 18:31:16 +0100, Richard Lucas wrote:

British Waterways aren't responsible for the Thames - it's the Environment
Agency as successors to the Thames Conservancy, IIRC.

And they claim to be keen supporters of cycling, hurrah!

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk...sion=1&lang=_e
--
Best Regards
Richard

in message , JLB
') wrote:

Anyone can take out a prosecution
against those who obstruct a highway.

Sorted. On you go, Oliver, get the *******s.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

For office use only. Please do not write or type below this line.

wrote:

Just recently someone has erected a "kissing gate" on the tow path just
past Iffley lock on the Thames in Oxford. Before hand there used to be
a gate

This renders it almost impossible to take a bicycle through, although
it can be achieved with great difficulty.

I am absolutely furious about this, especially considering this does
indeed form part of the national cycle route no. 5 (see
www.sustrans.org.uk)

It is obviously known that this route is used by a lot of cyclists, and
obviously someone somewhere has decided they don't like cyclists and
are doing their best to block them. Now short of (illegally) tearing
this gate down, what exactly can I do about it?

Anyone else affected by this issue?


I thought there was loads of kissing gates along the Thames? I've done a
relay (running, not cycling) along the Thames towpath and I remember going
through several kissing gates on my 7.5 mile leg around the
Chertsey/Shepperton area (I broke the leg record btw!).


--
Brian Wakem

David Hansen came up with the following;:
On Mon, 9 May 2005 18:15:41 +0100 someone who may be "Paul - xxx"
wrote this:-

On a canal near where we used to live speeding cyclists were quite a
large problem as the path was narrow and was also occupied by fishermen
most Sundays. Conflicts often arose between cyclists and fishing rods
pulled back over the path.

Are you claiming that this was related to the speed of cyclists? If
so, why?

I'm not claiming anything, that was the argument put forward by the Fishing
Club to justify the erection of much larger barriers to cycles than had
previously been up. The fishermen complained that speeding cyclists were
regularly riding over their rods and equipment. At the time there was quite
a large local (Nottingham/Derby area) hullabaloo about it.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!
For Sale on Ebay
5771988658

joe came up with the following;:
This renders it almost impossible to take a bicycle through, although
it can be achieved with great difficulty.

The method I use along the Grand Union canal (West London) is to dismount;
lift up the bike in one hand (the canal side); grab hold of the barrier
with the other hand and swing round the end of it. Obviously it takes a
bit of careful footwork and practice, but I found this the quickest
method.

Sorry I can't explain it better, but in plan it looks something like this
(the bike is actually over the water, but I think most cyclists will have
a strong enough grip to keep hold of it and the barrier):

canal | bike | me | barrier

That's what we did too ..

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!
For Sale on Ebay
5771988658

:

wrote:

Just recently someone has erected a "kissing gate" on the tow path just
past Iffley lock on the Thames in Oxford. Before hand there used to be
a gate


Now short of (illegally) tearing
this gate down, what exactly can I do about it?

Ingredients:
1 dark night
1 box of matches
1 bottle of lighter fluid.

Mix vigorously.

In the morning, the gate will be gone.

Simon Brooke wrote:


Yup, it must be. A cyclepath is a highway, and it is illegal to obstruct
a highway.


IIRC tow paths are not highways and their use for cycling is permissive
i.e. the owner (British Waterways) can do what they like as you are only
allowed there with their permission. They have no obligation to keep
them unblocked for cyclists

--
Tony

"A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought" Lord
Peter Wimsey (Dorothy L. Sayers)

On Mon, 9 May 2005 21:14:41 +0100 someone who may be "Paul - xxx"
wrote this:-

The fishermen complained that speeding cyclists were
regularly riding over their rods and equipment.

They appear to be trying to join together two separate issues. I
doubt if the speed of the cyclists is an issue, for reasons given
below. I suspect the real reason is they are too lazy to lift their
equipment out of the way.

At the time there was quite
a large local (Nottingham/Derby area) hullabaloo about it.

The fishing fraternity also complain about barges interfering with
fishing. Of course without barges the canal would not be there and
there would be little or no fishing [1]. Some of the fishing
fraternity don't remove their equipment when a barge approaches. As
it travels at a few miles an hour this has nothing to do with the
speed of approach.

The fishing fraternity is of course like any other group, members
are good, bad and indifferent. I am only commenting on the bad ones
and these are the ones that leave the greatest impression.

[1] There are exceptions, but the generalisation is reasonable.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Tue, 10 May 2005 00:13:51 +0100, Tony Raven
wrote:

Simon Brooke wrote:


Yup, it must be. A cyclepath is a highway, and it is illegal to obstruct
a highway.


IIRC tow paths are not highways and their use for cycling is permissive
i.e. the owner (British Waterways) can do what they like as you are only
allowed there with their permission. They have no obligation to keep
them unblocked for cyclists

Surely they have to keep them clear for horses towing barges?

David Hansen came up with the following;:
On Mon, 9 May 2005 21:14:41 +0100 someone who may be "Paul - xxx"
wrote this:-

The fishermen complained that speeding cyclists were
regularly riding over their rods and equipment.

They appear to be trying to join together two separate issues. I
doubt if the speed of the cyclists is an issue, for reasons given
below. I suspect the real reason is they are too lazy to lift their
equipment out of the way.

Actually, it's a bit of both. In the instances I'm speaking of some
cyclists _were_ acting irresponsibly and racing along the towpaths. The
fishermen became aggressive and took the stand that they owned the rights to
the bankside and stopped removing equipment, cyclists were only really there
by permission, not by right, so the fishermen felt justified. Whatever you
or I think, the fishermen had reasons that they could justify to leave their
equipment to hand.

As usual, it's the polarisation that acts against the interests of all
parties. If the cyclists behaved responsibly, the fishermen would have done
likewise.

I know the above to be true because I both rode along the paths and fished
them. When cycling, if I stopped and waited the fishemen _always_ moved
their kit for me. When I hooned about they uinvariably made me wait.

Whilst fishing I felt exactly the same way. If a cyclist came up and
slowed/stopped to give me time to move the kit I would, if one came along
demanding right of way I would still move it, but would take my time ...
Human nature I guess.


--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!!
For Sale on Ebay
5771988658