Sorting the cyclists

Published: Friday, 04 July 2014

AFTER reading Mick Fitzgibbons' article entitled 'Towpath Velodrome', I dug out my British Waterway (BW)  Cycling Permit (in its plastic holder with strap to affix it around the seat stem of your bike) and a copy of the (then) BW Code which accompanied the permit, writes Graham Freeman.

For those who may be surprised to learn that such a thing even existed, I've enclosed scans of both the permit, and the BW Code relates: Cycling: You need a permit and information telling you which stretches are open to cycling.

Permission

On reading the words in the Code and on the permit, you will note that BW state that you need: 'permission to cycle on designated towpaths', and that 'permission may be withdrawn if you ignore this code, and you could be liable to prosecution'. If this stipulation applied 20 years ago (assuming it comes from still-extant BW bye-laws) why did BW drop the need for 'permission'—was it too expensive to administer/too difficult to police ?

Regardless of the reasons why the cycling permit was dropped, if the legislation for its enforcement still exists, doesn't that provide an opportunity for CaRT to take legal steps to curb the 'lycra menace'?

Signpost all towpaths

That said, if, as Mick indicates, CaRT are unwilling to do anything about this (growing) problem until 'a serious accident occurs', perhaps the Trust needs to (rapidly) signpost all towpaths in the manner now familiar to us all by use of the blue sign which notifies the public that stretches of pavement are 'dual use' by depicting symbols for a pedestrians and a bicycle?

I only suggest this because it could help reduce the costs to CaRT if they were to get involved in an expensive legal case where a death occurred (cyclist/pedestrian) on land for which it has a duty-of-care (especially if bye-laws relevant to towpath cycling are still extant) . . . .