Upon checking out trailwise' maps of my local area to give some more info to a fellow LZ-er, one of the UCR's I've driven has their voluntary no-vehicle requests on it. Are these tied in any way to the local authority's views - impending TRO? or some such? Is it regularly updated or just an annual thing - assuming county inspections are annual - I don't know.
Note that when I checked, Lancs County Council had no restrictions apart from the 60mph speed limit.

The route in question would not get any better without vehicular traffic; divots and potholes don't heal themselves do they?. However it would probably become more overgrown through lack of vehicular (brick-shaped Land Rover!! ) usage. On my last trip down there the Disco had no real trouble negotiating the terrain; minimal TC interferance, so not churning wheels, flinging rocks and digging big holes.
(OK it wouldn't cop for any worse erosion for a long time without 4x4 and motorcycles, but I think you get the idea!)

My impression is that if negotiated in low first, steady away, a horse or walker would slip more and cause more of a rut!

The request is a voluntary one, which is just that - not enforceable. I'd obviously like to go laning there in the future, but don't want to say "poppycock to your request, I'm off down there..." at least not without being better informed. Don't want to knacker up our chances of actually using a fun little UCR.

Is there a lot of anti-4x4 sentiment on trailwise?

Thanks people!

Diff.

Are you a member on trialwise, if so you can view the comments and find out why. I have not seen any anti 4x4 feeling, in fact I think GLASS part fund it.

Dont know which lane you are talking about but I did a search around your location. Only one I could find had the following comments




Repairs carried out by Glass, Red Rose & LCC working well, no evidence of illegal use. Great Lane

Lane subject to damage and illegal off route driving, major project by volunteers led by GLASS and LCC on Sunday 12 July 2010 has repaired damage to both lane and surrounding woods and blocked off illegal tracks leading from route.

Not a member of trailwise.

I'll send you a PM Sue.

Diff.

DIFFLOCK66 said:

Upon checking out trailwise' maps of my local area to give some more info to a fellow LZ-er, one of the UCR's I've driven has their voluntary no-vehicle requests on it. Are these tied in any way to the local authority's views - impending TRO? or some such? Is it regularly updated or just an annual thing - assuming county inspections are annual - I don't know.
Note that when I checked, Lancs County Council had no restrictions apart from the 60mph speed limit

Click to expand...

A VR or voluntry restriction is just that, but its usually there for a good reason. There was one in the peaks(chapel gate maybe) it was there because if traffic coming down meets traffic coming up there is no room to pass and it could be dangerous if people tried.

But requests not to use lanes by other trailwise members are obviously just a request. There is a particular lane i know of in wales that has a request from a member of TW not to use it, it turns out it was only a temporary thing as there horse had just given birth to a foal. The foal was 2 years old by the tim ei came to ask why i should steer clear, when you type a comment it can only be deleted by admin.

I am a TW member, if you PM me the link to the lane in question i will have a look for you.

BGB

Thanks BGB - suew has already given me some info. I'll send you a PM

Diff.

BIG_GINGA_BEARD said:

There was one in the peaks(chapel gate maybe) it was there because if traffic coming down meets traffic coming up there is no room to pass

Click to expand...

This may be a factor in the lane we're on about. I've been lucky so far in not having to reverse etc.

Diff.