Avebury & the Marlborough Downs forum 64 room
Image by Chance
Avebury & the Marlborough Downs

Avebury footpath partly destroyed lock

close
more_vert
Sanctuary S
Sanctuary Aug 31, 2011 17:31:08
Replying to moss

moss wrote:
Well here is Scubi's report and photos.....

http://heritageaction.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/avebury-footpath-partly-destroyed/

I couldn't help but notice in the photographs that the bridleway was badly rutted beyond the ploughed-out section. If the now ploughed-out section was in the same condition prior to the ploughing has anyone given thought to the fact that it may have been done to IMPROVE the situation? I believe the farmer will have a month? to reinstate the path which would then be in a better condition than before. I take it access hasn't been denied so it may be a simple case of badly needed maintainance taking place and not destruction at all.

T thesweetcheat
thesweetcheat Aug 31, 2011 19:07:02
Replying to Sanctuary

Sanctuary wrote:
moss wrote:
Well here is Scubi's report and photos.....

http://heritageaction.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/avebury-footpath-partly-destroyed/

I couldn't help but notice in the photographs that the bridleway was badly rutted beyond the ploughed-out section. If the now ploughed-out section was in the same condition prior to the ploughing has anyone given thought to the fact that it may have been done to IMPROVE the situation? I believe the farmer will have a month? to reinstate the path which would then be in a better condition than before. I take it access hasn't been denied so it may be a simple case of badly needed maintainance taking place and not destruction at all.
Although it would be nice to give the benefit of that doubt, I can't see it myself. The intention very much appears to be to plough to the field edge and then plant. The original route was well-established and appears to have been rather wider than the statutory two metres that will have to be re-instated. So even if/when it is re-instated, the farmer is likely to have gained at least a few extra feet of width, which times by however long the ploughed section is, may not be insignificant.

Anyway, if that is the case we'll soon know because he only has 14 days to reinstate at least to the two metre width.

S scubi63
scubi63 Aug 31, 2011 19:50:30
Replying to Sanctuary

Sanctuary wrote:
I couldn't help but notice in the photographs that the bridleway was badly rutted beyond the ploughed-out section. If the now ploughed-out section was in the same condition prior to the ploughing has anyone given thought to the fact that it may have been done to IMPROVE the situation?
Hi Sanctuary,

Actually the rutted section is a byway (not a bridleway) that is open to all traffic which finishes at the field boundary. Actually it turns slight right into the gated field the third photo was taken from. The tracks fade rapidly as the route enters the ploughed field suggesting there were no tracks going into it.

The ploughed out section is the start of the bridleway heading south-west and (going by the lack of tracks entering into the field) would, imo, have been similar to the first photo.

Maybe the farmer has good reason to do this and plans to reinstate the bridleway shortly. But I do not see any harm letting him know people are using the route and are concerned that this has happened without any notification and without directing people to the correct route across his property. It would be very easy to follow the byway and enter the incorrect field.

I hope this helps

:o)

L Littlestone
Littlestone Aug 31, 2011 21:29:23
Replying to Sanctuary

Good point Mr S, although I wouldn’t say it’s that badly rutted. Besides, why stop where the two parallel hedges stop? If the farmer wanted to improve the byway/bridleway he could have run a tractor between the hedges. Looks more like the absence of one hedge just allowed him to plough up to the remaining one without too much ‘difficulty’.