Bike in Cyprus

This paper argues that the current rights of way network could and should be developed in ways which would make it much more useful for cyclists. At present it does not adequately support the Government’s policy to increase access and thereby raise levels of physical activity and reduce car use. It sets out the case for a review of the rights of way network so that it better meets the demands of the 21st century. It also suggests improvements to the information available to users.

1. The English countryside is a powerful draw for a wide variety of cyclists. Rural roads and paths are used for sport, leisure, family outings and simply getting around. Current provision for cyclists caters for some groups better than others, and is uneven across the country. In the main, those who rarely venture off road are well served by the network of minor roads. The needs of much the largest group of cyclists, the family and leisure cyclists who rely on the network of bridleways, byways etc are less well served than they could be. For this reason, and because the deadline for Rights of Way Improvement Plans is approaching, this paper focuses on rights of way. For present purposes these are defined in the same was as for RoWIPs, and so include cycle paths, towpaths, forest tracks and other permissive routes.

2. The law which governs cycling access to rights of way dates from 1968 and essentially allows cyclists to go wherever horses may go. It was a pragmatic compromise born of a different age – an age when the number of bicycles designed for offroad use was zero. The number of offroad bicycles has since risen to something like 15 million and accounts for about 80 per cent of new bicycle sales. The Rough Stuff Fellowship, established in 1955, showed that the joys of cycling away from roads were not lost on hardy cyclists. But it was far from being the mass pursuit that it has become in the era of the mountain bike. Hitherto there has been no serious public debate and engagement about the needs of the offroad cyclist or the potential for developing the rights of way network so that it caters better for 21st century cyclists. Such debate could inform future development of the network itself and the legal framework which governs its use.

3. A law which allows bicycles to share only those rights of way available to horse riders would be fine if all bridleways and byways were suited to cycling and all footpaths were not. But this is very far from being the case. This paper does not address the specific requirements of more serious enthusiasts who number perhaps 150,000 and whose needs are largely met through specialist facilities. It is, rather, on the far more numerous leisure and family cyclists who rely on shared rights of way. Many of these paths have a wider purpose than recreation alone, important though that is. They take their place alongside the road network, the National Cycle Network and other cycle paths as part of the transport infrastructure, not least for those who live in rural areas. The importance of this role is underlined by the requirement on highways authorities to provide progress reports on their RoWIPs in the context of their Local Transport Plans.