A Bracknell cyclist has complained that part of the National Cycling Network has been blocked off at Dorney Lake, where she says she encountered “wound up” security staff employed by Eton College.
The Windsor Observer reports that a group of six women had planned to ride from Bray to Dorney Lake along National Cycle Network route 4 this week.
However, they were met with a barrier and ‘road closed’ signs.
“I went up to the security man and said ‘this is a public right of way. We would like to use it’,” said one of the cyclists, Charlotte Parker.
“He just said ‘the road is closed, go away’ and put the barrier right in front of my bike.
“I wanted to establish a connection and say I totally understood why they had had to take action they did, but this was a right of way. Had a temporary closure notice been applied for?
“He just said ‘we are Eton College and it is closed’.
“I pointed out the bridleway notice and he just said, ‘that’s coming down’.
“He was right in front of me and seemed so wound up. He threatened to call the police.”
Dorney Lake is privately owned by Eton College. In March, the college obtained a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) for the area in response to anti-social behaviour.
A post on the lake’s Facebook page explained: “The Order was granted in recognition of the fact that persistent incidents of an array of aggressive, unreasonable/anti-social behaviour including alcohol and drug abuse, littering, vandalism and bridge jumping has had a significant negative impact on the local environment, our events and the quality of life in the locality.”
A subsequent post, on June 1, announced that the lake was closed until further notice, including to cyclists.
Parker said she felt the college were managing the situation very badly.
“I asked Eton College to update me regarding the legal details of the closure a week ago when I found another route with barriers across. Eton College have not responded.”
The National Cycle Network is managed by Sustrans. A spokesperson told road.cc: “A few weeks ago, access to NCN4 was closed because of a Public Spaces Protection Order obtained by the College to deal with anti-social behaviour. Sustrans has since made contact with the college, and are working with them and the local authority to find a temporary diversion.”
Add new comment
38 comments
I am local and I visited today (13 July) on my bike. The permissive path around the West and North of the site is now open. The new sign marking it says "Although this is not a public right of way you may enter through the kind agreement of the landowner."
A new 6 foot high (approx) fence is being erected around the site. They have started on the West side. It is private land and I suspect in future visitors will be charged an entry fee.
Dorney Lake is a 2km long boating lake with extensive grounds and paths which were well used by families, cyclists, roller bladers etc.
The revolting behaviour of a few over recent weeks has spoilt it for the many.
Image shows new fence.
The County Council show the the NCN through Eton as a public right of way on their definitive map. OS similarly. There is no closure in place either. Security have no authority whatsoever, the PSPO does not apply to legitimate use.
OS Map does not show the NCN route as a public right of way, it shows it as a traffic free cycle route - the orange dots do not confer a public right of way. In the attched pic you can see where NCN 4 goes through private property. Assuming this was the direction the cyclists were travelling, you can see a bridleway for a short distance joining up with a footpath - both public rights of way. However you can see clearly that NCN 4, once in the lake area proper, is not on a public right of way.
I'd suggest you just trundle on through and let the police deal with the security staff if they use force to stop you. Kinder Scout etc...
I think we are all reading too much into this.
It is probably just part of a student project set by the college
"How to stop the plebs walking over your Pater's estate during the holidays"
After all if you are going to be a prime minister you need to know how government works at all levels
Just to give you an idea of what an embuggerance this is here's my Strava track from the detour with the usual route roughly in black.
Obviously not the most efficient route back to the NCN but the kind you follow if you don't know the area too well. I was on a commute to London from Reading which is something I do maybe once or twice a year. Worth mentioning that the same NCN was closed/diverted badly in 3 other places which was disgraceful.
Which demonstrates one of the problems of the NCN; much of it is permissive, or can be closed at a moment's notice without too much concern about safe detours.
Could you imagine the motorway network being on permissive routes that could just be closed by recalcitrant land owners?
Looks like you could have cut off most of the additional distance with a quick right then left at Eton Wick? Would have missed a bit of nice riverside cycling I admit, but no more than you picked up by following the river round the lake ..?
As you say, it's not having appropriate direction / diversion signs that probably cause the biggest problem.
50/50 chance of getting it right if you don't know where the path is in relation to the lake.
Plus the blocked path is about 20m down the bank from the bridge and the opposite direction is strongly shadowed under the bridge, so the tendency is to continue forward, which is the wrong move in this case.
Heavens forbid I'd actually check for directions on my phone
I'm assuming the judge was an Old Etonian?
Privilege = Private law...
Hope they find a better diversion than I managed when I got caught out by this in Late June. Must have been a 2-3 mile diversion I made due to the size of the grounds.
"The Order was granted in recognition of the fact that persistent incidents of an array of aggressive, unreasonable/anti-social behaviour including alcohol and drug abuse, littering, vandalism and bridge jumping has had a significant negative impact on the local environment, our events and the quality of life in the locality.”
banning cyclists will surely resolve all these issues
No, but it does sound like typical behaviour of an Eton boarding school attendee
The order makes no mention of either cycling or walking through the area covered by the order.
Further the order, as seen on the link states that a penalty not exceeding scale 2 or 3 would be payable "upon summary conviction". This suggests that enforcement is a matter for the police, not security guards.
As cyclists and walkers who are not drinking alcohol or taking drugs who keep moving cannot be said to be loitering I can't see what grounds the college has for closing access to the area under the order.
During the later extremities of the lockdown, but after it was made clear that people were allowed out for socially distanced exercising, a farmer closed the road to Seathwaite in Borrowdale with barricades. The council had to forcibly open the road again. I know of someone in the Yorkshire Dales who was cycling a bridleway, and the farmer turned him back. He claimed that there was no entry because someone living beside this track was suffering with some pre-existing condition and had gone into social isolation. Back in Foot and Mouth the farmers were thrilled that there was an official order keeping walkers and cyclists off the land- foot and mouth was brought in by farmers buying dodgy animals- it wasn't the cyclists and walkers! These people, and Eton College, are Trying It On! They are grossly exceeding their powers. They must be resisted and locals are duty bound to complain to the council and sort it out.
This matter of landowners believing the lockdown gave them permission to close paths was a real issue across the country for Rights of Way teams. There is no legislation or "official order" that permits this. IPROW the national institute worked with Govt to set up an approach that provided polite signs to anable permissive alternatives - but these did not close the paths. Report obstructed routes to the Highways Authority for enforcement under the 1981 Highways Act. Also, be aware that riding cycles on public footpaths is only with a landowner's permission. If you dont have the permission you are trespassing and also bringing our fine mode of travel into disrepute
Sup up your beer and collect your fags, there's a row going on down near Slough....
The PSPO doesn't cover the legitimate use of the lake or closure of any Bridleway.
https://www.southbucks.gov.uk/article/10518/Dorney-Lake-Public-Spaces-Pr...
Eton rightfuls
Wow! Thanks for searching out that Butty. Perhaps the local cyclists could organise a ride through and take a copy of the order with them to show the guard. With appropriate use of video cameras; could be hilarious.
If the bridleway is a permissive bridleway only, and it may well be, then Eton College would still have the right to close it even though such is not mentioned on the order. I live locally, but don't know if that's the case.
Looking at the OS Maps, the NCN 4 Route is a 'traffic free cycle route'. It is not a public right of way and is on private land, presumably owned by Eton. They have every right to close access with or without a PSPO.
There is, however, a public right of way called The Thames Path on the other side of the lake. This is a footpath - it is not illegal to cycle on a footpath (as opposed to a footway).
It does look like permissive access on the definitive RoW map so am puzzled why the story quotes Bridleway signs being pulled down.
So it appears to be a lawful denial of access. The unconnected PSPO has somehow been introduced into the story to make a storm in a teacup.
Was it RoadCC hacks who have tried to stir this up as clickbait?
Eton perfectly entitled and rightful to do so
More likely someone from road.cc reading a distorted/one-sided version of the story elsewhere and then just rehashing it without digging any deeper.
Perhaps the PSPO order was applied for partly to allay any concerns about how a closure out of the blue would look? Easier to justify that way, even if they're perfectly within their rights to restrict access in the first place.
If so, why would they need a PSPO?
Liking that!
Ah, just got the allusion.
“The Order was granted in recognition of the fact that persistent incidents of an array of aggressive, unreasonable/anti-social behaviour including alcohol and drug abuse, littering, vandalism and bridge jumping....”
That would be their own students, so why ban cyclists?
Don't worry about the current students. The former pupil botching the management of a pandemic is much more dangerous.
Pages