Petition not to sign! Another attack on the 4x4 !

[stewart]

https://www.change.org/p/to-the-ceo-of-the-lake-district-national-park-authority-protect-the-lake-district-s-world-heritage-status-by-banning-4x4s

 

The Lake District risks losing its UNESCO World Heritage status. One of the most beautiful and distinctive stretches of land near Little Langdale in the UK is being ruined by 4x4 cars and motorbikes that are devastating tracks, have forced a sheep farmer out of the area and are violating the terms of its World Heritage status. We have to save it.

We are a group of local residents and walkers. Some of us have lived here all our lives, and for the sheep farmers among us this land is our livelihood. It’s truly one of the most beautiful and serene landscapes in the country - and it’s heartbreaking to see the damage now being done to it.

The noise of these vehicles can be heard for miles in the valley, ruining the peace and tranquility of the area that were key reasons for it being recognised by UNESCO. The off-road vehicles have caused so much damage and interruption that a local sheep farmer has had to pack up and leave - and others could follow.

This stretch of land near Little Langdale was owned by Beatrix Potter and handed over to the National Trust in the 1930s and 40s to preserve it for future generations. Letting off-road vehicles ruin its beauty and tranquillity is doing a great disservice to her legacy.

The Lake District National Park Authority has the power to stop this. We are calling on them to protect this incredible UNESCO World Heritage site by imposing a Traffic Regulation Order to stop 4x4s and motorbikes from doing any further damage.

Please sign our petition to help preserve the Lake District’s natural beauty and World Heritage status by protecting it from 4x4s and motorbikes.

 

 

 

[TimC]

We avoid Tilberthwaite/Little Langdale now as it's become a sensitive area. It's a shame as it's supposed to be a really challenging group of lanes, which is why it's so popular with the likes of Kankku for their commercial trips. I have only ever driven one of these in this area, High Oxen Fell, looks like I won't get to drive the others now.

Green laning is just one of these sorts of areas of conflicting interests and unintended consequences: You TRO a load of lanes and it means the traffic on what's left increases, which annoys the people who live near them, you deny access to areas of natural beauty to preserve them and local business ( like Kankku who, although I do not really approve of commercialising green roads, do provide employment and bring income to the area ) go to the wall. You take a Lane like Old Coach road which is (was?) a great lane because it was in such a "bad" condition and therefore a challenge spend a ton of money repairing it and it becomes something you can drive in a Ford Focus and loses it's appeal. There's no easy answers.

In my opinion though it's like many things: on a macro level the "antis" are just being greedy, the number of lanes that can be driven now is so small in relation to the areas you can walk cycle and enjoy without having to see/hear/meet the horrible 4x4s it is insignificant, plenty of places you can go, if you don't like 4x4s stay off the tiny number of byways and stick to the thousands of footpaths and open land you do have access to. On the other hand, on a micro level, if you happen to live/work/walk your dog/ride your horse near or on a heavily used byway then seeing convoys of bright orange ( or otherwise) landrovers churning down it all the time is probably going to piss you off.         

[V]

>The off-road vehicles have caused so much damage and interruption that a local sheep farmer has had to pack up and leave

 

What a load of sheep s***!

 

The sheep farmer probably packed up because losses due to natural causes are high.

Non intensive sheep farming in the UK doesn't compete globally.

His/her kids don't want to be involved or take over the family business.

Vet bills, medication and dips costs are increasing.

It will soon be winter again and he/she is too old or poorly for an outdoor job.

 

These are the reasons why people give up with sheep where I live. Pastures just get rented out to other farmers that want to keep going.

 

[Delta]

Was it ever thus! I was a Forest Ranger working on  SSSI  SPA  SAC  designated conservation site with  public access and  sheep grazing. As  rangers we faced conflicts  on a daily basis with local residents, dog walkers, riders , hikers, and  sheep worrying . Our job was primarily to manage the heathland and help the public . Everyone hated us in the winter because  of the statutory conservation work we did.  Our tractors and 4wd vehicles were making ruts and mud on the rides and paths which upset the local residents, riders and walkers. Now happily I am an urban Jeep owner with a mall crawler . Never go anywhere near mud !

Edited September 28, 2018 by Delta

[Stew the Jeep]

The challenges responsible 4x4 drivers are facing to keep green lanes open are becoming ridiculous some of us including GLASS and ATUK spent over 2 years getting Highways to remove a gate illegally blocking a lane within a week it was blocked at both ends with large farm trailers

[V]

In my imaginary world of guerilla warfare a magical autonomous drone with a valve core removal tool would swoop by to inconvenience the trailers.

[Gerald F]

We rarely use 'green lanes' in the UK, but when we do get the chance, they generally seem to be in good nick. I don't know where this 'tracks/land/livelihoods are being destroyed' myth comes from. I suspect that a lot of it is about selfishness – 'this is my land, even if it is a  public right of way' and snobbishness – 'I'm a healthy walker, not someone polluting the atmosphere'. You will find that many protesters are those who have moved to the country from urban areas for the bucolic way of life, little realising that this includes farm vehicles, mud, animal ordure and silage.

Such a contrast in Spain and Sweden, where we travel frequently, and where many marked roads are unsurfaced. They don't seem to get destroyed, either, and there is rarely any hindrance to their use. Our favourite was Iceland, where many roads are marked '4x4 only'!

The picture is in the Spanish foothills of the Pyrenees. Although marked on the map, and obviously used regularly, it was intact and passable. It was also part of GR7, the long distance footpath, but no-one was walking that day.

 

[Stew the Jeep]

Highways have issued removal notice on both trailers

[TimC]

ALERT ALERT!! The Lovely and fragile Lake District is being viciously ruined by hordes of noisy smelly 4x4s who want only to destroy all things Beatrix Potter and Wordsworth!! SAVE THE LAKE DISTRICT!!

 

Just come back from a couple of days green laning in the Lakes. OK, so it wasn’t great weather, but we did not see a single other 4x4 or trail bike out on the routes. Only people we came across were two runners who gave us a cheery “hello”......no, of course they didn’t, they gave us a filthy look cos they couldn’t run right down the middle of the road and had to move to the side for 5 seconds, tsk tsk, the inconvenience!

 

Only other 4x4s we saw were a couple of (friendly) chaps in a Defender and a Nissan Patrol ( I think) at the campsite who were out doing a similar thing to us.

 

Only Hordes we saw were of Japanese Tourists out in Windermere and Ambleside.

 

We did a bit of a green laner good deed by clearing a fallen tree on the Old Coach road so other users could get by easily . We did not see any evidence anywhere either of “damage” caused by 4x4s. And while we are on the subject of “damage” and  Old Coach road in particular, we can report that the repairs to this route, paid for and organised in large part by the 4x4 users, GLASS and the TRF are now complete. This is in spite of the fact that the “damage” on this road was never caused by 4x4s in the first place it was, in the most part, water erosion. This road is a good example of a typical green lane dilemma, since, depending on your point of view the road has either been “restored” or “ruined”. It used to be before the repairs a pretty good challenge to drive with fairly large sections where you’d really need a spotter to get you along it due to the deep washouts, now you could almost drive it in a Ford Focus. In a couple of years the biggest obstacles along it will be the unsightly drainage pipes. The road used to look rugged and spectacular, now it looks ugly and grey. It used to look part of the landscape, now it looks like somebody has tipped a load of hardcore and chippings along it ( which they have).

 

Why can’t we all just share the Lakes, there’s no need to ban 4x4s from the less than 1% of the public rights of way they actually have access to. I love the Lakes too, it’s where I grew up and it always feels like going home when I get into that landscape. I am the very last person who would want to see the Lakes “destroyed”, I enjoy walking there, I’ve loved sailing there, living there, just driving the tarmac surfaced routes there is spectacular, PDB you are absolutely right, this is not about saving the Lakes at all, it’s just people with an unreasoning hatred of 4x4s wanting it all to themselves: it’s the ignorance of someone walking along what, to them, it a footpath, and finding a couple of Landrovers driving along it when you weren’t expecting it....surely that can’t be right, they must be doing something illegal at the very least, they must be damaging the countryside !! Ban them! Lynch them! Burn them!........but what do we burn apart from 4x4s..........MORE 4x4s!! (Slips into John Cleese impression)      

 

Gets off soapbox.......

Edited October 14, 2018 by TimC

[AlexK]

I've often wanted to have some biodegradable signs made up that say something like "this repair work was carried out by 4x4 drivers free of charge for your benefit" and leave them at the site whenever anyone fixes or clears a trail.

[sabconsulting]

I rarely green lane these days. But one thing that worries me about this is once they ban motor vehicles, give it a few years and they will start a campaign to ban mountain bikes because they are dangerous and eroding the tracks, and eventually hikers (due to the erosion, damage, etc.) from everything but the highly managed major tourist tracks.

 

I think many of the other users of these routes fail to see this potential escalation. Frankly EVERYONE who accesses the Lake District is a nuisance to locals,farmers and the environment (once you ignore the income generated). In fact you could argue that the Lake District has been ruined by locals felling trees since the Roman times resulting the the bare, although admittedly beautiful hills and mountains we now have. 

 

Plus the irony is much of the noise they are complaining about is probably from trials bikes ridden illegally which will continue once everyone else has been banned as it does in our local woods.

 

Steve.

 

[TimC]

24 minutes ago, sabconsulting said:

I rarely green lane these days. But one thing that worries me about this is once they ban motor vehicles, give it a few years and they will start a campaign to ban mountain bikes because they are dangerous and eroding the tracks, and eventually hikers (due to the erosion, damage, etc.) from everything but the highly managed major tourist tracks.

 

I think many of the other users of these routes fail to see this potential escalation. Frankly EVERYONE who accesses the Lake District is a nuisance to locals,farmers and the environment (once you ignore the income generated). In fact you could argue that the Lake District has been ruined by locals felling trees since the Roman times resulting the the bare, although admittedly beautiful hills and mountains we now have. 

 

Plus the irony is much of the noise they are complaining about is probably from trials bikes ridden illegally which will continue once everyone else has been banned as it does in our local woods.

 

Steve.

 

 Steve, you are bang on! 4x4s are an easy target but it’s the thin end of the wedge. And, as you rightly point out, most problems, where there are any, are caused by people acting illegally anyway, the very people who bans will have no effect on. Laws only affect the law abiding. Continue on this route and the future holds only access to “safe” managed routes probably guided and almost certainly that you’ll have to pay for.

Edited October 14, 2018 by TimC

[TimC]

........and another thing!  Yes Steve, ban mountain bikes, they are much more dangerous than 4x4s: (warning, huge generalisation ahead) They have no respect for other users, they travel far too fast, they don’t make any noise so you can’t hear them coming until they’ve almost hit you, they churn up the paths, they damage dry stone walls when riders cross then carrying their bikes, they are a menace to other traffic on surfaced roads  when travelling in packs.........

 

and.in spite of that  I would still support their right to access the Lake District  freely along with all other users.

[Chrisby]

This is indeed a slippery slope to eventually everyone being banned from anything but tarmac regardless of your means of travel.

There is an answer I believe that could actually open up more tracks on privately owned land and work well to fund routine and regular track maintenance.

GPS app on a smart phone or tablet with a pay per use feature funds being split between land/track owners and GLASS.

I would expect a Green Lane (it’s a road after all) to be inexpensive but of course funds going to GLASS to pay for upkeep and then a higher price for newly opened private tracks. Perhaps a higher “toll” for the high usage tracks that need more maintenance.

I’d be happy to pay if it meant more tracks and less restrictions. I know policing would obviously be the big issue.... just a thought had over a beer in front of a camp fire in Wales on weekend ....,

[V]

Perhaps I have a better idea:

 

Legislation changes:

- Removal of obligation to maintain unsealed rights of way at the public expense. E.g. If it has a tarmac or concrete surface, highways dept maintains it.

- Automatic stopping up of routes that have become unpassable through neglect for at least five years. Does not include illegal obstruction or damage.

- Introduction of 3-month chain-gang penalty for illegal obstructors, vandals, fly-tippers and those ignoring TROs.

 

Legislation to create a national governing body for rights of way users

- Operates a third party liability insurance scheme for maintainers and travellers

- Funded by annual membership contributions with a rate set proportional to the available mileage for unsealed routes for the usage class for your chosen user group

- Incorporates existing membership organisations such as Ramblers Association, GLASS, TRF etc

- Paid maintenance is decided by referundum (Swiss style) amongst the membership. The majority vote decides what gets funded for maintenance

 

Membership Classes:

Ramblers: Maintain footpaths, bridleways, restricted byways and byways

MTB and Horse Riders: Maintain bridleways, restricted byways and byways

Carriage Drivers: Maintain restricted byways and byways

Motorcycle and 4x4: Maintain byways

 

Membership Fee is proportional to the mileage of the routes available to the classes. E.g.

 

Ramblers have 100% of mileage always as they have rights to all routes

MTB/Horse = 30% (Guess)

Carriage = 10% (Guess)

Mororcycle/4x4 = 1% (Guess)

 

If the annual governing body membership fee is £10 for a Rambler, it is £3 for MTB/Horse, £1 for Carriage, 10p for Motorcycle/4x4. The only way to increase the proportional fee is to increase the available network to that membership class. If an additional admin fee is charged for membership it must be the same for all membership classes. As the membership fee covers the route maintenance costs of the governing body, it is in the governing body's best interest to increase the available route mileage for deprived classes. TRO'd route mileage cannot be included as it is not available.

 

There is no upper limit on the cost of an all rights Rambler membership fee, this is largely set by the annual budget using the following formula:

 

Annual unsealed rights of way maintenance budget -

(

  (Number of MC/4x4 memberships x MC/4x4 fee) +

  (Number of Carriage memberships x Carriage fee) +

  (Number of MTB/Horse memberships x MTB/Horse fee)

)

= Total amount payable by Ramblers

 

Individual Ramblers fee = Total amount payable by Ramblers / Number of Rambler members

 

This is a self regulating fee structure.

If the number of Rambler members drops, their costs per member increases.

If TRO's are increasingly used on Byways it lowers the fee for MC/4x4 and the total revenue from that group.

Reducing the overall network mileage will not reduce the Ramblers liabilities because they always have 100% access to all route classes. The only way to reduce the Rambler membership fee is to reduce paid mantenance, increase voluntary maintenance. Ramblers will concentrate their efforts on Footpaths and Bridleways and will not be concerned with restricted byways or byways due to the sheer size of their footpath burden.

If restricted byways become byways, MC/4x4 fee increases to match Carriage drivers fee.

To avoid increasing costs, voluntary maintenance is done by the route users as they see fit bearing in mind the automatic stopping up legislation.

 

Edited October 14, 2018 by V

[TimC]

1 hour ago, Chrisby said:

This is indeed a slippery slope to eventually everyone being banned from anything but tarmac regardless of your means of travel.

There is an answer I believe that could actually open up more tracks on privately owned land and work well to fund routine and regular track maintenance.

GPS app on a smart phone or tablet with a pay per use feature funds being split between land/track owners and GLASS.

I would expect a Green Lane (it’s a road after all) to be inexpensive but of course funds going to GLASS to pay for upkeep and then a higher price for newly opened private tracks. Perhaps a higher “toll” for the high usage tracks that need more maintenance.

I’d be happy to pay if it meant more tracks and less restrictions. I know policing would obviously be the big issue.... just a thought had over a beer in front of a camp fire in Wales on weekend ....,

Chris, I have heard, although not sure how accurate this is, that Kankku do something similar in the Lakes for their paid guided trips. On roads that used to have byway status but are now restricted byway ( such as Garburn Rd.) and on tracks which have never had a RoW they will do a deal with the local landowner/farmer to pay to be able to get access along them. Easy to police since only thier vehicles can drive it and they are easy to spot. This, of course, would also give the lie to the idea that all the locals are up in arms about 4x4s as a matter of principle to “save the Lake District” since some are clearly happy for them to be there as long as they’re getting paid. 

As a general principle though I’m not sure. It might work kind of an extended pay and play thing. There is a similar, though free, thing for footpaths called “permissive footpaths”, would be nice to extend that. I have to admit I’d be pessimistic though, I just don’t get why 4x4s are hated so much.

[TimC]

27 minutes ago, V said:

 

Ramblers have 100% of mileage always as they have rights to all routes

MTB/Horse = 30% (Guess)

Carriage = 10% (Guess)

Mororcycle/4x4 = 1% (Guess)

 

Out of interest Vince, I just did a quick internet search and , according to good ol’ Wikipedia’s entry on the Lake District national park, as of 2012 there are:

1342 miles of Footpaths (70.11%)

544 miles of bridleways (put together with restricted byways 28.89%)

9 miles of restricted byways

19 miles of byways open to all traffic (0.99% )

 

So your guesses were pretty spot on.

 

These numbers do not include all of the open access/right to roam open land available to walkers and I’m not sure if it includes ORPAs or not and wouldn’t include any permanent or Temporary TROs ( a BOAT with a permanent TRO on all 4x4s is still technically classed as a BOAT )

 

So how driving 4x4s on 19 miles of tracks is “destroying” anything is beyond me.

 

 

 

[neal]

3 hours ago, Chrisby said:

This is indeed a slippery slope to eventually everyone being banned from anything but tarmac regardless of your means of travel.

I find these arguments from other groups to exclude another type of group quite challenging and in some way interesting. Once the precedent of exclusion is set, it does not take much to move to the next group of individuals that are perceived to be doing harm in some way and excluding them, to ‘save’ the natural environment.

 

I follow a page on FB called ‘IPROW Institute of Public Rights of Way and Access Management’ which covers a lot of these types of issues. They post some interesting info.

 

One such post at the beginning of this month covered the congestion at the summit of ‘the old man of Coniston’

 

The first picture shows the number of walkers on an October Saturday early in the month, which they say is a regular event.

 

The second shows the walkers parking on Walna Scar road, which is now recorded as a restricted byway in most of the picture and as such not open to mechanical propelled vehicles.

 

All of the vehicles in the photo are breaking the restrictions and could be subject to enforcement.

 

I believe the current solution to this breach of the restricted byway is a planning application for a pay and display car park......

 

Seems like an application of the rules to suit the individual group here and a perception of damage from another.

[jasonb]

I read this post with such despair!

 

I live in the North East and have traveled over to the Lake District since my early twenties starting with a little ski boat on the back of my Suzuki jeep over to Windermere, water skiing all day long and loved it.

Since then they put a 10mph limit on the lake to stop us having fun and what happened, millions was lost to the economy. Now some thirty years later I'm back with my wife and teenage daughter after buying a holiday lodge and another boat traveling over there in my JK or my GC and has anything changed? yes it has! Cumbria has got wealthy, I see more grand designs being built along Windermere's shore and a mass influx of wealthy elderly incomers who would love to see my caliber of visitor removed from the Lakes as it inter fears with their perfect prestigious way of life.

 

I have worked out that I spend more than £20,000 a year in Cumbria. I am often asked as I spend so much of my time over there whether I may sell up and live there, no way! I love the place but unfortunately I struggle to understand why the people have so many axes to grind about boats, 4x4's or anything else they take a disliking to.

 

The Westmorland Gazzette's front page is constantly filled with the locals banging on about anything 4x4 or powerboat related. In the future I would want my daughters children to go and enjoy the Lakes as much as I have. I don't want it ruined for anyone but as it has been pointed out the lanes concerned are about 19 miles compared to 1342 miles of footpaths, for gods sake lets get a grip and be civil to one another.

 

I end on this note, if we do loose the lanes don't worry there are loads of 4x4 needed challenging uneven routes in the lakes, they are called "THE ROADS!"

 

 

 

[Matt]

It's a really difficult topic - my perspective is as a climber / hill-walker / fisherman / camper in the lakes that also wants to enjoy the remaining lanes in my Jeep.  Like others here, it seems that the majority of hikers just assume that just because you have a 4x4 then you don't care about the countryside or it's preservation and that we are all irresponsible teenagers!

 

I go up to the lakes probably 4 times each year, trying to avoid the crowds and I have been going since I was young.  I have seen a huge amount of erosion, litter and irresponsible use of the national park, mostly by folks walking or camping.  I've never come across a 4x4 on a lane!

[TimC]

23 hours ago, neal said:

I find these arguments from other groups to exclude another type of group quite challenging and in some way interesting. Once the precedent of exclusion is set, it does not take much to move to the next group of individuals that are perceived to be doing harm in some way and excluding them, to ‘save’ the natural environment.

 

I follow a page on FB called ‘IPROW Institute of Public Rights of Way and Access Management’ which covers a lot of these types of issues. They post some interesting info.

 

One such post at the beginning of this month covered the congestion at the summit of ‘the old man of Coniston’

 

The first picture shows the number of walkers on an October Saturday early in the month, which they say is a regular event.

 

The second shows the walkers parking on Walna Scar road, which is now recorded as a restricted byway in most of the picture and as such not open to mechanical propelled vehicles.

 

All of the vehicles in the photo are breaking the restrictions and could be subject to enforcement.

 

I believe the current solution to this breach of the restricted byway is a planning application for a pay and display car park......

 

Seems like an application of the rules to suit the individual group here and a perception of damage from another.

These are great photos Neal, a perfect reminder that walkers aren’t just walkers, they bring their cars with them and neither are they always solitary Wainwrights harmlessly sketching Blea Tarn, when gathered together in numbers like this they are just as damaging as a couple of 4x4s if not more so. I wonder how much rubbish and plastic bags got left up there that weekend? And I still fully support their right to access, just wish it was reciprocated, we should really all be on the same side.

[neal]

20 minutes ago, TimC said:

These are great photos Neal, a perfect reminder that walkers aren’t just walkers, they bring their cars with them and neither are they always solitary Wainwrights harmlessly sketching Blea Tarn, when gathered together in numbers like this they are just as damaging as a couple of 4x4s if not more so. I wonder how much rubbish and plastic bags got left up there that weekend? And I still fully support their right to access, just wish it was reciprocated, we should really all be on the same side.

Tim,

 

I agree, we should all be able to share, damage can be done by any of the groups of users.

 

I would love to have seen the reaction of all these walkers if there had been enforcement action for their off-roading activities.

 

Other photos from this particular post showed just as many dogs as walkers, I wonder if they carried the trash out.........

[TimC]

Walna Scar Road is a 5 mile restricted byway from `Coniston to Dunnerdale which I believe is an old mining road to serve the quarries on Walna  Scar, it runs right below the Old man of Coniston. If they are thinking of putting in a pay and display car park for the hikers then perhaps they could put in a Pay & Drive toll for Walna Scar road to make some money too. From the OS maps it looks like it would be a fantastic trail to drive. 

Edited October 15, 2018 by TimC

[TimC]

Saw this news article from the telegraph recently regarding Tilberthwaite/Little Langdale:

 

“News

Lake District residents criticise 'breathtakingly biased' report on 4x4s churning up Beatrix Potter's land

Lake District admirers have criticised a "breathtakingly biased" report which they claim downplays the damage caused by 4x4s churning up land once owned by Beatrix Potter.

Campaigners claim the Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA) is turning a blind eye to the disruption caused by tourists who hire off-road vehicles to immerse themselves in the scenery which inspired some of William Wordsworth's most iconic poems.

They argue that noise, pollution and erosion on two farm tracks near Little Langdale is destroying the legacy of nature-lover Potter, who left 4,000 acres of land to the National Trust, as well as disturbing sheep grazing on the fells and making it difficult for farm vehicles to pass along the routes.

But following a two-year review, the LDNPA has concluded that the impact is "negligible", the disturbance "localised and temporary", and that there is "no actual evidence of artistic inspiration being reduced or stifled".

It suggests Cumbria County Council should do more to maintain the tracks.

The report will be presented to a crucial meeting on Tuesday (Oct 8th where it will be decided if off-road vehicles should be banned.

Its findings have been branded "truly scandalous" and "breathtakingly biased" by campaigners, who say it "brushes aside" legitimate concerns.

A petition supporting a ban, set up by former BBC World Service producer Fritz Groothues, has been signed by more than 300,000 people.

Mr Groothues said: "For most visitors, both routes are places to get away from motor vehicles and the stresses of urban life. The LDNPA should be taking the lead in the protection of natural beauty and the special qualities of the Lake District.

"Instead it needs to be cajoled into action when our landscape is being degraded by off-road motorists invading some of the most beautiful tracks in the country."  

A spokesperson for the Lake District National Park Authority said: "The two public roads are open to all users and make up just 0.09 per cent of our rights of way network. The overwhelming majority of people enjoying the national park’s 3,280km of trails are highly unlikely to encounter recreational motorists on these routes.

“As a national park representing everyone’s right to enjoyment, the decision to restrict anyone’s right to use these roads must not be taken lightly. In line with government guidance, legal intervention through a TRO is a last resort and we should explore other management options first.

"We have completed a comprehensive evidence gathering exercise and the findings will be presented to our Rights of Way Committee on 8 October where Members will decide on the future management of these roads and whether or not we should consult formally on the creation of a Traffic Regulation Order."

Discover more from The Telegraph“

 

A couple of things that are interesting:

First, the body of the article reports that the LDNPA two year review found that impact is negligible, disturbance minimal and that there is no actual evidence of “artistic inspiration being reduced or stifled” (whatever that means) However the headline of the article, in typical fashion, suggests entirely the opposite, not that The Telegraph is biased of course..

 

Second, why is it that, these days, when an independent review is carried out to ascertain the facts if the results of that review don’t agree with your point of view then they must of course be “breathtakingly biased”. As with so much these days I doubt that if the review had supported their point of view 100% they would have declared it was breathtakingly biased or truly scandalous. 

 

Anyway, it seems to me like the LDNPA is talking a lot of sense and just reporting unbiased facts rather than emotionally charged hatred of 4x4s

Edited October 6, 2019 by TimC