Ebbisham Lane: in the face of continuing unwillingness by Surrey CC to do any meaningful repairs, I suggested the conservators consider service of a repair notice.
Dog control: Epsom and Ewell borough council is exploring introducing dog control orders, but is concerned about enforcement.
Post-Derby clean-up: plea for contractors to have planned arrangements for clearing up glass after the event, which is problematic every year (noted by Rupert Trevelyan). It was agreed to clarify the downskeepers’ powers to enforce byelaws on racing evenings.
Race for Life: complaints about the organisers not ensuring a full clean-up after the event, nor arranging for recycling. It’s planned that a deposit will be taken from organisers of future major events, so that all or part can be withheld in similar circumstances.
Additional horse route across Warren Woods: asked why this new path, apparently for the trainers’ benefit, was being cleared by the downskeepers, rather than the training grounds team. Was told that it was also a matter of public safety. But really, the point had not been raised, and the downskeepers just ended up getting the short straw because no-one thought to ask.
Calendar of events: agreed to put this on the council’s website, in order to minimise conflict between users.
Map of the downs: a planned comprehensive map of the downs was circulated for comment. This is intended to replace those currently shown on the byelaw boards. Unfortunately, the map is intended both to provide legal information and to be informative, but at present, it doesn’t quite do either. We agreed to provide further comments subsequently, within the next three weeks. It was suggested that each display should have a ‘you are here’ marker.
Cycle routes: cyclists’ representative John Bird offered to meet with horse riders’ representatives to agree a plan of cycling routes on the downs.
Habitat Management Plan: we asked about the extension of the plan to cover the golf course. Surrey Wildlife Trust had conducted surveys of invertebrates, flora and fauna, which were likely to be repeated later in the year, with a report due in October.
Closure of subway: Rupert Trevelyan confirmed that the subway would be closed only in response to a police direction, and not simply in response to vague concerns about ‘health & safety’.
Lonsdale enclosure: comments were made about the appearance of the fencing, which must be approved by the conservators, but Rupert Trevelyan said that the fencing was owned by the racecourse, had been approved for many years, and would be very costly to replace. Since the conservators’ consent cannot be ‘unreasonably withheld’, that probably means that we’ll have to put up with it for the forseeable future.
Marking hack rides: it was thought that afternoon rides (marked with yellow) were being confused with public footpaths (also yellow), and the aim was to adopt a new colour for the former, although no decision had yet been taken.
Sand track: a report had been commissioned on the cost of full reinstatement of the sand track at the foot of Six Mile Hill, upon which the conservators would be able to make a decision. Maintenance had fallen behind recently, which Bob Harding attributed to the demands of the Derby and other racing days, but Alex Stewart said that after reinstatement, the sand track would need regular maintenance if any investment was not to be wasted.
Hatched area: the TGMB does not consider that it has responsibility to deliver the conditions necessary to enable hack riders’ use (whatever those conditions may be: no-one has ever said). Alex suggested that the conservators needed to decide who had responsibility, and what actions should be taken.
Date of next meeting: 1st November 2010
Date of consultative committee downs tour: 23rd August 2010, meeting in racecourse car park
