Hack writer

Downskeepers have cleared and reopened the hack ride through Beech Wood, just east of the Langley Vale Road valley. It runs through the woods below the ‘racehorses only’ ride which runs south-west to feed into the start of the fibresand track.
To find it, head south-west along the valley track from Walton Road, running parallel to Langley Vale Road. At the junction where the ‘racehorses only’ track bears left, and the main track continues down the valley, go slightly left between the two, and pick up a well-defined track through the woods, which emerges opposite the start of the fibresand track.

This track can be used all day, but if you want to stay on the downs and it’s before noon, you can either go along the south side of the fibresand track, turn right by the old police horse crossing, down to Roseberry Road (opposite Harding Road), and continue along Roseberry Road (the continuation beyond the police horse crossing is an afternoon ride). Or you can bear right opposite the start of the fibresand track, and bear right again to pick up the valley track back up to Walton Road.

Our thanks to the downskeepers for restoring to use this rather quiet and pleasant path through the woods.

According to the Epsom Guardian of 30 April, the racecourse cancelled its concert proposal for 2010 on 22 April because of lack of sponsorship: Nick Blofeld, MD, is quoted as saying he didn’t “want to waste everyone’s time”. Which is odd, because the application for approval from the conservators was submitted only on 9 April! And it was withdrawn just a fortnight later, one day before a special meeting of the conservators was due to take place: hardly conducive to not wasting time. Mr Blofeld reportedly added: “To get the festival sorted out we needed to get approval this month but we haven’t got the contracts signed so I cancelled.” Makes one wonder why the racecourse didn’t wait a fortnight longer before submitting the application? Fourteen months sounds an unlikely lead time, especially when just eleven months was considered sufficient for the (abortive) 2009 concert.

The alternative possibility is that the racecourse learnt that its application was heading for rejection as being inadequate, and jumped before it was pushed.

This on-line report also made front page news in the Epsom Guardian. The dogs were lucky: some horses would have kicked, leading to broken bones or worse.

News today in the agenda for the next Conservators’ meeting that Gerry Ball, the head downskeeper for many years, is retiring – and indeed, did so on New Year’s Eve. We’d like to wish Gerry a full and happy retirement: we have not always seen eye-to-eye with the conservators, but Gerry and his team have always been enormously helpful, and done their best to secure improvements within the resources available to them.

News also comes of the appointment of an interim chief executive to the council, suggesting that David Smith, who has been off work for several months, may not be returning soon, if at all. David has always been a sharp-witted but very fair-minded clerk to the Conservators, and we hope he makes a full recovery. Meantime, we look forward to meeting the interim chief executive and clerk to the Conservators.

According to this article in the Surrey Advertiser on-line, the 2009 concert has been abandoned owing to the lack of sponsorship (though whether because the 2009 Derby itself still lacks a sponsor, or because sponsorship for the concert could not be obtained, is unclear).

The article quotes Cllr Jean Smith, chair of Epsom and Walton Downs Conservators, saying: “I think this is very disappointing news.” I’m not so sure. See the post on the 2009 Concerts below for a different point of view.

The diversion of bridleway 65 is due to come into force on 28 November. But it’s not ready yet. This gap at the junction with Epsom Lane North (opposite the junction with Royal Drive) looks a bit narrow for horse riders:
while this sign between the bridleway and the all-weather track is intended to discourage hack riders’ use of the latter, but is mounted in such a way that it appears to prohibit use of the bridleway instead:
Both will be raised with the consultative committee meeting on 18 November.

Surrey CC has published notice of confirmation of the diversion of bridleway 65. The existing route cuts across the south-eastern corner of the gallops on Six Mile Hill, either side of here. The diverted route follows the hard track around the bottom of the gallops (currently used by nearly all hack riders), then continues up close to Epsom Lane North, but on the other side of the hedge and the railings.

It’s a win-win for hack riders, because the original alignment remains available as a hack ride, despite the diversion, while the northern extension provides a new outlet through the railings here: and out onto Epsom Lane North, emerging opposite Royal Drive.

The original alignment of bridleway 65 seems to follow what used to be the southern boundary of the downs, until the training area was extended south to take in some of the adjacent fields some decades ago. Both the bridleway and the borough boundary (with the borough of Reigate and Banstead) continued to follow the old boundary to the downs, and even now, the jurisdiction of the conservators stops at the borough boundary.

Horseman’s Sunday was diversified this year: anyone with a pet was invited to attend the service on the Hill at midday, and there were more dog owners than horse riders. In fact, there were fewer than thirty horses ridden, and a handful more in hand. Old hands remember there being upwards of 1,000 horses as late as the 1970s, and I can recall standing in line to be announed among at least 100 others in the rain just a decade or so ago.

Why don’t people turn up anymore? It can’t just be the weather: today was perfect, with fine sunshine and the temperature hovering around 20 degrees. Certainly, some are discouraged by the gypsy trotters with their carts racing up and down the ‘platform’: the borough council having in recent years closed Tattenham Corner Road, the racing now takes place even nearer, inside the racecourse, and the police seem uninterested so long as the road closure is enforced.

Perhaps others are turned off by a religious service, and the singing of hymns, which a larger proportion of the community might have felt more comfortable with 30 or 40 years ago. But then, without the service and blessing, what would Horseman’s Sunday be for?

And finally, maybe riders have better things to do: many horse owners have a horse box these days, and can box out to shows, dressage competitions or hacks. There were shows on Sunday at Pachesham Equestrian Centre and Great Bookham Equestrian Centre. Many riders may find attending a show more appealing.

What could be done to reinvigorate Horseman’s Sunday?

The plans for two concerts on Epsom Downs have attracted widely differing views from local people. Some seem happy to put up with some disruption, particularly in the aftermath of Derby week, perhaps intending to attend one of the concerts themselves. Others see the disturbance, particularly the probably noise, as an unacceptable intrusion during the evenings into an essentially residential community.

Riders are likely to have just the same diversity of views: some might want to go along to the concert, others (many of whom will be local residents) will be resentful. But riders have a particular reason to oppose the plans: the concert will be staged at the eastern end of The Hill, and exclude public access from one of the most popular hack riding areas on the downs for perhaps a fortnight. It also remains to be seen whether the events will cause lasting damage to the ground, and whether the clean-up will be sufficient. And while the racecourse is offering a sweetener to the conservators of £50,000 in the first year, no-one has adequately explained how that figure has been arrived at, whether it is a fair contribution, how it will be spent, nor who might benefit. Reinstatement of the ends of the sand track at the foot of Six Mile Hill would be welcome, but it’s more likely to be spent on new downskeepers’ accommodation: an understandably pressing cause, but one which should be funded by the conservators out of current income.

There are three challenges I would make to the plans as currently described:

1. The conservators have powers (under the Epsom and Walton Downs Regulation Act 1984) to authorise events involving “a significant degree of interference with the rights of the public of access for air and exercise” for not more than five days a year. Yet the promoters’ own plans suggest that the concert arena will be closed off with fencing for as long as 12 days. In an effort to get round the problems, the promoters are talking of keeping open walkways across the arena during the construction period, but these too will be fenced off (so who’d want to use them?) and completely unsuitable for riders’ use (even if they are ostensibly made available for that purpose). In effect, the public will be excluded from the arena for far longer than the period allowed in the 1984 Act. That’s without even considering the impact of the stage and backstage area, which will be put up (and the public excluded) even before the Derby, for nearly three weeks!
Q1. Under what powers do the conservators claim to be able to exclude access from such a significant part of the downs for up to a fortnight or even three weeks?

2. The racecourse and the promoters plan to charge for car parking for concert-goers. The 1984 Act allows the racecourse to set out parking places and to charge for parking, but only in connection with horse racing. Any parking places are required to be removed ‘as soon as practicable’ after the end of each race meeting, and in any event, within 10 days. The racecourse cannot charge for parking for other events, if, at the very time it is charging for that parking, it is under a duty to remove the temporary parking places for which it is levying the charge! The conservators have been advised that their powers to authorise special events are so wide that they can authorise anything in connection with the events, even though a power to charge cannot be inferred from the 1984 Act without specific words to that effect.
Q2. What powers does the racecourse have to charge for parking on the downs, and what powers do the conservators have to authorise such charging, given that the 1984 Act confers powers to charge for car parking only in relation to horse racing?

3. The plans involve the closure of bridleway 127 between the two racecourse crossings, and restricted use of the Old London Road access way across the racecourse and the metalled road to the milepost car park, for the whole of the period between the Derby and the concerts (and possibly beyond). The conservators have resolved to impose a condition that “all public rights of way across the downs to remain open” and then contradicted their own resolution by continuing “and arrangements for temporary diversions to be made where necessary”, and have failed to explain what powers might be used for that purpose. In fact, there are no powers to temporarily divert the bridleway, and a closure could only be authorised by the county council.
Q3. What powers will be used to close bridleway 127 and the access road to the car park for up to a fortnight? On what grounds?

That’s not all: the whole basis on which the conservators have approached their approval for the event is questionable, and I wrote to David Smith, clerk to the conservators, on 30 August 2008. But these are the key points.

Remarkably, Surrey County Council has at last attended to the slough of mud which had built up at the bottom of Ebbisham Lane (see photo below), just short of the entrance on to the Downs. Ebbisham Lane used to be part of a through route between Epsom and Walton-on-the-Hill, and until the 1970s, one could drive along Walton Road over the downs and up Ebbisham Lane. Now, the lower part of Ebbisham Lane is only of practical use to horse riders, cyclists and walkers, for the car park at the bottom is neglected (it lies in the borough of Reigate and Banstead, but oddly, Epsom and Ewell borough council has a duty to maintain it). Unfortunately, reaching the downs this way meant negotiating a deep pool of mud which had built up at the lowest point of the road — unpleasant on horseback, and pretty revolting on a cycle. The council has scraped the carriageway, and dumped the excavations on the shoulders of the road. Some efforts have been made to improve drainage too. How long it will last is anyone’s guess.

Edit: I’ve subsequently learned that this job was done by the downskeepers, and not by Surrey CC, despite the fact that Ebbisham Lane doesn’t even lie on their patch. So three cheers for the downskeepers, and none at all for Surrey Highways, which hasn’t carried out any maintenance in years.