Hack writer

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.

Juniper Hill: The tour visited Juniper Hill, partly to look at the hack rides: the centre hack north-south ride has been much improved thanks to the efforts of the downskeepers, but the east-west hack ride remains inaccessible for the time being. It turned out that some members of the committee had never ventured onto Juniper Hill, and Nick Owen, the nature conservation adviser to the Conservators, took the opportunity to show how much promise this area has as a relic of unimproved downland. But good management calls for regular scrub clearance, and there was a consensus that opening up the east-west hack ride would be good for biodiversity as well as riders.

Photo: the consultative committee on Juniper Hill

The tour also looked at the sand track, along the bottom of Six Mile Hill, which remains in need of maintenance at its extreme eastern end, and in the vicinity of Nohome Farm at its western end.

The hatched area: We asked the chairman for feedback from the special meeting of the Training Grounds Management Board on 22 April, which apparently was dedicated to discussing use of the hatched area. All the chairman could say, tight-lipped, was that no conclusion was reached. Pressed to say what might have been discussed, she added that further legal advice was being sought. So, it seems that the TGMB is wriggling hard to avoid reaching any decision that might involve re-opening the hatched area to hack riders, and is reconsidering its legal room for manoeuvre.

Habitat action plan: We commented that the plan makes no provision for maintenance of the downs north of Grand Stand Road, and ignores the public rights of access to the downs on foot and on horseback. The plan will be taken into account, but not the determining factor, in drawing up a four year action plan for habitat management. The action plan should set out plans to restore to use the various hack rides and areas which are now difficult or impossible to use because of scrub encroachment

Hack riders’ leaflet: This is close to publication, and will be a substantial improvement on the present one.

Events on the downs: We obtained a commitment to look at better ways of publicising events which take place on the downs, and which might interfere with riding: for example, the Cancer Research Race for Life was held on 29 June, but there was little advance warning to hack riders of the event, and plenty of tape fluttering in the wind on the day, enough to make most riders turn round and head home. The conservators will look at better notices (in places where hack riders might see them) and placing details on the website.

Next meeting: the downs tour takes place on 21 August 2008.

A long agenda but a short meeting, with little to report of interest to hack riders. However, we were told that the Training Grounds Management Board will consider hack riders’ use of the hatched area at a special meeting on 22 April.

Video surveillance: The conservators have previously got quite excited at the idea of video surveillance of Six Mile Hill, to catch hack riders using the training grounds. They call this ‘abuse’ of the training gallops by hack riders, though oddly, they never refer to ‘abuse’ of the downs by dog walkers failing to clear up after their dogs, or ‘abuse’ of the downs by kite flying outside the designated area. The conservators were told that they would have to jump through all sorts of hoops to engage in video monitoring, and they didn’t seem sufficiently motivated to take it on. No-one asked whether the same requirements had to be met if the downskeepers wanted to film someone visibly breaking the byelaws.

Habitat action plan: This was circulated to the conservators, but not to anyone else, so we’ll have to wait until the run-up to the consultative committee in June to see it. It should promise a timetable for clearing some of the scrub on the downs, including some of the blocked hack rides.

Next meeting: Takes place on 24 July 2008.

A stunning turn-out for this meeting, almost standing room only, but goodness knows why, because nothing much was happening. What might have proved interesting was the expected circulation of the draft habitat management plan, but illness has delayed drafting, and it wasn’t ready. The plan should, among other things, set out an action plan for cutting scrub on the hack rides and hack areas.

Bridleway diversions: Surrey County Council has made an order to divert various public rights of way on the downs, including several public bridleways. Generally, the effect is to regularise existing use, and in any case, the statutory hack rides are unaffected. One benefit is to extend bridleway 65 further north alongside Epsom Lane North, almost as far as Tattenham Crescent. So it was disappointing to hear that the orders cannot yet be confirmed, because one objector is objecting to the diversion of that same path. I understand that the objector is concerned about loss of public rights across Six Mile Hill. But because there is public access on foot to all of the downs, and the old route will remain a hack ride, it’s difficult to see the purpose of the objection. If it’s not withdrawn, the diversion order will have to be referred to the Planning Inspectorate.

Ebbisham Lane: Last month, I noted that Ebbisham Lane had again been made passable for traffic as far as the downs car park. At the conservators’ meeting, suspicions were raised that Surrey County Council would like to downgrade the road to a bridleway. There could be only one reason for that: to reduce maintenance liabilities (not that there’s much maintenance at the moment).

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.

The consultative committee is where users of the downs get a chance to air their views, rather than watching from the sidelines at conservators’ meetings while the local authority members remain silent. There was a poor turn out from the ‘establishment’, with only the chairman present from the conservators, no racecourse or trainer representation, and no downskeeper. And we still managed to keep busy for 90 minutes!

Leaflets for downs users: We’ve been shown a draft leaflet for hack riders, but it’s needed much further work. We obtained a commitment that we’d be shown a further draft before it’s published.

Maintenance of the sand track: This is the sand track, for the use of hack riders (after noon each day) at the foot of Six Mile Hill. We’re getting close to having a commitment to weekly maintenance included in the downskeepers’ operating programme, but it’s suprising how long it can take to give effect to something so simple: we’ve been pressing for something similar for years.

Overgrown hack rides: There’s a commitment to review the several hack rides which have become overgrown with scrub in the last ten or fifteen years. These include across the Warren Woods (see the photo), on Juniper Hill, the afternoon hack ride between Walton Road and the London Road crossing (on the south side of the fibresand track), on the south side of the golf course near top of Rifle Butts Alley, and on the south side of Downs House inclosure. The habitat management plan action plan, currently under draft, will put forward a programme for dealing with these, although results won’t be instantaneous (it’s pretty obvious that some of these paths disappeared without complaint over a decade ago). We’ve been assurerd we’ll be able to review a draft of the action plan before it’s adopted.

Representation of hack rides on OS maps: We’ve now got final approval for the conservators to get the Ordnance Survey to mark the hack rides as ‘permitted bridleways’ on the next edition of the OS Explorer Map. Certain hack rides will be omitted, principally those only available after noon each day, while hack areas will be marked only where there is a defined route from A to B. But it should be much more obvious to riders, armed with a map, from outside the locality, where they can legitimately ride.

Marking of hack areas and hack rides: Officers have agreed to meet us to discuss waymarks on the downs, particularly where we think new ones are needed (some rides aren’t marked at all). In the meantime, the arrows on the existing waymarks are being repainted. And all the public bridleways should be signposted if the present programme of diversions is completed.

Golf course: We’ve flagged up a few minor concerns about hack rides on the golf course. It’s not always clear who is responsible for cutting back vegetation and scrub, so sometimes it doesn’t get done. Along Grand Stand Road, the hack ride lies across one of the raised tees, which can discourage equestrian use (particularly if golfers assume riders shouldn’t be there). And some of the new ‘golfer’s’ paths on the downs, although not constructed for equestrian use, can hardly be avoided because there’s no other way to go (which gets the golf club upset). It looks like these concerns will be taken on board as part of discussions between the conservators and the golf club about maintenance of the tenanted areas.

Next meeting: Takes place on 12 June 2008.