View Full Version : PLEASE HELP - show your objection to the proposed Butser Hill TRO

11-07-11, 08:50

Hampshire County Council are proposing to TRO a most excellent route known locally as Butser Hill. If anyone has ridden this at any time in the past please could you take 5 minutes and show your support by emailing:


Along the following lines (add or delete anything as you see fit):

With Reference to Hampshire County Councils Proposal to apply for a Traffic Regulation Order on Langrish BOAT No. 14

Dear Sir

My name and address is...................................

I have used this byway over a number of years and I wish to object to the proposed traffic regulation order on Langrish BOAT 14 on the following grounds:

The report states it has regard to Hampshire Byway policy. This policy states that if a TRO is required it should be the least restrictive required. It’s impossible to establish exactly what is required as no substantive survey of traffic or assessment of all users’ impact on the route, taking into account the water erosion, has taken place.

The report asserts that the route is subject to a high level of motorcycle use however no objective evidence is provided to substantiate this or make consideration of other users / causes, neither is there any definition of “high level”. Please provide by return evidence and definition of the above respectively together with comparative usage data of other types of use.

This route is subject to significant water erosion due to its steepness and has suffered two of the worst winters on record with the freezing of water in porous chalk causing significant damage.

It is the responsibility of the HCC to maintain access and condition of Byways for all users and alternative protective methods based upon seasonal and voluntary measures should be considered before discriminating against minority user groups by blanket bans.

Wet chalk by nature of its properties is extremely slippery. The flint filled gully improves accessibility for all users including walkers and cyclists when it’s wet as it provides a tractable surface.

The BOAT due to its level of steepness provides amenity for all users seeking a challenge for which their needs are not being acknowledged. As an example of non motorised users, cyclists spoken to state that the route is very valuable to them in its current challenging condition and they would lose amenity if it was made into another “sterile” path.

The published map showing an alternative route assumes that motorcyclists will use the tarmac road. This is unlikely and as with all BOAT closures will displace traffic usage to alternative BOATS nearby.

The report fails to take into account that there is Access Land immediately bordering the route to the East that provides numerous alternatives for walkers seeking an easier route.

The report is sensationalist in its documenting of the helicopter evacuations. There is no demonstration that these evacuations were of or as a result of motorcycle activity. There is no mention that helicopter evacuations are needed for walkers, riders and cyclists on other routes not open to motorcycles. There are many other examples of helicopter rescues for walkers in National Parks etc but there are no proposals to limit pedestrian access to these areas.

The duty to perform a balancing act under section 122 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act is not evident in the process.

The condition of the route should be considered in relation to others in SDNP. There are many footpaths and bridleways that aren’t subject to any vehicle use that have comparable surface conditions.

There is no consideration given to motorcyclists needs to enjoy the SDNP made in the report. The SDNPA website states there are 3282km of ROW in the park and of this 100% are open to walkers with another 5% of the parks area access land. 1469km of the ROW are open to equestrians and cyclists but only 77km of the ROW are Byways Open To all Traffic with approximately 17km of the 77km have TRO’s to all motor vehicles. This effectively leaves less than 2% of the SDNP ROW open to motorcyclists and as such we as a minority group should have the remaining limited facilities protected from any further reductions.

The council is ultimately responsible for the state of the current route and the ensuing problems. The current route was a replacement of an original route some years ago and could be considered as ill conceived in the first place because of its construction at its geographical situation by being positioned on the side of the hill where the erosion is compounded from water running off the side of the hill.

A number of alternative suggestions could be considered as a suitable solution for all including:

i) Reinstate the original straight up route for motorcycles / vehicles no more than 2 wheels only.

ii) Retain in current rote solely for all other non motor vehicle users such as walkers and horse riders.


11-07-11, 08:55
Can you post a streetmap link to the location of the route?



Greg Masters
11-07-11, 09:44
Can you post a streetmap link to the location of the route?



Seems to be this one (http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=470822&y=120760&z=120&sv=470822,120760&st=4&ar=y&mapp=map.srf&searchp=ids.srf&dn=689&ax=470822&ay=120760&lm=0).

If it's the lane I think it is, it's a slippery as feck!


Greg Masters
11-07-11, 09:47
I've pinged mine in.


11-07-11, 09:53
Butser Hill (http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=471500&y=120500&z=120&sv=butser+hill&st=3&tl=Map+of+Butser+Hill,+Hampshire+[Hill/Mountain]&searchp=ids.srf&mapp=map.srf)

Link shows Butser Hill summit with the two BOATS going down towards Leythe House. I think the Westerly Route has already been closed.

12-07-11, 07:45
Seems to be this one (http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=470822&y=120760&z=120&sv=470822,120760&st=4&ar=y&mapp=map.srf&searchp=ids.srf&dn=689&ax=470822&ay=120760&lm=0).

If it's the lane I think it is, it's a slippery as feck!


Yep that's the one and you are right, very slippery when wet, great fun going up it in Winter.

Thanks for sending a response - there is a 13th July deadline for objections so anyone else thinking of doing so please do so today if possible.

Thanks agian.


Greg Masters
30-08-11, 13:44
Dear All

Further to your response to the formal consultation on the above proposal to prohibit all motorised vehicles on this route, I am writing to give you an update on the current situation.

The formal consultation on this proposal, advertised in June this year, attracted a very high level of response, demonstrating a strength of feeling that was not apparent following the informal consultation carried out last year. As a result, HCC is now carefully reviewing the options available for managing the problems that exist on this route and will not be taking any further action until this review is complete. You will be updated further when a decision has been made on how to proceed in this case.

Many Thanks

Vicky Bowskill

01962 846891

Countryside Access Development Officer
Countryside Service
Culture, Communities and Business Services
Hampshire County Council
Mottisfont Court, High Street, Winchester SO23 8ZF

30-08-11, 16:26
Great news, thanks for the update:beer: