The Battle for Broxhead Common
The Case for Hampshire County Council – PART 29
- November 2005. The matter came before the Regulatory Committee of Hampshire County Council. Their reason for refusal was:
- “The lease agreement between the landowner and the County Council, does not give horse riders a right of access to Broxhead Common, and therefore access land as defined by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, this access does not convey a right of access to horse riders.”
- “The lease between Mr Whitfield and Hampshire County Council dated 5th March 1980 covenants not to use or permit to be used the Common or any part thereof other than for a nature reserve within the meaning of Sec.15 of the said act of 1949 and for incidental use by the public for air and exercise and:
To be responsible for the proper control of the common and not to do or permit anything in or upon the common or any part thereof which may be or become a nuisance annoyance or damage to the Landlord or his property.” - This statement made on the back of a lease never agreed with the commoners, or as it turned out, on any lawful basis! Also, completely different to their explanation to Natural England’s CEO (see Part 28).
- However, Hampshire County Council gave a firm commitment that they would take steps to see access for horse riders on Broxhead Common was improved.
- Knowing by now that they could not be relied upon to do as they said, I appealed their decision to the Secretary of State in the form of the Planning Inspectorate.
- 1998 Case law in the form of Bilson v Surrey County Council re Ranmore Common had in fact confirmed horse riders do have the right of access to common land. Indeed, why would they not since there was nothing else before the invention of the bicycle.
- Small ‘No Horse Riding’ signs now appeared on all remaining tracks on the common!!
Next time: A follow up letter of objection and a letter to HCC from the British Horse Society County Chairman.