The Battle for Broxhead Common
Common land since time immemorial
The epic blow-by-blow story for riders’ rights, by Maureen Comber
I will be serialising the Story of the Battle for Broxhead Common from the beginning of the problems in 1963 when the owner of Headley Wood Farm, started fencing in the 80 acres of Broxhead’s common land, for it surely did not go unnoticed at the time and has been a cause of discontent ever since.
Broxhead Common has been identified as common land since time immemorial.
Says Maureen:
“In 2017 I made application under sec.19 Commons Act 2006 to correct the Register of Common Land because of ‘mistakes’ made by the Commons Registration Authority, which in this case was Hampshire County Council. (HCC). I knew that because of the ‘interest’ they have in Broxhead Common the matter could not be decided by them but would have to go to the Planning Inspectorate.”
The Case for Hampshire County Council – PART 141
At Para 28 the Inspector casts doubt by drawing attention to the fact that Mrs Thomas claims that she used the track on a daily basis. She now lives in France and could not be present at the PI, but had the Inspector queried this, we could have told her that Mrs Thomas had riding pupils and her daughter used to Event, which would have accounted for her daily use. Riding on Broxhead Common is very limited, and she would have needed to go further afield to keep her competition horses fit. Cradle Lane leads directly to Alice Holt Forest.
Para 37 is still more contradictory, for she says “I am not satisfied that use could properly be described, on the balance of probabilities, as having been exercised by the public at large.” Compare that with Para 34, which states, “However, it has been accepted in the past that the term must not be taken to mean the public in the wider sense, but to acknowledge that in many cases a way may only be used by local inhabitants”.
Neither is she correct to say at the top of page 8, “It is, in my view, unlikely that even an observant landowner would have thought that the public, in general, was asserting a right to use the land in question”. This is because the land was open and available, and it appeared accepted that this was a right of way. In any case, the owners were several and Lithuanian. When considering the balance of probability, the question must be asked whether it was likely that they would have enough knowledge of this aspect of English law to enable them even to question the use of the path.
Neither has the Inspector evaluated the claim on a common law basis. The map for the FA 1910 shows that the route from A and D to the turning circle on Baigents Hill was declared ‘common land’ under the terms of the FA 1910, evidence that the Inspector has declined to evaluate.
It is difficult to understand how the Inspector can dismiss 15 User Evidence Forms as not belonging to ‘the public at large’.
In addition, as an elected District councillor, I represent around 3,000 members of the public in my Ward and am a Trustee of the British Horse Society, which has more than 70,000 members.
I also can't entirely agree with the Inspector’s contentions in Paragraphs 39 and 40. Her argument appears contrived, as must any assessment made without scrutinising all of the evidence.
Next time: my notes continue.
Creating multi-user public rights of way
www.thetrailstrust.org.uk/ or find 'The Trails Trust' on Facebook
Promoting safety for horses & riders on UK roads
Riders have Rights
It’s vitally important that riders know and maintain their Rights of Way.
If we don’t know and maintain our Rights of Way, we will have less and less land on which to ride.
The problem is knowing our Rights of Way!
“Success is not final; failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” Winston Churchill
Contact Us
If anyone has tales they would like to tell or malfeasance they would like to reveal or something they are passionate about, then please get in touch.
Email: info@horseytalk.net
