The Case to included Equestrians in all Active Travel Policy and Projects

 

In my spare time I do quite a lot of voluntary outdoor access work. Here is my response for a call for evidence from the government's All Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling and Walking on Active Travel and Social justice ( https://appgcw.org/2024/11/12/active-travel-and-social-justice-inquiry/ ) New riding routes coming soon, but thought I would post by my paper here for future reference.  

The All Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling & Walking (APPGCW)

Active Travel and Social Justice Inquiry

The Case to included Equestrians in all Active Travel policy and Projects

Active travel is a growing focus in urban planning, as governments aim to promote healthier lifestyles, reduce congestion, and decrease environmental impact. Policies often emphasize the use of bicycles as a primary mode of active transport, with campaigns targeting cyclists for infrastructure development, safety, and accessibility. While much of this focus is beneficial in encouraging physical activity, there exists a significant oversight regarding the role of women in active travel and the inclusion of equestrian users in these policies. Despite the fact that more women engage in horse riding compared to men riding bicycles, equestrian needs are largely excluded from active travel initiatives. This paper explores the reasons behind this discrepancy and the implications of excluding equestrians from active travel policies, particularly in the context of gender equality and the promotion of women's participation in sport.

Active Travel England (ATE) has a focus on walking and cycling only and this has been imbedded into its policy as ATE only follow Local Walk and Cycling Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs). There are however other users who could and should benefit from active travel policies and projects, but as central government only talks about walking and cycling, we are finding that equestrians are excluded from active travel projects at a local level.  

Equestrians are often excluded from the conversation even though government ministers have confirmed on a number of occasions and as outlined in the Highway Code that equestrians are Vulnerable Road Users (VRU).  This happens when government and local councils only talk about ‘Walking and Cycling’ which then translates to equestrians being ‘excluded by design’ and policy for example the Keswick to Threlkeld Railway Trail, which had nearly 8 million pounds of public money (https://lakesanddaleshorsebackrambler.blogspot.com/2024/05/equestrians-need-to-think-like-cyclists_30.html). 

Equestrians are the oldest form of active travel and while horse riding people burn a similar number of calories to walking and cycling (Figure 2) and are recognised as active travel as outlined in an article published by Science Direct (Figure 1).   One of the best definitions of Active Travel I have found was

‘Active travel is primarily defined as making journeys by walking, cycling and scooting. It can also include horse-riding (and even running and non-motorised water-based transport.) It is an approach to travel and transport that focuses on physical activity as opposed to motorised means’ (from West Lothian Council).

This definition also needs taking into consideration with statements like this:

‘We live in an obesogenic polluted environment, with unacceptably low levels of active travel. We need to design the healthy environments of the future if we are to relieve the NHS of the pressures that are otherwise going to overwhelm it’ (from Andrew Selous in Parliament 23 October 2019, Conservative MP for South West Bedfordshire).

The focus of Active Travel England should shift to being multi user and inclusive of all users – walkers, runners, disabled users, equestrians, cyclists and paddle sports such as canoeing.

Active Travel should also be recognised as not just urban with 63% of personal miles traveling over 50 miles being for leisure purposes (https://www.cnp.org.uk/blog/national-parks-four-big-transport-issues-and-how-fix-them). This means that Active Travel has a large role to play within our countryside and especially our Protected Landscape areas.

Many may not be aware but equestrians are primarily women and girls and there is a very clear gender split between equestrians and cyclists. In the UK of the 3.5 million equestrians over 80% are female (British Horse Society) and for the 7.5 million cyclists over 70% are male (Cycling UK).

It is well known that women and girls are a hard group to encourage into sport with Sport England outlining:

• ‘There are 313,600 fewer women than men who are regularly active.
• More men do sport and physical activity than women at almost every age group.
• When asked, 13 million women said they'd like to do more sport and physical activity.
• 4 in 10 women are not active enough to ensure they get the full health benefits.’ (https://www.sportengland.org/research-and-data/research/gender?section=research )

 

It is also noted by Womens Sports Fitness Foundation that ‘access to facilities’ is listed as a barrier to women in sports (https://www.funding4sport.co.uk/downloads/women_barriers_participation.fpd). If active travel infrastructure is aimed at the male cyclist with little consideration for the equestrian sport that is dominated by women and girls then currently active travel infrastructure is a barrier for women in sport. 

If ATE are serious about being inclusive then they need to take on board that by having active travel routes focused on the National Cycle Network (NCN) and following Walking and Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LC WIPs) you are in effect continuing this hidden gender inequality.

With ATE focus being on walking and cycling on cycleways rather than greenways and multi user routes ATE are only encouraging new infrastructure that is primarily aimed at the male population. It is vital that the government and ATE start using inclusive language around outdoor access and active travel. Too often equestrians and others such as disabled users are left out of the conversation.  This results in these users only being an afterthought when new access projects are planned. With Sustrans being only a walking, wheeling and cycling charity equestrians have been excluded by design and policy on many off road NCN routes.

Active Travel England should not just have a focus on walking and cycling, it should be about getting everyone active regardless of the activity. A more inclusive form of words rather than just saying walking and cycling would be ‘by foot, wheel, hoof or paddle’. This would then include everyone – walkers, runners, disabled users (wheel chairs, trampers, mobilities scouters, 4 x4 wheel chairs), families with push chairs, scooters, roller skaters, skate boards, cyclists (road bikes, gravel bikes, mountain bikes, tricycles, e-bikes), equestrians (horse riders, carriage drivers, people who lead their horse), non-motorised water-based transport (kayaks, canoes and paddle boards). All these activities are and can be active travel.

With only 22% of Right of Way in England & Wales being open to horse riders and cyclist (Bridleways, Byways Open To all Traffic and Restricted Byways) any new multi user off road routes are cherished and are very welcomed to get us all off our busy roads. Off road routes whether they be a right of way or a permissive route should be managed as a national asset for everyone for the nation’s health and wellbeing.  

The table below outlines how Active Travel England can become inclusive of all users and be a truly multi-functional organisation for everyone. 

 

Active Travel England should include all Non-motorised and  assisted forms of active travel	·       Include all Vulnerable Road Users (VRU) as per the Highway Code. ·       All users should be included as per Figure 1 and Figure 3. ·       Use inclusive language - Use terms such as by ‘Foot, Wheel, Hoof and Paddle’ not ‘Walking, Wheeling and Cycling’.
The National Cycle Network should be renamed the National Green Network	·       Thereby it would be relevant to all active travel users and reflect the multifunctional status of these routes (Figure 3). ·       Create and improve green corridors between urban and rural, blue and green spaces and improving biodiversity by connecting landscape-scale wildlife corridors for people and nature. ·       Connecting people to nature and improving people’s health and wellbeing. ·       Meet the government’s Environmental Improvement Plan (EIP), which includes a commitment that everyone should be able to access green or blue space within a 15 minute walk from their home. ·       ATE should not just be about urban travel. It should cover both urban and rural and have a focus on improving active travel to our green and blue spaces and Protected Landscapes. Some of our National Parks are just as congested with traffic as busy city centres.
Excluded by policy	·       Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LC WIPs) need to change their name and guidelines as equestrians are not included withing this document. ·       For example the Yorkshire Dale National Park are creating their own Active Travel Plan that includes everyone and have moved away from LCWIP approach (Figure 3). ATE need to follow this inclusive approach. ·       Strava heatmaps are used to look at new active travel routes, however Strava does not list equestrian activities as an outdoor activity meaning equestrians are also missed in this data set. For example, Ordnance survey data is more inclusive of all users on their OS mapping app.        It should be noted that Jesse Norman in House of Commons debate on Road Safety, 5 November 2018 stated ‘We should be clear that the cycling and walking strategy may have that name but is absolutely targeted at vulnerable road users, including horse-riders.’  Horse riding is outlined as active travel in ATE Route Check Tool User Manual on page page 29 referring to paragraph 10.11 ' Horse riding is explicitly included in active travel: House of Commons Transport Committee Active travel: increasing levels of walking and cycling in England Eleventh Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report (London, 2019): “Active travel covers any journey that is made by physically active means, and covers such diverse activities as horse riding, skateboarding, roller skating, and riding a scooter.” p6. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65e5b5fb7bc329e58db8c1c8/ate-route-check-tool-user-manual.pdf
Excluded by design	·       Equestrians and other users (not just walkers and cyclists) should be included from the start. In Scotland they think in multi user terms due to their access laws, but in England this is not the case. ·       Therefore, many projects for example have barriers than are too narrow or parapets that do not meet recommended standards.  ·       Recommended standards for infrastructure (gradients, bridges, widths and heights) should be that ‘a recommendation’ as often these standards are unrealistic for the nature of a route and if each feature on a route is individually risk assessed then most risks can be mitigation against. Sustrans and British Horse Society both outline this approach in their guidelines. It should also be noted that many new and old infrastructure features on right of way and highways do not meet these recommended standards. For example the new road bridge at Pooley Bridge, Cumbria and the bridleway bridge known as Gooseholme Bridge, Kendal, where both bridges have lower than recommended parapets.  ·       Looking at ATE Route Check Tool on ATE website it is clear that this will continue as the first question is – ‘ will horse riders use this route?’. Please note people would like to take their horses into urban areas and there should note be a rural/urban slip and it should be assumed that all are welcome everywhere. ·       Horses also do not need special surfaces either, not by chose but we have to take our horses on tarmac roads every day to get to off road riding. If the surface has to be sealed then other alternatives to tarmac should be considered such as Flexi-pav or Nu-Flex.
Shared paths work (bridleways have been used by foot, wheel and hoof since 1968), but we still need to make everyone feel welcome and sometimes change behaviour	·       Reinforcing the Highway Code changes for Vulnerable Road Users on active travel routes. ·       The Countryside Code could become the Outdoor Access Code to enable it to cover both urban and rural areas and reinforces such campaigns as ‘Be Nice Say Hi’ (https://www.cyclinguk.org/press-release/be-nice-say-hi-cycling-uk-and-bhs-guidance-cyclists-and-horses ).
Making our Public Rights of Ways more multi user and less disjointed	·       Many areas do not have any multi user access with only 22% of Right of Way in England & Wales being open to horse riders (Bridleways, Byways Open To all Traffic and Restricted Byways). ·       Currently there are too many missing links forcing equestrians and other VRU onto roads. ·       All off-road cycleways should be multi user i.e. Make cycleways inclusive of all users similar to bridleway under the Countryside Act 1968.
The provision of active Travel routes should not be to the determent of nature, history and landscape value	·       Our historic bridleways and byways should not be turned into 3m wide tarmac none motorised roads. ·       By putting down tarmac then a routes can loose it’s wild and natural feel, meaning this could have an effect on whether the route is good for our health and wellbeing. ·       The Peak District is a good example of where active travel projects have been completed in a sensitive way having regard to the local environment and landscape (https://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/visiting/places-to-visit/trails )
Liability on active travel routes is often a barrier to taking a project forward and currently many off road active travel route are permissive with no legal protection.	·       One of the best ways to have less liability on a route is to make it a bridleways, restricted byways or Section 16 land under the Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act 2000. ·       Under Section 16 of CROW Act an open access linear route can be created for walkers, disabled users, cyclists and horse riders (this is how the new King Charles Coastal Path has been created in places). Section 16 land under the CROW Act also provides land owners with the ability to close a route for a number of days a year, which can be very helpful when needing to do maintenance work. ·       It should also be noted that by giving a route legal protection this also means the route will be there in perpetually thereby meaning any government investment into a route will be protected long term. Currently many off road NCN routes do not have any legal protection even though millions of pounds of public money has been invested.
Working better at a local level and getting value for money	·       Active travel and VRU projects project can cost millions of pounds. For example, the Keswick to Threlkeld Railway trail cost near £8 million pounds for a 3 mile route. As a compression the Lake District National Park Authority budget from government is £5.6 million per year. Questions should be asked if bridges on this route could have been more cost effective and did the surface of the trail need upgrading to a 3m wide tarmac trail. ·       New routes should aim to be ‘kept in the green’ i.e. be a cost effective project. A good example of this would be to keep a routes surface to a ‘forest road standard’ (local quarry stone). This works very well in rural areas where landscape impact should be a consideration. ·       Sustrans seem to have a history of producing expensive plans, designs and project briefs without first consulting locals and landowners. The key being getting landowner agreement before such plans take place.  Recently Sustrans have taken this approach with the Lancaster Greenway extensions to Kirkby Lonsdale. Currently locals are concerned the route will not follow the old railway line as parts are too steep and not a single landowner is happy to sign over their land for the project.   ·       Landowner will work with new outdoor access projects, but the correct approach should be taken. The Trails Trust has just finished a DEFRA Environment Land Management Grants Test and Trials 159A on this and seen positive results in getting new multi user access on a landscape scale. Link to reports - https://www.thetrailstrust.org.uk/elms-test-trial-159a-final-report/
Government department need to work better together	·       Active Travel although not in names has been managed by other departments for years. ·       Therefore, ATE need to work closely with DEFRA, Natural England, Forestry England, Highways England and Sports England. ·       All the above departments have policies on outdoor access, Vulnerable Road Users (VRU) and sustainable transport, with the same aims, but departments are not working well together on active travel/outdoor access/VRUs projects.

 

Conclusion

Horse riding is an activity that happens in cities and rural areas with 9% of equestrians having a disability and we can be anyone from an older retired person to teachers, nurses and children. We come from all walks of life and deserve to be treated the same as any other outdoor activity for publicly funded projects. The exclusion of equestrian users from active travel projects represents a significant gap in both gender equity and transportation policy. While women are more likely to engage in horse riding than men in cycling, they are not given the same level of support in active travel initiatives. To encourage more women to participate in physical activity and to align with broader goals of promoting gender equality in sport, it is crucial for policymakers to recognize the needs of equestrians and include them in active travel policies and projects. By doing so, governments can create a more inclusive, equitable, and effective approach to promoting active travel for all individuals, regardless of their chosen mode of transportation.

Paper by - Hannah Gardner BSc (Hon), MSc, CEnv, MRICS

I have over 20 years’ experience of working in the countryside and land management sector, holds a degree in Countryside Management, am a Chartered Environmentalist (CEnv) and Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor (MRICS). In my spare time I am a keen walker and horse rider. I hold the voluntary roles of Vice Chair of The Trials Trust, Cumbria Bridleways Society and the Yorkshire Dale National Park Authority Local Access Forum.