The Ramblers' Association is appealing for funds to be used in a campaign to improve the condition of rights of way in England and Wales. The RA claims, based on evidence collected by the Audit Commission, that the state of the path network is a national disgrace and that, on average, a walker is likely to encounter a problem every 1.25 miles (2km).
It is correct to state that a few local authorities have neglected their statutory duties shamefully with the result that their paths are in a parlous state, but in the main,, in my experience, the network is in a reasonable condition.
My reason for doubting the validity of the RA statisics is that I walk between 1,800 and 2,000 miles each year in many parts of the country and only rarely encounter a problem. Recently I walked 75 miles from Westminster Bridge to Littlehampton mostly on undesignated rights of way which are unlikely to get the attention that long distance paths and recreational routes are likely to receive. All the stiles, except one, were in good condition as were all the gates. There were no illegal obstructions nor problems with overgrown vegetation. There was one recently-broken stile which was easily circumvented by climbing the adjacent post and rail fence, and an intimidating notice indicating that guard dogs were running loose on the line of the right of way (I saw none).
What is the experience of OMers on both lowland and upland paths? Do you think the RA is correct in making a blanket condemnation of the state of the path network?
