Responding to Map Modification Orders (DMMO's), Public Path Orders (PPO's), etc

The Definitive Map is the record held by each local authority showing the position and status (footpath, bridleway or byway) of legal trails. It is recognised that these maps carry many inaccuracies, but lack of resources means that few Definitive Maps will record all legal trails with complete accuracy.

Definitive maps are changed by DMMO's or PPO's - described below. Both types or order, if confirmed, will change the depiction trails on the definitive map. These changes will then be subsequently shown on revised Ordnance Survey Maps.

Copies of these orders are required by law to be sent to mandatory consultees including the Cyclists Touring Club, the British Horse Society and the Byways & Bridleways Trust. IMBA is not a statutory consultee, but any response from IMBA is given equal weighting by the Local Authority.

Information about orders can increasingly be found on the PRoW section of local authority websites. This information may include the order itself or it may just be a summary. If you need more information, then send an SAE to the PRoW department to request a copy of the order or the pre-order consultation to enable you to respond. Use this link to locate the appropriate Local Authority office.

Definitive Map Modification Orders (DMMO's)

Map modification orders modify "errors" on the definitive map, and a Local Authority has a duty to make these orders when it becomes aware of any such "errors". There is an assumption that the right to use any potentially legal trail already exists - and that the order is merely confirming that right.

DMMO's may include:

• Upgrade, eg from footpath to bridleway.
• Downgrade. eg byway to footpath.
• Deletions, eg removal of a bridleway from the definitive map.

You should have historic or user evidence to back your response, as DMMO's can only be confirmed after consideration of this evidence. You may object to an order if you feel that the evidence has been wrongly interpreted, or if you have further contradictory evidence. However, if you do object, you may be required to submit your evidence or attend a public inquiry. If there are no objections, then the order will be confirmed. The flowchart shown below illustrates the process.

 

Public Path Orders (PPO's)

PPO's enable diversions of trails for reasons of safety, privacy, as a result of planning applications or to minimise conflict - for instance by diverting away from a farmyard. They are not based on evidence, but on suitability / convenience, and the Local Authority can refuse requests for these orders if it so wishes. Usual practice is to consult with users before any PPO is drafted.

IMBA policy will normally be tolerant towards reasonable diversions, but a serious objection to an inappropriate diversion will normally dissuade the Local Authority from making the order. When responding to Public Path Orders you may review the following considerations:

• Considerations for the Cyclist
  • Convenience
    • quality of proposed track / field edge path / cross field path
    • new need to pass through multiple gates
    • difficulties due to steepness / drainage / vegetation
  • Strategic
    • effect on potential linked routes
    • potential for further definitive map modifications
  • Safety
    • need to use busy roads
    • avoid busy farmyard
• Considerations for the Landowner
  • Safety
    • avoid busy farmyard
  • Convenience
    • move from cross field to field edge to avoid reinstatement after cultivation
  • Privacy
    • to avoid dwellings / gardens

Other Orders

1. Creation Orders. These introduce a new path where no rights already exist of the type to be created - eg a new bridleway. This process may be initiated by landowner dedication, through local parishes, and even (rarely) by compulsion.
    
2. s116 Extinguishment Orders. These are conducted through the magistrates court where the trail must be considered ?unnecessary?. Although notices must appear on the trail and in local papers, there is no requirement to consult directly with user groups. They can be unsatisfactory, in that magistrates do not have to give reasons for their decisions, and can award costs against objectors.
    
3. Traffic Regulation Orders. These will normally restrict use of a route by one or more user types for reasons of maintenance or safety. They may be renewed, and may require action from users to prevent this occurring.
   • Temporary TRO's will normally be valid for 6 months, after which they may be renewed.
   • Permanent TRO's are rarely used for cyclists, but can happen.
4. Consultation Documents. These are not legal orders, but are used before an order is made asking for our views on a proposed change.

Responding to Orders or Consultations

You may:

• support
• object
• acknowledge with no comment, but noting that "no approval or support is intended".

Use the IMBA MMO Response Form (PDF) to respond to Local Authority orders or consultations.

1. You should ALWAYS respond to byway / bridleway orders - even if it is a brief reply.
2. Briefly check any footpath order to ensure that their are no adverse implications for cyclists.
3. Read the notice carefully and check for accuracy, as some Local Authorities are surprisingly careless. Note the closing date for replies.
4. Note the key points, and contact the PRoW department for further information if the order is unclear.
5. Identify the path on the relevant Explorer or Landranger map to ascertain its importance in the local bridleway / byway network.
6. Decide whether a visit is necessary - most can be responded to without a visit. If you feel a visit is necessary, consider delegating the visit to another local cyclist.
7. If you are considering an objection, it may be useful to consult your local BHS / RA / LARA / TRF / Open Spaces representative to see what action they are likely to take.

Further Reading

More detailed information may be found in the Countryside Agency booket CA 142: A guide to definitive maps and changes to public rights of way (PDF).

 

More information / comments?

Last update: 12 Jan 2009