# It should be illegal to ride on a public road without wearing High-Viz Florencent



## Judgemental (6 November 2012)

What does one have to do to get it through to a large number of people who ride, that they are safer wearing a High-Viz Florescent coat etc?

Frankly I am of the view that it should be an offence not to be wearing easily seen kit on any public road.

For some bizarre reason there are a large number who think tweed jackets and black coats that blend in with their background is sensible!

Most of which is a result of idle arrogance, "oh I can't be bothered to make the effort for the benefit of other road users"

Similarly the horse should suitably tacked-up with High-Viz as part of their 'furniture'.


----------



## AprilBlossom (6 November 2012)

I think it should be an offence to spell incorrectly, but hey ho...


----------



## Judgemental (6 November 2012)

AprilBlossom said:



			I think it should be an offence to spell incorrectly, but hey ho... 

Click to expand...

Would you be kind enough to highlight the incorrect spelling?


----------



## L&M (6 November 2012)

'florencent' in the title...

Sadly I think our Masters would take a dim view of the mounted field following hounds covered in high viz, but I do try to have a strip in my pocket to put on if hacking home at dusk.


----------



## Meandtheboys (6 November 2012)

I have to agree.................and/or impose fines too:

also not wearing a riding hat and riding two abreast on narrow roads

There are some seriously irresponsible riders out on the roads and no wonder some motorists are getting sick and tired of horse riders thinking they own the roads and feel they are invincible - I just feel sorry for the horse ( because it potentially badly injured or killed ) and medical staff, vets and police that have to scrape people of the roads and the poor driver who has to live with the consequences.

Rant over............


----------



## Judgemental (6 November 2012)

Meandtheboys said:



			I have to agree.................and/or impose fines too:

also not wearing a riding hat and riding two abreast on narrow roads

There are some seriously irresponsible riders out on the roads and no wonder some motorists are getting sick and tired of horse riders thinking they own the roads and feel they are invincible - I just feel sorry for the horse ( because it potentially badly injured or killed ) and medical staff, vets and police that have to scrape people of the roads and the poor driver who has to live with the consequences.

Rant over............
		
Click to expand...

I support your rant, go on Meandtheboys, have a good rant and why not.

Too many people have an inflated sense of their own importance when they are on a horse on a public road.

Riding two abreast is wholly unacceptable, bad manners and above all DANGEROUS


----------



## Judgemental (6 November 2012)

Sidney said:



			Sadly I think our Masters would take a dim view of the mounted field following hounds covered in high viz, but I do try to have a strip in my pocket to put on if hacking home at dusk.
		
Click to expand...

Since when do masters of hounds have any jurisdiction so far as those riding on a public road even if they are part of the mounted Field.

The Hunting Act 2004 has diluted the authority and social stand of Masters of Hounds


----------



## HaffiesRock (6 November 2012)

I am with you on this. Same goes for cyclists too. Just cant see why anyone wouldnt wear hi viz. I get laughed at in my hi viz but I do not care. I love my pony and would never forgive myself if anything happened to him or me.

Its no hardship to wear a tabard and a few bits on your horse. 

How does insurance work if you are involved in an accident and arnt wearing hi viz? xx


----------



## stencilface (6 November 2012)

Hi vis is easy to carry in a pocket for the beginning an end of the day too.

Riding two abreast has its place in safe road riding, but its not always appropriate


----------



## ester (6 November 2012)

I think it should be an offence for anyone on a public road to not wear a certain quantity of Hi vis, walkers/joggers and cyclists included.


----------



## CrazyMare (6 November 2012)

The Highway Code allows you to ride two abreast - I often do, as I often hack out green horses, or with very novice riders.

As for hi-viz, everyone should wear it when on the roads. I had a huge scare a couple of weeks ago, when a man in dark clothes, with a black Labrador stepped off the verge into my headlights. I couldn't see him at all until the last moment.

I put a hi viz vest into my pocket out hunting, and have at least 3 seperate hi viz items on when hacking on the roads - Brushing boots, hat band, quater sheet, tabard, and necklace/breastplate thing.


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (6 November 2012)

I was hacking out last week , an on coming pair riders one in tabard  one in tabard and exercise rug. 

  I could hardly see the bay as the tabard was obscured by the horses head.  But the other rider  I could see.

 I would never ride out without florescent


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (6 November 2012)

Judgemental said:



			Riding two abreast is wholly unacceptable, bad manners and above all DANGEROUS
		
Click to expand...


 Rubbish absolute rubbish 

 Itd fine to ride two abreast on a wide road.

 Its unsafe going two abreast on narrow lane and on corners.


 Riding two abreast slows traffic and protects youngsters.

 Its easier for a car to past 6 paired riders than 6 single ones

*taken from the highway code


https://www.gov.uk/rules-about-animals-47-to-58/horse-riders-49-to-55
Riding
52

Before you take a horse on to a road, you should

    ensure all tack fits well and is in good condition
    make sure you can control the horse.

Always ride with other, less nervous horses if you think that your horse will be nervous of traffic. Never ride a horse without both a saddle and bridle.
53

Before riding off or turning, look behind you to make sure it is safe, then give a clear arm signal.

When riding on the road you should

    keep to the left
    keep both hands on the reins unless you are signalling
    keep both feet in the stirrups
    not carry another person
    not carry anything which might affect your balance or get tangled up with the reins
    keep a horse you are leading to your left
    move in the direction of the traffic flow in a one-way street
  never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.








,*


----------



## marmalade76 (7 November 2012)

So you'll be sporting hi-viz whilst out hunting this season, OP??


----------



## Hunters (7 November 2012)

Riding two abreast is perfectly legal & often a lot safer than single file as it ensures the motorist slows down.

Also, can't see many huntsmen being pleased with the mounted field clad in fluorescents.


----------



## Judgemental (7 November 2012)

Hunters said:



			Riding two abreast is perfectly legal & often a lot safer than single file as it ensures the motorist slows down.

Also, can't see many huntsmen being pleased with the mounted field clad in fluorescents.
		
Click to expand...

And so you may think and I agree that is what the Highway code states. Nevertheless it is not well received by motorists, who after all pay a license fee to use the road.

As for huntsmen and the mounted field. Clearly the 2004 Act is here to stay and it would be helpful if folk adopted a more modernistic approach to their riding attire, habits and overall ATTITUDE.

Let's be wholly objective about the whole subject, all the platitudes and comfortable words about repeal, are a complete waste of time or to put it another way, it's all over bar the shouting.


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (7 November 2012)

Ride and lead would be hard if it was illegal to go 2 a breast  also leading a child on pony would be hard!!

  Riding 2 abreast (in safe place)

 6 riders  in 2 abreast  take up the space of 3 small micras, this in turn would easier to past  than..........................

 6 riders in single file moving along, which would most often make the passing car  have to pull in dangerously close to one of the horses in order to miss oncoming cars .

 Also If a car has to pull in  between the group it can cause the back horses to panic as they have been separated from the others.




			Nevertheless it is not well received by motorists, who after all pay a license fee to use the road.
		
Click to expand...

 So most of us who use the road pay to use it, yes when i am on the horse i am not paying  but the money i paid for my car and lorry license does not stop just because i am on the horse not in the car.  I pay 365 days of the year for my horsebox and don't take it on the rd every day  same with the car ,so I think I have paid enough with vehicles tax   so to be able to use the rds with the horse.




			Too many people have an inflated sense of their own importance when they are on a horse on a public road.
		
Click to expand...

 God you are so  inflated .

 I think you will find most of use who ride on the rd are paying more attention to what our horses and the traffic  is like to be worried  on how important we are.


----------



## Orangehorse (7 November 2012)

Most cyclists do wear high-vis.

I can't understand why hunt riders don't keep a set of high-viz leg bands and a hat cap/tabard stuffed in a pocket, so if they are riding back in the afternoon from a meet they can put the high-viz stuff on.  I don't think they need have it on at the meet or during the hunting.  It is only polite to other road users.


----------



## Alec Swan (7 November 2012)

Re: It should be illegal to ride on a public road without wearing High-Viz Florencent

I'm sorry JM,  but that's nonsense.  We are already burdened by more than enough bureaucratic old bollox,  some originating from our clown like Continental cousins,  some from our own Government who employ others to tighten the control which they have over us,  and I strongly suspect some to originate from those with nothing better to do than dream up yet more stringent and restrictive rules and regulations.

It's my life and I will live it as I see fit.  If I still rode,  I'd also still chase a fox or two,  armed with a Hoss,  and a dawg or two. 

I agree with you,  that Hi-viz is an excellent idea,  at all times of the day,  but to burden us with further rules and conditions,  by which we live our lives,  isn't on.

Alec.


----------



## Dunlin (7 November 2012)

Living in rural Dorset I often come across 2 hunts in my area. I have never seen any hunt members sporting high vis. Some of the lanes I have found them on are tree covered and almost dark when it's daylight and the majority are single track or very narrow. I have headlights to turn on, a horse doesn't so I think high vis is essential if you will encounter roads at any point. 

A small tabard folds up to the size of a mobile phone so hardly cumbersome to carry around. If the rider doesn't want to wear one then at least stick on a fluro tail bandage and breaststrap as something is better than nothing.

I know hunt members like to look smart and keep dress traditional but the roads are dangerous these days, lord knows as a motorcyclist I have often found myself being forced off the road by tractors down here and I do wear a high vis. The way I see it is if you are involved in an accident why give someone else the chance to say "I didn't see them". It's one of the most common causes/excuses given for accidents so don't give them a chance to use it against you.

As for riding 2 abreast I don't have a problem with it, I was stuck behind a rider leading a second pony the other day for over 20 minutes until she found a path to pull into. I'd sooner be 20 minutes late than send someone to hospital or an early grave.

Out of interest, is it legal to wear hats on the road with no harness/strap?


----------



## Rollin (7 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Re: It should be illegal to ride on a public road without wearing High-Viz Florencent

I'm sorry JM,  but that's nonsense.  We are already burdened by more than enough bureaucratic old bollox,  some originating from our clown like Continental cousins,  some from our own Government who employ others to tighten the control which they have over us,  and I strongly suspect some to originate from those with nothing better to do than dream up yet more stringent and restrictive rules and regulations.

It's my life and I will live it as I see fit.  If I still rode,  I'd also still chase a fox or two,  armed with a Hoss,  and a dawg or two. 

I agree with you,  that Hi-viz is an excellent idea,  at all times of the day,  but to burden us with further rules and conditions,  by which we live our lives,  isn't on.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Alec,

It is not just your life.  Your horse may kill a driver or child passengers in the event of a collision.   I am horrified that riders go out, especially in winter wearing sombre clothing.

It is a legal requirement all over Europe that cars use lights in poor visibility which includes heavy rain.  I don't think that Hi-viz for riders and cyclists is over legislating.


----------



## GinaGeo (7 November 2012)

Dunlin said:



			Out of interest, is it legal to wear hats on the road with no harness/strap?
		
Click to expand...

Over the age of fourteen (I think) there's no law stating that a hat must be worn to ride on the road, strapped or otherwise. 

I always wear Hi-viz when on the road, but I also ride and lead and ride two abreast, often it's safer.  

I was driving through a city centre last week it was dark and was the tail end of rush hour. I came across two cysclists, neither had as stitch of hi-viz on or any lights. I could not seem them until they came flying past me as I was turning left, a second later I'd have hit them.  Some people really beg belief. 

As it is, I am going to purchase a nice foldable fluorescent tabbard I can fold up and put in my hunt coat pocket and along with a reflective hat tabbard. Quite how it's going to fit in with my mobile phone, foldable hoof pick, various bits of string and hip flask without falling out when I'm grappling to find my cap for the Hunt secretary I've yet to work out...


----------



## Alec Swan (7 November 2012)

Rollin said:



			Alec,

It is not just your life.  Your horse may kill a driver or child passengers in the event of a collision.  

.......
		
Click to expand...

Quite,  and I agree with you.  H-viz or not,  there are accidents involving horses on a regular basis.  I'll tell you what,  I've had a brilliant idea;  Let's ban all horses from the public highway.  That should sort the problem,  and rest assured,  following on from a new set of regs,  which may or may not solve the problem,  the eventual step will be taken whereby no horses are allowed on the public highway,  at all.  Would you be happy with that?

Alec.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (7 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Quite,  and I agree with you.  H-viz or not,  there are accidents involving horses on a regular basis.  I'll tell you what,  I've had a brilliant idea;  Let's ban all horses from the public highway.  That should sort the problem,  and rest assured,  following on from a new set of regs,  which may or may not solve the problem,  the eventual step will be taken whereby no horses are allowed on the public highway,  at all.  Would you be happy with that?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

No, I suspect they wont.....:-D

I (personally) wouldnt dream of not riding with high viz, but I also wouldnt* dream *of being so arrogant as to dictate what others do or do not wear when riding perfectly legally on the roads.

Riders may not pay road tax (which incidentally isnt earmarked for roads anyway, hasnt been for a long time, and drivers pay it because of the wear and tear cars do that horses and cyclists dont to the road surface -so it is quite reasonable), but none of those roads would be there if the horses hadnt used them long before the cars - they are the reason the roads exist....!

I find that hunt riders tend to be in groups and TBH if you cant spot a combined 3 ton on horses and riders ahead of you, you shouldnt be allowed on the road anyway. 

As a car driver it is my responsibility to spot slow moving road users, and to be able to stop within the distance I can see. end of.

If a car driver is driving fast enough to fatally injure a (strapped in) passenger by ploughing into a horse and rider then IMO the responsibility is down to that driver since they are neither driving at an appropriate speed nor being aware of any other road users.


----------



## monkeybum13 (7 November 2012)

Orangehorse said:



			Most cyclists do wear high-vis.

I can't understand why hunt riders don't keep a set of high-viz leg bands and a hat cap/tabard stuffed in a pocket, so if they are riding back in the afternoon from a meet they can put the high-viz stuff on.  I don't think they need have it on at the meet or during the hunting.  It is only polite to other road users.
		
Click to expand...

Many people do keep a hi viz tabard in their pocket for hacking home/to their box after a good days hunting


----------



## thundermacd (7 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Re: It should be illegal to ride on a public road without wearing High-Viz Florencent

I'm sorry JM,  but that's nonsense.  We are already burdened by more than enough bureaucratic old bollox,  some originating from our clown like Continental cousins,  some from our own Government who employ others to tighten the control which they have over us,  and I strongly suspect some to originate from those with nothing better to do than dream up yet more stringent and restrictive rules and regulations.

It's my life and I will live it as I see fit.  If I still rode,  I'd also still chase a fox or two,  armed with a Hoss,  and a dawg or two. 

I agree with you,  that Hi-viz is an excellent idea,  at all times of the day,  but to burden us with further rules and conditions,  by which we live our lives,  isn't on.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Love your posts! And your (naughty ) postscript!


----------



## Dovorian (7 November 2012)

Swop the hip flask for a neatly folded lightweight tabard and hat band....?

I am now doomed of course!


----------



## Judgemental (7 November 2012)

It's simples. The Under Secretary of State uses his or her powers via the Statutory Instrument in the Hunting Act 2004 to make it illegal for anybody participating in Trail or Drag hunting not to be High-Vized.

Far far too many people on horses on roads putting all and sundry at risk. 

If one cannot ride off-road, then give up keeping all these horses?

A decent 'Bomber Jacket' style High-Viz from say Jewson's the builders merchants is only about £20.00+


----------



## ester (7 November 2012)

trouble is.. I quite like keeping my one (not all these ) horse. One clearly needs to buy a bigger estate to have ones own off-road riding routes. . .


----------



## Judgemental (7 November 2012)

ester said:



			trouble is.. I quite like keeping my one (not all these ) horse. One clearly needs to buy a bigger estate to have ones own off-road riding routes. . .
		
Click to expand...

There is very little purpose for people to use public roads since the ban because the trail should be laid well away from roads.

Probably the best thing you could do ester, 

Yes I am advocating High-Viz as being mandatory in the so called 'hunting field', if one can call a hack round the countryside after a smelly rag, 'hunting field'.


----------



## marmalade76 (7 November 2012)

lachlanandmarcus said:



			No, I suspect they wont.....:-D

I (personally) wouldnt dream of not riding with high viz, but I also wouldnt* dream *of being so arrogant as to dictate what others do or do not wear when riding perfectly legally on the roads.

Riders may not pay road tax (which incidentally isnt earmarked for roads anyway, hasnt been for a long time, and drivers pay it because of the wear and tear cars do that horses and cyclists dont to the road surface -so it is quite reasonable), but none of those roads would be there if the horses hadnt used them long before the cars - they are the reason the roads exist....!

I find that hunt riders tend to be in groups and TBH if you cant spot a combined 3 ton on horses and riders ahead of you, you shouldnt be allowed on the road anyway. 

As a car driver it is my responsibility to spot slow moving road users, and to be able to stop within the distance I can see. end of.

If a car driver is driving fast enough to fatally injure a (strapped in) passenger by ploughing into a horse and rider then IMO the responsibility is down to that driver since they are neither driving at an appropriate speed nor being aware of any other road users.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with this.

Also totally agree with this statement by OP:-

Too many people have an inflated sense of their own importance when they are on a horse on a public road.


----------



## Goldenstar (7 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Quite,  and I agree with you.  H-viz or not,  there are accidents involving horses on a regular basis.  I'll tell you what,  I've had a brilliant idea;  Let's ban all horses from the public highway.  That should sort the problem,  and rest assured,  following on from a new set of regs,  which may or may not solve the problem,  the eventual step will be taken whereby no horses are allowed on the public highway,  at all.  Would you be happy with that?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I am apsolutly with you on this that's the logical point to follow the hi viz law though to .
Horses are at risk on the roads ban them , problem solved.
There's enough nutters passing damn fool laws in this country already


----------



## The Fuzzy Furry (7 November 2012)

Judgemental said:



			It's simples. The Under Secretary of State uses his or her powers via the Statutory Instrument in the Hunting Act 2004 to make it illegal for anybody participating in Trail or Drag hunting not to be High-Vized.

Far far too many people on horses on roads putting all and sundry at risk. 

*If one cannot ride off-road, then give up keeping all these horses?*

A decent 'Bomber Jacket' style High-Viz from say Jewson's the builders merchants is only about £20.00+
		
Click to expand...

Some people HAVE to use roads to get to access hacking, are you honestly saying that if you had to take a horse on the road then give up riding completely? 

While you are at it, make it compulsory for everyone to HAVE to wear a properly fixed crash helmet conforming to current regulations - that will take even more off the road - probably over 50% of most  riders out with hunts in the home counties at least!

Then, make all cyclists HAVE to wear hi-viz and properly fitted helmets.

And of course make ALL road users of any age; make them have to take out a 3rd party liability insurance- cyclists, horse riders......

How on earth would you get your dream policed? 

I'm all for safely, but have never read quite such a bigoted diatribe on here in a long time


----------



## Judgemental (7 November 2012)

The Fuzzy Furry said:



			Some people HAVE to use roads to get to access hacking, are you honestly saying that if you had to take a horse on the road then give up riding completely? * Probably the best option, far too many folk using the roads in any event
*
While you are at it, make it compulsory for everyone to HAVE to wear a properly fixed crash helmet conforming to current regulations - that will take even more off the road - probably over 50% of most  riders out with hunts in the home counties at least! *Yes excellent idea*

Then, make all cyclists HAVE to wear hi-viz and properly fitted helmets. *Naturally of course we won the Tour De France too*

And of course make ALL road users of any age; make them have to take out a 3rd party liability insurance- cyclists, horse riders...... *Exactly I am with you on that point 100%*

How on earth would you get your dream policed? *If there were less horses using the roads there would be less of a problem*

I'm all for safely, but have never read quite such a bigoted diatribe on here in a long time 

Click to expand...

* You aint seen nothing yet.* *Perhaps I should give up and join the league
*


----------



## Countryman (7 November 2012)

Horses were around long before cars....Perhaps casualty rates would go down if all car drivers had to wear properly fitting crash helmets!


----------



## Starbucks (8 November 2012)

Oh shut the fook up


----------



## muckypony (8 November 2012)

Just putting it out there...

On a dull day rider is wearing no fluorescent and riding on a windy country lane, a careful driver comes round the corner, does not see said horse and bumps in to the back of it, not fast, but enough to fatally damage a leg (which lets be honest isn't hard!)... One dead horse.

Am I missing the point, or is it slightly unfair on the horse that it was killed because the rider was not visible enough? And unfair with the driver to always have that on their conscience?

Just out of curiosity, why don't people wear a fluorescent when riding on the roads?


----------



## Hunters (8 November 2012)

I think that riders who may have travel on roads should have flashing hazard lights on them - Oh and someone walking in front waving a warning flag.  

Maybe a car could following the rider with a flashing orange light?

Seriously people, get real, nothing wrong with wearing tabards etc, but don't go all 'do gooder' dictatorial - don't we have enough rules in our lives already - pah !!


----------



## ester (8 November 2012)

lol well I do own the former


----------



## Chaptertwo (8 November 2012)

Judgemental said:



			What does one have to do to get it through to a large number of people who ride, that they are safer wearing a High-Viz Florescent coat etc?

Frankly I am of the view that it should be an offence not to be wearing easily seen kit on any public road.

For some bizarre reason there are a large number who think tweed jackets and black coats that blend in with their background is sensible!

Most of which is a result of idle arrogance, "oh I can't be bothered to make the effort for the benefit of other road users"

Similarly the horse should suitably tacked-up with High-Viz as part of their 'furniture'.
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree!!


----------



## Goldenstar (8 November 2012)

Judgemental said:



* You aint seen nothing yet.* *Perhaps I should give up and join the league
*

Click to expand...

Oh I assumed you where one of their " deep plants " you know  most hunts have someone who works uncover in hunts making them selves  unpopular and making hanging around with hunting people just a little unpleasant.


----------



## Pink_Lady (8 November 2012)

I absolutely agree .... the wearing of hi-viz on public roads should be made compulsory - I wouldn't hack from the yard without it.

I know a few people who don't wear it - with the attitude that it will never happen to me ....


----------



## RunToEarth (8 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Quite,  and I agree with you.  H-viz or not,  there are accidents involving horses on a regular basis.  I'll tell you what,  I've had a brilliant idea;  Let's ban all horses from the public highway.  That should sort the problem,  and rest assured,  following on from a new set of regs,  which may or may not solve the problem,  the eventual step will be taken whereby no horses are allowed on the public highway,  at all.  Would you be happy with that?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I think for anyone who genuinely want to be safe on the road, not riding horses on there is the only option to safeguard all parties. Roads are dangerous, with or without hi viz.


----------



## ester (8 November 2012)

clearly and we all take risks on a regular basis. We don't always have to reduce them to zero, life would be very boring and for myself I would rather take the risk and be able to own a horse as I would be otherwise a much less happy person. But if its possible to reduce them a bit, simply, why not?


----------



## applecart14 (8 November 2012)

People are very silly for not wearing a flourescent. I have lost count the number of times I've slowed down and shouted through my window at drivers who I have only at the very last minute struggled to see them against bright sunlight whilst riding under a tree on a dark horse wearing dark clothes. I've had every excuse under the sun from "oh I lost my hi viz coat" to "I was schooling and couldn't be bothered to get off and get it" to "I'm only going up the road for five minutes".  The most stupid excuse is "My horse looks stupid with it on".  I have replied to the last one, that your horse would look a lot stupider lying hanging from a meat hook at the abbatoir but they still don't get my drift!It drives me totally potty.  I tell people that it gives a driver an extra 3 seconds of thinking and braking time, with one second of braking time equating to 45 feet which is roughly more than 3/4 of the length of a short dressage dressage arena.


----------



## Judgemental (8 November 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			Oh I assumed you where one of their " deep plants " you know  most hunts have someone who works uncover in hunts making them selves  unpopular and making hanging around with hunting people just a little unpleasant.
		
Click to expand...

*
Deep plant a sort of agent provocateur then?* *Therefore now I shall have to write in green ink. If you don't know or understand the significance, I suggest you read Spy Catcher.*


----------



## Goldenstar (8 November 2012)

Judgemental said:



*
Deep plant a sort of agent provocateur then?* *Therefore now I shall have to write in green ink. If you don't know or understand the significance, I suggest you read Spy Catcher.*

Click to expand...

Ok will get onto that when I 've mucked out the house should not take more than three weeks.


----------



## GinaGeo (8 November 2012)

I wear Hi-Vis on the road and I will also be taking Hi-Vis out Hunting in my pockets with me now it's getting dark early enough and the probability of me being on the road at dusk in the event of an accident is increased.  And on that front I do totally aree with the OP. 

However, to suggest that horse's should be banned from our highways full stop would be horrendous for most of us - perhaps not to a lucky few though that have full access to off road hacking and I can only presume it must be such people suggesting it.  

We have some bridlepaths here, but I have to go on roads to get to them - simple as that. I do my best to minimise risks, I wear Hi-Viz, I ride only in good visibility, I avoid peak times, I avoid busy roads, I thank all drivers and am polite and courteous at all times.  But if I was totally trying to prevent risk I wouldn't have got on in the first place, in fact I wouldn't own a horse and I certainly wouldn't be trying to keep it fit for hunting...  In fact I may as well not get out of bed to drive to work in the morning as there might be a risk increase...

I can tell you I'd love to have access to hundreds/thousands of acres of Off Road hacking, and if I did there's no way I'd be on the roads - fact is I don't and nor do the majority of horse riders...


----------



## Judgemental (9 November 2012)

Well that certainly awoke a few old hands on this forum.


----------



## benson21 (9 November 2012)

Sidney said:



			'florencent' in the title...

Sadly I think our Masters would take a dim view of the mounted field following hounds covered in high viz,
		
Click to expand...

and i am sure there are people who would have a 'dim view' when a member of the mounted field is hit by a car, becasue they couldnt be seen!!!!  FGS, what is more important!!!


----------



## fatpiggy (9 November 2012)

benson21 said:



			and i am sure there are people who would have a 'dim view' when a member of the mounted field is hit by a car, becasue they couldnt be seen!!!!  FGS, what is more important!!!
		
Click to expand...

I narrowly avoided hitting a hunt member late one autumn afternoon when driving down some lanes. He was on a bay horse, dressed in ratcatcher and standing in the middle of the road at the time. The only part I saw was the horse's white blaze. Luckily I'm a very careful driver and I was tootling along steadily and watchfully. I was able to stop safely but the rider gave me the dirtiest of looks so I told him he should stick a lightweight fluoro tabard down his boot next time because he might not be so lucky in future.  I got the finger.


----------



## ILuvCowparsely (9 November 2012)

The  law will never enforce Hi viz on horses / cyclist etc.

 Everyone has their own views on this subject.  Right wrong its personal choice.


 MY view is : be seen be safe - a motto that has been around for years.  I have loads of hi viz when I hack out, always will.  It gives the motorist that much more warning that there is a potential hazard.

 Some feel embarest to wear it, feel its unfashionable or stupid looking or whats the point etc etc.

 A yard next to me don't wear much  if any,  We live on a sharp bend where cars go too fast (lost my kitty in Aug this year and another few years back).  Tabards are not always enough.

 Last week two riders walking towards me one with rug and tabard one just tabard. The tabard was not visible due to horses head, but the horse with a rug I saw (I was on horseback).  So a driver lower down might not have seen the horse on the left.

  I know Hi Viz wont save you all the time but it gives drivers that extra time to slow down. Its a warning which is why police lollypop ladies etc use it. 

  I love my horses to death and  Would not send my horses out on the road without protection. 

 Its a sad subject because most of the deaths are the horses. I cannot understand why some riders put fashion before their horses safety.

  The roads today are worst than when I was younger, people drive round these lanes like they are on motorways.

*So when you next  ride on the roads without Hi Viz thinking oh it wont happen to me or Hi Viz looks stupid.  Think of the riders who in the past thought that and now they have lost  their child or horse - wife or husband due to a car not seeing them.  *

 You protect your horse in transit against knocks scrapes bumps but you won't protect him out on the roads!!! does not make sense to me


----------



## Aleka81 (9 November 2012)

Dunlin said:



			Living in rural Dorset I often come across 2 hunts in my area. I have never seen any hunt members sporting high vis. Some of the lanes I have found them on are tree covered and almost dark when it's daylight and the majority are single track or very narrow. I have headlights to turn on, a horse doesn't so I think high vis is essential if you will encounter roads at any point. 

A small tabard folds up to the size of a mobile phone so hardly cumbersome to carry around. If the rider doesn't want to wear one then at least stick on a fluro tail bandage and breaststrap as something is better than nothing.

I know hunt members like to look smart and keep dress traditional but the roads are dangerous these days, lord knows as a motorcyclist I have often found myself being forced off the road by tractors down here and I do wear a high vis. The way I see it is if you are involved in an accident why give someone else the chance to say "I didn't see them". It's one of the most common causes/excuses given for accidents so don't give them a chance to use it against you.

As for riding 2 abreast I don't have a problem with it, I was stuck behind a rider leading a second pony the other day for over 20 minutes until she found a path to pull into. I'd sooner be 20 minutes late than send someone to hospital or an early grave.

Out of interest, is it legal to wear hats on the road with no harness/strap?
		
Click to expand...

Yes it is legal to ride without a hat full stop when over 14! I rarely ride in anything apart from my Patey unless it is tipping it down at which point my HS1 is donned to save the velvet on my Patey....


----------



## Suelin (9 November 2012)

This is going to kill the fashion industry then.  According to this thread the entire population will have to wear High Viz at all times!!!!


----------



## Shysmum (9 November 2012)

Have to admit that driving home from the yard in the evening, many a time I've been shocked to suddenly see a dark horse, with a rider in black, just back from the hunting. Not clever really. But it isn't "the done thing" to wear hi viz and be seen, is it.


----------



## Judgemental (9 November 2012)

Suelin said:



			According to this thread the entire population will have to wear High Viz at all times!!!!
		
Click to expand...

When on a horse on a public road -yes. Why should that not be the case?

Far far too many people are simply absurdly self conscious about what they are wearing when mounted


----------



## Suelin (10 November 2012)

The view I have is this.  If I walk my dog or grandchild down the road, the traffic has no problem with seeing me, they pull over and give me room on the side of the road.  Half an hour later I might get on my white Arab who weighs about half a tonne and I am expected to believe that I am rendered invisible.  Now why is that?

My husband pointed out that if lady riders decided to ride topless then every car in and van in creation would slow down to have a good look..  I'm not suggesting we do that but it certainly is worth thinking about.  (I suppose there may be a market for high vis nipple caps!!)

I have no problem with it being a fashion statement or not I just question why horse riders are expected to and vilified if they don't.

We had a problem with low flying helicopters (military) over our yard and land.  We were advised to wear High Vis....IN THE YARD!!  We'll be required to wear it to bed next!!!  Where does all this stop?


----------



## Judgemental (10 November 2012)

Suelin said:



			.  We were advised to wear High Vis....IN THE YARD!!  We'll be required to wear it to bed next!!!  Where does all this stop?
		
Click to expand...

Yes yes oh wow, now you are talking

With luminescent stripes perhaps?


----------



## Kaylum (10 November 2012)

Why on earth wouldn't you wear hi viz? Surely it's common sense and basic riding and road safety knowledge. Or is it a case of I don't care if I get hit by a car and cause an accident and kill my horse.  Bored with the excuses can't wait until its law and with the latest cycling accidents that's what they are pressing for.


----------



## benson21 (10 November 2012)

There are lots of valid reasons to wear hi vis, ie,e safety, be seen on the road, be seen by air ambulance if needed etc etc.  but what are the valis reasons not to wear hi vis.  I dont really call being fashion concious a valid reason, so what is?


----------



## Alec Swan (10 November 2012)

benson21 said:



			There are lots of valid reasons to wear hi vis, ie,e safety, be seen on the road, be seen by air ambulance if needed etc etc.  but what are the valis reasons not to wear hi vis.  I dont really call being fashion concious a valid reason, so what is?
		
Click to expand...

Freedom of choice?

Alec.


----------



## Carefreegirl (10 November 2012)

Well here I am reading a hi viz thread in the Hunting forum and notice Alec's little ditty about Queen and fat bottomed girls.

Alec, I salute you


----------



## cob&onion (10 November 2012)

I always wear hi-viz when hacking - it pisses me off when i see others riding without it, especially through wooded/shaded roads (alot round here) in the winter when its getting dark on dark horses in dark clothing.  WHY?? takes seconds to put on a hi viz tabard


----------



## Kaylum (10 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Freedom of choice?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Watched a program a few months ago about a cyclist that was killed on the road, he had no hi viz on and the police arrested the car driver.  They then investigated what had happend, the driver could in no way have seen the cyclist as dusk was falling.  The driver was released without charge.  If the driver had seen the cyclist he would most probably have even alive today. A very harsh lesson learnt for both parties. The poor driver I feel sorry for. 

No excuse at all, everyone should do their best to protect those around us who we share roads with and do the best to protect ourselves and our animals. No wonder horse riders on the road have such a bad reputation.


----------



## EAST KENT (10 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Re: It should be illegal to ride on a public road without wearing High-Viz Florencent

I'm sorry JM,  but that's nonsense.  We are already burdened by more than enough bureaucratic old bollox,  some originating from our clown like Continental cousins,  some from our own Government who employ others to tighten the control which they have over us,  and I strongly suspect some to originate from those with nothing better to do than dream up yet more stringent and restrictive rules and regulations.

It's my life and I will live it as I see fit.  If I still rode,  I'd also still chase a fox or two,  armed with a Hoss,  and a dawg or two. 

I agree with you,  that Hi-viz is an excellent idea,  at all times of the day,  but to burden us with further rules and conditions,  by which we live our lives,  isn't on.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Thank God someone said it! Let us lead our lives with less not more flaming rules.


----------



## Alec Swan (10 November 2012)

Kaylum said:



			.......

....... The poor driver I feel sorry for. 

.......
		
Click to expand...

As would we all.  The ill prepared person who dies,  is rarely the victim,  they're off to heaven.  The victim is all so often the _innocent_ person who sits with the dying,  as they pass on.  

I understand your concerns,  but our freedom to decide for ourselves,  how we depart this life,  and if it's through stupidity and not wearing Hi-viz,  then so be it,  is ours to make,  and it must remain so.  Without choice,  we become as sheep,  or cattle,  in that we have our lives directed by others.

Again,  I accept your point,  but I refuse to die in a way that makes others feel a little more comfortable about my passing,  or themselves.  Sorry. 

Alec.


----------



## Rollin (10 November 2012)

Alec Swan said:



			Quite,  and I agree with you.  H-viz or not,  there are accidents involving horses on a regular basis.  I'll tell you what,  I've had a brilliant idea;  Let's ban all horses from the public highway.  That should sort the problem,  and rest assured,  following on from a new set of regs,  which may or may not solve the problem,  the eventual step will be taken whereby no horses are allowed on the public highway,  at all.  Would you be happy with that?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Just seen your reply.  You are of course right.  Horses get killed so do people let us not bother to do anything about it.  

Before the introduction of seat belt legislation, trauma wards in the UK were full of people with facial injuries caused when they shot through their windscreens.  They of course occupied beds in Ortho. units which could have been used by people waiting for elective surgery.  Hip and knee replacement bring huge improvements in quality of life.

Since smoking was banned in public places, Scotland in particular, has noticed a huge improvement in the health of new born babies.  

Do you feel that seat belt legislation and the smoking ban represent the nanny state?


----------



## Alec Swan (10 November 2012)

Rollin said:



			.......

Since smoking was banned in public places, Scotland in particular, has noticed a huge improvement in the health of new born babies.  *I'm all for giving new born babies the best of starts,  but suggesting that that would be aided by not smoking in public places,  doesn't make much sense.  Explain to me how this works,  or show me the relevant research.  I'd remind you that alcohol,  or the attendant problems,  in Scotland are or is an endemic problem,  as is smoking,  and the bulk of the risk which small children take on,  is in the home.*

Do you feel that seat belt legislation and the smoking ban represent the nanny state?  *Numerically,  car drivers and horse riders cannot be considered as parallels,  so I don't see the comparison as being relevant.*

Click to expand...

Alec.


----------



## irish_only (10 November 2012)

Come on, the answer is so simple. No motorised vehicles on designated routes at specified times to allow all horse riders to exercise their beloved creatures.


----------



## Lizzie66 (11 November 2012)

It might be common sense to where hi-viz and it certainly makes you safer, but people still have freedom of choice. They can and should be allowed to make decisions for themselves and not have them imposed upon them.

Otherwise as someone else said lets make everything hi-viz, we can have cars that should only be allowed in luminescent and fluorescent colours, we should make their engines noisier so we can here them coming, and we should make someone walk in fornt of them with a fluorescent flag whilst wearing a hi-viz vest. We'll all be safer. 

A little less flippantly as far as I was aware it is a car drivers responsibility to ensure they are driving at a speed whereby they can observe potential hazards and stop before hitting them. If visibility is poor then you should slow down, and if you can't see a half-ton horse on the side of the road then hopefully the DVLA will remove your licence for you !


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (11 November 2012)

Lizzie66 said:



			It might be common sense to where hi-viz and it certainly makes you safer, but people still have freedom of choice. They can and should be allowed to make decisions for themselves and not have them imposed upon them.

Otherwise as someone else said lets make everything hi-viz, we can have cars that should only be allowed in luminescent and fluorescent colours, we should make their engines noisier so we can here them coming, and we should make someone walk in fornt of them with a fluorescent flag whilst wearing a hi-viz vest. We'll all be safer. 

A little less flippantly as far as I was aware it is a car drivers responsibility to ensure they are driving at a speed whereby they can observe potential hazards and stop before hitting them. If visibility is poor then you should slow down, and if you can't see a half-ton horse on the side of the road then hopefully the DVLA will remove your licence for you !
		
Click to expand...

this, x 100!!!


----------



## Judgemental (11 November 2012)

Suelin said:



			We'll be required to wear it to bed next!!!  Where does all this stop?
		
Click to expand...

I am surprised that more has not been made of this possibility


----------



## LickettySplit (13 November 2012)

You know what, those car things are bl**dy dangerous....let's ban them and save countless lives. 

As for hi-viz - if you can't see me on a 17hh grey then you need your eyes testing.


----------



## Suelin (14 November 2012)

LickettySplit said:



			You know what, those car things are bl**dy dangerous....let's ban them and save countless lives. 

As for hi-viz - if you can't see me on a 17hh grey then you need your eyes testing.
		
Click to expand...

Liking this comment.  So true.


----------



## PolarSkye (14 November 2012)

Suelin said:



			The view I have is this.  If I walk my dog or grandchild down the road, the traffic has no problem with seeing me, they pull over and give me room on the side of the road.  Half an hour later I might get on my white Arab who weighs about half a tonne and I am expected to believe that I am rendered invisible.  Now why is that?
		
Click to expand...

Well, actually I see this as an overall road-user safety issue rather than a horse and rider safety issue.  

I routinely take a small rat run on my way home through a semi-rural residential and park-like area . . . dogwalkers (fully kitted out in dark SuperDry jackets, Hunter wellies and probably jeans) at dusk are very difficult to see in the gloom and against the backdrop of the trees and shrubs that line both sides of the narrow roads.  If you are going to be using the road as a pedestrian, cyclist or rider in low-light or dodgy visibility conditions then surely you ought to take some responsibility for your own safety by making it easier for drivers to see you?  Any road user not in a car is just that much more vulnerable than someone in a car . . . just seems like common sense to me.

P


----------



## Judgemental (14 November 2012)

Having started this thread, I feel duty bound to add the element of one's legal liability, which remarkably nobody appears to commented upon. Please correct me if I have missed such a point.

However there is the issue of 'fault'. In the event that there was an accident and one is wearing a high viz jacket and preferably high-viz boots on the horse then it can be argued in law, you took all reasonable steps to be seen.

In the alternative, where there is no element of High Visual kit, then your arguments may be diluted as to damages and or liability.

Whilst it is the responsibility of car drivers to drive with due care and attention, similarly the rider can be required to ride with due care and attention.

This could apply where for example, two cars are coming in opposite directions and one does not see the rider until the last moment, because of their lack of luminance. One car swerves into the path of the other car to take avoiding action.

It is all very well to say, well why cant they see me on my 17hh grey hunter. 

The point is, cars are traveling at a much faster speed than the rider and therefore, it is sensible to provide as much warning for the driver in advance, so that they can take evasive action.

In the awful event you were party to an accident, albeit only as a witness and the matter went to court and or worse still the Coroner's Court. You will welcome the fact you were wearing High-Viz and you can say to the court and judge, you took all reasonable steps to be seen. In the alternative you could find yourself at the very least extremely embarrassed when somebody says you could not be properly seen.

Think about the consequences of an accident and your appearance. When off your horse, on the ground, in an urban judicial environment and lawyers swooping down upon you like vultures, you will be happy to be able to have been reasonably seen.


----------



## benson21 (14 November 2012)

I was riding in feb 2010 when we were hit by a car.  me and the other rider were both wearing hi vis,  The Police told us if were we not wearing hi vis, the driver could claim he couldnt see us.  as it was,he couldnt claim that so was found guilty of dangerous driving.


----------



## Jess Hoss (14 November 2012)

It enfuriates me when people don't wear high viz ! Out my way it's hegde lined roads & funny little gulleys. It might not make you feel pretty smothered in bright yellow or whatever, but I do it for the sake of my horse. . . Even a hatband & a tailguard will help & there's just no excuse as far as I'm concerned !


----------



## undertheweather (14 November 2012)

Sign the petition ... 
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/34110


----------



## AengusOg (15 November 2012)

A person must be seventeen years of age to drive a vehicle on the road. It's an offence to drive without due care and attention. It's against the law to drive a vehicle without a full licence, insurance and valid road tax. All persons within a vehicle must wear seat belts or be otherwise suitably restrained. Vehicles are subject to MOT to ensure roadworthiness, and police do roadside checks on tyres, lights, brakes, and such.

Anyone can get on a horse and ride it on the road. It matters not whether the person is competent, or whether the horse is trained to a level sensible for roadwork. They can ride in any tack they like. They do not have to pay road tax or have insurance to ride on the road, nor do they have to pass any tests on knowledge/competency/ability. 

There will come a day when horse users of the roads will have to take full responsibility for their right to ride on the highways. Better that we do it voluntarily than be subject to legislation.


----------



## CrazyMare (15 November 2012)

Have signed and shared the petition on Facebook


----------



## Colby (17 November 2012)

I have to agree... 

But you are talking about hunting which is based on tradition and rituals, the law is something for logical things.

I always try to wear Hi-V when walking on roads and always wear it when riding on the roads.

I also believe that the speed limit of vehicles should be lowered on country roads, I dont see why vehicles should be priority in the countryside personally.

I've lived in a couple of places where there are a few small bridges that are one way with no traffic lights, the amount of people who drive over them fast 'incase someone is coming round the corner' defys the object, crash at a higher speed and survive?

I hate to see people blasting their horns at tractors and getting annoyed trying to overtake, those roads where not created for people to take 'fast' shortcuts or gallivant about at 60mph.

It does have an impact on wildlife.
I like those bridges created in sweden to allow the traffic to move underneath to give wildlife alternative routes and to stop so many being killed or injured, I dont see why wildlife should be killed due to people driving high speeds or not caring.
In my opinion you shouldnt have the privilage of living or being in the countryside if you cannot respect it and just want to use it and drain its resources.

Things have changed alot, I use to be able to walk the dogs and come across 1-3 cars driving around 40-45mph. Drivers are getting more and more rude and dont seem to be aware or worried that they may hit somebody, in the  countryside alot of them drive down the middle of the road because 'nobody else is here' I had one van driver the other day swerve out of the way of me and the dog and we took up around 1.5ft of the space of the road. People think im cocky though and that I should drag the dog onto the small amount of verge left everytime a vehicle goes past, the only time I do this is if im near a sharp corner and they had no chance of seeing me(for my own safety, they should be aware that somebody may be around the corner so not to drive so fast around it) or if the largest type of lorry is thundering along, again for my own safety.  
How is it proper exercise if you have to have 50 rests along a walk?

I know the majority of people disagree with my views as they dont fit in with the world as it is right now, but none the less if I had my way I would reduce the amount of vehicles on the roads by at least 50%


----------



## tankgirl1 (19 November 2012)

I couldn't read to the end of the thread - got to page 7

I thought the times of the 'horsey world' being up its own ar*e had passed - Obviously not as there are a few people on this thread who's opinion beggers belief!

Why the hell would you NOT wear high viz on the roads? It's cheap, doesn't restrict your riding, or the horses way of going, and it may well save lives! 

And it's not only your own personal safety at risk, but that of your horse and other road users.... Oh sorry, it's not cool, or the done thing to wear high viz? Please!

I'd like to see it mandatory for all road users to be visible in poor light - cars, walkers, horses, cyclists... its just an accident waiting to happen if not!

Great introduction to the hunting forum... Bloody hell some of the posters on this thread would put me off it altogether if I didn't realise they were in the minority!


----------



## Goldenstar (19 November 2012)

tankgirl1 said:



			I couldn't read to the end of the thread - got to page 7

I thought the times of the 'horsey world' being up its own ar*e had passed - Obviously not as there are a few people on this thread who's opinion beggers belief!

Why the hell would you NOT wear high viz on the roads? It's cheap, doesn't restrict your riding, or the horses way of going, and it may well save lives! 

And it's not only your own personal safety at risk, but that of your horse and other road users.... Oh sorry, it's not cool, or the done thing to wear high viz? Please!

I'd like to see it mandatory for all road users to be visible in poor light - cars, walkers, horses, cyclists... its just an accident waiting to happen if not!

Great introduction to the hunting forum... Bloody hell some of the posters on this thread would put me off it altogether if I didn't realise they were in the minority!
		
Click to expand...

How angry you are people don't have to hold the same view as you and are allowed to express them, if you get so angry that you feel the need to resort to bad language on your first post I think the hunting forum mightn't be for you .
Personally I think there's far too many laws as there is and it would be all together better if the world was not full of people strutting around making things mandatory .


----------



## marmalade76 (19 November 2012)

Lizzie66 said:



			A little less flippantly as far as I was aware it is a car drivers responsibility to ensure they are driving at a speed whereby they can observe potential hazards and stop before hitting them. If visibility is poor then you should slow down, and if you can't see a half-ton horse on the side of the road then hopefully the DVLA will remove your licence for you !
		
Click to expand...

Agree, any policeman, driving instructor, etc will tell you that if you cannot stop in the distance you can clearly see, you are going too fast. It's every driver's responsibility to not kill people with their cars, be them pedestrians, cyclist or riders. Of course, there are always idiots and no amount of hi viz (always makes me think of the comic, that!) will save you from the likes of them.


----------



## tankgirl1 (19 November 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			How angry you are people don't have to hold the same view as you and are allowed to express them, if you get so angry that you feel the need to resort to bad language on your first post I think the hunting forum mightn't be for you .
Personally I think there's far too many laws as there is and it would be all together better if the world was not full of people strutting around making things mandatory .
		
Click to expand...

This is a forum, you are allowed to express your opinion, I am equally allowed to express my opinion 

'Arse' and 'Bloody' are positively polite terms in the veterinary world 

Don't worry, I won't allow your rude welcome to a newbie put me off either having a bash at hunting, or visiting this forum.

I still personally hold the opinion that high viz should be mandatory for road users.


----------



## Goldenstar (19 November 2012)

tankgirl1 said:



			This is a forum, you are allowed to express your opinion, I am equally allowed to express my opinion 

'Arse' and 'Bloody' are positively polite terms in the veterinary world 

Don't worry, I won't allow your rude welcome to a newbie put me off either having a bash at hunting, or visiting this forum.

I still personally hold the opinion that high viz should be mandatory for road users.
		
Click to expand...

I gave my opinion on an open forum as you did I was not rude to you I expressed my view as I would to any one being new does not give any special privileges in my book .
Why should people agree with you ?
I don't quite follow the coherence of your post but am I to infer you are calling me a Bloody Arse in your irrelevant reference to the veterinary world.
Of course you still hold your opinion why would you not .
But resorting to using language like completely unnecessary .


----------



## tankgirl1 (20 November 2012)

Goldenstar said:



			I gave my opinion on an open forum as you did I was not rude to you I expressed my view as I would to any one being new does not give any special privileges in my book .
Why should people agree with you ?
I don't quite follow the coherence of your post but am I to infer you are calling me a Bloody Arse in your irrelevant reference to the veterinary world.
Of course you still hold your opinion why would you not .
But resorting to using language like completely unnecessary .
		
Click to expand...

I didn't call you a bloody arse lol

I wasn't rude to you either - we were both just voicing opinions on a public forum

Veterinary world is where I grew up - from age 17-now... swearing is rife in stressful life or death moments - rightly or wrongly - it just is!

Don't want to offend anyone - I'm a happy hacker who hopes to hunt next year. I just feel the issue of hi viz is important, and we should all wear the silly yellow stuff to keep us and other road users safe.

End of.


----------



## benson21 (20 November 2012)

marmalade76 said:



			It's every driver's responsibility to not kill people with their cars, be them pedestrians, cyclist or riders.
		
Click to expand...

But surely its also every pedestrians, cyclist or rider (or anyone else for that matter) to help prevent being killed by being as visable as possible?


----------



## Judgemental (20 November 2012)

Since the Hunting Act 2004 anybody riding on a public road, assuming they are connected with hunting (I accept a large number are not) nevertheless, in the eyes of the public there was a general cutting down to size, in the eyes of the non-riding public. 

Clearly that was the intention of the last Labour Government, any illusions or notions about animal welfare are secondary.

However hunting as such, now operates in a somewhat 'twilight' world (oh dear was that a pun in the thread subject) and therefore the whole subject and presentation needs to be seen with a revised overall (oh dear another one) generality.

Consequently if one is on one's horse on a public road wearing high-viz, even if one is following hounds, or not, it is likely your acceptance by society and or other road users will be more welcome.


----------

