Just emailed in my objection:
Dear Mr Rhodes
I am writing to register an objection to the permanent adoption of the experimental TRO for Chapel Gate on the basis that it is an amenity for all users and as a regular visitor to the Peak District and a 4x4 driver and trail motorcyclist, as well as being mountain biker and walker by restricting access to vehicles you will be imposing a serious loss amenity on me and others who share my chosen mode of recreation.
As a result of a leg injury I am currently unable to walk or cycle far, so currently rely on my 4x4 and my motorcycle to enjoy the countryside and The Peak District is the closest National Park to my home where I can enjoy these rights. Over the years I have visited Chapel Gate on several occasions, always as part of a larger tour of the area. To close this lane to me would significantly affect my enjoyment of the area not just take away my right to ride a Public Right of way, forming as it does a crucial part of the local vehicular rights of way network.
I am always careful to avoid damage to the lane, as I am to any other, following the respective codes of conduct of the Green Lane Association and the Trail Riders Fellowship as appropriate. Indeed I am particularly careful to avoid vehicular rights of way in excessively wet weather and would never contemplate driving/riding off the proscribed route. I consider myself a responsible user of vehicular rights of way as indeed you might expect as I am a member of the Local Access Forum here in Hertfordshire.
However I understand that Chapel Gate has been repaired and Derbyshire County Council have confirmed that "the repairs carried out were to byway standard and the surface is now suitable for use trail bikes and land rover type 4x4s" so can see no reason why this should not help to maintain the route in good condition with appropriate management and that to my mind does not include the imposition of a TRO, which is inappropriate. There are a range of measures available to the Authority, a blanket TRO being the most draconian and so should only be considered as a last resort.
As mentioned, over the years I have been a regular visitor to the Peak District and like to think that I contribute to the economy of the region. This I feel is true of many vehicle borne visitors in their purchases fuel, food and accommodation. Measures to restrict this type of visitor can only serve to impact on the local area, to a higher degree I would assume than the perceived impact of recreational motoring on intangibles such as tranquillity, ironically that being one of he reasons I enjoy driving/riding in the countryside in the first place.
Whilst I appreciate you are bound by legislation, the six month cap on objections is particularly cynical when the experimental TRO has been imposed for eighteen months, a period of six months would have been far more appropriate.