Access debate

The UK's estate of non-operational viaducts and tunnels is a source of fascination for many people. Researching their history and photographing them is a legitimate pastime. Of course, as a result of liability issues and the dreaded health 'n' safety, society no longer enjoys the same freedoms that it did a generation ago; those seeking to explore disused structures can find themselves coming into conflict with authority.

It is beyond question that entering a tunnel or crossing a viaduct have inherent risks (unless they've been prepared for public use) but the same is true of walking to the shops! Should those with an engineering interest be at liberty to explore any disused structure 'on their own head', particularly those maintained at the public's expense? Or is the threat of injury such that they should all be sealed to save adventurers from themselves? Do owners really have no choice in today's litigious climate?

We asked for your views on this subject and, below, you'll find some of the comments we've received so far.

Comment received from The Navigators on 7th February 2011:

Work with the access code to set up some guidelines and recommended equipment (like torches, hard hats, vests). Then, during inspections, determine if the tunnel is safe to enter (no toxic gases, extreme risk of collapse, reasonable ground conditions).

If a tunnel is safe, remove the 'keep out' signs and replace with a warning sign that  says "You are responsible for your own actions." Then advise of any need for equipment (hard hats, torches etc) or hazards (lose bricks or railings, uneven ground).

But the biggest thing in my view is "You are responsible for your own actions." That's my view every time I see a lawsuit against a railway due to injury when trespassing.

Comment received from LM on 16th January 2010:

I understand why British Railways Board has a blanket 'keep them out' policy but that, in itself, creates a problem for them. Because the policy is not risk-based and is obviously disproportionate in many situations, those people with a legitimate interest in tunnels will go in using 'unauthorised' methods. BRB needs to learn the meaning of 'pragmatism' and allow people to explore some of its tunnels on an occasional basis under supervision.

Comment received from Smithsonian on 5th January 2010:

Most people have a healthy interest in our Victorian industrial heritage especially railway infrastructure. The problem is that even a view of these structures is often denied for the sake of a small amount of work. Many viaducts need little more than the removal of a few trees to make the structures presentable to the general public. 

Roman walls, castles, cathedrals and most of our canals are treasured and so should our railway engineering masterpieces. So don't hide them away; make them accessible for all, then there would be no need for trespass.

Comment received from MEB on 4th January 2010:

Purely from an explorers point of view, I believe (and I'm nudging 40 now!!) that if the tunnel is safe to both get to & walk thru, then it should be open to all, either legally or otherwise, such as Tidenham was until only recently. The longer ones (Woodhead, Rhondda &c) should be sealed but opened annually for guided tours if safe, such as Combe Down was. Personally, most portals that get sealed are broken open again anyway (Lydbrook, Moseley Green, Abernant, Cefn Glas, &c), so it seems pointless, & dedicated explorers will get in somehow anyway, but if all tunnels were as freely open as say Purton (Severn Bridge), then it would be a great world!!!

Back to the top