Catherine Chapman is a Managing Director of ADL Traffic and Highways Engineering Ltd and has been a transport planning consultant for over 20 years. She is a twice published academic researcher. Alongside Charles Musselwhite, she co-authored the first academic journal paper examining the vulnerabilities of horse riders on roads in 2011 which was followed by Equine Road Safety a Literature Review and Where Next in 2025. Her work has helped shape understanding of equestrian road safety, active travel inclusion, and driver behaviour. This course translates her latest research into practical guidance for professionals responsible for designing and managing transport systems.

CIHT Learn eLearning Course

Horse Riders as Road Users is a one-hour online professional development course designed for those working in the highways and transport sector to create safer and more inclusive transport systems

In your experience, where do equestrian users sit within the hierarchy of transport planning priorities?

Unfortunately, equestrians as road users sit very low in terms of transport research and planning priorities. I would go as far as to say they have been completely neglected. This is in stark contrast to their position in terms of vulnerability in the Highway Code where they are equivalent to cyclists.

I think there is little appreciation of both the volume of horse riders in the UK and the benefits of horse riding.  There are estimated 1.5 million horse riders using the road network 3-5 times per week. For context there is the same level of regular motorcyclists (1.5 million) (National Motorcyclists Council 2024). Horse riders therefore account for around 16% of the total UK ‘vulnerable road user’ population. The equestrian industry has been valued by BETA at £5 billion and the British Equestrians 2024 report on the social value of equestrianism found it to contribute to social value in terms of: physical and mental health, subjective well-being, individual development and social and community development. The report concluded that there is evidence that there is unique social value in equestrianism which is not found in other activities.

Equine road safety research is minimal, between 2011 to 2024 there were just 14 academic papers published on horse riders as road users. In comparison, a similar study on 10 years of cycle safety research (2012-2021) reviewed 1066 documents.

There is very little inclusion of horse riders in transport planning policy and design guidance. CD143-Designing for walking, cycling and horse-riding (March 2021) and GG 142 Walking, Cycling and Horse Riding Assessment and Review (WCHAR) (November 2019) both formally apply to the trunk road network. However, the vast majority of horse riders are simply not using the trunk road network to hack out. Manual for Streets (2007) and Manual for Streets 2 (2010) which are the principle design guides for the non-trunk road include negligible reference or advice on designing for the inclusion of horse riders. I welcome that the recent Government Road Safety Strategy is more inclusive in terms of acknowledging horse riders, but the question has to be asked as to how this strategy will be turned into practicable advice for a road user we understand so little about?

British Horse Society have been instrumental with their Dead Slow Campaign, they successfully lobbied the government for the 2022 changes to the Highway Code to be more inclusive of horse riders, support academic research and were partners in creating this CPD workshop. However, the transport industry should not be reliant on charities and volunteers, there should be funding allocated for policy development and equestrian highway safety research.

To what extent do current active travel policies adequately reflect the needs of horse riders?

There has been a significant increase in the development of Active Travel Plans and design guidance since 2020 including the Government Cycle infrastructure design guide LTN/120 (2020) and the development of Local Transport Plans and Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans. Whilst it is entirely right to promote and develop active travel for pedestrians and cyclists there is concern that these plans both exclude and are potentially to the detriment of the safety of horse riders.

The BHS critic of LTN/120 (May 2025) concludes that the measures being put in place to improve the safety of cyclists and walkers are compromising the safety and ability of equestrians to access the off-road network. The BHS (2025) have advised that a more holistic and inclusive approach to active travel is required which considers demand for horse riders to use proposed active travel schemes. Multi-user paths should be the first principle of design, particularly in rural and semi-urban areas. Gates and barriers should be the ‘least restrictive option’. There is also a case for reviewing the funding formula for these schemes in terms of delivering benefits over a wider area. Continuous traffic free routes, even if delivered to a lower standard are preferable to shorter or fractured routes. Quiet Lanes are likely to be the most cost effective and practical solution to achieving this but development within the boundaries of existing highways in parallel to but with a degree of separation from traffic (such as a fence or hedge) could also be considered.

LTN1/20 para 5.6.1 states that Cycle traffic should preferably be separated from pedestrian and equestrian traffic to avoid conflict and allow cyclists to travel at a comfortable speed.” The issue identified is that this prioritizes cyclists over horse riders and pedestrians and suggests that shared use is unacceptable. However, this approach is contrary to the Memorandum of Understanding (2024) between the BHS and Sustrans which commits to a vision of a UK-wide network of traffic free shared paths for pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders.

In recent years transport planners have sought to reallocate carriageway space for the widening of footways and cycleways. I support this approach; however there has been no consideration that horse riders require a minimum 5.5m carriageway width to enable a vehicle to pass with a 2.0m gap, whereas a cyclist can still be adequately passed on a 4.6m carriageway.

My view is that horse riding has been excluded/marginalized from Active Travel policy because it is predominantly a leisure activity, but of an estimated 6.6 million regular cyclists in the UK, 4.4 million (60%) are leisure cyclists. The use of the highway for leisure should not mean that the safety of those users should be less important or facilitating their access less beneficial. As above horse riding has significant economic, health and social benefit

What are the real-world consequences when equestrian users are not properly accounted for in transport design and policy?

Firstly, there are very real road safety implications. In the last 10 years (2016-2025) there have been 19,528 road incidents involving horses, 8 people were killed and 999 were injured. Incidents are important because equestrians experience far more near misses than they do actual collisions.. Avoiding vehicle impact with a horse is not enough to avoid a rider injury, we need to recognize that they are particularly susceptible to injury from fast/close passing and road rage. There have also been on average 56 horses which have been killed a year on the roads, roughly 1 per week. The fatality of horses in traffic accidents is important not just from an animal welfare perspective. A horse death caused by road accident is almost 12 times as likely to result a severe to fatal injury to the rider/handler.

There are approximately 42,100km of bridleway and byways in the UK (17) which represents less than 22% of the total Public Right of Way (PROW) network. Even when there is a good network of off-road routes in the area horse riders use for hacking, road use if often required to travel to and/or between them Around half of horse riders (53.1%) reported that they had access to very few or few off road routes and 59% considered those off-road routes to be very poorly or poorly connected. Hacking is a localized activity. Typically, most riders only hack 2-5 miles Factors associated with increased road use by horse riders include; proximity to off road routes, poor levels of connectivity to off road routes and age with younger riders more likely to use roads than older

From an economic perspective there are potentially 3 million former horse riders who would like to return to the sport and the vast majority of them would likely want to hack out. Road safety is a potential barrier to that latent demand being realized.

My own personal experience is that I have experienced near misses on my horse due to poor driver behavior, there are local bridleways I cannot access because the roads to get to them are too dangerous.  

Why should this topic be included in mainstream CPD rather than treated as a niche specialism?

We need to stop treating horse riders as a niche specialism and treat them for what they are which is a vulnerable road user. From an inclusivity perspective should be approaching road safety of vulnerable road users wholistically in terms of pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and motorcyclists. It is as important that transport professionals understand horse riders as they do cyclists or pedestrians.

Why do professionals often have misconceptions about horse riders as road users?

I think the misconceptions stem from a lack of knowledge and training. Given there is so little guidance and until now no professional training, it is not surprising that transport planners will fill the gap with their own personal experiences and perceptions of horses.  We know the majority of driver misperceive the amount of control that horse riders have over their horses so many transport planners may not realise how vulnerable horse riders are.  

Guidance such as LTN120 prioritises needs of cyclists and has led to the perception that mixed use paths are not desirable or appropriate, but we already have a network of shared use paths, they are called bridleways. The concept of shared use paths by pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders is therefore established, we just need a wider application.  

There is also a potential influence of gender bias in transport planning. Compared to other road users the vast majority of horse riders are women (80%). Transport professionals based on CIHT membership are predominantly male (86%) (CIHT 2022) which is similar to levels of male cyclists and motorcyclists. Statistically transport professionals are far more likely to be cyclists or motorcyclists with experience and understanding of those modes than they are horse riders. Perhaps consciously or unconsciously as an industry this has resulted in a bias in research interests and design.

How does this course help shift thinking in transport planning?

Horses are our oldest mode of transport, yet it has taken until 2026 to develop any formal training on them as a road user. As transport planners we like to think we are inclusive and we prioritise safety. However, it is impossible to achieve that for a road user when we know so little about them. If transport planners even start thinking about horse riders then is a huge positive step forwards!

The course will help transport planners understand the unique vulnerability of horse riders and the factors which effect horse rider safety. I hope it encourages transport planners to think outside the box. Initiatives which would benefit horse riders do not necessarily need to be expensive or high specification. Changing shared footway/cycleways to multi user paths could be achieved with signage. We could make better use of verges and highway boundaries to create paths for horse riders. Off road networks which are connected even if provided to a lower standard are more beneficial that high quality but fragmented paths.

What kind of skills are critical now for integrating the needs of horse riders into active travel and transport networks to succeed?

I’m not sure it is a skill but I think an open mindedness is what will be essential. Also for transport planners to recognise the need to engage with stakeholders such as British Horse Society or local equestrian groups to fill the knowledge gaps they don’t have, both at a national and local level.

What do you hope this course triggers in terms of future research or professional attention?

I think it should be viewed as an exciting opportunity particularly for researchers. There are so many gaps in the research which could be filled. For example, we know nothing about younger horse riders except that they are the cohort which ride the longest distances on the road and are potentially the most at risk. We know nothing about carriage drivers experiences of using the road. We know nothing about horses themselves and their perceptions/experiences of the road environment.

For transport planners I hope it triggers a consideration of a different framing of active travel as not just a substitute for commuting but facilitating modes which generate health and social benefits, and that includes horse riders. Ultimately increasing access to the PROW network and safer roads benefits everyone.

Horse Riders as Road Users eLearning course

Horse Riders as Road Users is a one-hour online professional development course designed for those working in the highways and transport sector to create safer and more inclusive transport systems

CIHT Statement

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the CIHT or its members. Neither the CIHT nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.