Objectors to traffic calming measures at Burley Woodhead have been slammed by councillors who say the scheme is a vital for safety.

The 20-mile an hour speed limit and eleven speed humps along the moor road have been described as "ridiculous" and "overkill" by opponents of the measures.

But now councillors who represent the area have hit back at critics, arguing that many of them shouldn't even be using the road in the first place.

Rombalds member Chris Greaves accused outsiders of rat-running along the road and he stressed that villagers themselves were not opposed to the scheme.

He said: "These measures were not just put in place on a whim. There was a lot of research done. The villagers themselves put their money where their mouth was and got independent highway engineers in to do a survey

"There was a huge amount of consultation, including public meetings, special meetings and neighbourhood forums.

"When it went to committee for final approval, there were only two objections. Only one of them was local and that was an objection to the particular position of the hump, not to the scheme itself."

He added: "The survey found around 6,000 traffic movements a day - of which in excess of 70 per cent were speeding. Some were doing over 70 miles an hour. There was a very definite problem."

"There are 127 on the electoral register. Even if we assume that they have all got a car and maybe a couple of spares they couldn't be responsible for more than 500 traffic movements a day. "

He argued that most of the remaining 5,500 sightings were of people rat-running through.

He stressed: "We have got a perfectly good A65. I am sure that the people in Addingham and Ilkley would be happy to use that instead.

"What annoys me is people in Addingham, who are by-passed, having the nerve to complain because they want to rat-run along a village that doesn't have a by-pass."

Fellow Rombalds councillor Mat Palmer threw his weight behind the scheme as well.

He said: "I wasn't involved in the decision because I have only recently been elected. Nevertheless I do believe it is very very important to have a road calming scheme in that location.

"You have narrow, windy roads. And because the roads are narrow the view is negligible. There are corners there where, if you are going at 20 miles an hour, you are going too fast."

He stressed the need for speed restrictions, pointing out that the road was also used by pedestrians, horses and cyclists. And he rebutted the suggestion that the wealth of the residents had anything to do with the decision.

"As far as I am concerned I don't care if you are a multi-millionaire or living on benefits - if a road is dangerous, it is dangerous.

"It is not overkill or over-engineering. I would find it hard to think of an area where it would be more appropriate to have speed restrictions."