[Closed] Bogtrotters ride the Ben on a bank holiday!

philfive - Member
... at least we have laws saying you can't ride that and if you do you can be prosecuted. plain, simple and easy.

Wrong. In E and W we have signs claiming you can be prosecuted, but there are no laws to support prosecution (except some very specific by-laws).

SFB/Bogtrotters are in the militant wing of cheeky riders. Disregarding legal niceties, I'm never convinced that such militancy makes a positive impression of cyclists on the non-cycling public.

"[i]I'm inclined to think that, having made a mistake of going up there when it was so unexpectedly (to them) busy, they would have been MORE disruptive if they had been pushing their bikes down as rider + bike are twice as wide![/i]"

I'm inclined to think that, having made a mistake of going up there when it was so unexpectedly (to them, because they clearly didn't even attempt to think that one through) busy, they might have trickled down in a rather more deferential manner and then realised that they'd made a significant error of judgement and decided not to edit up a video of them barging past people and post it on the internet for all to see.

But I guess I'm a hopeless optimist.

(Oh, in reference to the earlier "get a bloody grip" comment re the driving analogy: it's an analogy, not an equation of the two. The point of the analogy was simply to show that various defences of the riding on the video become demonstrably fallacious when tested against an activity which also places others at risk but which happens to be considered universally unacceptable. The underlying point being that the actual risk is not directly altered by whether the driver/rider in question perceives themselves as so skilful that rules shouldn't apply or whether they feel something is safe because they've got away with it so far.)

"[i]can I be the first to congratulate you on raising the bar on genius, satirical, comedy statements. That's without a doubt. the best I've ever read[/i]"

It's got more holes than Swiss cheese. Read more 🙂

SFB/Bogtrotters are in the militant wing of cheeky riders.

think of it rather as civil disobedience - we're always disarmingly polite and friendly, except perhaps when riding away quickly from aggressive farmers 🙂

Wrong. In E and W we have signs claiming you can be prosecuted, but there are no laws to support prosecution (except some very specific by-laws).

correct, barring a right of way you are liable to the landowner for any damage you cause in passage, but this is a civil tort for which he/she would have to take you to court at his/her own expense (a win only for the lawyers). Even where there ARE bylaws, the enforcement is notably lax, eg: http://www.bogtrotters.org/downloads/stanage.html

It's got more holes than Swiss cheese

why thankyou Bez old lad :o) Whatever anyone else may think, this is pure comedy to me!

as for the posting of the video I think they've done everyone a service by demonstrating that it would be better to do it at a quieter time, or not at all as it looked crap to me 🙂

my post vanished! The end-of-page bug has hit me 3 times on this topic so far...

It's not a bug Simon

😉

LOL

must go to bed
[IMG] [/IMG]

It's not a bug Simon

you mean it's intentional ? Oh no, I know, it's a [b]feature[/b] :o)

must go to bed

is that Sherlock or Van Gogh ??

looks a little like you actually 😆

looks a little like you actually

except my hair is straight and greying and shorter and my nose is much bigger and I never sleep on my front ?

obviously 🙄

what a bunch of ****ers

The path is so busy... as you would expect.... given the holiday and the location.

A first light descent would have been much more appropriate.

Plenty other, better hills, with better descents and less walkers.

Makes you wonder why you would choose this hill.

It wouldn't be my choice.

I'm just glad they didn't have a dog off the lead with them!
In all seriousness though, imbeciles, please f*** off and make us all look like kints to the general public somewhere else.

petesal - Member

The path is so busy... as you would expect.... given the holiday and the location.

A first light descent would have been much more appropriate.

Plenty other, better hills, with better descents and less walkers.

Makes you wonder why you would choose this hill.

Precisely for those reasons I would imagine.
A reputation as a first class asshat takes time and effort to cultivate.

All a bit pathetically 'look at me, I'm a rebel', I'm afraid.

Welcome back sfb. 😀

About time we had someone challenging rules/perceptions etc!

Edit: on a serious note, cycling is not 'banned' from Ben Nevis so surely they are not breaking the law?

It must have taken an awful long time and a lot of effort to get those bikes up there but don't think this was emphasised in the vid.

Why should the trail be exclusively for walkers?

wow - way to resurrect it

no ones saying its illigal

no ones saying its banned

we are saying it was irresponsible to pick the middle of one of the busiest days of the year to tear down it.

300 posts here we come smee !

cinnamon_girl - Member
Edit: on a serious note, cycling is not 'banned' from Ben Nevis so surely they are not breaking the law?

It must have taken an awful long time and a lot of effort to get those bikes up there but don't think this was emphasised in the vid.

Why should the trail be exclusively for walkers?

but that doesn't reflect my attitude to fellow trail users, to whom I'm unfailingly polite, and I often take time as I bimble along cautiously at the back of the pack to check with the walkers I meet that they haven't been inconvenienced by the other riders.

Probably not need to if you did not ride footpaths in such large numbers

Even if the law were to be changed (itself unlikely) Scotland is huge and largely empty (people were driven out by the English). Mostly there's no one to stop you going where you want, same as in England and Wales (and Ireland from the bit I rode, the Wicklow Way)

Good point I had not thought of ignoring the law…bit like drink driving in rural areas…I mean it's only bad if you get caught then

Please stay I have missed you and some very funny posts in there...go on mention rainbow bridge wher epets go to die 😉

As I said in an earlier post, I've walked up and down Ben Nevis as part of a group of friends doing 24 hour 3 peaks challenge. I was shocked at the number of charity walkers, some of whom clearly were struggling big time.

Frankly, I got fed up with having to dodge them!

Never mind it's for charity, mountain rescue will help us when we can't walk any further [s]cos we haven't done any bloomin' training[/s]

So ... I ask ... should one take a personal responsibility test before being allowed anywhere near a mountain?

[i]So ... I ask ... should one take a personal responsibility test before being allowed anywhere near a mountain? [/i]

no. HTH.

"[i]It must have taken an awful long time and a lot of effort to get those bikes up there but don't think this was emphasised in the vid.[/i]"

I'm lost on this one. Are you saying that because they've put a bit of effort into behaving like dicks they've earned the right to behave like dicks?

CG

the law basically says you can ride anywhere so long as you are not a dick. These guys were dicks.

"[i]So ... I ask ... should one take a personal responsibility test before being allowed anywhere near a mountain? [/i]"

Clearly not. But it seems quite reasonable one should apply consideration and common sense before taking themselves up a mountain and whilst on it, and reflect on the earlier decisions once down - ideally in a context wider than just one's own viewpoint.

But then you can replace "taking themselves up a mountain" with absolutely any activity and that still applies. The absence of the above process is pretty much the essence of being a dick.

we are saying it was irresponsible to pick the middle of one of the busiest days of the year to tear down it.

It was 6am start up and 9.30am start down. Not really middle of the day.

The path is so busy... as you would expect.... given the holiday and the location.

Like walkers, mountain bikers are often restricted to holidays to drive 6 hours for the weekend. Should mountain bikers be restricted to only riding on weekdays?

A first light descent would have been much more appropriate.

Was a first light ascent. Is it responsible to lead a group of mountain bikers up a proper mountain in the dark?

...and reflect on the earlier decisions once down

Because they have not come out to your forum to reflect, does that mean they did not reflect or regret earlier decisions?

"[i]Because they have not come out to your forum to reflect, does that mean they did not reflect or regret earlier decisions?[/i]"

Not at all.

However, I think that spending time editing up a lengthy video and then sticking it up on YouTube for all to see does rather imply that - even if they did reflect on it - regret wasn't exactly one of the responses.

badbod99 - Member
Was a first light ascent. Is it responsible to lead a group of mountain bikers up a proper mountain in the dark?

"[i]Like walkers, mountain bikers are often restricted to holidays to drive 6 hours for the weekend. Should mountain bikers be restricted to only riding on weekdays?[/i]"

Ben Nevis being presumably the only feasible mountain biking spot within a 6 hour radius?

"[i]Is it responsible to lead a group of mountain bikers up a proper mountain in the dark?[/i]"

Electing not to take one irresponsible course of action does not inherently preclude one from also electing not to take another irresponsible course of action.

Doesn't look too bad to me, doubt that is illegal anyway, sure they could have picked a quieter time but please please get over it.

Ironic how this is discussed on an ST forum where most of their bikes are tested on sneaky calderdale footpath.

Ho-hum.

...regret wasn't exactly one of the responses.

One of the group posted a video means every individual in the whole group did not reflect on or regret their choices?

...sticking it up on YouTube for all to see

Youtube is used for sharing videos between groups and friends, not just for public performance. Do you believe the intention of posting the video was to brag or cause offence?

There are quite a few people on this thread that seem to be hard of understanding.

Ben Nevis being presumably the only feasible mountain biking spot within a 6 hour radius?

Fort William is a riding destination due to the downhill and cross country courses. Riding Nevis is a popular challenge (albeit others may have better timing).

Electing not to take one irresponsible course of action does not inherently preclude one from also electing not to take another irresponsible course of action.

Agreed. However, the other course of action may not have seemed irresponsible at the time. Hindsight is a great thing.

Hindsight is a great thing.

As is common sense.

As is common sense.

So someone who makes a mistake is devoid of common sense?

"[i]One of the group posted a video means every individual in the whole group did not reflect on or regret their choices?[/i]"

No, but then aren't we simply debating whether the riding in the video is irresponsible/inconsiderate/dengerous? That's of interest to all of us because all of those things are about how MTBers' actions affect others, whether that's MTBers or walkers and whether it's directly (eg through immediate physical risk or lack of respect) or indirectly (through risk of loss of access). We're not really discussing what the individuals' own responses are.

"[i]Youtube is used for sharing videos between groups and friends, not just for public performance. Do you believe the intention of posting the video was to brag or cause offence? [/i]"

Who knows. But it's the internet - by and large, everyone sees everything. You don't post stuff you're genuinely ashamed of on the internet, unless you're [i]really[/i] stupid or are unhinged enough to be going through some sort of bizarre circus act of catharsis. I don't think it's unreasonable to infer that whoever posted the video is not genuinely ashamed of what it shows. I could be wrong, of course, but I'd be surprised.

"[i]So someone who makes a mistake is devoid of common sense? [/i]"

Not at all.

But someone who makes a mistake, fails to realise that mistake through however-much-time of making the mistake all the way down a mountain, goes home and edits the footage of their mistake and then shows the mistake to the whole world could, I would contend, be argued to be lacking it to some degree.

We're not really discussing what the individuals' own responses are.

Seems not all threads are aligned here. This was the topic on hand from this comment

...and reflect on the earlier decisions once down - ideally in a context wider than just one's own viewpoint.

I don't think it's unreasonable to infer that whoever posted the video is not genuinely ashamed of what it shows

Are you [i]ashamed[/i] of every mistake you have made? or do you just regret or wish you had done differently?

fails to realise that mistake through however-much-time of making the mistake all the way down a mountain

So you would have carried your bike back down? Would that have been safer for riders and walkers?

I have to say, I'm not a fan of the Bogtrotters' attitude as I've been at the brunt of it myself. I regularly ride a local fell that is "Open Access". It's signposted "No Cycling". The landowner is known to one of my regular riding buddies, and has said that the No Cycling rule mainly for insurance purposes, and if it discourages irresponsible cyclists, that's a bonus.

I regularly get challenged by walkers, and I politely point out that I have permission, and that's usually the end of it.

A year or two ago, I overtook around 30 Bogtrotters as they started the ascent of this fell. When I was around 500yds in front, I was challenged by a walker, practically foaming at the mouth with anger at the state of the footpaths where bikes had cut them up.

My argument didn't really hold much sway when I was - for all intents and purposes - sharing a path with 30-odd other bikers.

They certainly didn't have the direct consent of the landowner to ride the fell, so I couldn't really use that argument on their behalf.

So yes, I think they are irresponsible in their choice of rides, and antagonising other users of these areas is only going to deepen the rift between us.

Show a bit of common sense in future, there are plenty of places to ride where you won't cause that sort of bad blood, even on a bank holiday.

But someone who makes a mistake, fails to realise that mistake through however-much-time of making the mistake all the way down a mountain, goes home and edits the footage of their mistake and then shows the mistake to the whole world could, I would contend, be argued to be lacking it to some degree

People move on, they took a risk, pretty boring and pointless one, but that's what lifes about, no one got hurt, because mtb-ing is relatively safe, as another wise stw-er once said: Live and let live. I'll let you guess who.

Once up on the mountain and faced with all that traffic?

Ride down slowly stopping to let walkers clear sections if needed. As the code says - give way to walkers don't expect them to give way to you. Passes should be at near walking pace, even if the walker steps aside ,on a path as narrow rocky and steep as that. too bad it would spoil the descent

Ride down slowly stopping to let walkers clear sections if needed. As the code says - give way to walkers don't expect them to give way to you.

Agreed. Was there a specific point in the video where you believe this was not the case?

These guys were dicks.

All over it. others point out specific timings but I watched a fair chunk of it and saw dozens of incidents which were not giving way to the walker and speeds were consistently far too fast causing the walkers to scatter off the path.

All a bit pathetically 'look at me, I'm a rebel', I'm afraid.

as far as I can make out they just hadn't expected such numbers of walkers - but it was nothing to do with rebellion!

They certainly didn't have the direct consent of the landowner to ride the fell, so I couldn't really use that argument on their behalf.

owning land allows you to exploit some of its resources, not say who can pass over it

owning land allows you to exploit some of its resources, not say who can pass over it

Pretty sure you're not a particularly astute student of the law.

"[i]Seems not all threads are aligned here.[/i]"

No, fair point, my fault for picking up on a tangential point earlier.

"[i]Are you ashamed of every mistake you have made? or do you just regret or wish you had done differently? [/i]"

In an abstract context: no and yes respectively. Naturally. But we have context here, and if I'd ridden in the manner shown in that video I'd be ashamed of it. I wouldn't have done it, of course, but it's feasible one could have a bit of adrenaline whilst on the trail and then in the cold light of reviewing the footage realise that it was out of order. And I'd have thought anyone realising it was out of order wouldn't then publicise it.

Anyhoo... that's still the tangential point.

"[i]So you would have carried your bike back down? Would that have been safer for riders and walkers? [/i]"

No, and there are plenty of sections in there where the combination of speed and space meant that passing is/was fine. But there are several points, some of which I've specifically mentioned but there are others, where the passing was extremely inconsiderate and/or dangerous. At the narrow and/or technical points I'd have been slowing and trackstanding to let people make their own decision of what to do - and if their decision had put them in a position where I thought they were at risk, such as standing with no margin for error to the downslope of the trail, I'd have waved them through before carrying on. And I wouldn't have been approaching people at the same speed as is done at some other points.

So no, I wouldn't have carried, but I'd have dealt with it totally differently. I'd have dealt with every group of people in the same way that I'd deal with anyone on a less busy ride and accepted that I just picked a daft day to do it and at least I'd be able to do some trackstanding and hopping practice. It's not a big deal, I've done that plenty of times before - not on quite such busy trails, but on more technical ones where being in control and being able to come to a standstill is if anything even more important.

There's no need for a horsehair shirt like just pushing a bike down, but the fact that by picking a silly combination of route and day you land yourself with a long chain of being considerate doesn't make it ok to just not be considerate.

Nice, really surprised the mods let you get away with that.

True though......

... speeds were consistently far too fast causing the walkers to scatter off the path.

Walkers are often surprised and move erratically regardless of riders actions. The speed is difficult to guess, it's so bumpy the cam footage makes it seem faster. It took 1hr 30 to descend (what must be 8km).

Scotland is huge and largely empty (people were driven out by the English)

It is a large country but it's not all unpopulous: The Central Belt and Ben Nevis on a bank holiday afternoon are obvious examples of busy areas.

Highland de-population was in-part caused by forced eviction of tenant subsistence farmers to make way for agricultural improvements by [b]the landowners who were mostly Scots[/b]. Blaming England for the highland clearances is just propaganda.

I didn't think it was that bad, maybe they made a bad call coming down at 09.30am on a bank holiday but I wouldn't expect it to be that busy, it's only with hindsight that I/and I'm guessing now they do too, know this not to be the case.

Also, I thought they were generally quite polite through the whole video.

So no, I wouldn't have carried, but I'd have dealt with it totally differently.

I think most would. This is one riders footage and one person's choices. Looking at the video, he definitely could have done much better.

Ben Nevis on a bank holiday afternoon

Just to clarify, 9:30 am.

Politeness is great but just saying "morning!" to everyone doesn't mean much. Acions speak louder and all that.

simonfbarnes - Member

owning land allows you to exploit some of its resources, not say who can pass over it

You're actually rather ignorant, aren't you. Open Access allows access to people on foot. It specifically prohibits cycling.

The land owner has every right to grant permission for individuals in exactly the same way that they can do as they please on their own land.

Just because I invite someone into my home for a beer, doesn't automatically give you the right to enter with 29 of your mates uninvited.

"[i]I think most would. This is one riders footage and one person's choices. Looking at the video, he definitely could have done much better.[/i]"

I think that's kind of what I/we've been getting at 🙂

I think that's kind of what I/we've been getting at.

Fair enough. Didn't really need 9 pages of flaming / swearing / insults to make that point.

[s]Dark[/s]Sunny? Scotland? Early June?

Hey. I stand by my flaming and insults 🙂

The land owner has every right to grant permission for individuals in exactly the same way that they can do as they please on their own land.

Hey. I stand by my flaming and insult

Such is the problem with forums. A disagreement in person most often end us in some agreement in the end (one way or another). On forums just more anger and hatred.

The last time I swore at someone in person was in high school (apart from my ex-wife that is) 😉

bit of a side issue but one brought up (tho not actually the same) by shibboleth. Most cheeky riders beef with the boggies [i]seems[/i] to be that they are open and forthright about flouting access rights. That's a bit rich really, either you beleive access rights are fair in england, in which case don't do cheeky, or they aren't in which case stop having a go at boggies just cos they don't sneak around flouting the stupid access rules.

Lot of insults getting chucked at the riders. 9:30am no way would I have expected that many walkers. BH would be busy yeah but not that busy at that time, so the these guys aren't the only ones surprised. Locals obviously know better but try not to be too condescending to those who don't.

Can a land owner really do as they please on their own land?

to about the same degree as I can do what I like on anybody's land 🙂

As a former boggie I have access to the Facebook messages. Also I know or have met most of the guys in the vid

Whatever the right or wrong of this particular episode, (personally I think they were well in the wrong) there was a massive self congratulatory thread on their Facebook page pointing to a message put up on a walking blog of one walker in particularly who had had an unpleasant experience that day with this set of riders

Early on in the thread I pointed out it would have even better to have retired to the nearest cafe before they got too far up. Especially as they had done plenty of riding that weekend

As I know these guys and their own particular quirks and attitudes there's one guy I think is pretty sensible and a very good rider. The rest are ego merchants with biggish bikes and no skill

Furthermore I have no idea why Simon fb has got involved as he is unlikely to know the ride was even on. Takes much less involvement in the club running that he had done previously. I can only assume he's been lacking attention and feels the need to bully some people on the web again to get his fix.

I may be wrong but I doubt it

Lots of love and group hug

Plum

to about the same degree as I can do what I like on anybody's land

I can only assume he's been lacking attention and feels the need to bully some people on the web again to get his fix

mea culpa!

"[i]Such is the problem with forums. A disagreement in person most often end us in some agreement in the end (one way or another). On forums just more anger and hatred.[/i]"

In my defence I would call someone a dick face-to-face if I was with them and they rode like that.

Early on in the thread I pointed out it would have even better to have retired to the nearest cafe before they got too far up.

For what reason would you retire going up at 6am with no walkers around?

As I know these guys and their own particular quirks and attitudes.

Simply not true.

The rest are ego merchants with biggish bikes and no skill.

Now that is just stirring, and not really relevant.

I think calling strangers names on forums is very undignified and I never do it - usually they can be relied on to trash themselves quite effectively without my intervention.

In my defence I would call someone a dick face-to-face

What do you think that would achieve other than a heated argument?

Wow. Looks like proper war.

"[i]What do you think that would achieve other than a heated argument? [/i]"

What's wrong with heated argument? I see nothing inherently wrong with letting people know you feel strongly about something provided you back it up with constructive and reasoned points. I'm not saying I'd just call them a dick and leave it unexplained.

In my defence I would call someone a dick face-to-face if I was with them and they rode like that.

Wow - what a thread...I kinda got fed up at the sniping by page 3 and jumped to the last page by wanted to add my 2p worth.

I guess those that are anti this caper ALWAYS negotiate all other users in a responsible manner when out for a ride and have NEVER left the marked path - aye right!

I know there are masses of other places to ride but as decent wild riders does the 'challenge' of riding up (ahem) and down Britain's largest mountain have no appeal whatsoever?

Anyway - why do the walkers have right of way over a biker, surely it is common sense and decency to give way to those coming down the hill? Isn't that normal etiquette for walker versus walker?

I think everyone's definition of 'reasonable' will always be different and unless behaviour is 'dangerous' then really we should be able to share the land without the animosity - sheesh.

Don't get me started on the erosion debate - thousands of walkers versus a handful of bikers and the bikers are the ones that are always lambasted - grrr.

Read the thread- walkers have right of way in Scotland.

... back it up with constructive and reasoned points. I'm not saying I'd just call them a dick and leave it unexplained.

I would say it's far more effective and polite to avoid the name calling and go with just the constructive and reasoned points. Will have a higher chance in the resulting argument being won.