[Closed] Forest of Dean Forestry Consultation

Potentially interesting

Many mountain bike riders who ride away from the formal trail network are people from the local community. We accept and tolerate the creation and use of ‘Wild Trails’ as long as they
meet the requirements of our national Wild Trail Policy. We would like to work with wild trail
riders so that there is a greater appreciation of their impact upon wildlife, heritage sites and other woodland users – not with a view to stopping their activity, but to help them shape more optimal routes in less sensitive areas.

The waymarked downhill cycling trails will be confined to the Cannop Cycle Centre / Sallow
Vallets area of the Forest, and the Family Cycling trail (and community links) will be
retained largely as it currently is.

FORESTRYENGLAND.UK "https://www.forestryengland.uk/sites/default/files/documents/FCE_Our+Shared+Forest_Consultation+Draft_2019v2.pdf"

Interesting ideas when they talk about sensitive areas and wildlife yet they go in with big machines and fell it to death HMMM

It's still a working forest. Felling, clearing and planting are all part of the management plan. At least they are taking the time to talk with riders. That can only be seen as being a good thing.

Thanks for posting the link @doomanic.

One issue I have with the consultation is in the summary for the "Community" section, where it states under "What are we going to do?":
"Promote adherence to our Wild Trail Policy for mountain biking, encouraging local riders to increase their understanding and respect for other users and local wildlife".
To which I responded that surely it is better to promote understanding and respect for other users and local wildlife amongst ALL visitors to the Forest, rather than just singling out mountain bikers which creates the impression that its is only those on 2 wheels who are capable of dick behavior.

Most likely someone has built some things poorly ( poor location or poorly constructed ) or in the wrong place.
Walkers don't build shit jumps out of rotten wood that give on to fire roads. ( Not saying this is what has happened - I have no idea ).
Given the time of year it may have been something kids out in over Christmas, but equally it could be a shitty rotten old jump someone broke their collarbone on last week that's been there for 10 years and now it needs pulling out.
This will be an effort to engage in order to reduce the chances of it occurring again and to communicate the whys and wherefores.
Engaging with the FC can be productive IME.

I didn't know the FC had a formal policy on wild trails.

Seems sensible and workable to me.

I'm with you that "respect for other users and local wildlife". Dog shitters and litter droppers probably cause more issues for wildlife than mountain bikers.

One issue I have with the consultation is in the summary for the “Community” section, where it states under “What are we going to do?”:
“Promote adherence to our Wild Trail Policy for mountain biking, encouraging local riders to increase their understanding and respect for other users and local wildlife“.
To which I responded that surely it is better to promote understanding and respect for other users and local wildlife amongst ALL visitors to the Forest, rather than just singling out mountain bikers which creates the impression that its is only those on 2 wheels who are capable of dick behavior.

You may be reading too much into that. The consultation is specifically about mountain biking, the impact of trail building and making sure its following the FC's policy, which if you read it, is remarkably pragmatic.

So, will that end up with us being able to ride in the forest as we currently do, or will we be expected to stick to sanctioned, controlled trails judged so by some H&S board ?

Will all those fantastic pixie built berms, drops, jumps and things be banned ?

Few years back over the Dowies people made gap jumps which were fine if people were sensible in there riding but people tried them well out of there depth and broke bones so the forestry took them out which was fair shout,then you had the thing over there about the Goshawks yet you can walk your dogs around there barking like mad so who would disturb the birds more MTBing bikers or dogs!!!the wild boar do more damage than most and they can get rid of them it will settle down in time as they start this thing from time to time quite a few years back they were going to ban cycles from everywhere in the Forest other than Worcester lodge and people had written on trees and made man traps and all sorts of things that settle down but that was not started by the Forestry some weird group out of London.

So, will that end up with us being able to ride in the forest as we currently do, or will we be expected to stick to sanctioned, controlled trails judged so by some H&S board ?

Will all those fantastic pixie built berms, drops, jumps and things be banned ?

if you ignore what the FC are asking for then possibly. If you engage with them then some might but the chances are the majority will not.

Edit in response to Trimix.
Bit melodramatic? 🙂 To some extent it will depend where all those fantastic features are and what they're made of/how they're constructed. The only people who can answer your question fully are actually looking to talk to you....

or will we be expected to stick to sanctioned, controlled trails judged so by some H&S board ?

Will all those fantastic pixie built berms, drops, jumps and things be banned ?

if you actually read the guidance you'd be able to answer that but 6/10 for dramatic flounce

There's a lot to get through in the linked PDF, I can't see anything obviously bad in there yet. I'm local so feel duty bound to do the survey.

my main complaint with the FC is the recent felling devastation caused by contractors with the huge machinery which has ruined many wild paths as well as some wild mtb trails.

Not FC, but this popped up on facebook last week.

You think having a consultation with FC is bad? I mean just look at the massive improvement that the CE imposed on riding at Swinley without consultation!

Trimix

So, will that end up with us being able to ride in the forest as we currently do, or will we be expected to stick to sanctioned, controlled trails judged so by some H&S board ?
Will all those fantastic pixie built berms, drops, jumps and things be banned ?

Well, current By-Laws in the FoD prohibit riding except on designated cycling trails or hard-surfaced tracks so technically you're not allowed to ride all those fantastic pixie built berms, drops, jumps and things now! That has been the case for years.

We are fortunate that a blind eye is turned to much of the cheeky riding; the rangers will remove inappropriately built structures because the FC could be held liable for injuries caused on them. Some gap jumps and north-shore have been removed in the past. But trails like those put in by Dowie over 20 years ago are still there. The trails at Highmeadow (Staunton) are still there although there was some 'unofficial' discussion a few years ago about exactly how far they could go. There has been recent conflict with local horse riders near Shutcastle. Plus riding (and rider ability) has become much more extreme which brings its own conflict with local residents.

My concern is that as policy becomes more defined then this local freedom may be curtailed or become more formally managed. In some ways we are our own worst enemy; the numbers of MTBers in the FoD these days means that it may be considered necessary to stop turning a blind eye locally and to manage cycle riding away from designated areas. And the FoD is very definitely a MTB destination these days! It's on the map and has to be managed.

What worries me is "trail death by committee". What we see as 'good to ride' can easily be seen by a committee of non mountain bikers as an accident claim waiting to happen.

Sure, some idiot could brain themselves trying a jump that normal riders would consider too challenging. But in general most riders ride stuff they think they can ride.

Im yet to see any evidence where natural/pixie built stuff has been improved by a committee getting involved.

psling, your post made it just before mine. So basically go and ride it now before it inevitably gets sanitised.

What needs to happen is we stop the FC being liable for idiots messing about in the woods. I'd be up for supporting that.

What needs to happen is we stop the FC being liable for idiots messing about in the woods

Not just MTBers. The FC in FoD receive a surprising number of claims every year because little Jonnie has tripped over a root and broken his arm, little Samantha has slipped in some mud and spoilt her clothes, a cyclist has fallen off crossing a rut and hurt themself, ad infinitum. (The last one is actual and happened last year - the rangers had to tape off the track and get the ruts graded. The ruts were about a foot wide and no more than three inches deep!).

a cyclist has fallen off crossing a rut and hurt themself, ad infinitum. (The last one is actual and happened last year – the rangers had to tape off the track and get the ruts graded. The ruts were about a foot wide and no more than three inches deep!).

And this worries me, as some of the trails have big features with significant consequences if you get it wrong. Not all build features, just taking the trail over what is there naturally or otherwise (eg old quaried sections). There are trails that are going to be too much of a liability risk to formalise, so what happens to them.

Sadly a committee will get them removed.

There is a tiny patch of woods near where I live, on the fence outside there is now a sign informing people that falling branches can be dangerous. FFS !

The FC in FoD receive a surprising number of claims every year

Seriously? With my record for crashing I may never need to work again! I might even be able to afford one of them thar fancy horseless carriages that run on elastictrickery.

Sadly a committee will get them removed

For all you know ( do correct me if I'm wrong and you do actually know better ) the FC staff involved all race enduro.
Get involved, get talking, get your voice heard. I can assure you the FC understand the general standpoint of the MTB community at large, but only by talking to them face to face are you going to be able to help strike a balance you can only achieve by compromise.
Or, you know, 'health and safety gone mad' on here 🙂

There are trails that are going to be too much of a liability risk to formalise, so what happens to them.

This is a possibility. Change is inevitable, but if somone is fighting our corner you at least have an opportunity to say 'ok, you won't let us have that, what about letting us have this instead?'. Or if they say 'we need to close that trail because it's on a Sssi' you can go back with 'ok, if you're closing that, can we put something through there instead?'
Also, if you're able to get a good relationship going, it's possible you can get other help from them, for instance where a contractor drops a tree across a trail, they may be open to helping get it removed.
It may take a bit of effort. You may have to do some work. Those trails you've been riding didn't just magically appear, and they don't fix themselves either.
At the end of it, if you consider what they want to be unreasonable, you can disappear off in to the woods, and they will do what they want, as it is their bat and ball at the end of the day, but at least all you've lost is a couple of hours finding out.

Anyway, hope it works out for all concerned. Last time I was there was ssec. Great riding as I remember!

Well said Del, a rare moment of common sense and positive constructive attitude on stw!

@Mark90

There are trails that are going to be too much of a liability risk

I don't suppose you've got a list? They sound like my kind of trail!

There does seem to be a tendency among some FC staff to over manage the woods at the moment. The Foresters Forest nonsense that just ends up fencing off otherwise accessible areas under the guise of ‘wildlife’ is just plain annoying to locals, mtbers or not.
Having said that, I notice that some nitwit has started spraypainting arrows and lines on the hard to find routes around Staple Edge that is bound to annoy the FC. If that’s you - stop doing it!

Its twits like that that get the FC excited.

"my main complaint with the FC is the recent felling devastation caused by contractors with the huge machinery which has ruined many wild paths as well as some wild mtb trails."

Heehee. Just how else do they get the timber out? The days when it would be tushed out with a horse are long gone. I wish that the contractor were asked to flatten everything out rather than leave it like a battle field but apparently that ads cost to the timber and the little beasties don't benefit. Funny how the private estates manage isn't it?
Anyway, those wild trails aren't meant to be there so complaining isn't really on.
Try and see both sides. The huge influx in MTBers over the past couple of decades isn't a positive thing to many locals apart from those who make their living from it. Not a huge amount of those.
It isn't going to get any better and we are already at the point where the areas where people could get away from bikes are no longer such. I don't know of many people here who are completely anti but I do know quite a few who would like some escape.
Of course there are antis of all sort everywhere.
Its unreasonable to expect a huge welcome from those who find the place they love spoiled. Split the difference, don't take the proverbial and it will suit almost everybody.

wish that the contractor were asked to flatten everything out rather than leave it like a battle field but apparently that ads cost to the timber and the little beasties don’t benefit

Difficult to see what advantage that gives overall. Cheaper in the short term perhaps. If you're going to replant the debris will want tidying up anyway.

Regarding the felling mess I've lived in the Forest for about 20 years and they never used to cause so much damage. There has been plenty of concern about it from locals, with the blame being laid at Welsh forestry contractors doing a lowest price job for the FC. Many areas have had the landscape completely changed by the very heavy duty machinery being used now, I understand budgets are limited but with tourism being such an earner it seem a false economy.

The consultation is specifically about mountain biking

No, it's about Trees and woodlands, Wildlife and wild spaces, Geology and soils, Water , Cultural heritage Built heritage and archaeology Community and last but not least Recreation

That said do respond to this please guys. Note wild trail discussion is buried under 'community'

One issue I flagged up is their plan to eventually make all car parks pay-to-use. While I'm fine with contributing to forest management via parking, the existing pay car parks all close around 5pm so if new ones follow this model there will be nowhere to park for evening rides. Worth a mention.

I wouldn't mention S******n on the internet but somebody else already has, so. Might as well point out that the existing management plan there doesn't account for its great value for mtb, and a more permissive approach is needed that allows the better wild trails to remain as well as respecting wildlife.

As an aside, it would be nice if the FC made sure their contractors took all their bullshit away with them. A few places I've been are littered with metal and plastic containers (mostly oil) used for the chainsaws and harvesters. They will not rot away in a hurry.

>meatsupreme:
This.
They are much more careless about how they leave the woods nowadays, though you can’t fault the contractors for their politeness and awareness of who’s around them.
I think the high price of timber has got the FC in a money grabbing spin and their getting as much cleared as they can.

>sideshow:
They’ll have locals rioting if they try to make every car park a paying one, not to mention there’s hundreds of places you can stuff a car if you just want to walk the dog. Stupid.

They are much more careless about how they leave the woods nowadays, though you can’t fault the contractors for their politeness and awareness of who’s around them.
I think the high price of timber has got the FC in a money grabbing spin and their getting as much cleared as they can.

Harvesting has always caused a mess. Most tends to be done in the winter months when the sap is low and foliage thin; unfortunately this is when the ground gets messed up more. Machinery is bigger too. There are a lot more people using the Forest now so we are a lot more aware of the mess rather than there being more mess.

They’ll have locals rioting if they try to make every car park a paying one, not to mention there’s hundreds of places you can stuff a car if you just want to walk the dog. Stupid.

Anarchy has already come close when they introduced car park charges! Generally speaking, currently if there are facilities, e.g. toilets, then there are parking charges. Barriers open at sunrise, get locked at sundown (approximately) and this applies if there is a barrier whether there are charges or not. Locals know places they can park to avoid charges, non-locals often block gates (some used for emergency access for MTB trails!) and park on the verges and wonder why their mirrors get knocked off.
People resident with a FoD postcode should get a free or discounted annual parking pass i.m.o.

I wouldn’t mention S******n on the internet but somebody else already has, so. Might as well point out that the existing management plan there doesn’t account for its great value for mtb, and a more permissive approach is needed that allows the better wild trails to remain as well as respecting wildlife.

This area has a bit of history now. When the first downhill(ish) trails were put in by the Monmouth boys and the original trails at the top were put in by the Forest boys the 'knowledge' was on a word-of-mouth basis. There were some issues with the Forestry Rangers because it is an important wildlife area and they were concerned that certain places may get disturbed but people talked and an uneasy alliance formed. Of course, these days the cat is out of the bag, strava gives access to all, signs went up restricting MTBing, signs are ignored and the area is now heavily ridden. The local horse riders don't like this, the local dog walkers don't like this, the FC don't like this. It is probably one of the areas of conflict that has led to the need for this consultation.

I agree with the local parking permit thing - they should just print an ad in the Review that you can put on your dash.
I presume the FC are under massive financial pressure like all govt depts and are looking for ways to supplement their budget. It sometimes feels like they’d like everywhere that isn’t currently productive timber to be turned into a money spinner. Like those crazy expensive cabins at Christchurch. No report created ever ends with the conclusion ‘let’s just leave it alone’.

I haven’t read the consultation yet, but I need to and respond to the survey.

A quick couple of points from posts on this thread. As MTBers we will only achieve anything if we work with the FC. We might not get the perfect outcome but it will be far better than the alternative. That could be things stay as they are, or it could be the worst outcome and everything is policed within an inch of it’s life and anything unofficial is destroyed.

I agree with the comments ref the forestry work. It’s an absolute mess. I witnessed a contractor unable to drive up a fire road last week because of the damage to it from the caterpillar 360s.

I also agree that the numbers of MTBers using the Forest is of concern if they are all using the unofficial trails. There is huge damage to some of the trails over Mallards Pike way, I didn’t ride a fair few of them today because I didn’t want to add to it. There were a fair few people out too, on a Monday morning. The boar had also turned over a huge patch that was once a neat little trail.

The future is in cooperation with the FC and all of the other user groups.

Can you still not apply for a free parking permit for a GL16 (etc) post code ? You could as we have had one in the past.

No, I've just checked the council website, it seems not.