You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
My first post - triggered by the [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/swinley-investment-and-mountain-bike-network ]Swinley Forest thread[/url] and I just can’t remain silent!
So..........there are these birds that I assume are quite capable of flying, but choose to build their nests on the ground in the proximity of popular mountain bike routes. Well, that’s clever of them for a start! I can understand that certain species cannot nest in trees - ostriches & emus for obvious reasons (the branches would break) and water fowl get the protection they need from, err, being near water, but how did these “ground nesting birds” survive this long living so dangerously. It’s hardly surprising that they’re rare!
Unfortunately I can’t fly, but I've had a look at Google maps from a bird’s perspective and it seems to me that there is no shortage of available space in this green and pleasant land for these birds to go about their business. If they choose to remain in an environment that is clearly not suitable for their purpose then surely they fully deserve to become extinct under the rules of Darwinism.
I'm sure the tree-huggers* will say that the birds were there first and that we have a duty to leave them in peace and actively protect their environment, but I strongly disagree – humans are the dominant species on this planet and we should not be bombarded by this endless guilt propaganda about the catastrophic consequences of our actions. I’m all for protecting the earth from the obvious harm of global warming/pollution/resource depletion/paedophiles etc., but why should we have our enjoyment to roam freely on our bikes curtailed by a few ground-nesting birds?
And.....will walkers also be banned and subsequently punished if they wander into these protected areas in Swinley? I would imagine that it is far more traumatising for old mother rare-ground-nesting-bird and her chicks to have some eccentric chap traipsing through the forest playing an undecipherable tune on his flute, or a bunch of mushroom or berry foragers delving into the undergrowth in search of their treasures, than a biker whizzing (or mincing in my case) along the trail and whooshing past almost silently in the space of a few brief seconds.
Am I the only one? To be honest, I don’t care if I am!
* It would probably be more correct to say “environmentalists”, but that doesn’t convey my disdain to the same degree.
I've had a look at Google maps from a bird’s perspective
From very high up?
in a true STW fashion wee in their nests.
WGAS
WGAS
YOU DO!
Ha! If you think they're messing with your biking you want to try building a house anywhere near the SPA. And even if the birds weren't there it seems like liability issues would have triggered the same changes anyway. So either suck it up, risk the repercussions of going off piste or try some of the other riding in the area.
idiot 🙄
[i]I’m all for protecting the earth from the obvious harm of global warming/pollution/resource depletion/paedophiles etc., but why should we have our enjoyment to roam freely on our bikes curtailed by a few ground-nesting birds?[/i]
The earth is in danger from paedophiles?
3/10 rant, 1/10 if it's a troll.
And yes, access restrictions are in place for walkers too in affected areas. Restrictions are limited to the breeding season (depends on the species but typically April to July).
Wasn't that the title of the last My Chemical Romance album?
The earth is in danger from paedophiles?
young earth theorists?
And.....will walkers also be banned and subsequently punished if they wander into these protected areas in Swinley?
definitley the ones who walk on the made up MTB trails in Swinley should be. I mean a whole f*****g forest and you have to walk on made up trails, with berms etc. I even met some walking down Deerstalker FFS!
Anyway badgerbonk or whatever your troll names is - tell us what MONEY you have contributed to said forest/MTB facility before you start claiming preferential RIGHTS to use it.
Git.
Somewhere in the depths of my memory I seem to recall a similar situation to this, where an MTB trial was moved away from nesting birds, and said birds upped and moved next to the new trial. The theory was that the MTBs proved no threat to the birds, but scared off predators.
It was a long time ago mind, so I may have been drunk and / or dreamt it up!
there are these birds that I assume are quite capable of flying, but choose to build their nests on the ground in the proximity of popular mountain bike routes.
Or, silly mountain bikers like to ride their bikes in areas that are traditionally home to self same birds.
Well, that’s clever of them for a start! I can understand that certain species cannot nest in trees - ostriches & emus for obvious reasons (the branches would break) and water fowl get the protection they need from, err, being near water, but how did these “ground nesting birds” survive this long living so dangerously. It’s hardly surprising that they’re rare!
Perhaps because they are birds that traditionally nest in areas that are dominated by open ground - where, guess what, there are no trees for them to nest in, and the reason they have become endangered is because some **** went round planting trees everywhere as a strategic reserve for times of war?
will walkers also be banned and subsequently punished if they wander into these protected areas in Swinley? I would imagine that it is far more traumatising for old mother rare-ground-nesting-bird and her chicks to have some eccentric chap traipsing through the forest playing an undecipherable tune on his flute,
Yes, personally I'm all in favour of a complete ban for public access, with a shoot on sight policy - thats why you see those wooden seats on trees in Swinley forest, so I can get a clear shot - if you look carefully there's a stash of riders corpses down seagull, one in every berm.
Another for the full list on grounds of self centered narrow mindedness.
May the ground nesters shat in his head whilst they mince across a land created solely for mans enjoyment.
Cock!
These birds are part of a larger picture and have existed for a duration longer than humans will manage at their present rate of destruction and thoughtless commercialisation.
Once they get wiped from the UK landscape then so will the raptors and other predators that rely on them. You can expect a change in flora as seed dispersal changes which will alter the landscape, no longer will the sound of the summer occur in the form of skylarks twittering high in the sky above. A bigger picture would be of the changing landscape as the flora takes on a new appearance, thus would all take time years in fact and during that time without close control species after species will get pushed out. Without a species to protect the landscape will get abused, neglected then rights would change eventually resulting in the land being developed on.
We've all heard the words our olds.."I remember when all this was fields..."
By putting restrictions on human behavior its in hope that it'll limit abuse, you'll never stop peoples true right to roam and if you chose to so be it.
By putting those restrictions in place, it does limit the impact we as a species sharing this planet have on it, most will abide.
Imagine a place where it was acceptable to say litter, if everyone who went there left some, imagine the result...
Anyway enough of the tangents I feel like going off too.
The point is, this is a shared environment and any negative impact we as an Apex predator has on it will when abused, come back round and wipe us out.
The big picture is the food chain and that starts in the ground and the air...
Sharki environmentalist, naturalist, conservationist and mountain biker
[i]Am I the only one? To be honest, I don’t care if I am![/i]
Fairly obvious that you don't care mate.
Unfortunately there's a lot like you.
🙄
one of the reasons other countryside user dislike us is our lack of respect for the environment. STW often shows this concern to be real sadly.
Rock climbers respect seasonal access restrictions for climbing on Stanage during the Ring Ousel(sp) nesting season, why shouldn't mountain bikers do the same?
Increased biodiversity is generally in the interests of humans in the bigger picture.
I walk and mountain bike and climb and always observe any restrictions in place.
Don't be so selfish.
+1 and then some Sharki, well said fella. The sight and sound of a Skylark singing as it flies higher and higher until it disappears then plunging back to earth is a ride stopping moment for me in spring and summer. Long may that continue.
cynic-al - Member
WGAS
--as I write this, eighteen people including yourself. Not an STW record, but you never know. Your ID is very apt – logic-al certainly wouldn’t have worked.
thepurist - Member
……. risk the repercussions of going off piste or try some of the other riding in the area……
--that’s what I’ll do, but in the meantime I’m just seeing if anyone feels the same as I do.
rkk01 - Member
idiot
--not me – my mother had me tested!
konaboy2275 - Member
….The earth is in danger from paedophiles?
--my version of gentle humour – obviously not yours? Actually, thinking about it, they do present a danger to some sections of society.
MrGreedy - Member
3/10 rant, 1/10 if it's a troll.
--So, I guess that’s they're both “fails” in your opinion then. I can live with that.
I didn’t know about the restrictions on walkers – I’ve been riding there pretty much every week this year and I’ve never noticed any. But surely the point is that we’re being prohibited from all areas apart from the three new trails and fire roads, not just from the nesting areas wherever they might be.
sugdenr - Member
…… Anyway badgerbonk or whatever your troll names is - tell us what MONEY you have contributed to said forest/MTB facility before you start claiming preferential RIGHTS to use it.
Git.
---I have paid for an annual pass, and I pay the new car park charges. I believe that entitles me? And “ouch” – no-ones called me one of those for about thirty years.
To everyone else who contributed; I’m really not anti-wildlife or nature, it’s just that I think that on a lot of occasions (e.g. this one) the authorities come over all precious about some of these minor (to me) environmental issues. As I was trying to point out, there is a vast area around Swinley which these birds could surely migrate to if they found bikers an issue.
It seems that, judging by the tone of many of the replies, a fair proportion of you must ride your bikes exclusively on man-made trails or roads; the minute you ride on singletrack you’re at risk of causing damage. Fair enough.
And.....will walkers also be banned and subsequently punished if they wander into these protected areas in Swinley? I would imagine that it is far more traumatising for old mother rare-ground-nesting-bird and her chicks to have some eccentric chap traipsing through the forest playing an undecipherable tune on his flute, or a bunch of mushroom or berry foragers delving into the undergrowth in search of their treasures, than a biker whizzing (or mincing in my case) along the trail and whooshing past almost silently in the space of a few brief seconds.
the biggest problem is with the dog walkers as their pet roams freely and acts as a full on preditor threat to the nesting birds. However they can't do anything to stop them as dog owners are always in the right so the restrictions are on the groups they can control
Am I the only one? To be honest, I don’t care if I am!
my view is that restrictions to assist wildlife are fine and should be respected but they should be equally imposed across all user groups
, where they aren't it's not a reason to ignore them
20 plus years ago when i lived near llandegla it waas used as a breeding ground for black grouse to be shot at, cycling along what is now the sleeper trail, a weirdo jumps out of the heather at us, saying we are scaring the birds, and bikes are not allowed there.
How he must hate us even more now.
Birds have wings and can fly and have legs to walk, but cant ride bikes as yet, so best if we try and avoid them.
I think that on a lot of occasions (e.g. this one) the authorities come over all precious about some of these minor (to me) environmental issues.
Which authorities? the Landowners, or the statutory bodies that enforce the international treaties to which we're signed up? If a species is protected under those conventions, then we have an duty to the rest of humanity and nature conserve them, if we don't, then what right do we have to lecture or complain about other countries not protecting their tigers/elephants/gorillas/whales? I think you're falling into the classic megafauna trap of thinking that some species matter, and others don't.
It seems that, judging by the tone of many of the replies, a fair proportion of you must ride your bikes exclusively on man-made trails or roads; the minute you ride on singletrack you’re at risk of causing damage. Fair enough.
Perhaps we ride off road in a more considerate manner than you and dont think we can do whatever the hell we like and everything else in nature can just move if it objects
It not a better troll than your OP tbh
It seems that, judging by the tone of many of the replies, a fair proportion of you must ride your bikes exclusively on man-made trails or roads; the minute you ride on singletrack you’re at risk of causing damage. Fair enough.
There's plenty of singletrack in the wooded areas of Swinley without the need to ride in the cleared areas, also, just to be pedantic, all the trails at Swinley are man made. As the tree's are clear felled, the endangered species move back in to the cleared areas.
but I strongly disagree – humans are the dominant species on this planet and we should not be bombarded by this endless guilt propaganda about the catastrophic consequences of our actions. I’m all for protecting the earth from the obvious harm of global warming/pollution/resource depletion/paedophiles etc., but why should we have our enjoyment to roam freely on our bikes curtailed by a few ground-nesting birds?
Unfortunately, people with this kind of attitude are not an endangered species, They need culling. It's no wonder the planet is in a state as it is.
Got to be a troll! First one I've seen picking on those ground nesting birds (bit obscure?) but each to their own?
So, the SPA in question is Thames Basin Heaths, and heathland is rare and becoming rarer by the day. Part of that is because 'heathland' is mostly found at lower altitudes in the South East on well drained land, prime development locations in other words. Heathland species are running out of space to 'move to'.
No idea why i would feed such a weird rant, but here are the figures for the (main) three species in question and the importance of the Thames Basin Heaths SPA (from JNCC):
Dartford Warbler, 445 pairs representing at least 27.8% of the breeding population in Great Britain (Count as at 1999)
Nightjar, 264 pairs representing at least 7.8% of the breeding population in Great Britain (1998/9)
Woodlark, 149 pairs representing at least 9.9% of the breeding population in Great Britain (Count as at 1997)
Access restrictions are put in place in loads of locations during nesting season and most people seem understanding of the reasoning, even if they don't always stick to it.
I am always, genuinely, disappointed to read posts like this. The long-term scientific research and the hard work that goes into the (often volunteer driven) conservation sector is only (IMHO) to be respected.
OK I'll bite! I was a local in that area for around 25 years. Just to the west of Swinley is Wildmoor Heath where those same birds were supposed to have frequented.
Funny, in all those years that I've walked, run and cycled both there and Swinley Forest, I've never ever seen any. Yes, sometimes I had binoculars with me.
So how strange that Highland cattle and ponies were introduced to the Heath, put into paddocks and semi-regularly were moved around. Won't somebody think of the birdies?
What really pi$$es me off is that it is a high density area and people need to have open space to walk their dogs, take their kids out etc. You know, recreational land not a blinkin' museum.
I'm sick of hearing about conservation, biodiversity, eco this that and the next thing. Too many bloomin' jobsworths spouting crap.
Phew, I was quite restrained. 🙂
The bit I don't understand is that the habitat that the ground nesting birds is entirely man made. Heathland ain't a natural environment, that's why it needs maintaining.
Must say that I think the people that within reason I agree with Cinnamon Girl - the priority should be to get people out and about in a high population area. It should be a balance and in the SE it appears to have gone the wrong way.
To the o/p - respect the restrictions - as stated above - climbers do for birds etc - if there is a real reason for the restriction then obey it - you can ride your bike elsewhere - I am an RSPB volunteer and birds / wildlife have enough of a hard time - it isnt life or death for you riding a bike - for these birds it could well be...
Use it as a catalyst to go elsewhere for a change...
OK I'll bite! I was a local in that area for around 25 years. Just to the west of Swinley is Wildmoor Heath where those same birds were supposed to have frequented.Funny, in all those years that I've walked, run and cycled both there and Swinley Forest, I've never ever seen any. Yes, sometimes I had binoculars with me.
So how strange that Highland cattle and ponies were introduced to the Heath, put into paddocks and semi-regularly were moved around. Won't somebody think of the birdies?
What really pi$$es me off is that it is a high density area and people need to have open space to walk their dogs, take their kids out etc. You know, recreational land not a blinkin' museum.
I'm sick of hearing about conservation, biodiversity, eco this that and the next thing. Too many bloomin' jobsworths spouting crap.
Completely agree with you, in fact for the lolz....yes I am sad....I was considering writing a long essay that more eloquently and philosophically states "Our ancestors were natures bitch for 100,000 odd years - now it's our bitch". She/he can think of it as payback for introducing us into this world with weak physical bodies but plenty of self awareness to contemplate the vast array of suffering she/he has dished out on us such as disease and predation. Do you think predators treated the first human ancestors to walk out of the jungle with respect and kindness? Think of it as misotheism but applied to nature.
Species get wiped out all the time by acts of nature (humans and their behaviours are ultimately a product of nature btw, whatever we as a species choose to do is at the end of the day the fault of nature and the universe)
Nature isn't beautiful or good. It's not ugly or evil either, it just is.
What really pi$$es me off is that it is a high density area and people need to have open space to walk their dogs, take their kids out etc. You know, recreational land not a blinkin' museum.
Has anyone suggested it become a museum?
I think the suggestion is that as well as you using it birds can still live there and breed there.
I'm sick of hearing about conservation, biodiversity, eco this that and the next thing. Too many bloomin' jobsworths spouting crap.
Its folk like you who keep them in work.
Here is what they are doing - hardly banning you simply providing you with your thing and asking that you leave the birds to their thing.
Not that unreasonable if you choose to think about things other than your own needs or the bastards if you dont.
Swinley is a commercial forest run owned and by the crown estate. Mountain Biking was originally permitted on Fireroads and in the area defined as the Expert Mountain Biking area. However the trails have expanded outside of the original area to cover the forest.Swinley Forest is home to 3 types of rare ground nesting birds, Natural England has designated Swinley a Special Protection Area and requested that clear felling take places to provide an environment for these birds, they've also requested that access is restricted to these area to avoid disturbing the birds.
CE has been subject to multiple liability insurance claims by individuals who have had accident on features on the unregulated trails.Because of these 2 reasons (erosion is not an issue) CE have had to develop a plan to provide a sustainable method of permitting Mountain Biking, and have been in discussion with Rowan Sorrel for the past 18 Months who has devised the strategy for Swinley. Although members of BOB and Gorrick have been consulted, the plans suggested by BOB and Gorrick we not workble so the original plan has been actioned.
There will be 3 routes:
A green run for beginners and children, this is being developed with input from 2 local schools.
A blue run which will wider than singletrack, fast and flowy.
A red run which will be mainly technical singletrack with potentially some black features.
The Blue and Red routes will include some existing trails plus a lot of new tracks, where existing trails are used some work will be done to improve the surfces and flow.
There will also be a Downhill area by deerstalker/labrynth, and a free ride area in the Gully area.
Riding on all fireroads is still permitted
Apart from the above marked trails/areas, the rest of the forest is off limits. Wardens will use a soft approach to illegal riders, reminding them the only permitted trails/areas are permitted, however if this doesn't work thet may need to take further action.
Crowthorne Woods (bomb holes, corkscrew) are not included in the Changes to Swinley as it is Forestry Commission land, however FC are watching the development in Swinley to see how to proceed.
The permit scheme finishes in March, replaced with the carparking charge which applies to all vistors not just MTBers. The new trails will open in March 2013.
It is envisioned that the new Swinley Access Group (SAG) will help provide voluntery assistance to help perserve,maintain & develop the new trails. It is also stated that the current plans are not the end of trial development.
There is still a question mark over XC/Enduro racing at Swinley, as all events will be limited to having to use the new trails.It should be noted that all users of the forest will be subject to control restrictions over the next few years, with new walking trails developed.
Shocking lack of concerns for things other than themselves on here from some.
No wonder my countryside loving friends moan about us 😕
Although from a utilitarian standpoint I would say that it's probably useful to protect both the interests of environmental groups and cyclists - aka creating as many happy people as you can and limiting the amount of irritated people. From a scientific standpoint if it's useful to protect these nesting sites so that the birds as a species can survive and we can keep as much of our planets genetic record intact and living then I'd say that's also another important reason as to why the birds should be protected.
Any reasons beyond that are just a load of shite.
Is that not what you think they are doing or at least trying to do?
Indeed Junky - if they weren't taking a utilitarian standpoint, then they could quite easily just close the car park at the look out, put fences up, ban everyone and leave it for the birds!
[i]What really pi$$es me off is that it is a high density area and people need to have open space to walk their dogs, take their kids out etc. You know, recreational land not a blinkin' museum.
I'm sick of hearing about conservation, biodiversity, eco this that and the next thing. Too many bloomin' jobsworths spouting crap.[/i]
That's one of the saddest things I've read on here....
think you're falling into the classic megafauna trap of thinking that some species matter, and others don't.
You should check out Peter Kareiva's thoughts on this. Loads of articles on him and his views available via a google search eg I think you're falling into the classic megafauna trap of thinking that some species matter, and others don't.
I'll leave you with a Guardian quote.
Peter Kareiva, who works for the world's biggest conservation group, the Nature Conservancy, argues that conservation should aim to protect wild nature not for its own sake, but if and because it benefits humans. The Earth, say the neogreens, belongs to homo sapiens now. The value of nature is measured by what we can do with it.
The Earth, say the neogreens, belongs to homo sapiens now. The value of nature is measured by what we can do with it.
Or perhaps the value of Man is in what we do with or allow to happen to nature (including ourselves in that 'nature' as an equal, and no more).
This thread makes me really sad, I thought we'd moved on.
cinnamon_girl - MemberSo how strange that Highland cattle and ponies were introduced to the Heath, put into paddocks and semi-regularly were moved around. Won't somebody think of the birdies?
Hardy grazing animals help keep down the bushes and colonising vegetation that would otherwise see heaths return to woodland - it's a common conservation method. Usually they're moved elsewhere during breeding season so the birds can nest undisturbed.
All I'm asking for is a common-sense approach. For the benefit of those who aren't familiar with the areas I've mentioned, we really do have high-density housing here and indeed there are more thousands of homes in the pipeline.
Wildmoor Heath is managed by the local Wildlife Trust. They put up loads of signs telling people to keep dogs on a lead, they tried to divert footpaths as well. The character of the place has changed, not forgetting the devastation from felling.
As a child growing up on the outskirts of London, I was fortunate enough to have plenty of areas to play in, build dens, climb trees etc. My own children enjoyed playing on Wildmoor Heath and we did cycle through there on our way to Swinley.
The bottom line is that we can not preserve and protect everything. A whole industry seems to have been built on 'conservation' and any common-sense seems to have fallen by the wayside.
Local people need to be consulted, their needs should be listened to and, more importantly, we can't wrap people in cotton wool and discourage them for exploring what's around them.
At least badgerbonk pays for his annual pass and isn't moaning about car park charges that fund the forests like so many on here do, since I withdraw the git comment, bit hash.
preserve and protect everything.
conservation
Personally, I think that the biggest errors are when land managers are unable to distinguish between the two things
car park charges that fund the forests
I think that what makes people really angry, is that most of it isn't!
The bottom line is that we can not preserve and protect everything. A whole industry seems to have been built on 'conservation' and any common-sense seems to have fallen by the wayside.
Why is it not common sense to give you an area to cycle in and an area for the birds to breed in ?
What exactly makes more sense to you ?
Apparently I'm in the 2% that make their living from the land, and a lot of this thread is shockingly funny, some people know as much about land and conservation management as I do about IT systems*. Explains why dealing with the public can be so hard sometimes, they are detached from the real, living world.
*I don't work in IT
cinnamon_girl
What's not common sense about using ponies to keep heathland as heathland?
The alternative is groups of volunteers going out and pulling up the newly growing trees while they're still small enough to deal with pretty easily.
The trees being clear felled isn't devastation, but the creation of heathland areas for nesting birds.
To be fair i'm from Sheffield with the Peak District on my doorstep, so don't know how things are in the south east, but surely it's only a part of the woodlands which has been clearfelled?
I'm with Dave. One of the most pathetic and depressingly ignorant things I've ever read.
As mountain bikers (and hence presumably lovers of the outdoors) we shouldn't be complaining about seasonal restrictions for stuff like ground-nesting birds. It's not like there isn't plenty of other riding to be had around the Thames Valley.
(but that's different to broad-brush banning of riders from parts of forests all year round)
One of the most pathetic and depressingly ignorant things I've ever read.
Blimey! Hasn't anybody on this forum heard of satire?
What's not common sense about using ponies to keep heathland as heathland?
Yes, in theory it sounds like a good idea but I need to come back to my phrase 'high-density housing'. Unfortunately the local yoof thought it would be fun to not only terrorise the ponies and cattle but also to break down the wooden fences and gates.
We then move on to those 'local characters' who think the animals need feeding. 😆
My personal feeling is that this was the wrong area to introduce animals for grazing.
Oh my god.
Almost lost for words TBH.
Some staggering ignorance on display here from more than just the OP.
CG - for someone that was only a week or so ago was jumping on the "cut'n'paste opinion bandwagon" over Amazon and Google I'm sitting here in disbelief. I really do hope you don't mean what you say because if you do you're become a sad and bitter individual.
I can't open this thread again. I'm out.
Blimey! Hasn't anybody on this forum heard of satire?
😆 Some of my posts were certainly a wee bit over the top. 🙂
That's one of the saddest things I've read on here....
+1
I thought the same when i read the OP too.
I usually try and keep my posts on here calm and balanced, respecting the right for all to have an opinion.
in this case though I will simply say - OP, you are a prat and should not be allowed out in public
I didn’t think I was trolling when I started this thread, but having checked the definition I guess it’s not surprising that that’s the way it has been taken by some. My intention was to start a debate not a hate-fest and, in that former respect, this thread has been a success as it has certainly exposed some wildly polarised opinions and triggered some lively discussion.
In my defence and to give some balance - I am not an evil person. My closest two friends are both devout Christians, albeit of slightly different varieties. I am saddened when I see road kill, I rescue spiders from the bath and put them out in the garden (some might say that’s cruel as they’re obviously domesticated) and I don’t try to kill flying insects purely because they are in my space. I hate seeing abandoned supermarket trolleys in my local canal, and I am sickened by our government’s lack of the moral strength to carry out necessary but unpopular policies. I see everyone driving around in overly opulent boutique vehicles that waste vast amounts of fuel lugging around electric motors for functions that could quite easily be carried out by a little human muscle, or air-conditioning systems so that they don’t break into a sweat if the temperature should ever creep above 20 degrees. I provide counselling on a voluntary basis to cancer patients about to undergo surgery, and I make charitable donations by monthly direct debit as well as into numerous pub rattle-cans. I’m not 100% bad!
However, I am opinionated, cynical, selfish and probably a little too flippant for most people’s tastes. I consider these to be positive attributes and wouldn’t have it any other way. Unfortunately, like everyone else, I do fall into the trap of instinctively believing that kittens are cute and that cockroaches are repulsive, I am self-analytical enough to realise that these are redundant emotional responses and I try to resist them.
Anyway........I only started getting a little more serious about biking last January, and Swinley provided the catalyst. Over the months I explored (i.e. got hopelessly lost) the whole area and devised a route that not only took in the main named trails, but also some well-established but less well-known single track to link these all together - I’m not tearing across open heath land. It’s a big safe playground for all of us and now the majority of it is being put out of bounds and I’m sulking. I like the idea of the new improved trails, but I also want continued access to the less anaesthetised, more natural paths.
I really have no time for these birds, and I am neither ashamed nor embarrassed to declare the fact. If they became extinct tomorrow it would be a bit of a shame, but it wouldn’t all be my fault. Despite some of the hate on here, I’m not trying to organise a posse of like-minded bikers to meet up next nesting season to rampage across the forest armed with shotguns and killing jars.
To the protectionists on here, you have your views and I can see your reasoning, particularly on the point regarding complying with international conservation laws. But – I personally disagree with them; surely Swinley Forest is primarily a lumber farm and recreational area, not a zoo?
This is all just my opinion, and this is a forum. Will I die?
I struggle with long sentences
Sigh.
I thought about writing a structured and reasoned reply but instead I'll just go and beat my head against a wall.
surely Swinley Forest is primarily a lumber farm and recreational area, not a zoo?
Why can't it be all three?
Will I die?
Almost certainly!
OK - it seems we're done here. Let's get back to something really worth talking about..........[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/on-one-latest-offer-merino-socks [/url]
OK - it seems we're done here. Let's get back to something really worth talking about..........[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/on-one-latest-offer-merino-socks/url ]
[i]I am saddened when I see road kill, I rescue spiders from the bath and put them out in the garden (some might say that’s cruel as they’re obviously domesticated) and I don’t try to kill flying insects purely because they are in my space.[/i]
& you're a hypocrite & I'm out too.
You actually read it ...beginners mistake