You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Big-Bud.
Yes we were (not was) seriously considering booking a trip with him and you are correct that we will now not be doing so. Somehow carried out a background check ! Well I looked on his public Facebook page and there is a post dated 21st of February stating that after this year he will no longer be running trips in Scotland. I also rang an acquaintance whom I rarely see but I know goes on a lot of MTB trips all over the world and asked if they had any experience of him.
Seriously – what other criteria do you use to judge how fast it’s acceptable to ride? I’m not being facitous here.
Serious question, when you're trained as a mountain bike guide, which you presumably are, what do they tell you? I can't believe it's just a simple, 'make sure you don't crash into anyone'.
My take would be that you should ride at a speed where you're not going to endanger or startle other trail users based on a conservative perception of what might be alarming for them.
I'm not suggesting mountain bikers should pootle about like OAPs on a shopping trip, just that a mountain biker's perception of what's a reasonable speed may differ from a walker's perception of the same speed in a similar way to GoPro footage maybe not being an accurate representation of actual speed.
Of course it's all subjective and I'm not having a pop at you, but I'd say there's more to it than just being able to stop before you hit someone. Genuinely curious, when you train as a guide, what are you told?
Reflect and all will be well! 😆
Incidentally, how does one prove they have reflected sufficiently? Are the baying mob expecting a grovelling apology? 😆
One must sacrifice their first born at the high priestess of tandem morality.
Come on, Joe. 🤣
thunderwingdoomslayer (Dan) - the reasons for stopping running trips in Scotland are non of your business and nothing to do with having had my "use" or money out of guiding in Scotland.
I was referring specifically to bad things to say about my guiding and attitude to other trail users. But I'm glad you feel the need to have a swipe at me personally behind your anonymous username on an internet forum.
Anyway - bigger fish to fry.
Videoed self flagellation is the minimum standard accepted by the STW select committee. It marks the beginning of a lifelong learning exercise.
Rule 1 applies......
Go fast on proper bike trails with little use and open corners? Hell yes.
Treating open access routes with lots of foot traffic the same way? Just no.
I'm firmly of the 'rambling with a bike' school, unless I'm on a dedicated bike trail, when I can go for it without the fear of mowing someone down.
Are the people who treat common access trails like racetracks the same people who drive like ****s on minor roads, with the same sense of entitlement?
I would imagine so.
MTB was much more fun when fewer entitled arseholes with no idea how to behave in the countryside were involved. The sooner they piss off back to their golf clubs, the better.
And Strava. That can go and **** itself, big time.
Not everything is a race.
No one gives a shit how fast you are.
And anyone who rides the most popular walking routes on a weekend is a bell end.
Ladybower on a Sunday?
Just **** off.
No imagination, lazy thinking and a complete disregard for others.
That's why a lot of people hate us. They have a point.
There's thousands of miles of empty, cheeky trails out there.
Don't be a ****. Go and find them.
Has the YouTube vid been edited, can't see anything at 8.15 now??
Yup Poop. It would probably be a good idea for the mods to shut this thread/ kill it with fire as nobody can actually see the incident now. That removes any chance of folk coming across this thread being able to make up their own minds about it and he does have a business to run.
Well as I’m waiting for access to a job I’ll say I’ve ridden his Mont Blanc Enduro trip and it was fantastic and I have lots to compare it to from the last 20 years. Incredibly capable guide and just non stop top riding for a week and great hotels. I’m not his mate only a punter he probably doesn’t remember as you meet lots of them and am looking to book one of his Italian trips for my 50th next year if I think my legs are willing. I’ve just pulled one nail out the cross but my right hands free if you need somewhere to put it.
That removes any chance of folk coming across this thread being able to make up their own minds about it
Still has the woman at 3:05 saying "Alright. Enjoy" if people still need something to get het up about
The meeting with walkers at 8:15 must have been edited out, unless they are invisible people.
Rusty Spanner
Subscriber
Rule 1 applies……Go fast on proper bike trails with little use and open corners? Hell yes.
Treating open access routes with lots of foot traffic the same way? Just no.
I’m firmly of the ‘rambling with a bike’ school, unless I’m on a dedicated bike trail, when I can go for it without the fear of mowing someone down.
Are the people who treat common access trails like racetracks the same people who drive like * on minor roads, with the same sense of entitlement?
I would imagine so.MTB was much more fun when fewer entitled arseholes with no idea how to behave in the countryside were involved. The sooner they piss off back to their golf clubs, the better.
And Strava. That can go and * itself, big time.
Not everything is a race.No one gives a shit how fast you are.
And anyone who rides the most popular walking routes on a weekend is a bell end.
Ladybower on a Sunday?
Just * off.No imagination, lazy thinking and a complete disregard for others.
That’s why a lot of people hate us. They have a point.
There’s thousands of miles of empty, cheeky trails out there.
Don’t be a *. Go and find them.
Guessing someone shat in your kettle this monrning! 😆
Mountain biking has changed a lot since the late 80s and early 90s when many people first got into the sport and bought their first XC hardtails. At that time you shouldered the bike up a mountain then picked a route carefully down while being shaken to bits and stopped at the bottom to tighten your threaded steerer, which had worked loose with the battering. If you met walkers you'd stop for some banter and they would congratulate you on having got up there in the first place then stand by to watch in the hope you would crash for their amusement.
Nowadays with mountain bikes resembling motorbikes with no engine you can blast over stuff that would have caused a disaster in the 80s and 90s. Speeds have increased massively and accidents are much more bone-crushing as a consequence. The speeds in the video above would be fine on a dedicated downhill trail but on a public footpath they look downright idiotic. If I'd been one of those walkers I would certainly have had a go at the cyclists for selfish disregard for other people's safety. I don't see any difference between a reckless cyclist who injures a pedestrian and a reckless driver who injures a cyclist and that's where cyclists' misplaced sense of smug entitlement does the sport no favours.
So... Are we ever going to see these injury stats, or are we still on anecdotal evidence?
What about walkers with their pointy poles, if they stumble they could have a childs eye out with that you know. And let's not get onto those fell runners, hooligans to a man, tearing up the trails at breakneck pace! 😆
but on a public footpath
it isn't a public footpath
Are we ever going to see these injury stats, or are we still on anecdotal evidence?
Isn't the discussion here about an anecdote? I didn't spot where "Was this irresponsible?" became "How many people in Scotland get injured by mountain bikers hitting them?"
As before, you won't find any stats on how many people have an unpleasant experience as a result of being narrowly missed. Which I suspect is why you keep asking for them.
So… Are we ever going to see these injury stats, or are we still on anecdotal evidence?
If you are so desperate to see these injury stats try looking for them yourself .
You would find stats about injuries though.... The reason I asked is if there are stats showing injuries from mountain bikers against hillwalkers, then the anecdotal evidence, and therefore the fear you all seem to be suggesting exists in the hills, is well founded. If they are none to very little accidents, well then, it's just hysteria...
I suspect, rocks and ankles are the hill walkers biggest worry though...
Perhaps we should ban rocks and pave all the hills? 😆
Ramsey Neil
If you are so desperate to see these injury stats try looking for them yourself .
I'm not the one claiming menace, I'm asking people to back up their claims with more than anecdotal evidence. I don't think that is an unreasonable request.
Idiots to be riding like that on a shared path.
The reason I asked is if there are stats showing injuries from mountain bikers against hillwalkers, then the anecdotal evidence, and therefore the fear you all seem to be suggesting exists in the hills, is well founded. If they are none to very little accidents, well then, it’s just hysteria…
If a town centre was known to be frequented by youths with knives, but the stats showed that very few people had been stabbed, would you say that anyone fearful of walking through that town centre was hysterical?
Bez
Subscriber
The reason I asked is if there are stats showing injuries from mountain bikers against hillwalkers, then the anecdotal evidence, and therefore the fear you all seem to be suggesting exists in the hills, is well founded. If they are none to very little accidents, well then, it’s just hysteria…If a town centre was known to be frequented by youths with knives, but the stats showed that very few people had been stabbed, would you say that anyone fearful of walking through that town centre was hysterical?
Yes.
Do you think every one in america walks down the street fearing for their life from a gunshot?
They will if an area has a high prevalence of gun violence, they won't if it doesn't.
Yes.
Then I think you have a major lack of empathy.
Bez
Subscriber
Yes.Then I think you have a major lack of empathy.
Perhaps, but at least I've got a respect for stats and actual evidence! 😆
Do you think every one in america walks down the street fearing for their life from a gunshot?
Obviously not. Do I think that some people in America actively try to stop people wandering around with guns? Yes, of course. Just as I think some people in the UK actively try to stop people hooning around with mountain bikes.
Hang on. This has morphed.
The question of whether or not the rider was acting irresponsibly is different to the question of how many biker/walker incidents there are. But even so, how many upset or injured walkers is acceptable?
Perhaps, but at least I’ve got a respect for stats and actual evidence! 😆
No, you really don't, because you're trying to apply the wrong data to the problem.
This is like the close pass initiatives that have happened with regard to cycling on roads. It's well known that one of the factors that keeps people away from cycling on roads is perceived danger, a major component of which is the experience of close passes. Which is also one of the most hated aspects of road cycling for those who do ride on roads.
There were no data about close passes. So the "only stats matter" people argued it wasn't a problem: it's the "no collision, no worries" attitude, but masquerading behind the pretence of "evidence". But the evidence wasn't the evidence about the problem, it was about something else. Related, but different.
So people started gathering data. There are of course only certain types of data you can gather, and—guess what—an important aspect of that is anecdotal, or at least "unstructured" data, in that it's people simply saying they've had a negative experience and describing it. But you can still measure the semantics of this and analyse it.
And it paints a different picture to that painted by what's recorded when the emergency services turn up and cart people off for treatment.
Bez
Subscriber
Do you think every one in america walks down the street fearing for their life from a gunshot?Obviously not. Do I think that some people in America actively try to stop people wandering around with guns? Yes, of course. Just as I think some people in the UK actively try to stop people hooning around with mountain bikes.
But in america, there's lots and lot's of evidence for gun violence!
😆
This is like the close pass initiatives
Initiated due to overwhelming evidence of a problem.
I'm starting to see a pattern here...
But in america, there’s lots and lot’s of evidence for gun violence!
Again, you're not understanding that broadly speaking humans aren't terribly rational and don't naturally base decisions or emotions on data, they base them on experience and anecdote.
I’m starting to see a pattern here…
Is it the one where you repeatedly insist on turning a conversation about one specific event into a conversation about population-level outcomes of similar but different events? 🙂
Challenges for evidence are standard in the Cycle Chat forum where people discuss lots of right-on stuff. If a poster feels they are on dodgy ground they will try to gain the intellectual high ground by demanding "a peer-reviewed study" or "verifiable statistics", even when people are only bantering about the trivial stuff cyclists like to discuss.
Bez
Subscriber
I’m starting to see a pattern here…Is it the one where you repeatedly insist on turning a conversation about one specific event into a conversation about population-level outcomes of similar but different events? 🙂
I thought 5 pages in you might want to get passed slaughtering the guy and discussing if there is a wider issue...
globalti
Member
Challenges for evidence are standard in the Cycle Chat forum where people discuss lots of right-on stuff. If a poster feels they are on dodgy ground they will try to gain the intellectual high ground by demanding “a peer-reviewed study” or “verifiable statistics”, even when people are only bantering about the trivial stuff cyclists like to discuss.
It's the next logical step ya loonball. Youse have presented a hypothesis, that people are riding dangerously on shared trails. The next step in that is to go ahead and turn it into a theory with some evidence.
Either that or you are just stuck in a never ending circle of gossip, which is exactly what you anecdotal evidence is...
But aye you're right, imagine me having the audacity to ask for evidence! 😆
benjonesmtb
The fact that I endo’ed may have looked uncontrolled… but please reserve your judgement on my control of front wheel traction until you’ve ridden with me.
lol pull the other one will ya? I posted a pic a few pages back. It's total balls that you had it under control.
I thought 5 pages in you might want to get passed slaughtering the guy and discussing if there is a wider issue
Not sure I was "slaughtering the guy", I mostly just said it looked irresponsible from the video and noted that it was odd to admit on the one hand to having scared people and felt the need to apologise, and then on the other to say that it was all fine and there was nothing to apologise for or reflect upon.
Aide from that I've mostly just been trying to challenge the "no-one got hurt so it's fine and anyone who says otherwise is a hysterical alarmist" attitude, which I see a lot in the context of people riding on roads and which I don't personally like seeing applied to people walking on trails.
In other words, I am trying to move on to a wider problem. It's just that it's an even wider one than the one you're trying to move to, which only considers collision/injury outcomes—which inherently excludes the incident we started with and is therefore less relevant.
It's funny but here in the mill towns I see idiots driving BMWs, Audis and Mercedes recklessly every day, nobody gets hurt either but it doesn't half reinforce the prejudices of the other 99.9% of law-abiding drivers.
Tbh, what is really happening is that we are looking at it from 2 different view points. I don't think this is a problem, you think there is a problem.
My stand point is that if there is a problem even with close passes, then it stands to reason that some of those close passes would convert into collisions and therefore if there are collisions it would be indicative of a wider problem. If there aren't large numbers of reports of collisions, then it's not really a problem worth investigating further, as the evidence(lack of collisions) would suggest that the problem is largely just psychological. If there are reports of collisions, then it's a problem that needs looked into. If there's a problem I'm not against looking at it and doing something about it. You kinda need to present a viable problem firstly though.
Your stand point seems to be, people are scared, there's a problem and it's dangerous. Well not really, if there aren't any injuries happening because then it's simply not dangerous, and it doens't compare like for like to things like the close pass roads initiative at all.
Far as I can see I'm the only one presenting a way of quantifying if there is a problem. You can't quantify anecdotal evidence. (I reckon you could easily find a larger number of anecdotes of people with a positive view). Even if you look at the original video in the OP, the anecdotal evidence suggests that the vest majority of people are fine with mtbs on the trails, there was only 1 derisory comment from a number of people that were passed.
globalti
Member
It’s funny but here in the mill towns I see idiots driving BMWs, Audis and Mercedes recklessly every day, nobody gets hurt either but it doesn’t half reinforce the prejudices of the other 99.9% of law-abiding drivers.
loads of people get hurt. look I can easily quantify it for you...
Statistics on reported road casualties in Great Britain for the year ending June 2018 shows, there were:
1,770 reported road deaths.
26,610 people killed or seriously injured.
165,100 casualties of all severities, a decrease of 6%
Tbh, what is really happening is that we are looking at it from 2 different view points. I don’t think this is a problem, you think there is a problem.
Yeah, hopefully we're getting to the point where we inevitably largely agree and can put this bugger to rest 🙂 I think the difference in how we're considering the phrase "a problem". As far as I can see you're mainly considering the problem of physical harm; I'm mainly considering the problem of non-physical harm (since there was no physical harm in the incident we're discussing here) and its potential for causing a certain reaction.
Your stand point seems to be, people are scared, there’s a problem and it’s dangerous.
Again, a subtle difference: you're inferring the "it's dangerous" bit; my standpoint is more like "many people would be scared by this manner of riding, that's a problem, and even if it doesn't manifest itself as injury outcomes it's still a problem". And I've said nothing about the population-level scale of the problem, only that the riding in this case is to my mind problematic; if we all did it then similar encounters would happen more frequently and the overall problem would be bigger.
You can’t quantify anecdotal evidence.
You can, you just have to collect it in certain ways and treat it in an appropriate manner. If anecdotal evidence were unquantifiable we'd probably have people saying that racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination didn't exist because there were no data. Whereas we can do anything from, say, counting allegations of criminal offences to performing sentiment analysis of social media posts to start to understand the scale of the problem.
Even if you look at the original video in the OP, the anecdotal evidence suggests that the vest majority of people are fine with mtbs on the trails, there was only 1 derisory comment from a number of people that were passed.
Sure. And again, we need to pull it back from saying that we don't have data about any supposed problem in the entire population, and simply say that coming round a blind bend on your front wheel, causing other people to evacuate that trail, and then feeling obliged to apologise to them is self-evidently not commendable behaviour and is something which, whatever the scale of the overall problem, isn't going to improve it.
The fact that we don't know how many of these incidents occur doesn't mean we should say they're fine and dandy and we should just crack on as long as no-one actually gets hit.
Your stand point seems to be, people are scared, there’s a problem and it’s dangerous. Well not really, if there aren’t any injuries happening because then it’s simply not dangerous,
It is highly antisocial and aggravating though.
And there are accidents happening. I crashed into someone whilst hooning around Swinley too fast. It was another biker. My finger was cut in the collosion, his was quite badly whacked, and a rhododendron bush took a fair amount of damage. I learned a lesson and slowed down on blind corners.
tbh, long as you are careful around other users you can go as fast as you like, imo(which if you look at the rest of the video, they are perfectly respectable and careful around the other users, 1 woman was upset but there really was no basis for her comment).
The incident was an oversight by the OP, nothing more really. You really can't legislate for that, mistakes can happen.
Anyhoo, I think both our points are really made, we've differing opinions that aren't going to perfectly align in lieu of much else significant to talk about.
Ultimately lesson, keep a decent line of sight and make sure you can stop within that distance. I think we all agree on that.
molgrips
Subscriber
Your stand point seems to be, people are scared, there’s a problem and it’s dangerous. Well not really, if there aren’t any injuries happening because then it’s simply not dangerous,It is highly antisocial and aggravating though.
And there are accidents happening. I crashed into someone whilst hooning around Swinley too fast. It was another biker. My finger was cut in the collosion, his was quite badly whacked, and a rhododendron bush took a fair amount of damage. I learned a lesson and slowed down on blind corners.
Well that was stupid! 😆 I've never crashed it to anyone, myself.
Does that anecdote cancel out your anecdote? 😉
@rich_s
'Norfolk edition'?
They only worked on the flattest part of the country, lol!
As a general observation, the guide might have been wise to invest in a bunch of walkie-talkies. Send someone down the trail to warn of any 'hazards'.
Though, if I was shelling out the £££ for a guided walk or MTb trip, I'd like a commemorative video with drone footage.
Or would the 'Norfolk edition' feature six-finger levers???
seosamh77
...The incident was an oversight by the OP, nothing more really. You really can’t legislate for that, mistakes can happen...
Oversight?
Surely he knew he was going fast and that was a blind corner?
And that it was a shared path with the possibility of people/bikes/dogs/kids likely to be coming in the other direction?
Just because there wasn't the last several times doesn't mean there isn't now.
And the reason that there aren't any significant statistics is because most people don't ride like Richard Heads on public paths.
However we all make mistakes. The secret is not repeating them and this is one incident.
7 pages on an incident that never happened. The guide most likely had ridden that trail several times before and never came across a soul. unfortunately on this occasion he did on one of the only blind bends, could he have ridden round it slower, with hindsight most definitely, but he did still stop in time and I’m sure if he rides this trail in future he will ride it with more caution, lessons learned and all that. No one was hurt the walkers didn’t seem that offended, the only people that seem offended are the self righteous, overly opinionated bunch on here that are clearly out damage probably what is a very good guides reputation and business because of there overly anal standpoint. I always thought mountain bikers were a pretty relaxed bunch but clearly they have been infiltrated by the hybrid love children of the ramblers association and local curtain twitching neighbourhood watch brigade. - well on here at least.
@bigwill - as stated previously, he's a guide, who has ridden that trail before and knows that it's a blind corner (stated in the original video) and that it's a shared trail. If he wanted his clients to go round there at speed then he should have scouted ahead on that section at a slower pace to make sure the way was clear. Later on the trail there are good sight lines and the trail is empty so there's no problem with riding at whatever speed the riders are capable of, but not at that point of the trail.
It's not the fact that no collision occurred it's an incident where the negative perception of mountain bikers by others is reinforced. Avoiding such incidents isn't kowtowing to other groups it's common decency.
If we as mountain bikers want respect and acceptance in the countryside then we also have to respect other trail users. Without it we aren't going anywhere.
Or would the ‘Norfolk edition’ feature six-finger levers???
Original 'mistakenly' message referenced five finger leavers which taking into account the thumb gripping the bars is where the Norfolk reference came in. I had some plastic LX levers on my Marin Palisades and yeah they probably did only work on Norfolk gradients.
7 pages on an incident that never happened.
It did happen. There was an incident.
I always thought mountain bikers were a pretty relaxed bunch but clearly they have been infiltrated by the hybrid love children of the ramblers association and local curtain twitching neighbourhood watch brigade
So you think it's wrong to care about pissing people off and giving us a bad name?
This is starting to turn into one of the nasty Singletrack "baying mob" threads. I think he's learnt his lesson, he'll slow down there next time but it's not the worst example of trail behaviour. I'd not have ridden it quite like that, but I've ridden the same trail quickly where the sight lines are good.
It seems we are going round in the inevitable circles and people just want to see blood, particularly the likes of epicyclo and TJ who don't ride bikes in that way and I'm not sure appreciate the control that you can have on these modern big bikes. I suspect TJ will reply repeating that access in Scotland is unique and a qualified right, and epicyclo will say something about "trailparks", which seems to be a deliberately obtuse reference to what the rest of the world calls trail centres.
Aye, 100%.
I don't get this 'negative perception of us MTBers' pish either, is this maybe a reality in the overpopulated south? It's certainly not the case up here, or even in the Lakes, the absolute vast majority of folk I've met in the mountains are either amazed to see folk howking a 30lb bike up there, and up for a blether.
The guy came into a corner a bit hot, apologised to the walkers, end of.
Christ, imagine he'd been on an ebike? 😂😂😂
@whitestone I’m not I saying this guide was without fault and as said in hindsight I’m sure even he might reflect that he could had gone a tad slower, but we are human and as so not always perfect, it’s a very low level incident and he did stop without any contact. I think as mountain bikers with the exception of some gravity events / specific DH trails the perceived speed and real speed are often miles apart, I bet he was doing no more than 12-15 mph.
As for reinforcing negative perception of mountain bikers in all the years I had ridden on bridleways, footpaths, shared trails, I have never come into conflict with any other trail user and I don’t think this guide did, apologises were said and everything moved on, hey I’m not saying conflict doesn’t occur but I believe it is far more infrequent than is often perceived and just like this minor infringement blown out of all proportion in internet echo chambers like this. People need a sense of perspective that’s all.
The guy came into a corner a bit hot, apologised to the walkers, end of.
That isn't the end of it. The crux here is that he didn't (initially) think he did anything wrong at all. If he has indeed had a think and realised this, and if others have, then good.
As for there not being conflict between trail user groups - I think there has been in the past and probably still is. I don't see much of it because my trails are quiet, but in other areas I suspect there is more conflict. But then, I slow right down to pass people and exchange cheery hellos and stuff, because it's important. I could blast past them at high speed but I don't.
That isn’t the end of it. The crux here is that he didn’t (initially) think he did anything wrong at all. If he has indeed had a think and realised this, and if others have, then good.
Nonsense.
He apologised to the walkers, which is pretty much as 'initially' as you get.
The 'crux' is that he didn't apologise and seek redemption from a bunch of self righteous moral internet gods.
It's the knock-on effects. Those walkers get back to their hotel/B&B/home/pub and mention: "Nearly got taken out by some mountain bikers today", that becomes "Out of control bikers, etc.". To the walkers it was an inconvenience, a near miss, just happens, no big deal. To their audience and further audiences getting Chinese whispers it's reinforcing stereotypes.
A bear shitting in the woods isn't a problem. One hundred bears shitting in the woods becomes a problem. But, crucially, for each individual bear, shitting in the woods isn't a problem.
Moving away from this incident. I coordinate/oversee an outdoor challenge, not bike related. The notes given to the contenders have gone from less than a page to over four sides of A4 purely because people can't behave themselves. This includes them believing that their supporters don't have to pay at pay and display car parks, making a racket outside peoples' homes at 3am, etc. It means that on occasion I've had to deflect the national park, the National Trust and even the national press. The press obviously just wanted to hype things up to make a story (see the Jeremy Vine thread) and a few pertinent facts sent them on their way.
Nobeerinthefridge
Nonsense.
He apologised to the walkers, which is pretty much as ‘initially’ as you get.
The ‘crux’ is that he didn’t apologise and seek redemption from a bunch of self righteous moral internet gods.
It's not nonsense. Read his post again. He apologised for startling them, but he maintains he did nothing wrong.
A lot of responses on here from people sounding like they'd be better staying home eating their cornflakes musing over the Daily Mail than heading out for an early morning ride.
I've seen many scenarios where a polite, law abiding bike ride has encountered walkers and its been the walkers who have been downright rude, abusive and out of order. But walkers don't tend to wear GoPros to film their adventures and then post them up for the world to see. Its a shame then that Ben has felt the pressure to edit the video as whilst it was an unfortunate incident, nothing happened.
I wonder whether we should start posting up every instance of rides when encounters with walkers garners unwarranted abuse, because I'm certain that it isn't a one sided storey of inconsideration for other users of our - free for all to use - countryside.
For what it's worth I'm a member of multiple hill walking clubs here in Scotland, and I can tell you that there is definitely a rising resentment against what many of them see as aggressive and intrusive mountain biking. If you don't spend lots of time with these folks then you don't know. On the bus and in the pub, it's a topic of discussion that does come up, even from folk that know I'm a mountain biker. As Whitestone says, all it takes is one minor thing then they're all flapping about it for months, and their position is gradually polarising negatively. Fair enough some of them are miserable old brexity sods, and I do what I can to defend the position of responsible mountain biking, but clearly there's a section of us with little consideration for anything else than their rad gnarr edits n hucks
Cant we all just kiss and make up? I’m a member of climbing clubs in the Lake District and Wales and more and more of our members are buying bikes and ditching the walking boots. Go figure. Of course the older right wingers with red socks are having their feet cut off and impaled on stakes to warn of approaching blind corners.
I would echo what Mike says above.I think that bikes have been about long enough that folk are used to them, and even the most dyed in the wool hillwalker recognises how handy they are to get into remote areas,but some folk like to complain about other users, end of. I have had the odd remark in the past, but weirdly it hasn't been from anybody with what I recognise as a Scottish accent.That to me suggests that a certain level of conflict down South that is a lot rarer here, so we should work to keep it like that. Being told I should dismount while passing her party as I was on a bridleway in the Southern Cairngorms was a favourite.
I had to Google Bridleway; thank you God for making me Scottish.
Anyone who doesn't see riding like this in these areas as a problem need only look at the camping bans to see where it can end up.
munrobiker
It seems we are going round in the inevitable circles and people just want to see blood, particularly the likes of epicyclo and TJ who don’t ride bikes in that way and I’m not sure appreciate the control that you can have on these modern big bikes. I suspect TJ will reply repeating that access in Scotland is unique and a qualified right, and epicyclo will say something about “trailparks”, which seems to be a deliberately obtuse reference to what the rest of the world calls trail centres.
I do ride bikes that way, but only under closed race conditions. (However age means I don't do much of that these days.)
Whether it's a rigid hardtail or a "modern big bike" is irrelevant if you're riding it at the edge of control. The point is to ride it with enough reserve to safely slow/avoid obstacles and without alarming other people sharing the path.
Sorry about "trailparks" - that's what I thought they were called, I stand corrected.