[Closed] Peak District Route Closures - Next Phase

As a local Peak rider I too have been shouting about this for some time and received a mostly apathetic response. Where is our organised lobbying group? We have a good economic case to retain access as riders coming into the park bring money and create jobs. But Peak Horsepower have well connected and influential allies. If they succeed we will have only our own indolence to blame.

Ok worsecase scenario. I'm banned from riding footpaths. I still do it.

IF we are banned. Whats the worse that they can do? **** all. Combative but sorry its conjecture to me. The council are not nasty folk. I've witnessed 4x4's on Roych. I was gobsmacked at how two vehicles ripped it up and a circa 1ton rock was cracked infront of our eyes.

Ok worsecase scenario. I'm banned from riding footpaths. I still do it.

IF we are banned. Whats the worse that they can do? **** all.

I can't imagine you or anyone would be bothered about riding a featureless, chippings coated path, banned or not.

But if they sanitise all the surfaces they won't be worth riding.

I rarely see horses on bridleways anyway, they are usually walking down the lanes with their POLITE gilets on pretending to be police.

Hora, nothing to do with footpaths!!

Hora - go ride Chapel Gate or Brough lane and tell me that they are better for having been sanitised.

Admittedly they are a hell of a lot faster to ride (if you can bunnyhop kerbstones and drainage channels) but if the likes of Peak Horsepower do get their way there are a lot of stables around here who are looking forward to much more group trekking on sanitised loops.

The two groups have conflicting requirements, they want trails that are easy for horses not the challenging routes that we may like to ride.

Riding cheeky footpaths round here is just another stick with which they can beat us in the great access debate that seems to be brewing.

It's a very clever plan. They're not trying to ban us. They're just trying to turn it into somewhere we don't want to be.

I wonder if these new sanitised tracks will catch them out though. I ride down the beast a lot slower than I do down Stanage causeway now. (although I give way to horses whatever the trail).

Wasn't the plan to get all the horses into lasagne? Would have sorted it all out.

fao hora and everybody else

ps breaching a byelaw is a criminal offence

(*search for the word bike)

Details of their intentions are here, the ride details are on the home page:
Peak Horsepower

Is there a bit there where they outline their proposals to ban mountain bikes and establish horse-only networks? Maybe I'm just being naive, but it seems unlikely that that's every going to happen in a National Park.

Riding cheeky footpaths round here is just another stick with which they can beat us in the great access debate that seems to be brewing.

Where is it that we're being beaten with a stick so far? I don't have an axe to grind either way beyond being a mountain biker, walker and climber. I think I've just missed all the anti-mountain bike stuff somehow.

I'm just a little confused by it, the anti-mountain bike conspiracy seems to be very discrete, I guess. I'm more minded to think that the horse lobby is not unreasonably pushing for surfaces which are suitable for horse-riding rather than doing it as a stealth method of removing mountain bikes from the Peak Park. And just because they want something and have connections, doesn't mean it's going to happen.

And finally, all the gravel/hardpack stuff rips to shreds in a year or two anyway, look at the Roych for evidence of that one.

I hope they don't sanitise the beast! I'm still working towards being able to ride all of it!

Potential conflicts of interest aside, there's a risk here that we're appearing to deny, for one group of legitimate bridleway users, the enjoyment of a shared resource that we want exclusively for ourselves. The politics of the playground? What can be an engaging trail for mountainbikers can be impassable/dangerous for equestrians and also novice bikers. What we call "sanitisation" other legitimate users may call "making reasonably safe/useable". The primary purpose of rights of way is to function as effective rights of way for all legitimate users?While I can see that I might be possible to resurface trails in a way that also maintains interest for bikers I xan see that this is expensive.

While I can see that I might be possible to resurface trails in a way that also maintains interest for bikers I xan see that this is expensive.

That's basically what happened a few years back on Cut Gate. It's changed the character of the riding slightly in a few places, but as trail restoration goes, it's a pretty decent job, but it was a long and expensive project I think.

I wonder how much the Cut Gate restoration cost? Considering a load of dodgy road shavings dumped on Wigley Lane apparently cost £60,000.

Local authorities seem to be able to make any job bewilderingly expensive.

Cut gate was 200k. Used to be a cracking dh but at least now it makes for an easier climb to the good stuff.

problem is that both mountain bikers (not that I like that term but it does differentiate from leisure cyclists) and horse riders lack quality facilities and have inherited a shared trail system that works for neither - the main issue shouldn't be fighting over this minimum legal access right but increasing access rights for mountain biking - doesn't need a change in the law - all it needs is large landowners to give permission for mountain biking on their land - lets start with the National Trust who own substantial areas of the Peak District, followed by the like of Yorkshire Water - if mountain bikers had access to all CROW land then sanitised bridleways just become access routes to a host of more interesting stuff - meanwhile a bit of organisation helps like Ride Sheffield - see point 1 in the following -nobody seems to have told the Eastern Moors Partnership that the new Bridleways should only be for Horses
[url] http://www.easternmoors.org.uk/what-we-do/access-recreation.html [/url]

What antigee said. In the meantime, ride where you like,take care, smile and play nicely.

I'd also argue that the notion that trail sanitisation dangerously increases speed (as has appeared in similar threads) is rubbish and does us no favours. If a motorist made the same argument there'd, rightly, be outrage in this parish.

[quote=grittyshaker ]I'd also argue that the notion that trail sanitisation dangerously increases speed (as has appeared in similar threads) is rubbish and does us no favours. If a motorist made the same argument there'd, rightly, be outrage in this parish.

It might not do us any favour but unfortunately its true. smooth wide tracks will lead to greater speed then narrow bumopy ones. that's why FE started building trails in the first place...

@antigee - it would be the most sensible idea, however, that's going to be one bitch of a fight to get any agreement on. I used to part of the group that runs the Wolf's Pit Fell race and just to allow additional access for one day a year took months of negotiations, cajoling and 'persuasion' to keep the race going over private land.

Agree that the starting point should be the FC and STW (the water lot not the riders).

@BWD - there's quite a bit on the internet on various forums if you try google,

[url= https://www.thebmc.co.uk/illegal-offroad-driving-peak-district ]A good piece from the BMC[/url]

[url= http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=77174 ]A bit on teh CTC forums[/url]

But more important than who's trying to get whom banned, is that thee does not seem to be a visible and coherent voice for mountain biking.

If we, collectively as bikers, can't control our speed within safe bounds on shared trails, and are happy to admit as much, we deserve to be banned from these trails on safety grounds. And stupidity.

Imagine the car driver that admitted the same thing with regard to the 20 mph zone outside their local primary school. "I'm sorry officer, the road's so straight and the tarmac is so smooth I can't possibly stick to the speed limit".

Grittyshaker

What speedlimit is there to 'obey'? Given that these 'roads' are not lit then the lowest any enforceable speedlimit can be is 40mph, and there arent that many places where MTB's exceed that.

Grittyshaker

What speedlimit is there to 'obey'? Given that these 'roads' are not lit then the lowest any enforceable speedlimit can be is 40mph, and there arent that many places where MTB's exceed that.

There are no speed limits on bikes, end of discussion.

The closest parallel is cycling furiously which is a totally subjective opinion of what is reasonable and what is not. Whether is applicable to unsurfaced tracks I don't know.

So one person could claim 10mph is ok but another 20mph.

Interesting thread with some cracking points. I guess if you're looking for a campaign group, it's either PMBA or Ride Sheffield. I'm involved with the latter and we're attempting to make contact with Peak Horsepower. I'm tinkin' that it's best to sound them out first and try to win them round - not easy I know but no harm in trying. I firmly believe that all user-groups need to get on and it's already happening in my experience when they're brought together as they've been at the Eastern Moors Stakeholder Meetings. I'd urge everyone to get involved in one of the current lobby groups. We're learning as we go, and there's a shit-load to learn about rights of way legislation, environmental concerns, land management and the rest and we need all the help we can get!

@BWD - there's quite a bit on the internet on various forums if you try google,

So there are organisations attacking mountain bikers and advocating banning us? I can't find it. Do you have any links. I'm probably just being dim.

Chrismac/MrMo - I'm not really arguing a legal point about whether enforceable speed limits exist on bridleways in the same way they do on roads. I know they don't. Just the sheer stupidity of arguing that the nature of the trail surface somehow makes riding at unsafe speeds an inevitability. I've seen this point argued on similar threads and it's bone-headed nonsense that does our claims for wider access no favours. End of discussion. :-/

rogerthecat - Member

@antigee - it would be the most sensible idea, however, that's going to be one bitch of a fight to get any agreement on
......there does not seem to be a visible and coherent voice for mountain biking.

i'd go for the bitch of a fight ... did access work years ago for BMC and stuff on climbing walls and people never never asked for enough - asked for limited, permit access or we'll have a bbq and build it ourselves and it will be sh!t and we'll keep it quiet... fighting over individual trails with horse riders ain't going to sort anything .... coherent voice - well national bodies have to make the effort to be representative and to encompass all facets - CTC should take on this role and local campaign groups should be affiliated (BMC/Ramblers style) and policy needs to be driven up not down

@BWD - will dig some out when I'm home later, we used them for the fell race discussions.

Ride Sheffield - do they cover the entire Peak Park?
PMBA - who?

I am inclined to agree it should be the CTC as this is not the only National Park and it won't be the only one facing these issues. And, there are more routes outside national parks that need some form of voice. Do they have the stomach for a "bitch fight"? 😀

Ride Sheffield successfully campaigned for work on some of Sheffield's bridleways to be both suited to house riders and also to mountain bikers iirc

@grittyshaker, i'll accept where your coming from but the problem is subjective. my idea of fast, or specifically inappropriate speed will differ from some one else. If you make the track smooth, what speed is appropriate, the safe for me speed? which will rise, the conflict speed, which will barely change?

IMO I can safely ride past a walker on a reasonably wide bridleway at 20+ mph, obviously a horse is a different situation! But many walkers jump if you go past them at more than walking pace. Bikes are pretty quiet afterall.

*horse

All this discussion of speed is a bit of a distraction. It's not about the speed we ride at but how that speed is perceived by others.

However, smoother trails will lead to higher speeds. This is why local authorities employ traffic calming. We like chicanes and speed bumps even if they do slow us down.

The kerbstones on Brough Lane are entertainingly placed around a couple of bends, the surface and the width does encourage one (well one that I ride with) to slide the back wheel out a bit.

I agree that speed is a bit of a hijack and the real issue is one of effective representation. So this is the last I'll say, I think...

@MrMo - I recognise the idea of "safe speed" and "conflict speed" too (though you've introduced me to that last term, thanks). It's mildly irritating when walkers leap in the air or shout "look out everyone" as you trundle past at a considerate speed. 🙂 I also know about the headless chicken effect of taking walkers by surprise where it seems as likely they'll jump into your path as out of it. I've seen riders barrel past other users at speeds where luck has played the greater part of avoiding a collision. I'd suggest that an appropriate speed is that which reduces the chance of collision to as close to zero as possible and minimises the potential for conflict as much as reasonably possible. Bikers are nearly always the least vulnerable users of bridleways and speed is always a conscious choice. To blame the trail surface as some (but not you, I note) do is stupid and damaging to the wider access campaign.

To blame the trail surface as some (but not you, I note) do is stupid and damaging to the wider access campaign.

Sorry I don';t have time for a full debate but you really are coming at this from the wrong end. the issue of inappropriate speed is not one that's been raised because of trails - trails have been built becasue of inappropriate speed. The very frst MTB trails at Coed Y Brenin were built becuase cyclists were going at what seemed to be a reasonable speed, only to find that due to the surfacing and trail design, they were unable tp control their bikes, leadin to some serious injuries. Dafydd proposed that to slow cyclists down, they should be encoiurage into the forests by giving them trails where speed coould be controlled by trail design. It seems to have worked

To blame the trail surface as some (but not you, I note) do is stupid and damaging to the wider access campaign.

What 'wider access campaign'? There is no wider access campaign. Is there?

Not sure that the same ideas of design shld apply to shared use bridleways as to trail centres where the main risks presented by bikers are to themselves. Bikers need to demonstrate responsibility on shared use trails. Otherwise there is a risk that we're perceived as effectively saying, "Ban us. We can't be trusted".

Sorry, double post.

Yes BWD,"campaign" is probably too strong s word.

Why do we want wider access? Bar the Peak Park Rangers and a very few stroppy old ramblers, no-one gives a stuff where you ride as long as you're polite, considerate and reasonably discreet.

That's my experience too BWD. Be nice not to have to risk prosecution though, say where ownership changes.

Yes Ride Sheffield are branching out into the Peak. We've been heavily involved with the work on the Eastern Moors, worked with Sheffield Wildlife Trust on Blackamoor, encouraged the National Trust to consider opening more routes on Longshaw Estate and have campaigned on any number of other fronts too. Not sure the CTC can claim quite such a track record....

I'm more bothered about what would happen if magazines and guide book writers suddenly had carte blanche to include my favourite local riding in their latest editions... But anyway, it's no more likely to happen than, say, horse riders being allowed to annex trails in the Peak District for exclusive use by equestrians.

Cut Gate? Has anyone ever seen a horse on Cut Gate? I know I haven't. Or even a hoof-print. Or a pile of the manure they leave behind to mark their passing.

When was the last time anyone was prosecuted for riding a footpath in the PDNP I wonder. I can vaguely recall an incident about eight years ago or so.

I'm not against mountain biking pressure groups or representation by the way, some of the heavy-handed trail work is dreadful, but I'm not overly convinced by campaigning for access to the footpath network. I suspect if there's one thing that would really stir up resentment among groups like the Ramblers, that would be it.

From my (naive) point of view Blacka moor you have an abundance of trails so quite easy to keep both activities separate where with the proposed routes there are no alternatives.

Can see your point BWD but if you have never encountered any hostility from walkers then you are doing very well. We're a pretty considerate bunch compared to many we meet riding round here and we still get grief on occasions, not because of how we ride but because we exist in their universe!

Opening up some, if not all, footpaths would ease the situation rather than exacerbate it because it would spread the load. There will always be the honeypots but a wider spread would be good.

CTC should take on this role and local campaign groups should be affiliated

We have no voice on a national scale so maybe this is a good example of why CTC / BC / another group is needed.

Re Cut Gate - this is the route they are proposing, the site is all flash based so could not pull the image through and the map is pretty poor, but unmistakably Cut Gate:

[url= http://www.peakhorsepower.co.uk/#/kinder-loop/4564966794 ]Kinder Loop[/url]

Or from the flip side, if ctc took this issue up, maybe I'd feel they did consider mountain bikers and might be more inclined to join. Bit chicken and egg that one really.

Can see your point BWD but if you have never encountered any hostility from walkers then you are doing very well. We're a pretty considerate bunch compared to many we meet riding round here and we still get grief on occasions, not because of how we ride but because we exist in their universe!

Twice in the last ten years, which, given the amount I ride, is pretty good going. But then I ride mostly either alone or in small groups, I slow down or stop for walkers and horses and I say hello to people and smile. I look at it positively, I exist in their universe, so I'm going to be smiley and friendly. It doesn't cost you anything to say hello and maybe pause for a chat and it means people view you as a human being on a bike rather than a loosely guided missile... Or maybe I just look very fierce... 😉

Re Cut Gate - this is the route they are proposing, the site is all flash based so could not pull the image through and the map is pretty poor, but unmistakably Cut Gate:

Kinder Loop

Haven't they just linked a bunch of existing rights of way and slapped a fancy name on it? We've been riding that route, more or less, for years. I find it reassuring that the blurb includes the line: 'We hope it will be enjoyed by horse riders, cyclists and walkers alike.'

Though I note that behind the scenes they are apparently out to ban bikes and create a horse-only right of way network in the Peak District, which I know because someone wrote it on a forum and that makes it true.

Bit chicken and egg that one really.

It has been scientifically proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the majority of horse riders are tw*ts. We can't let them win.
Get yer winter tyres on and anywhere you see examples of sanitised trails; get shredding! I will personally be doing a big skid all the way down roych clough leaving the landscape scarred beyond recognition.

On that linky, the horsey peoples' Kinder Loop, it says...

[i]We hope it will be enjoyed by horse riders, cyclists and walkers alike.[/i]

I'm confused (which actually happens quite often).

Blimey, this is hard work.
The horsey folks are in favour of sanitised trails, I don't think anyone suggested that they wanted MTBs banning. Sanitised trails = boring riding, which may encourage people to use footpaths more, which may cause more conflict with other ROW users and landowners.
The local landowners & farmers round here would be very happy to see access limited for just about everyone, they make running anything outdoor a challenge in itself.
There are a few threads/posts/comments online where other ROW users seem to be setting their stall out against MTBs as well as 4x4s and trail bikes. I will go and dig them out shortly.

Which camp do walkers sit in?

Boring flat trails in a rugged landscape or those which are scarred by hundreds if years of passage exposing the geology and adding vast wealth to the surroundings?

Can the landowners not be persuaded to have two paths next to each other, one left as it is and another new one cut with shavings? Signage to direct the best option for your enjoyment and shared sections where its slready smooth and "we'll maintained"

Is this too simple? Surely all users add money into the economy so encouraging all of them is a benefit to everyone?

It's either that or the national park authority actually open up some of the moorland and cut in some trails down to the bedrock

Stuff the horse riders & the walkers, this right here is the problem...

john horscroft - Yes Ride Sheffield are branching out into the Peak. blah, blah, blah, Not sure the CTC can claim quite such a track record...

If the people who are supposed to represent us cant even mention another group that are supposed to represent us without sticking a snide comment in then we're doomed from the start.

Right that's it..... I'm riding footpaths as fair game and taking a matok with me on night rides. A few nice humps and bumps to leap off across this smooth fast trails should spice things up a bit!

Cut Gate? Has anyone ever seen a horse on Cut Gate? I know I haven't. Or even a hoof-print. Or a pile of the manure they leave behind to mark their passing.

Yes, actually 2 of them.
It's worrying what's planned...it's worrying that 1 complaint can result in £60,000 of Tarmac shavings being dumped on a bridle way to improve it, make it safer, whatever.

Could we now complain about the bridleway, that's it's to easy and try to get it put back as it was.....

fao hora and everybody else
>

EPSOM-EWELL.GOV.UK "http://www.epsom-ewell.gov.uk/EEBCWeb/Committee+Agendas+and+Minutes/E+and+WD+Conservators/2011-01-27/Item+08+-+Downs+Byelaws.pdf"

ps breaching a byelaw is a criminal offence
>

PEAKDISTRICT.GOV.UK "http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/290647/trails-management-plan-summary-2012.pdf"

(*search for the word bike)

Hora for the crime of riding willy nilly I hereby charge you with 1 bike for the rest of your natural life.

The horsey folks are in favour of sanitised trails, I don't think anyone suggested that they wanted MTBs banning.

That's exactly what the OP is suggesting. Educated guess is that he's a motorcycle trail rider trying very hard to persuade mountain bikers that somehow the world is out to get us.

Come back with credible evidence that a credible, representative user group has a stated policy of banning mtbs and I'll give it some credence, but lunatic fringe individuals who hate bikes is a whole different thing altogether. It's like taking a thread off here and representing it as somehow representative of what mountain bikers believe en masse, no?

It's worrying what's planned..

What is planned then?

What is planned then?

Tarmac, lots of it. All over the peaks including Kinder.

The horsey lot have some pretty powerful allies....

Stuff the horse riders & the walkers, this right here is the problem...

john horscroft - Yes Ride Sheffield are branching out into the Peak. blah, blah, blah, Not sure the CTC can claim quite such a track record...

If the people who are supposed to represent us cant even mention another group that are supposed to represent us without sticking a snide comment in then we're doomed from the start.

What's snide about that? I'm not convinced that CTC have the resources to cover all the bases. I'm suggesting that Ride Sheffield migth be able to fill that gap. Hardly snide!

What the original post says is exactly what has happened around here. The Peak District National Park is now following fully in the footsteps of the Yorkshire Dales National Park.

The OP sounds like a trail (motor) biker or 4x4 driver. YDNP has gone out of it’s way to ban/curtail/manage motors but at the same time been fantastic for MTBs. It has not closed or restricted any routes at all for MTBs but in fact has created several new bridleways, specifically to encourage MTBs. The Park thinks, and I agree, that trail/scramble bikes and 4x4s have no place in a national park but should leave the outdoors for walkers, cyclists and horses.

Motors have tried many times to get MTBs to support them, by saying “when we go, you will be next” but have always failed. It is a false argument and would only fool MTBers that have not really taken a long hard look at the facts.

The anti-offroaders worked hard to bring in the NERC Act 2006 and continue through the courts to make it bite. The CTC supported this. The NERC Act curtails the creation of routes for motors but does great things for he creation of bridleways and RBs for ‘us’. You can now create a bridleway by simply riding, unchallenged on a route for 12 years on your bike. Before NERC you could not.

Consider that legislation will only go one way for motors. Over 10 years places to go on a motorbike, on green lanes in the countryside, has only been tightened. In 10, or 20 years more it will get even less or even be banned altogether.

The last 10 years has been fantastic in the Yorkshire Dales and now that’s being repeated elsewhere.

C

The last 10 years has been fantastic in the Yorkshire Dales and now that’s being repeated elsewhere.

Agree. But if the preparation for vehicle restrictions included covering Mastiles Lane with crap shaved off roads to a depth of a couple of inches, the first few of those years would have been a bit rubbish.

Let's hope that nature and enthusiastic use works its magic on the new surfaces. Skids are for responsible MTBers...

Why do we want wider access? Bar the Peak Park Rangers and a very few stroppy old ramblers, no-one gives a stuff where you ride as long as you're polite, considerate and reasonably discreet.

Wasn't this government talking about legislation that would make trespass a criminal rather than civil offence?

Just to clear up a few things. We actually work closley with the CTC and are insured through them too. There are some areas that their orgainisation can work well in and other which are more limited. The same applies to us.

The best way that any mountain bike groups/advocates/organisations and just riders can work is together. Bitching and moaning amongst and about ourseleves is a futile exercise

Shared use tracks are exactly that and a land manager has to be able to meet everyones needs. They have to do the work, but how they do it can sometimes be contentious.
In Sheffield we hopefully have tuned a corner and are now consulted on all work to be done. We input on it and are considered in the design proccess. In Derbyshire, little if anyone is consulted. Which is the problem. They are also delivering a lot of the Peak Parks work, as they can afford to do it.

We are doing our best to engage better with DCC as well as groups such as Peak Horse Power. We are also working on a specific strategy for what is mentioned in the original post. We will post up on the website when we have info.

While our name is Ride Sheffield we will do our best to help with Peak based issues, until a more peak based group get set up

Thanks
RS

For trails that the horse groups want "sanitised", would a solution be to sanitise half of the width, leaving the other half more technically interesting for mountain bikers? Obviously not all bridleways are sufficiently wide to do that but we would only need a relatively narrow strip, if a compromise is needed.

So lets get this straight. Are we saying ALL horse riders or just one group?

Look at it from their perspective. How many times has a mountain bike warrior come belting down a trail and startled the horse?

Ever ridden a horse? Its waaaaaaay harder than a bike. Imagine putting a saddle on a hormonal woman who is hungover and pissed off at being surprised..

(Mods please be kind) 🙂

Imagine putting a saddle on a hormonal woman who is hungover and pissed off at being surprised..

you sound like you're talking from experience....

Hora - I have never even come across a horse on a bridleway while mountain biking in the Peak District (which is once or twice every week). They are always walking on the road (and crapping outside our house!) 🙂

Ok worsecase scenario. I'm banned from riding footpaths. I still do it.

IF we are banned. Whats the worse that they can do? **** all. Combative but sorry its conjecture to me. The council are not nasty folk. I've witnessed 4x4's on Roych. I was gobsmacked at how two vehicles ripped it up and a circa 1ton rock was cracked infront of our eyes.

i have to agree

secondly

Just to clear up a few things. We actually work closley with the CTC and are insured through them too. There are some areas that their orgainisation can work well in and other which are more limited. The same applies to us.

The best way that any mountain bike groups/advocates/organisations and just riders can work is together. Bitching and moaning amongst and about ourseleves is a futile exercise

Shared use tracks are exactly that and a land manager has to be able to meet everyones needs. They have to do the work, but how they do it can sometimes be contentious.
In Sheffield we hopefully have tuned a corner and are now consulted on all work to be done. We input on it and are considered in the design proccess. In Derbyshire, little if anyone is consulted. Which is the problem. They are also delivering a lot of the Peak Parks work, as they can afford to do it.

We are doing our best to engage better with DCC as well as groups such as Peak Horse Power. We are also working on a specific strategy for what is mentioned in the original post. We will post up on the website when we have info.

While our name is Ride Sheffield we will do our best to help with Peak based issues, until a more peak based group get set up

Thanks
RS

And i have said this before who said we need representing and who elected half the groups out there to do it for us

so persoanally i think its twaddle wether you gobble up the small breadcrumbs the councils decide to appease you with and claim it as some form of victory or not,

WONT STOP ME RIDING

Bit unfairly harsh there composite pro. I think it's fair to say that by having groups such as RS doing some level of campaigning, or at the very least opening dialogue with the authorities, the chances of some of the communal pot of cash being spent in our favour goes up whereas before it was at zero - and that can't in any way be a bad thing can it?

Bit unfairly harsh there composite pro. I think it's fair to say that by having groups such as RS doing some level of campaigning, or at the very least opening dialogue with the authorities, the chances of some of the communal pot of cash being spent in our favour goes up whereas before it was at zero - and that can't in any way be a bad thing can it?

Maybe so in some folks eyes it might be harsh ....its one of those be burned by the majority for your opinion the supporters of said groups

i think its very naive to publicly say we have an input with anything council related , being a cynical bastard i think its more of a box ticking excercise on their part "have we listened to everyone" yep ok then ...

surely DCC listened when they tarmac , and i think there was a rant on this very forum regards it
and sanitize everything to the point where there are folks on forums complaining about trails being sanitized....mountain biking was you a bike and the terrain presented ,have fun

Sorry but in 20 years of riding wharncliffe and the peaks all i have seen is issue after issue arise the more interaction that goes on with councils and groups

My apologies for maybe my tone as I'm not a great putter of my thoughts into writing genius but thats the way i see it and if they did say ooh you cant do that sonny im more than happy to say ....er see these two fingers

But if we're talking about Greno, say, that very interaction with a group - in that case the woodlands trust - has resulted in the fantastic tracks up there.

And the issue with DCC is that they simply don't consult at all as I understand it.

Pook Im not having a go !!

In my experience I/we never had a problem before

Now Greno got very popular, there were trails there already ,some very very good ones, , I'm not nocking the work (just because i don't personally agree with it) ,but then more trails got built and more folks started arriving, then it all got very political , folks go on about sustainability and the face of the peaks and the countryside change quite naturally wether we accelerate it or not

My only point is there was no problem before we just went and rode up there

I now just ride the langsett end and cut gate end of the landowners estate ,

vickypea - Member

Hora - I have never even come across a horse on a bridleway while mountain biking in the Peak District (which is once or twice every week). They are always walking on the road (and crapping outside our house!)

No I know you're not.

I guess it was easier when there were far fewer riders though. Now there's so many more of us, having some 'official body' representing us is the only way we'll get a say on what's going on rather than being seen as hooligans in the woods. As you know, it only takes one nob to spook a horse and we're all tarred with the same idiot brush, regardless of how many more of us ride respectfully.

We might not all agree on what groups like RS do, debate, or claim success for - but there's nothing stopping us all getting involved and making our voices, dissenting or otherwise, heard to that group. Better to settle our differences 'internally' so to speak before other groups get a chance to knock us down for lack of organisation or unity. If that's as part of something like RS then so be it.

Garry Lager- I ride a lot round Roman Lakes, but mostly after dark, which would explain why I haven't seen a horse there! That newly sanitised bit is awful.