You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Hey - worth a read as this will affect quite a lot of trails in the Surrey Hills over the next few years, specifically on Leith, Bury, Ranmore and Redlands:
The PDF is a biggie; I'm going to have a rummage, but many eyes make light work and all that.
I used to do a bit of trail building and was one of the builders for Summer Lightning, so had a few conversations after the fire earlier this year with Forestry as well as the AONB and a few others: we originally put spades in the ground for SL on a rough line about 20 years ago, so none of the Forestry peeps involved then are involved now, and a lot of trail access, silvicuture and organisational culture has changed since then.
This consultation is likely to be critical to what happens in this area over the next decade, so if you ride here, please take the time to read it through and respond: we've got a lot to be thankful for for these hills and FC has been a very receptive land manager of the years.
As part of the Forest Planning process we seek the views of external stakeholders, including local communities and organisations involved with nature conservation, public recreation, and the timber industry. Through this consultation process we can ensure that an appropriate balance of objectives is achieved.
It doesn't specifically exclude consultation with the public but it seems fairly weighted to "organisations"
Questions are weighted ... Q1 Yes/No .. Q2 specific to "Your organisation" Q3 "your organisation"
TBH doesn't sound like they are really interested in members of the public that use the land.. just organisations ??
we’ve got a lot to be thankful for for these hills and FC has been a very receptive land manager of the years
Out of the area being planned I know Redlands (east of CH Lane) best and I'd say the main issue for MTB is liability.
FE seem to have a relaxed attitude putting some signs up saying "Do not ride here - its not safe" whilst being quite sympathetic to not blocking trails deliberately.
The only bit that references cyclists is here:
For me there isn't much in the way of a plan there, no timeline and not munch in the way of specific goals and objectives. Would be intrigued to know how much the uk distributors who are based not far from there are getting involved, as the loss of somewhere like redlands would result in less bike sales.
Would be intrigued to know how much the uk distributors who are based not far from there are getting involved, as the loss of somewhere like redlands would result in less bike sales.
liability nightmare right there, i wouldn't blame them for not wanting to get involved however recent videos clearly show they "support" trails in the woods..
It will just be as it's always been - riders build, landowners bulldoze, riders build, landowners bulldoze rinse and repeat.
If that drop on the Sam Reynolds gravel video is Surrey Hills, its no wonder they get flattened 😉
The only bit that references cyclists is here:
The one thing that seems likely from that very short statement is the aspect of more active management and the possibility of other user groups derailing current and future trail development during other future consultation processes on expansion and maintenance.
Out of the area being planned I know Redlands (east of CH Lane) best and I’d say the main issue for MTB is liability.
FE seem to have a relaxed attitude putting some signs up saying “Do not ride here – its not safe” whilst being quite sympathetic to not blocking trails deliberately.
What's the current state of play around Redlands. Back in the good old days we had the likes of SL (the last stretch), WOM, Mangrove Alley and many others, then the anti-MTB attitude shot up and we were told to pretty much stick to fire roads. It remained that way for years, with a few peeps sneaking in some trails here and there. But recently I've seen a lot more activity, with many MTBers saying the openly ride wherever they want.
SirHC
The only bit that references cyclists is here....
For me there isn’t much in the way of a plan there, no timeline and not munch in the way of specific goals and objectives
Looks like a sham, smells like a sham and waddles like one.
Q1 sums it up.
Do you agree that the plan achieves an appropriate balance of social, economic and environmental objectives for the woodland?
Name
******
Yes
No
Q3. needs an organisation to qualify.. I suspect any non approved organisation comments will just be binned.
You're very lucky - they're proposing minimal clear felling and to use Low Impact Silvicultural Systems (LISS) going forward. It's all mixed conifer and native broadleaves so not a Sitka farm. What this means is they'll be thinning the woodlands to allow more light to the forest floor to allow for natural regeneration or under planting. Not flattening the whole thing in one hit and destroying trails. It should result in a light, open woodland which will be perfect for trails. I'd say overall it's a good plan and really positive for the local MTB scene.