[Closed] Swinley Investment and Mountain Bike Network

For a lot of people, mountain biking = trail centre.
What's the bridleway situation like round there ?

Reading between the lines, it looks like a long term money spinner for the crown estate while attempting to keep it all under their control. Sounds like someone's realised they could be making a lot more money out of it than they are. Part of its charm was that it wasn't a trail centre.

There could be some advantages, but as someone once said, the art of diplomacy is telling someone to go to hell and making them think they'll enjoy the journey. And this sounds like a very diplomatic press release. Hoping to be proved wrong.

I guess a lot of the existing bi-directional trails will become uni-directional then.

Will be interesting to see how that works with riders joining the trails via all the different forest access points (if you bike to Swinley from the local area).

I have only ridden Swinley mid week when it was very quiet. Only passed three other riders all near deer hunter/deer stalker? But on those bi-directional trails I was very glad not to face people coming the other way. Especially the route from the corkscrew area back to lone star.

Excuse the names, I don't really know the area.

I would I,shine this is good news. It won't stop the cheeky trails fortunately but may make others better.. Win, win.

What's the bridleway situation like round there ?

Crap, but we do have miles and miles of quasi-cheeky singletrack on MOD and Crown land. None of it signposted and only really accessible if you join one of the local clubs on a ride as it's very well hidden. The Chilterns north of Reading are good for bridleways.

I blame the Romans, most of the roads are Roman, thus there's not been a need for slower wiggly paths linking anywhere as there was already a dead straight road!

PS - Wouldn't it be good if Swinley and Back on Track made all the trails 1 direction only.

No it'd be shit, it'd halve the number of trails! And how would you decide which was the right way on Stickler, 9 yards, Watsons Wander or Seagull? Bessides, Swinely's the best known, but by a long way from the best riding localy.

It'll be interesting to see how this pans out, I can't see how they could police cheeky riding in the woods, especialy as this pretty much rules out banning cycling as an option by admitting it's a monney spinner. I suspect the horse has already bolted on that one and trying to restrict it to perscribed routes will have minimal effect.

Better building of the exiting aroured trails is a good thing though.

I really hope they don't signpost everything. Half the fun is getting lost and finding new bits. Some trails do need work but please lets not turn it into a trail centre...

All routes beginning at the Lookout is not much use. My route to Swinley sees me enter the park just south of the reservoir. Quite handily just by the Deerstalker etc.

It's a very rare trip for me mind you as (mentioned above) there's far better riding in the area and it's actually rideable from Swinley.

PS - Have had a few almost head on Seagull moments so would happily see it go 1-way!

he sheer volume of unrestricted mountain biking is having a detrimental impact on this protected environment which has been designated a Special Protection Area by Natural England.

where is this detrimental impact ? - I have not seen any of it - anything there is pretty minimal and would grow over again pretty quickly - nothing compared to what horses do to the bridleways in that area.

The only time I've had a near head on on Seagull is on the last section heading south in the densely wooded bit, not a crash, there just wasn't room to get past so one of us had to back up!

Ok so having to stop ruins your STRAVA but I'll take that over not being able to ride it both ways. What next, signposts on bridleways? Everyone knows it's 2-way and as long as you keep your head up there's little chance of a crash.

where is this detrimental impact ? - I have not seen any of it - anything there is pretty minimal and would grow over again pretty quickly - nothing compared to what horses do to the bridleways in that area.

Not just direct erosion, which we're pretty bad at as unlike walkers/horses we dont stick to 1 path, we'll make 3 different ones and make them in every parcel of land. See the Labrynth for examle, a walker wouldn't make that, they'd make a straight ish path through the woods. the 2nd point about building in every parcel of land means we're potentialy disturbing anything that would want to nest there rather than leaving areas free for ground nesting birds etc.

Perhaps they intend to make the new routes so attractive to the majority of cyclists that they not going to be that bothered about the few that choose to go off and get lost on unmarked trails.

I'm just a 'glass half full' kinda guy today.

Everyone knows it's 2-way and as long as you keep your head up there's little chance of a crash.

My worry will be that given there are folks there that have ridden some trails both ways since time began, and others that will be going there for a first go now it's a 'trail centre' - you'll have folks riding it as if it's one-way and won't be keeping their head up looking for other traffic, and while they'll technically be in the right, it's no fun being right and broken.

I'd be willing to put a bet, on a rough statistic, that 90% of the riders in Swinley stick to 10% of the trails.

keeping the 'sheeple' on well constructed and well located trails where you want them can only be a good thing for the 'proper' mountainbikers of the area.

Poorly worded release, ambiguous I thought- so is it known, or just supposed, that riding will be restricted to waymarked trails and the roads,
Or is the intention to hope that the majority of users will take the easy option and follow the paths from the Lookout, a la Cannock?

There's also the ambiguity that bikers are currently allowed to ride on the fire roads, and the trail to/from the 'advanced mountain biking area' and nowhere else. I never really understood how Tank traps, stickler and seagull fit in with that.

Word is they will indeed be one direction only and signposted. Essentially as I've heard there is the green which will be the family loop and the blue which links into the red as an extension. No black.

Freeride and DH areas will exist on top, i.e. Gulley & Clubhouse, but what form they take compared to existing is unknown.

And... anything not on the new plans is getting removed. Existing trails will run whilst they build the new ones.

P.S. Bike permit is scrapped from April. Bearing in mind this is what gives you the right of way to ride there and provided the liability insurance to convince the estate it was okay to have a free for all between bikes and walkers. After that if they say you can't ride anywhere but the marked trails, then that's it (noting that riding anywhere else is only trespass etc).

fyi - what I know above the press release comes from people in the know on the Swinley FB group, so it's second/third hand from me.

I have a few loops I do as an early Sunday morning blast - a couple of hours and most of the main trails covered - start at 7am, done by 9:15 - I bet the new directionality of the routes is going to stuff this up.

And tough to decide which is the better direction for many of these routes as they average out as flat.

If you read the Swinley FB page, everything appears to be very up in the air

However, if you read the crown estate press release, everything appears to be a done deal

I'll be disappointed if any of the major tracks become one-way, but i know the place well enough to navigate around everything

The cheeky trails will remain, local riders will still enjoy 90% of what they used to and i'm sure new trails will continue to appear

Wonder what will happen with trail maintenance ? Gorrick/BOB currently do that from a slice of the permit income. If no more permit income then where does the £££ come from...

Wonder what will happen with trail maintenance ? Gorrick/BOB currently do that from a slice of the permit income. If no more permit income then where does the £££ come from...

The other thing to consider is, if you are only allowed to ride the official trails, will Gorrick only be allowed to use these same trails for their races?

If Swinley get this wrong, I could see Tunnel Hill etc getting more popular?

If Swinley get this wrong, I could see Tunnel Hill etc getting more popular?

and the MOD confiscating loads of bikes?

I fear that Swinley will lose its charm. Trail centres are ten a penny and I really wouldn't want that concept introduced.

It's too well used for many sports and mountain biking could become quite unpopular with other users. Also heaven forbid Joe Public becomes aware that there is more than fire roads. Carnage!

Will extra parking be made available? Didn't see any mention of that.

Seems a sensible decision. The forest has become so much busier in the 16 years I have ridden there and the amount of destructive trails just goes up and up. The rubbish left behind on the steep bits around the reservoir is a disgrace. Given the huge number of riders now one way trails is very sensible.

There's other riding round there anyway.

For once i agree with CG (LOL), this will spoil the charm of Swinley, i.e being able to mix it up as you wish.

And ride it in any direction you wish.

Never had a problem with two way traffic, as all the really quick and/or technical bits only ride one way anyway.

Wow, that's ruined my weekend! I've loved riding at the Lookout for years. I really don't know what else to say.

Mixed feelings about this. I have ridden Swinley weekly for a couple of years. Great if there are new trails but the beauty of Swinley is you can ride a different route each week.

Recently showed a friend around and we did 3 different routes all over 10 miles and only really repeated Stickler.

Rode there Tuesday and there were a few new bits around corkscrew I guess for the mtb event Sunday.

Anyway the charm of Swinley is the variety of routes if you want to ride stickler several times you can without following a linear trail.

For once i agree with CG (LOL),

😆 You're the only one on here, some guys on the HR thread are firing missiles at me. 🙄

Back on topic - there'll never be a consensus. 🙂

I guess it's nice to be able to amble around - I just think the state of some of the trails this year has been really detrimental to the forest. Hopefully they'll leave labyrinth etc well alone...

cinnamon_girl - Member
Trail centres are ten a penny

In Wales and the far north, yes, but not in the south of England. There's an aweful lot of us with work and family commitments who measure our time off in hours or even minutes rather than days. These people can only very rarely justify driving more than an hour to ride but a lot of them live within an hour of Swinley. A trail centre is like a track day is for the petrol-heads. I've enjoyed Rowan's trails in Wales and I think he'd do a good job at Swinley. If usage is going to increase then one way traffic is a must.

I just think the state of some of the trails this year has been really detrimental to the forest

I think that the rain was mostly to blame, keeping the ground conditions as they were.

It is still nothing to the devastation the forestry guys have done to the Surrey Hills, or the Horsell Common preservation people have done to Horsell Common, even.

I mean more the unregulated building of DH-style tracks around the reservoir - one trail that has been in an excellent state ever since I have ridden at Swinley is now criss-crossed with huge ruts and big skids which have ripped up the soil. If we want to keep riding in the forest I think a level of compromise is needed.

Also - the level of use has increased enormously and so the unsurfaced trails like the Gorrick 10 or whatever you call the 15 foot wide slog between Swinley and Crowthorne have just become fire roads - I remember when that was a narrow ribbon of singletrack... Again - in terms of sustainable use this cannot continue.

Also - the level of use has increased enormously and so the unsurfaced trails like the Gorrick 10 or whatever you call the 15 foot wide slog between Swinley and Crowthorne have just become fire roads - I remember when that was a narrow ribbon of singletrack... Again - in terms of sustainable use this cannot continue.

true

I'd be willing to put a bet, on a rough statistic, that 90% of the riders in Swinley stick to 10% of the trails.

If Swinley get this wrong, I could see Tunnel Hill etc getting more popular?

I suspect the the former means the latter, and Cesars Camp, Frimley, Porridge Pot etc will be safe. I've ridden those places plenty of times on group rides yet on my own I can't find a thing, they make Swinely seem easy to navigate! That's unless people start navigating them by Strava.

I can see why they're doing it, and as others have said "it's only tresspass" so 95% of people will do the signposted loop plus maybe one or two better known diversions which will no doubt appear. Those of us living in/around the woods will keep riding the less well known bits, which might if anything get better with less erosion.

Considering how poorly the permit scheme is currently policed, I can't see them trying to police any other changes to the rules this investment might have.

I'm curious as to where the money is going to come from to fund further maintenance and trail-building in the forest once this is tranche of work is done if not from the permit scheme.

I think I'm excited about this overall, as it could hopefully pave the way to have some sensible dialogue between actual users of the land, with the owners/managers. For far too long Gorrick have been the only voice who are far from transparent over their decisions.

Also, surely this is as good a time as any to bust out the Pareto rule, that would state 80% of riders use 20% of the trails? If we're going to make up statistics at least do it pretending there's a rationale behind it!

I think I'm excited about this overall, as it could hopefully pave the way to have some sensible dialogue between actual users of the land, with the owners/managers. For far too long Gorrick have been the only voice who are far from transparent over their decisions.

What's not transparrent? Gorrick dig trails for races some of which last long enough to become part of the network, others return to nature, BOB dig trails for everyone else. My only criticism would be that you have to pay to join BOB.

Also, surely this is as good a time as any to bust out the Pareto rule, that would state 80% of riders use 20% of the trails? If we're going to make up statistics at least do it pretending there's a rationale behind it!

I dunno, I reckon that's about right, you hardly ever seen anyone in Crowthorne, yet there can be a que to get onto Seagull.

I'd be more than a little interested to know where the 'better' stuff from Swinley actually is.

Email in profile if anyone wants to give me a little guidance.

Who has ever seen a pinemartin in Swinley ? even the trees are an artificial import. Yes the trails will be one way - yes the trails will be policed and fences go up - yes it will be much worse than now - sanitised to death just like aston court has become in Bristol.

It is pretty tricky to deal with this as it is private land - but these woods should all be open access as should much of the other woodland accross the south - it could have been if we had got our act together a few years ago - urgent need for a UK MTB dedicated body we all support who actively represent MTB interests with teeth.

W

need for a UK MTB dedicated body we all support who actively represent MTB interests with teeth.

Have you been on this forum long?

Not sure how i feel about this....I do like the freedom of cutting in via Barrossa aqnd riding anywhere, however, a lot of riders are new to this and do not have the skill to look up on the two way trails causing a lot of stop starting so maybe one way is safer??!
i agree with gee that the top of surrey hill is ruined I used to love riding it but frankly avoided it on Sunday as it looked horrendously messy and torn up, a bit of work is desperately needed there, but I'm not sure they will be interested in fixing it...

http://www.getbracknell.co.uk/news/s/2124321_new_cycle_routes_for_swinley_forest_after_damage_caused_by_mountain_bikers

The new trails will be ready by March and bikers will be banned from riding in other areas.

Hmmm. While I appreciate the intention it strikes me that this is going to become another Hurtwood type of situation. The vast majority will (and already do) stick to the main trail network, a small group (BOB/Gorrick/SorrelCorp?) are allowed to build new trails to extend this and a tiny minority will still turn up and do what they like anyway. And in general the trails built by this latter group aren't the sort of trails that 'most' riders will want to ride anyway.

Also, is the Crowthorne side part of the Crown Estate? Think I'd heard that was part of the reason Gorrick race in that area, so it maybe unaffected by this?

Crowthorne Woods is Foresty Commission owned land.

There are some trails there, mostly old race settings from Gorrick. There are none of the "yellow brick road" type trails you see in Swinley Forest though. As a result it can get very muddy and slow-going in places. Some people argue it's better for that.

I believe you don't need a permit to ride on that land.

There are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding this development. Not least, how much of the 24km trails that will be available will just be the routes that already exist, with some signposted links inbetween?

Crowthorne Woods are not effected in any way by the Crown Estate developments

I was disheartened to see the first redevelopment of Swinley last night, where they have ploughed up the entrance into Stickler 3

They appear to have ploughed up the first 3 corners, covering the first 50 yards

Lots of people had already rode though this section - and the work only started Monday morning

This raises 3 questions for me:-

1) Why are they resurfacing the newest part of Stickler?

2) If Stickler is 1.5 miles long, and they've done 50 yards in a day, how many months is Stickler going to be out of action?

3) How on earth will the trail bed during the wet months when people are just going to ride it regardless?

When i first learnt about the changes, my feelings were neutral - now i'm concerned that this redevelopment is going to heavily impact our winter riding and the trails will be worst of come the spring as they're laying it too slowly at the wrong part of the year - foundations are everything for well armoured tracks!

boltonjohn - can't be a whole day's work as I rode it late morning and it was still intact, so maybe that's 100 yards a day? 😉 Guess you mean the North/'non tank traps' end - that was crying out for a better link to the rest of the trail netwrok as the fire road/bog access really suffers in bad weather, but apart form a bit of maintenance to the first 5 yards or so I can't see a need to rip up the rest of it.

What I'm still worried about is what are they planning on doing with tracks like babymaker and mini-alps? They're not exactly IMBA spec! Even deerstalker is barely a red compared to say the Red at GT, maybe for the 5 minutes when it's freshly maintained, but it soon cut's up into the lumpy bumpy track we all know and love.

And while Swinley is a perfect example for anyone who wants to say "look MTBers cause more errosion than walkers" (which is a seperate argument), they've clear felled the area arround the gulley! So 170,000 bikers a year, and we've done less damage than whatever comerical* opperations they carry out havesting the trees.

*assumption that it wasn't disease controll, making way for other species of tree, habitat creation, or some other reason.

On the other hand I wen for a ride on Saturday and left fairly quickly as the 8ft wide winter 'singletrack' got boring. So maybe in time I'll enjoy the armoured stuff more.

*is full of cynicism about this project*

The purist - i agree - the armoured track at the start of the non-tank traps end of Stickler does not need work

Yes, the muddy track intersecting it is in desperate need of rework

Cinnamon girl - i'm with you!!!! 🙂

I'd be a lot less cynical if they published a map of what they're planning.

25km of green/blue/red doesn't tell you very much, 24.9km could be a green fireroad loop!

Chief Forester John Deakin explained: "Over the years, Swinley Forest has become increasingly popular with mountain bikers and extensive informal routes have been created through the forest. With a conservative estimate of over 170,000 cyclists using the site each year, the sheer volume of unrestricted mountain biking is having a detrimental impact on this protected environment which has been designated a Special Protection Area by Natural England.

"The Crown Estate plans to reduce this impact on the natural environment whilst creating a centre of excellence for mountain biking. There will be a formal cycle network of 24.2km within an area of 1,000 hectares and we will be introducing green, blue and red cycle routes in line with the International Mountain Bike Association industry standards. All routes will begin from The Look Out Discovery Centre and we want to provide a range of challenges for families cycling for fun to highly skilled riders. Mountain biking is not permitted elsewhere on the Windsor estate and so we want to focus resources on providing excellence in Swinley Forest."

FCOL It's a working forest, you know trees are planted, grow and then felled. Repeat and repeat and repeat. I've been a user of the Forest for over 20 years so I've seen it.

I'm not taken in by this tosh about 'protected environment/special protection area'.

This is all to do with money, balancing books and how to screw Joe Public. Whatever happened to the megabucks happily taken from the Harry Potter filming? I heard mention of £20K being received by Bracknell Forest Borough Council for the use of a car park for filming for just one period of time.

We're not told the truth, there is no transparency whatsoever!

From a selfish point of view, I don't want to see families ending up on the trails that are beyond their abilities. You know, Alpha Male leading wifey and sprogs on their Argos bikes, determined to stoke his ego and demonstrate that riding Tank Traps/Toboggan Run/Deer Stalker is a piece of pi$$. 😉

Can we look forward to trails being policed, with newbies being removed if they dare ride outside of their skill level? Will I be removed from the trail if I scream at them to get outta my ****ing way?

It all stinks of political correctness by jobsworths. 😐

Two thoughts - one, the quote for C-G reinforces the need for all MTB to think about issues of sustainable development. Its too easy for us to take a cavalier, "I'll ride where I like and bugger the consequences" approach. That's a general observation BTW and not a personal one! The other, is slightly contradictory to the first, but this may well be a good thing. Exisiting trails may be strengthened and 95% of riders focused on them. That leaves (as always) the rest to be explored WITH DISCRETION by those in the know. Isn't this how it works in most places? In other words, plus ca change, rein na change!

Like most things, vocal opposition may be self-defeating. Much better to follow the tried and tested approach of "smile, agree, ignore"!

Two thoughts - one, the quote for C-G reinforces the need for all MTB to think about issues of sustainable development. Its too easy for us to take a cavalier, "I'll ride where I like and bugger the consequences" approach. That's a general observation BTW and not a personal one! The other, is slightly contradictory to the first, but this may well be a good thing. Exisiting trails may be strengthened and 95% of riders focused on them. That leaves (as always) the rest to be explored WITH DISCRETION by those in the know. Isn't this how it works in most places? In other words, plus ca change, rein na change!

I agree with CG's point through, a free for all at Swinely was perfectly sustainable, it's a comercial forest and the bits not filled with MTBers are filled with kids making dens out of fallen branches and doggers f***** in the bushes. You could drop a bomb on the place and it'd look the same in 3 years time*, being an ex army training ground that's probably how half the features started anyway!

I'm all for new trails, armouring the worst of the existing trails, and to an extent even the creation of a waymarked loop. It's the word 'banned' I've got issues with.

*insert obvious joke about this being the exception to Bracknell town center in general which could be improved by the same method.

A bit more digging on SPAs (yep I'm bored). Frown what I can see on [url= http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-1401 ]this list[/url], [url= http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/SPA/UK9012141.pdf ]this[/url] is the SPA which covers Swinley. It specifically mentions 3 species of birds :- Nightjar, Woodlark and Dartford Warbler. AFAIK they all prefer open heathland, with the Nightjar also inhabiting recently cleared areas until they get too tall.

Now, the heathland areas around Swinley are mainly Barossa and Poors Allotments, neither of which are part of the Crown Estate managed forestry. As these areas have very few bits of 'trail' (apart from gravel tracks) they don't get much use from mountain bikers.

So the SPA argument is a bit of a red herring when it comes to bikers causing damage to the Crown Estates commerically managed forestry.

FWIW I can't wait to see some new Sorrel designed bits of track, but if that means losing(*) a whole load of other good stuff it seems they'll miss their 'centre of excellence' target by a mile.

(*) in a teamhurtmore stylee

thisisnotaspoon - Member
I agree with CG's point through, a free for all at Swinely was perfectly sustainable,

IMO, I would also agree with that. Part of the "fun" of Swinley is the navigation on your first few visits. So difficult to reconcile that with the idea that it is over-biked. But I am biased as only ever ride there mid-week when it is largely deserted and even then only rarely in comparison with Surrey Hills.

I understand that the real reason behind the changes is to avert lawsuits against the Crown Estate

There have been a couple of recent claims from cyclists who have damaged themselves and have raised lawsuits against the Crown Estate

Therefore, the CE want to build the trail centre and cover everything in disclaimer signs stating that 'you do this at your own risk'

Therefore, if anyone hurts themselves of a designated trail, then there is no claim

FFS - its mountain biking - if you cannot recognise the risks then you need a slap

The whole thing about the wildlife is a diversion. Yes, there is one track which apparently effects some rare fungus and will be closed - but the rare bird population will not be effected by the changes in Swinley

They are doing a good job in diverting the attention from the actual facts

I'm also led to believe that the new map will released to the public some time this week

Now, the heathland areas around Swinley are mainly Barossa and Poors Allotments, neither of which are part of the Crown Estate managed forestry. As these areas have very few bits of 'trail' (apart from gravel tracks) they don't get much use from mountain bikers.

There's another one namely Wildmoor Heath, just west of Swinley. Apparently the Dartford Warbler was to be seen here. Funny in 25 years of dog walking, running [s]and the occasional cheeky cycling[/s] myself and many other regular dog walkers had never ever seen one. 😐

Of course the 'improvements' to that place were a joke. Fencing off the perimeter, creating paddocks, introducing cattle and ponies for grazing, felling big style etc etc. All under the remit of the local Wildlife Trust, who tried to get footpaths diverted and put up notices saying that all dogs should be on a lead. Jeez!

What these neds forget is that if you have a densely populated area, then people need somewhere for recreation. Be that walking, running, walking dogs, introducing kids to the countryside etc. The countryside is not a museum.

I'll shut up now! 😆

I've never been to Swinley and can't comment on whether the project is worthwhile. But they are going to have to rip stuff up before they can make good.

sanitised to death just like ashton court has become in Bristol

For reference: AC, and the other flat trails in LW, were dreadful before the re-build - only worth riding in the "summer" when they weren't an ugly, sticky mess. The "good ole days" of the original AC trail were a long time ago.

Considering how flat the area is they did a damn good job making fun, fast, sustainable trails for locals to ride all year. There are still naturally eroded trails in the area (50A and LW) when you want them, but most cyclists don't.

Tough it out.

Have to say I'm also very skeptical but will keep an open mind. If the worst happens and it becomes a sterile unexciting place to ride full of people that shouldn't really be there (eg CGs Alpha Male example above) then there are lots of other options locally.

And as already mentioned there is also the bliss of ignorance - if entering the forest from somewhere other than the lookout, how would you know what the rules are?!

Edit to add: And of course if it all goes well we could have some even better riding on the doorstep. I refer you to the recent thread about plodding through mud all winter 🙂

And as already mentioned there is also the bliss of ignorance - if entering the forest from somewhere other than the lookout, how would you know what the rules are?!

They clearly have shares in a signage company going by the number of "you need a permit to ride here" [s]essays[/s] [i]signs[/i] posted arorund the forrest.

Pretty sure it will all come good and that the threads on here about how wet, gritty, sandy, brakepad eroding, sloppy etc that we see on here will become a thing of the past by this time next year.

And.. don't forget no more permits!

Damn. Does this mean you'll all be annoying me around tunnel hill......

Damn. Does this mean you'll all be annoying me around tunnel hill......

<troll heckle>

harrrrrrHARRRRRRRRR

</troll heckle>

Pretty sure it will all come good and that the threads on here about how wet, gritty, sandy, brakepad eroding, sloppy etc that we see on here will become a thing of the past by this time next year.

And.. don't forget no more permits!

Small benifit, back of a fag packet calc say the gorrick 100 uses 1/3rd of the trails inc some fire road so assume it's 5 miles of ST (being very conservative), so say there's about 15miles of singletrack riding to do, it's 2 way so 30miles (and I reckon that's very conservative). 24km split between 3 loops of which at least the green will be pants (to the kind of rider this affects)? We'll be lucky if there's a 1/3rd of the current trail legaly accessible!

scratches chin .... hmmmm

1>#most# of the riders I see in Swinley use the armoured amber trails and go to the gully jumps and labyrinth and stickler and then 'play' in the woods nearby.

2>Then a few less link up the armoured trails beyond this along seagul and out to corkscrew and others. A mix of armoured and natural.

3>even less still use the above in combination with the rest of the forest.

So... Most do 1, many do 1 and 2 and a few do 1, 2 and 3. Even less will just do natural stuff, maybe more local riders or people wanting the peace and quiet.

I think theres a good argument to put in an armoured route covering the above with 1 then secondly 2 as priority.

I dont think it needs to be directional, directional trails usually are best when there is some serious descents that would be risky to anybody foolish enough to climb them. Aside from the Labyrinth stuff, there's nothing much else that strikes me as needing to be directional.

I think signage would help allieviate some of the hotspots of 1. It would encourage use beyond these and into other features of the forest. It would also keep most day trippers on the mtb trails, so potentially reduce friction with walkers or areas they'd rather not let us into.

hmmm... still scratches chin... on balance I think some better management of existing trails and some enhancements would probably solve many of their issues.

/end of musing

I'm still puzzled as to why the plans still haven't been released. Considering it sounds like the trails will be ready in 4 months and by the sounds of it some work may have started, the only riders I know who've seen the plans say that it's SUPER MEGA TOP SECRET!!!!!!!! and can't tell anyone until the stars align or something.

atlaz - maybe they're worried that CG will stage a Swampy style protest and obstruct the new trail construction until they come clean about the real motives behind this 😉

😆 @ thepurist. Relax, I've moved away from the area but still like to add my twopennyworth to the thread. 😀

I think Ti Pin Man has it pretty much spot on to be honest.

So... Most do 1, many do 1 and 2 and a few do 1, 2 and 3. Even less will just do natural stuff, maybe more local riders or people wanting the peace and quiet.

Yer seems about right, i did a loop out from Woking, via tunnel, high speed test track into swinley round for a bit then back to woking with a mate of mine. only really saw bods at Labyrinth at at Lookout for tea and cake. rest was quiet.. damn muddy out in swinley though

Ooooh, I said I would shut up. 😳

What should have happened many years ago was a 'working party' being set up involving the Crown Estate and (preferably) local mountain bikers who had absolutely no affiliation with a club or organisation.

They should have been involved in decision-making concerning new trails/existing trails. There is a huge amount of goodwill in the mtb community and there would have been no shortage of volunteers to design/build trails, within the limits of their expertise obviously.

It's quite insulting to users, especially locals, to see a company being bought in to design and build. No disrespect to them obviously.

But here we have an opportunity for 'localism' to be implemented but people have been failed. Very short-sighted imo.

The thing I find odd is that even the riders they've got involved have been told they can't discuss things. Just seems a slightly random way to go about things if what you want is to bring everyone with you so people work together rather than the "screw you, we're keeping our old trails" approach

So where have these riders come from then?

No idea. I live 500 miles away so wasn't fussed in doing more than moaning on the internet about the unfairness of things 🙂

At least one is a member of the Swinley facebook group so may either be known in the area, have been sought because of the facebook group or have gone to speak to CE.

Riders brought into the fold are delegates from Swinley Forest MTB Facebook page, Gorrick & Berks on Bikes

I would imagine that they were asked to keep the plans secret

The idea was to obtain 'typical riders' wishes/requirements from the different sources. However, i believe that all 3 parties were pretty much ignored

I thought that the chap from the Facebook page asking a wider audience of what riders wanted to see was only released on facebook after the official plans were finalised

To be fair though, the Crown Estate were not obliged to share anything with these parties

Absolutely not, but it is a fairly transparent operation if you say "Plans are completed, tell us what you'd like to see"

Riders brought into the fold are delegates from Swinley Forest MTB Facebook page, Gorrick & Berks on Bikes

Now why doesn't (second and third) surprise me!

🙄

[quote=cinnamon_girl said]Riders brought into the fold are delegates from Swinley Forest MTB Facebook page, Gorrick & Berks on Bikes
Now why doesn't (second and third) surprise me!

Perhaps because or their history with Swinley MTBing, creating/maintaining the trails and administering the permit scheme ?

I take it you have a bee in your bonnet with them 🙂

erm.... because those 3 groups broadly speaking cover the three main 'organised' groups that use the forest. We've covered many times that without a single voice representing MTBing in general we are easily divided and conquered. I too would have welcomed a wider consultation exercise, but given the Crown Estate seem to have decided against that and instead opted to discuss with the organised groups that most obviously use the forest, who else would they have gone to?

I know you don't like them, you've made it clear several times, let's not start that one again.

@cinamon_girl - Gorrick arrange races at Swinley so the CE are used to dealing with them, Swinley is in Berkshire so I'd imagine Berks on Bikes would be an obvious group to contact. Not exactly controversial or surprising ?

On a personal note and being a bit of a cynic these plans look pretty negative, the only permissible riding will be on the official trails. The danger is the un-official stuff will be blocked off or destroyed.

I take it you have a bee in your bonnet with them

I know you don't like them, you've made it clear several times, let's not start that one again

Nope, you're both wrong.

It will be easier to be positive once the plans have been fully revealed and the real motives behind them admitted.

I think I'm right in thinking that if they wanted to, the CE could have just said, "Right, that's enough. No bikes, thank you please. If the FC want to run a trail centre in Crowthorne Woods then they can, but we're not interested."

They haven't done that - but it's not completely clear what they have done yet! I've never had a trail centre built near me, so I don't know: but I have been given the impression that they often tolerate cheeky bits off to the side on the basis they aren't ridden by many people so don't cause a big problem. Happy to be corrected if someone knows of an example where that's absolutely not the case?

It's not as if there's not an awful lot of other riding to be done in the area if Swinley doesn't float your boat any more after the changes... but those areas do have their own quirks I guess!

FWIW I've been out for a bit of a recce this morning as I'm meant to be leading a bunch of newbie friends & family this weekend.

Stickler is now fenced off at each end - there was a sole digger in there as far as I could see, still on the most recent section so I doubt it'll reopen for the weekend. From what I could see the work hasn't changed the line at all, just done some maintenance on the trail and even some (dare I say it...) [i]improvements[/i]. For isntance the first few berms at the start looked bigger & better built, though it looked like it used the same local material so will need a fair bit of bedding in.

Also if you're thinking of avoiding Stickler and heading off toward the jump track on the whole 9 yds, think again - the last section of that was also fenced off for forestry work. The other end by the manhole cover wasn't fenced so I guess it may only by shut to the fire road with the double drop on.

Didn't spot anything else but apart from that I kept away from the regular trails.