[Closed] Uh-Oh horse and hound magazine arent happy - surrey hills content

Do you have Google alerts set up for this stuff?

Better stick to riding the bridleway

do you not have a subscription?

do you not have a subscription?

Nah, I just get the info second hand from your good self 8)

Sounds like some fair points if true.

I had assumed everyone in that end of the country wasn't happy about something though.

The comment about "our bridleways" tells you everything you need to know about the attitudes towards cooperation from certain members of the equestrian world..

Trying to think of the last time I even saw a horse around the tower and new trail area 😕

FWIW its byway and not bridleway connecting the sections of trail together anyway

Purely from a 'sensible' perspective, I'd have thought that if you were going to build a 'trail' properly you'd consider how it would end and/or cross existing RoW.

But then there are lots of existing RoW which have blind corners and cross other routes.

And even at a trail centre you've always got to be aware that there could be a pedestrian/stopped cyclist around the corner.

Haha what is that magazine doing with all the [b]boldening the emotive parts[/b], do they think they're The Sun?

lack of understanding of how horses behave in confined spaces with unexpected activity happening alongside them

CRISP PACKET! NOOOOOOOO!!!
[img] [/img]

taking some emotion out of the points in the article the general point from the horse riders that some consultation should have happened is right.

working with the horse riding community is better than fighting them, this isolates the more "ranty" elements and reasonable compromise and joint action on access has to be the future

The comment about "our bridleways" tells you everything you need to know about the attitudes towards cooperation from certain members of the equestrian world..

but look at it from their point of view, they are putting in a lot of time, effort and cash to get changes to the definitive map. They see mountain bike trails attracting grant funding (which they are poor at obtaining) and are the latest sexy thing that is being pushed in local strategies. Very few mtbers have got these changes made.

We have much to gain from working together

and finally even "Jedi" has a horse 😉

Pretty sure no one will be jumping over the heads of riders. I believe there was a lengthy debate about cyclists not using the jumps on the new trail on this very forum.

I am sure it will all be fine if people use common sense.

I am sure it will all be fine if people use common sense.

“Of most concern is a 100ft blind spot where cyclists won’t know if there is a horse in the sunken bridleway beneath them.”

It also sounds like there is a lack of engagement with all user groups in the area, lack of communication leads to this sort of anger.

If they had consulted the BHS, they would have been told that a fast off-road cycle track alongside and crossing bridleways is out of order. Mountain bikes whizzing in and out of trees, jumping ramps above horses’ heads, around an established sunken horse track, is an accident waiting to happen.”

Best bit by far. Horses are useless, there should be some government scheme that allows people to trade them in for a bike.

If a horse eats to much grass it's feet fall off. That fact alone should be their downfall.

I am sure it will all be fine if people use common sense

my experience with people who ride mountain bikes (as with any other group) this isn't an automatic thing

If representatives of other key user groups - horse riders, walkers etc weren't consulted then that's pretty poor tbh. Surrey Hills are rammed full of people all year round and only a proportion are bike riders. Seems a bit daft not to have shared the plans for the new trail with other users and adapted them accordingly....

Single issue leisure activity sulks about another single issue leisure activity getting something they didn't think about asking for, sulks, and uses emotive language referencing 'think about the children's faces'.
'Tevs'

Does anyone care about horse riders? There are far more mtbers and they generally don't have stuck up attitudes or talk down everyone. Most horse riders I've had the misfortune of coming across do. Had one shouting at me once for driving my car safety and legally because her horse got a fright as I came into its field of vision at 3mph a good 20m ahead of it!

Burn them all!

The British Horse Society (BHS) maintains that the route is being built without “public consultation or lawful consent”.

Welcome to the way things are done in Derbyshire. Bulldoze, road planings, no consultation, repeat.

Is the new trail on public or private land?

I didn't finish the article before I got distracted by the "cross country and hunting mad" horse for sale for a thousand quid!

Hold crap you couldn't buy a usable bike for that but you can get a mad horse that'll do 30mph and eats grass.

Its a shane riders of all variety's cant get on. Ive had run ins with walkers on very little used footpaths, so I built a new trail above the footpath and then the walkers started to use that as it was dryer. SOme times ou just cant win.

have you seen this share the trail video that Naturla resources Wales produced?

I should also mention. Im one of the riders in this video, not that I have any connection, I just ride a lot.
It seems to be a bit one sided against bikers, in that the horses seem to be just plodding along and the 'biker' is that bad one not stopping.

Does make riders think though, it'd be nice to see a horsey equivalent...

glasgowdan - Member
Does anyone care about [s]horse[/s][b]bike[/b] riders? There are far more [s]mtbers[/s][b]drivers[/b] and they generally don't have stuck up attitudes or talk down everyone

FIFY

live and let live

Does anyone care about it at all ?its an issue that is happening south of England to be perfectly honest as long as it doesn't present itself up here in the north of England It's not a problem.

Completely irrelevant point mikewsmith, bikers generally don't behave as horse riders do. You've kind of missed that one.

Really as selfish gits who think they have top billing everywhere?

The point is that when one minority group starts having a go at another over trail access the real issues get missed. We should all be working together.

To solve this issue, should have given tesco a licence for free rein lasagne...
IGMC

Mike smith, don't you live in Taz mania, yup can see how we are all in this together

having lived in the UK for 32 years until 2012 I do get it and have been around a lot. Just objecting to the intolerance that goes on for other people daring to want to use trail in the woods.

There have always been issues with Horse riders and Cyclists, be it road or trail, it'll never go away.
One party thinks it has the right to ride and the other thinks it has the right to ride.
What would be good though, you know, is if someone considered others views BEFORE hacking something together on a piece of shared land/trail.

Theres your problem right there though, same old, same old.

Coming over all ant-equestrian isn't going to help anyone. They have the same rights of access and enjoyment of Leith Hill as cyclists do, we're actually all on the same side. If they feel like they should have been consulted, and they weren't, then they should have been. It's a shared resource, no one group has any right to impose on another.

I've never had any attitude problem from equestrians on Leith Hill, be nice to them, they're nice to us. Perhaps there's the odd nutter, well the the same applies to bikers too (and some).

From the article:

But Sam Bayley, National Trust head ranger, said that dedicated tracks for mountain bikers will improve safety, because cyclists have been “creating unauthorised trails at Leith Hill following and crossing many bridleways”.

This causes me concern, I hope we're not going to lose access to all the secret corners of the Hill in exchange for a point and shoot motorway. Bad deal if so.

I've been off the bike for a few weeks due to injury, hopefully I can spin up there at the weekend and take a look at the current layout of the new trail.

As for consultation, the first I knew about this trail was when it started to appear. I ride with one of the best known groups in the area, we meet right at the bottom of the hill. AFAIK nobody asked us if we thought it was a good idea, it just turned up. Perhaps it's my fault for being out of the loop somehow, but it feels like somehow somebody though it was a good idea, got a window of clearance, and just cracked on.

I have no issue with horses when I am out cycling, I go very slowly and let the horse rider know that I am there early so the horse and rider don't get spooked. Where I live, the riders are always appreciative and friendly.

I do have an issue in the car though, riding your horse in rush hour on a fairly busy road is just selfish.

glasgowdan - Member
Does anyone care about horse riders?

Yeah Dan, horse riders do. & they organise & vote too.

Is the new uber-trail that's just opened?

Many of the comments seem pretty balanced and reasonable.

Read that article with interest after reading this post on the CTC the other day -

I am the chair of a Local Access Forum and a member of another LAF, and it has often struck me that neither Forum has ever had any contact from CTC with regard to off-road access and rights of way. The only time I wrote to CTC about an off-road issue, I received no reply. I assumed at the time that this was because what little resource the CTC had was devoted towards specific projects like supporting trail-building.

As a result what few improvements you will ever see in access and rights of way are down to LAFs, local authorities and the British Horse Society. No cycling organisation gets involved, even though many thousands of CTC's membership must be active mountain bikers, as well as road users.

My advice to anybody who wants to see off-road trails improved in their area would be to join the British Horse Society and not the CTC, even if you don't own a horse. They do far more for off-road cyclists than the CTC does, and might do even more if you campaigned in your area for a particular trail to be improved, or a footpath to be upgraded to a bridleway. By comparison, the CTC doesn't appear to be interested.

Don't be too quick to distance yourself from horse riders. They may trash trails in winter from our POV but there's more value in working with them than against - ime I'd say they're all quite friendly towards us. MTB has no UK-wide voice, apart from local groups where it's been forced by access problems. Until we all spend as much time on creating one as we do on here, it won't have.

By comparison, the CTC doesn't appear to be interested.

That could have a point seeing as the CTC have just got shot of their MTB representative.

MTB has no UK-wide voice,

It could have done with IMBA UK, but mtb'ers (not all I might add) have been brought up on the understanding the mountain biking was somehow rebellious, and belonging to an organisation that could have represented our interests would have been a bit lame.

Unfortunately, the language of mountain biking still believes that being "out there man" is the only way to be.

This I agree with totally if the trail is crossing a BW in the same way stuff gets slowed down if crossing a fire-road etc at a trail centre. there could be horses, other riders, people with kids etc on the BW so agree, you don't want a bike flying across at speed:

“We aim to balance the needs of everyone,” he said. “The design will ensure cyclists naturally slow down at crossing points by appropriate turns and signage.”

This though puts them back to square one. Priority to horses? Wheres the rule about that or is it a horsey, upper-class, Range Rover driving expectation? So we need to share the space but give priority to horses?

We want to work with the BHS to educate cyclists about the priority that needs to be given to horse riders, so we can all share the Surrey Hills.”

[i]That could have a point seeing as the CTC have just got shot of their MTB representative.[/i]

Ian?

I love how horse riders think they own bridleways, reminds of one time at Dalby where some stupid horse rider expected us to stop completely because her daughter couldn't control her horse! And was accessing us of making too much noise

Does seem daft that people go out on horses that they seem to know damn well are scared shitless of anything with wheels, anything that makes noise, anything person shaped, sheep, cows, the sky etc etc.

All this from a forum where grown men admit openly to weeping at the site of a giant horse puppet.

We don't have a lot of choice but to share the trails in England and Wales unless we're going to get cheeky.

I've ridden (on a bike) with a few horses and they are pretty skittish for the first ride but soon calm down. Maybe we should be looking at buddying up with some horsey types to educate their equine friends 😀

Some decent points on here.

I think there will always be people with polarized views who can't or won't accept that trails are shared, but a bit of mutual respect and considerate riding (of bikes AND horses) will allow everyone to enjoy their day out.

Being inconsiderate is rubbish - whatever hobby you partake in.

Horses were using the trails before bikes. 😀

If you come across horses on a bridleway what's the problem in slowing down or stopping?Maybe even smiling and saying hello. You're not giving in to "bloody horse people", you're respecting the country code - Respect,Protect, Enjoy.
As regards having a DH track crossing Bridal Way's. ROW's, Footpaths, whatever does anybody actually believe that in this day of strava and the like anybody will slow down to check if a horse is coming? I can understand why horse and hound are annoyed at this due to zero communication by the trail builders (well at least I assume so reading the link by the OP). This kind of thing only fires the anger of the Aigle/Hunter/Land Rover Discovery brigade.

It's an issue that is largely based on intolerance and lack of consultation i think.

Sweeping generalisation, but horse and bike riders as groups seem unaware of the others' needs and abilities - and this can lead to conflict. Additionally, some local horse groups I've come across have odd ideas about ownership of things like bridleways.

More thoroughbred horses can take flight easily - as above joke about crisp packet as trigger - although this could potentially lead to death/serious injury of rider and anyone in the way. Ideally, any rider out in public should be able to control their horse but there doesn't seem to be any real ground to believe this. The fact that MTB'ers crash from time to time proves this goes on both sides.

I'm not really sure what should be done in this instance - but all the concerned parties AND THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TRAIL / LANDOWNERS should be sitting down rather than ranting.

Unfortunately this sort of thing has the potential for certain classes of user being banned from sites if there's a private landowner involved as it's easier than dealing with it.

As with regular moans involving ramblers and dogs, it's a 'shared use' - and frankly if it's a place where there are likley to be many types of user especially in numbers, then it's a stupid place to ride fast unless you want an accident or to otherwise cause trouble.

Come across horses & riders all the time in Epping forest & have loads of trails that cross bridle paths never had a problem to be honest. Think it might have to do with us both sharing a common enemy - walkers who think they own the forest & sabotage the trails

This though puts them back to square one. Priority to horses? Wheres the rule about that or is it a horsey, upper-class, Range Rover driving expectation?

My understanding is that on a bridleway cyclists are required to give way to horses, and all give way to pedestrians. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK that's the law.

Horse behaviour is a grey area perhaps, it's one thing to give way, but another to be expected to creep around like we're not there for fear of startling them. I'd presume horse riders taking a horse to a shared access area have a duty of care to make sure the animal can handle the reasonable stresses of the environment.

I don't really see what the issue is. Whenever I see a horse near enough to me on a track that it can see or hear me I slow down, say hello and stop if it looks like it will be the safest option. If everyone did this there would be no issue. Sure some of them are dicks, but then plenty of us are too.

Slow down, give way, then you won't end up with a tonne of horse on your head- simples.

I walked/rode this yesterday. The first 2 sections, which are the issue here with the horsey peeps I guess, are still taped off, they looked near finished to me so presumably that's because there is some furniture or calming features to go in where the trail crosses the bridleway (as per the H&H photo) and at the end of the second section (which starts on the right of the H&H photo).

At one point on the first section there is a choice between the straighter line, or a left turn to a roll in with ramped exit. A rider taking that would "pop out" suddenly a few metres above the bridleway. Like most of us I have never seen a horse on they bridleway, in 15 years of riding here, tho the state of the surface indicates it is used, as is their right.

I saw at least one biker hooning down the "normal" Tower descent, too fast IMO, with families, dogs etc walking up. That's the problem this trail is pitched as being there to fix. The other fix of course is for the rider to obey CTBM's famous maxim "don't be a dick".

For night riding the first part of the Tower descent would make a viable climb too, saving some wear elsewhere.

After the second section there is a large track climb of a couple of hundred metres then 2 more long sections linking all the way down to Waggledance. It's quite a piece of work the trail pixies have taken on here and it's well executed. It incorporates (and sanitises with a weather proof trail) most of Chicken Skin Revue, which I guess some people will have mixed feelings about.

The last 100 metres down to Waggledance, which is rooty, muddy and cambered, with a reasonable gradient, isn't resurfaced, dno if there are any plans to do that, tho I don't mind if not as it's quite characterful and can be a safe challenge, would be a big shame to lose it.

It's a proper rider's trail, not for novices or family bimbles. I'd call it a blue plus.

Good job trail pixies.

Aside, it was really odd yesterday riding with summer conditions but winter sight lines due to no vegetation. I came around the corner after the Rookery descent expecting to be closed in by the normal bracken forest that makes looking far quiet difficult, but of course at the moment it's just a brown carpet and I could see way forwards.

It's a proper rider's trail, not for novices or family bimbles. I'd call it a blue plus.

Thing is though, bar that last part to Waggledance it would be fine for more novice riders. I was really impressed with how much trail they've squeezed into a small area, I can imagine a lot of people climbing the bit to the tower unless it's adequately signed. Like you, I don't mind they've not done the last bit (yet), but I'm surprised, as that was the most eroded bit anyway!

Whilst I see the points the horsey brigade are making I'd have thought having the cyclists in one 'place', as it were, was preferable to the present situation with riders more likely to be popping up in various places. I'd always give way to horses, and be polite, stupid not to IMO, but I know not everyone's the same.

I read

We want to work with the BHS to educate cyclists

as

We want to work with the BHS to eradicate cyclists

Which I thought was a rather harsh line to take 🙂

I can see the point/worry. More and more cyclists/bikes are using the Surrey Hills, its getting more popular and you aren't tripping over the same amount of horse riders/explosion in numbers. Building stuff like that will have more bikes in that one spot and riders 'sessioning' it.

Horse riders have a right and yes horses can get spooked. Ever ridden one? Its GREAT but its a living animal with independent thought and fears. So we should be consderate towards horses/horse riders and not keep developing new bloody trails that bring in more riders.

This weekend I witnessed drivers attitudes to horse riders. Guess horses shouldn't be on the road as well in countryside hey?

I saw at least one biker hooning down the "normal" Tower descent, too fast IMO, with families, dogs etc walking up.

Far too many people do this. Happened to be up on Leith twice at the weekend and saw numerous people flying down on skill compensators with complete disregard for all the walkers out enjoying the sunshine. Not entirely sure what is going through their head when doing so, presumably not a lot. So the new section of trail will be a big plus from that point of view and hopefully won't cause issues with the horses when the gates are in. The rest of the trail is very good given what they have to work with. It's great to have an all weather alternative and with the jumps/roll-a-bility it works for a diverse range of abilities too.

both groups are missing a trick here, they should have a race down the trail, side by side, top gear style, see which is fastest.

Thing is though, bar that last part to Waggledance it would be fine for more novice riders.

To be fair, yes, taken at their own pace. I was comparing to, say, the Swinley blue. There's more going on on SL2.

Yeah they've done a good job in the space and gradient available.

It remains to be seen if SL2 brings many more riders in. I'd say only the Tower descent section is worth sessioning for the DH/Enduro guys and it's pretty short. And access isn't as easy as at Swinley or Peaslake, the nearby car parks can get full quickly at weekends, which means riding up from a fair distance.

As a local rider, it's a win, I hope it works out with the other land users.

Thanks to the implementer.

My understanding is that on a bridleway cyclists are required to give way to horses, and all give way to pedestrians.

I'm guessing RA would never stand for it tho, happily lots of walkers spot that it's easiest for them to step aside and seem happy to do so.

I feel the code is right, machines yield to people. People who happen to have a big animal yield to people on foot. I don't think we get a bad deal within the system as a whole, leastways not where I ride where there is a huge network of bridleways, and some open access land too.

I feel the code is right, machines yield to people.

@njee

http://muddyground.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/you-know-that-new-trail-over-on-leith.html

I am sure we all send healing vibes. The squeamish need not click through.

This near the cricket pitch apparently, I thought of the time there was potential for a trip up there. Roll it through first time.

Eh? Biker tries to do jump and crashes, hurting himself in the process. Could have happened anywhere. The jump was rollable, he chose not to and paid the consequences.

jekkyl - Member
both groups are missing a trick here, they should have a race down the trail, side by side, top gear style, see which is fastest.

Try that with my OH's ex-eventer and you will be in for a shock - the bloody thing makes a mountain goat look arthritic....

Eh? Biker tries to do jump and crashes, hurting himself in the process. Could have happened anywhere. The jump was rollable, he chose not to and paid the consequences.

My sentiments exactly. I didn't say it was a trail no one could crash on, just that it's quite beginner friendly, except that last bit to Waggledance.

Got two local bridleways sorted out with th ehelp of a member of the British Horse Society and the Bridleways Trust. Got nowhere with trying to get it sorted out with the support of the local MTBers ( not that they were not trying, they just didn't seem to have the right combination of influence and knowledge of the law ).

So the author of the piece quoted by the OP may have a point.

What tyres for a 15h Cleveland Bay?

Wasn't trying to make a point chaps, just sharing relevant (timely) info.

The law on bridleways is quite clear. The 1968 Countryside Act, section 30 introduced the right to cycle on bridleways, provided cyclists give way to walkers and horseriders. You don't have to like it but you've got to lump it. Those posters expressing views that the order of priority ought to be different are no different to motorists who think speed limits ought to be higher or cyclists ought to pay road tax. Campaign to change the law, by all means, but know what it is now and expect trouble if you don't follow it. Just sayin', like.

The only real issue with that hierarchy is that you could theoretically get stuck behind some belligerent walkers for as long as they wish, if they're legally entitled to stand their ground and not let you past.

The same hierarchy doesn't exist on the road, so those comparisons aren't as valid.

That said, I don't have a specific issue, always give way to others where appropriate, and wince at the pace at which people ride that trail from Leith Hill tower considering the number of walkers on it.

I do not believe anyone gets stuck behind walkers for any great length of time. If you ride behind them at walking pace for, say, a minute or two… make conversation, say hello, be civil… are you seriously saying they will just block your path? Nonsense. They might wait for an appropriate spot to allow you to pass. I don't see why walkers should jump into the ditch, or even stop and step aside, but when the path widens suitably then it is a good place to pass.

Back on topic - if I see horses at all I usually just stop completely and wait a few seconds. Say hi, wait until they're gone and then on with my stuff in peace.

I do not believe anyone gets stuck behind walkers for any great length of time. If you ride behind them at walking pace for, say, a minute or two… make conversation, say hello, be civil… are you seriously saying they will just block your path? Nonsense.

Read the post and calm down. No, I'm not saying that at all, I specifically said that I don't have an issue, always give way, and am polite. I said that a particularly belligerent walker [b][u][i]could[/i][/u][/b], with the law on their side, impede your progress if they so desired, which is a slight issue with that hierarchy.

Not that they will, not that they do, they could.

Back on topic - if I see horses at all I usually just stop completely and wait a few seconds. Say hi, wait until they're gone and then on with my stuff in peace.

Agreed, but the issue here is more that it's occurring at an intersection where horses are potentially unseen. The fireroad crossings on Telegraph Road come to mind - plenty of people hit them at full pace, it's a similar scenario.

Having ridden it a few times now, I really can't see the problem. Where exactly is the area(s) they are worried about?

I thought that - I assume they mean the bottom of the slope from the tower, the bit that's not open yet, where they can be coming up from the left. Seems quite an acute angle they merge though, which I'd have thought was better.

I'm still trying to figure out where this new trail continues once it exits at the bottom of the Tower, i.e at the crossroads linking the different fire roads. Was walking there on Sat (came up from the Landslip) and couldn't for the life of me see where it picked up in order to get to Waggledance. Saw some riders having a go on the cordoned off section then just stopping at the gate not knowing where to go either.

The "stuck behind" issue is probably regional, it's never happened to me in Surrey, I didn't even consider it, when discussing "give way" I was thinking face to face meetings. I guess on a fell or a thin moorland track, getting stuck behind must be more common. But it still seems to me the current system, if not right, is still optimal. I don't see how taking a bike somewhere justifies the expectation other people should get out of the way. Walkers and equestrians have a right to enjoy their time in the countryside without being obliged to dodge bikes. Bikers who can't handle that still have the choice of a bike park or trail centre, we get a good deal I think.

I'm still trying to figure out where this new trail continues once it exits at the bottom of the Tower, i.e at the crossroads linking the different fire roads.

Turn right before the gate, take the broad track (above the deep sunken lane) about 200 metres, there's a 90+ degree left bend at the top of the climb, take that, about 10 metres further on the trail entrance is on the right. It's not marked.

Having ridden it a few times now, I really can't see the problem. Where exactly is the area(s) they are worried about?

as it stands now:

* about 2/3 of the way down the first section from the Tower, there's a junction, turn left for a roll in and pop up "above the bridleway", or carry on the more contoury line

* where the first section ends (left of the bway in the middle of the H&H pic), rider crosses the bridleway to start the second section

obviously, it's taped off because it's not finished yet so there's every chance it's all in hand ...

I don't see how taking a bike somewhere justifies the expectation other people should get out of the way

make conversation, say hello, be civil… are you seriously saying they will just block your path?

I wasn't aiming specifically at you DONK. I'd assume walkers have priority based on historic reasons of the "common man's" rights, and also they are the most vulnerable, and slowest to make progress.

Turn right before the gate, take the broad track (above the deep sunken lane) about 200 metres, there's a 90+ degree left bend at the top of the climb, take that, about 10 metres further on the trail entrance is on the right. It's not marked.

Ah, ok ... I just missed it then as we walked up from the Landslip and headed for the Tower, hence didn't notice anything round the corner to the right.

Sounds like it's kind of an extended replacement for that trail that got closed off a few years ago (starts on the left about 100m further along before spitting you out just before the cricket pitch). I also remember that little C shaped trail that went off the side of the hill immediately oppos the cricket pitch before curving back in. That didn't last long IIRC.

yeah you'd have missed it if you left the BOAT at the top of the climb, which you would have done I think