You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So the council have started cracking down on the massive digging activity at my local.
For context, I live in SW London, and it is a forest owned by the National Trust on loan to Richmond Council. The jumps have been there since 2009 but recently there has been a flurry of activity with lots of peopl building and riding the jumps. These have been great fun and have improved my skills and confidence a lot.
Now, the not so great part.
The council has picked up on this and the environmental board is not happy. Last week, all the jumps were knocked down and berms flattened etc. This made a lot of 11-14 year olds not very happy at all. On came yesterday, and 25 people with shovels came down and rebuilt it all within a matter of hours.
Then a disgruntled older lady who I had never met before but seemed to have a reputation for being unhappy came down to the jumps and started taking pix of all of the jumps and argued that people could fall over them in the dark and that it was very expensive to repair (1000s of pounds).
The issue is that there will always be a demand for more jumps and a ready supply of boys with shovels geared up to make new jumps. I was wondering if anyone has had a similar situation and managed to resolve it? We are drafting a letter to the council at the mo but doesn't look super promising.
TIA.
Its vandalism pure and simple.
Where is that? Never heard of jumps in London.
It’s a very tough balancing act. If it wasn’t for so called activist trail builders there would be very few trails with features to build skills on in the UK. It’s working out where there is genuine danger and concern vs bored people with no hobbies and too much time on their hands.
If you do not have the landowners permission its both illegal and stupid. It will end up with the whole area being fenced off.
they are not "activist trail builders" they are antisocial vandals. Its not just the danger - its the disturbance to wildlife.
I'm not condoning it, just trying to find a solution and save the local
It's east sheen common.
It’s working out where there is genuine danger and concern
Yes unfortunately as with many youths health and safety isn't at the forfront of their minds. If we do manage to come to an agreement I think there would have to be a scaling down of difficulty.
Lots of trail builders out there doing a great job. The pandemic has really shown the huge demand there is on our limited spaces, especially in the high population density areas. I can't help with specifics for dealing with the council but there are plenty of experienced people on here who have done it and can. If you end with a petition stick a link on here and I'll happily sign it.
See my edit above - its not just danger the disturbance to wildlife from tree root damage to bluebells to badgers
the solution is to get landowners permission.
See my edit above – its not just danger the disturbance to wildlife from tree root damage to bluebells to badgers
the solution is to get landowners permission.
Eh. That makes no sense at all. It's either disturbing nature or it's not. Whether the landowner gives permission has no bearing on that.
the landowner will ( should?) Know the land and where is OK to build.
We had this on corstoprhine hill in Edinburgh - there was agreement that two areas could be used for jump building but the builders continued to build in other areas. caused a lot of strife when they built jumps on a badger sett and used concrete to build features. Came close to stopping any trail building
There is a great podcast here on the issue of ownership.
https://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/21-03-20/?mc_cid=0b35a11523#Michael-Shermer-Show
National trust/Richmond council, we own it don't we?
It is a sign that the council are not considering the local kids needs, all power to them.
Yea, kinda have to agree with TJ on this one, if there's any sort of protection (SSSI etc or just the T&C's of the lease say it can't be developed) for the land it might be even harder.
Local trails to me were flattened last year after local complaints. The (big) kids were grown up about it, got organized, formed a group, negotiated for use of the land, and produced T-shirts and hoodies which were sold to pay for liability insurance.
Maybe take it as an opportunity to get organized and teach the kids it's not ok to just take what they want?
From this:
To this:
To this:
Is that at Wisley? Looks familiar
Fox Hill (I had the ">" wrong on the t-shirt image which probably made it harder to tell 🤣).
5plusn8
Free Member
Quote
There is a great podcast here on the issue of ownership.
https://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/21-03-20/?mc_cid=0b35a11523#Michael-Shermer-ShowNational trust/Richmond council, we own it don’t we?
It is a sign that the council are not considering the local kids needs, all power to them.
Will they be applying the Freemen defense too?
Yes I didn't really think about liability insurance aswell - seems like a whole new can of worms.
The organisation bit is good if you can make it happen. Gofundme for any planning / liability insurance etc...
To put it into context:
This is basically on of the richest residential areas on the verge of central London. Any kids whose parents can afford to live there have a min £1m house with plenty of spare cash to help their kids out with their new hobby.
There are plenty of other parks and wildlife sanctuaries around for people that want that kind of thing. E.g Richmond, Bushy, London WL centre.
What the area has zero of is anything MTB related for kids to enjoy instead of sitting at home all day on Netflix.
See my edit above – its not just danger the disturbance to wildlife from tree root damage to bluebells to badgers
the solution is to get landowners permission.
How can permission solve disturbance to badgers and damage to vegetable matter? Asking for a stripey-faced friend.
there would be very few trails with features to build skills
What all the FC and private trail center, pump tracks, skate parks and long distance trails across the country, yeah absolutely nowhere to hone skills (do massive jumps count as skills training).
National trust/Richmond council, we own it don’t we?
He'll no, the National Trust is a private organisation independent of government, private land owner like any other, except they have specific bylaws which can make things a criminal offence that would otherwise be civil. Even if the government own the land you only have access rights if they have been granted, same with FC land although the FC are often tenants not the land owner.
I just don't get this belief that its acceptable, even morally right to go and destroy someone else's property. What the 14 year olds want is irrelevant in this context. As for engaging with the council, good luck, the local diggers have already pissed them off and getting something down even when a council is willing is tedious. Are the diggers going to stump up money for insurance, risk assessments etc., thought not. In this case it's not just the council, it's the NT as well, they will set the tenancy agreements for the council and haven't exactly caught the cycling bug.
If all the above seems a bit harsh, tough, that's the way the it works in this country. You need to understand it before you go ploughing in head first and destroy any little goodwill there may have originally been.
PS I'm a long term trail builder, just do it the right way with the FC, our volunteer efforts have significantly increased our local trail centre and resulted in additioanl funding that otherwise wouldnt have been forth coming.
massive digging activity at my local.
This is the bit that seems the biggest problem to me. Someone furtively clearing a trail is one thing, having a huge crew digging up massive mounds of dirt after being told that they do not have permission is just asking for trouble. How do they think it's going to end?
How can permission solve disturbance to badgers and damage to vegetable matter? Asking for a stripey-faced friend.
Me: I would like to punch you in the face
You: I'd rather you didn't, but there's a punchbag over there you could punch instead.
Me: Ok
Net result - I'm happy, and the badger doesn't get punched in the face.
"This is basically on of the richest residential areas on the verge of central London. Any kids whose parents can afford to live there have a min £1m house with plenty of spare cash to help their kids out with their new hobby."
This is making amassive, and ill-informed assumption about ALL kids who might use a facility in a particular area. I know for a fact, many younger riders travel across London to get to popular skate parks, BMX tracks etc, so to suggest it's just the 'rich kids', is actually quite prejudicial. You haven't got a clue about the economics of anyone involved.
All power to the kids, I say. As for those saying 'it's vandalism'; get a life, grandad! Stuff like this has far less environmental impact than many things, including roads for people to drive cars on, so they can access the countryside...
How can permission solve disturbance to badgers and damage to vegetable matter? Asking for a stripey-faced friend.
TJs point (I think) is that by working with the landowners you would be told not to dig where there is a Badger set and (hopefully) pointed towards a location where no stripey faced barstads are in situ.
Fear of litigation.
That’s why illegal jumps get knocked down. I fully hear the arguments for but at the end of the day the landowner will be liable for any accidents on their land. Regardless of whether they gave permission or not. If they give permission & they are built with the landowners involvement then insurance can be sought. Everybody is happy.
But if not? Well, one can hardly blame a landowner for wanting to cover their ass from litigious actions.
It’s not rocket science.
How can permission solve disturbance to badgers and damage to vegetable matter? Asking for a stripey-faced friend.
As in my other post - the landowner will ( should?) know if there are any particularly sensitive areas and thus direct you to OK areas
Go to the area, sit in any of the parks for just 10 mins and then tell me this is ill informed.
This maybe kids travelling from say Chelsea, Richmond, Barnes, it’s certainly not what you are thinking.
I also don’t get how it’s prejudicial to state that the local kids probably have the resources to help them if needs be?
Net net my view is this could be turned into something win win for the community that is seriously lacking this kind of thing. I think the closest outside of this is East London Olympics area and say Swinley.
It’s a difficult one.
Gives people stuff to do, but then it’s woodland so annoys people near by.
Increases the workload for local hospitals significantly.
Even ‘approved’ trail areas significantly increase footfall to hospitals
All power to the kids, I say. As for those saying ‘it’s vandalism’; get a life, grandad!
Can I come round to your house redecorate your house and dig up the garden?
apart from anything else illegal trail building puts peoples backs up
apart from anything else illegal trail building puts peoples backs up
Exactly.
Can I come round to your house redecorate your house and dig up the garden?
Could you do the downstairs loo first please then a couple of berms and a step down in the garden would be ace.
"Can I come round to your house redecorate your house and dig up the garden?"
Ooh yes please! Covid has meant we haven't been able to get anyone in to do the decorating, and it's well overdue. And the garden's a mess too, but please; I wouldn't want you to put your back out, or worse, keel over. That would be awkward explaining to the authorities.
"apart from anything else illegal trail building puts peoples backs up"
Are you aware that we have illegal activity (trespass) to thank for why we can now go riding our bikes in the countryside? Plus; graffiti art, the Civil Rights movement, etc. Back to your pipe and slippers and Daily Mail! 😉
apart from anything else
illegal trail buildingpeople on bicycles puts peoples backs up
FTFY
Forest isn't quite the phrase I'd use for East Sheen common.. couple of hundred of square metres of woods on the north edge of Richmond Park slap bang in residential West London. So a bunch of digging is always going to attract negative attention. Subtlety would be your best approach
Didn't we have exactly this discussion across several pages like a week ago?
The argument is simple, the answer slightly more complicated. Do we go what is good, or what is right?
It's fantastic that people are coming together as a community to build something cool that kids and adults alike can enjoy. Of course it is.
But it's not their land.
So any arguments to the contrary is just whataboutery. As TJ says, if you're not using your garden can I plant some cabbages? I'll park on your driveway of course, you're not using that either.
It's curious how morals go out of the window when it's in people's favour. There were arguments last time about people having massive gardens or owning lots of land and it's 'not fair'. Which is the same justification people use for keying cars. Cheeky trail in the afternoon, borrow a cheeky BMW to get home.
All that work, all that time, and not one person involved thought to seek permission first? Why? Because they knew they'd get told 'no'? There's your answer, if so. Get permission, you can stick it up the old dear's nose next time she comes sniffing around with nothing better to do.
I spent 7 years trying to work with the Forestry Commission to get some legitimate trails built in Lordswood, Southampton. We eventually got the go ahead from the local ranger but then a couple of weeks in we got told to stop as it is leased land and there is a clause to discourage public access.
We tried 'rhododendron clearing' parties and 'erosion prevention work' (Trails and Jumps) but were eventually told to stop everything which is when I went off and created Southampton Bike Park.
A few years later I discovered it was a lady who lived near Lordswood and regularly walked her dog in the woods who had been sending the letters to the FC legal team in Scotland threatening them about breaching the terms of the lease. The same lady whop had been caught red handed putting sticks across trails at neck height just round blind bends on trails 'because the riders should slow down anyway for the corners'.
graffiti art,
But for every Banksy there's a hundred like the local artist where I used to live who specialised in anatomically questionable Cock 'n' Balls. Which is exactly what I want to see out of my back yard on a neighbour's wall.
Best way to resolve? Form a trail association, engage with the stakeholders and put together a proposal for a development.
Once you've got permission, build a risk assessed and risk managed set of jumps that are insurable.
we have illegal activity (trespass)
More uninformed blather, trespass is not illegal (at the moment) and is a country mile away from digging jumps. If I trespass you wouldn't know I'd been there when I'd left (which is why no cyclcist has been sued for trespass).
WCA the lease thing may have some legs even if it was dredged up by some nasty nimby. My local forest has been a bit the same, when the land owner (United Utilities) woke up to the fact the trails had become successful they suddenly started to get awkward with the lease and saw it as an opportunity to make money. It doesn't help the FC is so spread out, were lucky our local beat forester is very pro trail building and tends to ask for forgiveness later.
Collaborate. This document has opened some doors for us.
I’d put my money on this being a single bored NIMBY dog walker from a mile away with too much time on their hands.
To the OP - Try and get one of the local private schools / Unis to get involved and back it. Would go nicely with the local rowing clubs. Make sure one of the jumps is gravel bike friendly, another kid friendly and you will quickly get local support.
Who owns the land with the jumps near Teddington Lock? Wonder if there’s some precedent there..?
I've just got home from visiting a jump site that we built with permission after a long history of build/destroy. Its on council land.
We came up with a plan to build without gaps and to make it beginner friendly but big enough for people to learn. They were cool with that and it hasn't cost them a penny. We have had to remove unwanted building twice but thats part of the deal.
Now they are aware of it, its your only sensible choice.
I also build less legitimate trails and features but I stay subtle, avoid damage and accept that if the landowner doesn't want them then thats that. This has never happened though yet, because I think carefully before I start, and don't move tonnes of dirt...
There is a spot near me that is going through that cycle where they are taking the piss so its now living on borrowed time. Started small but its growing every weekend.
You need to try and find out who at the council manages that bit of the land and get a site meeting with them, get them to explain their concerns - could be liability, environmental, complaints from others etc and then talk to them about what might be possible and what the limitations of that might be.
Many spots have been lost before by folk digging up and adding lots of new trails in areas where trails have been for years. Adding more and more trails in an area seems to be a common thing of late, wanting more and more but it doesn't make things better generally and is a short sighted view.
Looking at some of these responses, have you actuallu looked at where East Sheen common is? You can always go another hundred metres and build in Richmond Park
What SteveH says. Its certainly possible to find a solution. The nearest trail to my house, in the middle of a city is a proper scary jump line. All council approved and above board, but run by volunteers who do the digging and the riding. There's a lockable bar across the start drop in, but other than that it's open access and right next to a busy bridleway. Its always looked after, there's never any rubbish and it doesn't get (ab)used by dicks.
The difference to most places is that it being in Sheffield with its "The Outdoor City" tagline - there's plenty of people on the council who get action sports, can rationalise it to non-believers in economic grounds (tourist trade) and are prepared to listen and figure out a way to make stuff happen. Funny old world, the same guy who allows Monkey Bumps to exist is also behind the Lady Cannings mtb trails...
Wbo, I have a feeling that Richmond park is Crown Estate, whereas the East Sheen trails are on common land.
It's tough and drawn out enough negotiating with the local council, I'm not sure that digging in Richmond park would lead to any form of future agreement between bikers and the royal parks management agency.
"More uninformed blather, trespass is not illegal"
Well done. You win the internet for today. You'll be able to wear a nice pedant round your neck, to show off to everyone.
"If I trespass you wouldn’t know I’d been there"
I would. I have secret cameras. Everywhere. I'd set the dogs on you. No-one would ever know you'd been there...
"It’s curious how morals go out of the window when it’s in people’s favour"
Yep. That's the world in which we live. If you ask me, it's best to get your money's worth out of it. Because someone else will always be out to **** you over.
My (highly enjoyable) ride today involved using paths where cycling is expressly forbidden.I made the difficult moral choice. I'm sure Hell will be nice and warm at least.
build in Richmond Park
I know RP well - you’d never NEVER get away with it & I couldn’t advise more strongly against it.
If anyone did - I’d kick them down happily. You’d cause more damage than you could ever realise. The Royal Parks JUST about tolerate cycling as it is. DON’T give them a reason to really hate us!
It’s east sheen common.
I used to ride there with my mates nearly 40 years ago, it had jumps then too. I wasn't any good at them then, either 🙂
There is a lot of truth in that JonEdwards. Bradford Council have a chap in charge of outdoor space that rides bikes so they have Ilkey Moor and Esholt for example.
Sheffield is another level thanks to receptive people on the council (and lots and lots of time and hard work both mental and physical).
Here in Calderdale at the moment we don't have anybody on the council on our side which is very frustrating. The chap in charge of looking after our woodlands is a lovely bloke with a tough job but admits he knows nothing about mountain biking and his bosses aren't too keen on us.
Just over the hill in Kirklees their woodland guy rides bikes so is pretty cool with the idea of us managing the various local spots rather than destroying them.
There is a theme here isn't there?
If you do choose to go down this route it will be hard work. And in my case involves the poacher becoming the gamekeeper but its worth it. That little spot of ours was full of kids of all ages this afternoon all wearing big smiles. I just wish they'd take their litter home!!
Ok thanks all for your replies. Went down there today and to another spot in Wimbledon Common and it was busy as usual.
I may have misstated, it's not much of a forest, more just bits of forest and some paths.
In terms of digging, not much new happened today, they seemed to have just fixed up the doubles which were running nicely. I have tried to ask them to just work on one line, but I didn't get a great response.
Digging on Richmond Park is definitely out of bounds as it is heavily patroled and Crown Land is very protected.
Image showing where most of the digging is going on compared to the total common size:
I would be interested to hear people who are local to the common's opinions on the matter.
Where on Wimbledon common, in Wimbledon but about £1m short of being local to the common 😉
If it is in out of the way areas on the common I don’t really have an issue, it’s not as if a sodding great golf course full of middle class tossers is part of the natural nature of the common but that’s allowed / encouraged
Secret little spot, jumps, berms drops etc.
Depends how far away you are from the common but I am happy to give info. PM me if interested.
“Can I come round to your house redecorate your house and dig up the garden?”
Ooh yes please!
Only I get to choose what I do, and in fact I'm going to dig your garden to suit my own purposes in a way I know you'll hate, and I'll be round with my mates at all hours. Still up for it?
Look, I ride cheeky trails, but you can't take the piss.
The trails at hemlock stone in Nottingham went through a similar process when the council decided they were too dangerous and knocked them down. They were eventually reinstated with council permission after some hard work by locals to get it agreed and there's a pretty good relationship with the council now. Digging is only allowed on official dig days. Could be worth sending a message to hemlock trail association for some advice.
Anyways thanks for all the replys. Email should be going out soon and we will have to see what the response is from the council. Hoping for the best anyway.
Unfortuanetely it seems like the unstoppable force meets the immovable object situation.
It’s interesting that this and the Innerleithen threads have popped up on main forum page at the same time.
There’s a desperate need to fund facilities locally - where people actually live.
It is an old story of insufficient funding for local amenities and poor investment that is targeted towards our young people.
Getting this funding in place, securing some local space for this will surely reduce some potential for unofficial trail building on private land and the associated conflict...?
another spot in Wimbledon Common
You might just get away with it on the common.....just....maybe......but keep it small otherwise the rangers or someone else will find it & it’ll be gone with trouble to follow..
You might just get away with it on the common
Yes not me building, I just know the guys who did and they showed me. Apparently they've had a few run ins with rangers already and have had to run a few times lol. Especially after cutting down a tree to make space for a gap over berm jump.
I have to say I agree with TJ and others - you won't get the council to engage whilst you are actively vandalising their land (in their eyes, and in the law). The trick to getting a council to do anything is engaging with the councillors (not the officers) - they need to see three things:
- this will in some way make things better for the citizens of the council (that might be a cost saving through reduced vandalism elsewhere, or new facilities, or improved education outcomes etc - but the average resident has to see some "value" from it).
- the councillor must be able to get some PR out of it, this is especially important in the 18 months before they get reelected. So they won't be interested in quietly sorting it - they will want a big solution with their picture in the paper!
- that even if there is some controversy (e.g. dog walkers who complain), that there is enough general feeling that they are trying to do the right thing. Something that pissed off their voters is bad. So if their core voters are old people with dogs and too much time on their hands you have an issue. If their core voters are parents you may be on to a winner.
Which councillor to engage is an interesting thing. Only the ones in power have any real clout. The rest make noise about what the ones in power should be doing. A local trick here is to go to all the parties though and essentially try to get consensus - "young people need better facilities", "cycling across town to get to facilities is quite dangerous", "young people have lost out because of covid", "young people in london don't have good access to the outdoors" etc. you should be able to get some traction. IME they will then bring you the council officer who gets told to help you! Its not over then but if you try the council officer directly it will be a fight.
I'd want to find a local youth worker who understands the issues in the local area and how this group may or may not be helping them - experienced youth workers have usually learned how to talk council lingo.
You will also need to be prepared for stupic claims like this:
Increases the workload for local hospitals significantly.
Even ‘approved’ trail areas significantly increase footfall to hospitals
Whilst it may increase the number of people going to hospital with minor trauma, and that is easily measured, its much harder to measure the reduction in people going with minor trauma from trying to ride down concrete steps instead, or getting hit by cars, or stabbed because "all there was to do was get involved in drugs", or suffering mental harm on the internet, or becoming drunk sitting drinking cider in the same woods, or becoming fat lazy and a long term problem.
The small number of people who get hurt in trail centres (anyone who says "significantly increase" is presumably unfamiliar with statistics or has no idea the number of football, rugby, domestic violence and alcohol related injuries are in our hospitals on a normal weekend to make quite a big denominator for the face plants and collarbones on bikes!) would not have been sitting in a padded cell at zero risk of harm if they weren't riding a bike.
I just know the guys who did and they showed me. Apparently they’ve had a few run ins with rangers already and have had to run a few times lol. Especially after cutting down a tree to make space for a gap over berm jump.
Really? this is why illegal trail building needs to be stopped. FFS cutting down a tree!
Yes in this case I completely agree with you it was too far to cut down a whole tree. No wonder the rangers were pissed.
FFS cutting down a tree!
But on this common people are allowed to have a private golf course right across the middle of it, which is the more environmentally damaging? Who knows how much the golf club pays the council but in 2016 it was £25 p.a
On the subject of trees, right now in my area, the council are removing a significant amount of trees from the woodlands as part of a management plan and ringing some of those that are left.
I'm not saying this is wrong, this is part of a plan for a healthy woodland but to a young kid building a trail they are going to struggle to see how removing one tree or a few branches is a problem.
Same here. A huge area of cheeky trails has been destroyed when the National Trust cut down hundreds of trees. They built new roads to get the logging vehicles in, it now looks like the aftermath of a battle. They've done it in the name of conservation, getting rid of non native trees. It'll grow back and the wildlife will return. The trail builders will return too and the damage they do will be tiny
to a young kid building a trail they are going to struggle to see how removing one tree or a few branches is a problem.
I have this vague feeling that one of the things parents and other adults are supposed to do is provide guidance to kids about stuff like this.
Apparently they’ve had a few run ins with rangers already and have had to run a few times lol. Especially after cutting down a tree to make space for a gap over berm jump.
Their cover is blown then. Don’t be surprised if the trails get trashed. Cutting down a tree will have p1ssed off the rangers no-end. Shame, if they’d kept it subtle then they might have got away with it..
Whilst it may increase the number of people going to hospital with minor trauma, and that is easily measured, its much harder to measure the reduction in people going with minor trauma from trying to ride down concrete steps instead, or getting hit by cars, or stabbed because “all there was to do was get involved in drugs”, or suffering mental harm on the internet, or becoming drunk sitting drinking cider in the same woods, or becoming fat lazy and a long term problem.
Bit of a sweeping statement, but I can’t disagree with its intent. 👍
Your bike and other equipment can be forfeit if discovered damaging an SSSI or disturbing protected wildlife.
It is happening around here too. There have always been some jumps in the back corner of the woods, they are tucked away and although the landowner knows they are there, he turns a blind eye.
Recently (perhaps caused by lockdown?) there has been more building and closer to the carpark and main path. There are groups who spend all day there digging and riding, they have a portable speaker and food. The jumps are getting bigger, more gaps than tables, the borrow pits are getting bigger.
The result of this is more people see the jumps, hear the music and see the litter left behind. They see the gaps and the borrow pits and think of the danger.
We are on borrowed time before they get knocked down by the landowner.
But on this common people are allowed to have a private golf course right across the middle of it, which is the more environmentally damaging?
Wow, people just built an entire golf course across council land without asking permission? Oh, hang on - are you saying that actually the council can be cooperative if you open a dialogue BEFORE moving the bulldozers in. Who'd have thought that!
The thread title is about "resolving argument". There are two ways to resolve an argument. One is for all the parties to sit down and work out some sort of agreement. Ideally, both sides are better off. The other is to go to battle and the strongest side will get what they want while the weaker side will get nothing.
In the case of a council with the law behind them, plus earthmoving equipment, a bunch of kids with shovels will not win a battle, so that's not the way you're going to resolve it.
However, if you're not really looking to resolve it, just to find a rationalization for keeping on digging, just make up whatever reason you want. The council won't be interested in hearing it because you're not interested in finding a resolution, so the only person it matters to is you. "The world can go **** itself, I'll do whatever I want" will work just as well as anything else because the only thing that matters is your own opinion.
The thread title is about “resolving argument”. There are two ways to resolve an argument. One is for all the parties to sit down and work out some sort of agreement. Ideally, both sides are better off. The other is to go to battle and the strongest side will get what they want while the weaker side will get nothing
.
That tends to be the outcome when 'weaker' groups sit down with local authorities to try to reach an agreement, mainly. A group of youngsters will get nowhere trying things the 'official' route, in my experience. However; a bit of properly organised civil disobedience, might actually work well in the long run. Build jumps, council spend money flattening them. Build jumps again, repeat. Eventually the council will get fed up/run out of spending money, and either relent or ignore. The only winners are the plant hire firms. And each time, the kids learn new ways of thwarting authority. Which, given today's climate, can only be a good thing. As for all of you saying 'obey authority'; people like you stand by and watch as stronger people take a stand. So just stay out of the way; your apathy and weak mindedness achieves nothing. Ever.
Jump spots come and go, it was like that thirty years ago when I was a kid, it's still the same. Richmond council aren't going to help.
Anyway, the kids are back a school, the amount of digging will back right off, and all you miserable old gits can stop whining about kids having fun😁
A group of youngsters will get nowhere trying things the ‘official’ route, in my experience.
No, they need adults to show them how to do all this. The OP's question was about "resolving" the argument. That means that adults need to help the kids work through how to resolve disputes. Civil disobedience has its place, but starting things off with civil disobedience is a poor tactic because other people will view you as louts who are unwilling to sit down and resolve the issue. Starting by approaching the landowners and showing that you want to find a resolution is a much better tactic, even if you believe they are not interested.
My (highly enjoyable) ride today involved using paths where cycling is expressly forbidden.I made the difficult moral choice.
And last year we had https://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/why-are-cyclists-vilified-in-the-uk/
As for all of you saying ‘obey authority’; people like you stand by and watch as stronger people take a stand. So just stay out of the way; your apathy and weak mindedness achieves nothing. Ever.
You think this is all about 'sticking it to the man'? Don't talk wet.
It's not about blindly obeying authority. It's about how pissing someone off probably isn't the most effective strategy in getting them around to your way of thinking. Hols is bang on the money. We think we can do what we please and then are shocked when non-cyclists get the arse with us. You start digging up someone else's property and leaving it covered in shite, it's only ever going to go one way no matter how noble your cause may be. Meanwhile as a consequence I get shouted at as a 'bloody cyclist' or worse by families and dog-walkers on bridleways as I trundle past them at any-slower-and-I'll-fall-off speeds.
Wheaton's Law. This is why we can't have nice things.
This is why we can’t have nice things.
Civil disobedience is a big part of why we have as many nice things as we do.
Oh, hang on – are you saying that actually the council can be cooperative if you open a dialogue BEFORE moving the bulldozers in. Who’d have thought that!
No what I’m saying is that a golf course that restricts public use of a common and leads to more manicurement of the environment probably has a greater adverse environmental effect than some kids chopping a tree down and therefore the outrage here is a little misplaced. Thought that was pretty obvious tbh.
I’d say there’s little chance of any official help on Wimbledon common, cycling is banned over most of it, the priorities seem to be golf and horse riders (although a lot of the local stables seem to be closing).
each time, the kids learn new ways of thwarting authority. Which, given today’s climate, can only be a good thing. As for all of you saying ‘obey authority’; people like you stand by and watch as stronger people take a stand. So just stay out of the way; your apathy and weak mindedness achieves nothing. Ever.
😂🤣😂🤣
Or you can grow up and figure out that engaging and getting a seat at the table gets you far better results than "civil dissobedience".
I mean, what if every user group decided to say stuff the rest I'm doing my own thing. What will happen when the model railway club flattens the jumps to build their new clubhouse. Then Persimmon flatten that to build a block of flats? I mean, at what point do you think other people should engage with the democratically elected council?
Or you can grow up and figure out that engaging and getting a seat at the table gets you far better results than “civil dissobedience”.
That's working out really well for the majority, isn't it?
You think this is all about ‘sticking it to the man’? Don’t talk wet.
No; it's about getting what you feel you need, out of life. Regardless of your opinions, obviously these youngsters feel they want and need somewhere to have fun, so in their own eyes, they're being 'proactive'. Yes, they have much to learn about life, but forcing kids to be subservient and meekly obedient, is why we have such a weak, subservient and pathetically obedient society now. You're just jealous because you've got no fight in you. Leave the fighting to those who can; you stick to the safety of behind your keyboard. The strong will protect you. Hopefully.