DT78/buzz-lightyear - they're all witches out for a constitutional I tell thee.
Bike Forum
Cheeky trails, polite militancy, and developing a thick skin
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Why do you? Is it a 'I don't so other people shouldn't' 'It'll spoil it for everybody' or 'people shouldn't be out having fun' type thing? I'm genuinly interested, I've never worked out why people feel the need to police other actions - unless they are in the police of course!
Sort of playing Devils Advocate here but you'd complain if you found a walker wandering round at a trail centre. You're riding that place not expecting to see walkers, equally a walker is out on a FP not expecting to see bikes/horses. It's a really difficult balancing act - asking for full access to the countryside while still wanting exclusive access to parts of forests...
Posted 1 year ago # -
I do see a difference between being challenged by the landowner,
Yes, I do too. The landowner, or representative, has cause to complain about the trespass "offence" and can use "reasonable force" to evict me; so I take that very seriously. Although when confronted I ask for permission to continue, usually denied, and ultimately retire to the nearest RoW. Normally, completely amicably.
Landowners have different issues, for example:
1. I followed a land rover through a farm gate before turning off toward the bridleway, but stopped for a chat to the farmer. He mentioned that I should have used the BW gate and I agreed. But since the farm gate was open I used that - "fair enough" he said. I asked him if he'd had many problems with the new bridleway. He said that the only problem was not normal RoW users, who don't bother him at all, but thieves stealing the knackered car batteries from his cattle fences!
2. The owner of a local wood is generally tolerant of all the trail building and trespass that goes on, perhaps realising it's a losing battle and pointless to enforce. But is justifiably concerned when it interferes with his shooting activity which brings him income. Fair enough IMO.
So yes, I think it's good to be sensitive to genuine landowner issues, but be militant with the run-of-the-mill busybodies
you'd complain if you found a walker wandering round at a trail centre
Only in-so-much that I'd be concerned for their safety, given the full-bore approach that these trails encourage. One rides RoWs with rather more caution.
Posted 1 year ago # -
re: point 2) - I think the problem with not stopping trail building is that you're seen as condoning it and they may have legal implications if someone injures themselves.
the other issue with 'perpetual' cheeky trails is that after 20(?) years of continuous access there may be a 'right' in place which makes the land worth less.
I ride cheeky trails all the time, as above, I'm just polite if I do come across walkers and try and avoid obviously busy times of the week/day.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Bringing in a logical "what harm is this bike doing here?" question to the argument seems helpful.
Does the walker object because the presence of the biker is ruining their experience (feeling harrassed or inconvenienced, percieves rightly or wrongly that the bike is causing errosion a pedestrian would not) or just that the biker should not be there by the letter of the law.
Does the land owner object because the presence of the biker is damaging business (e.g. scaring livestock), causing errosion or pontentially endangering themselves on his land or is it just that they should not be there by the letter of the law.
If it is for the first reasons (irrespective if you agree or not) it is fair enough - if the second it's just being petty and small minded.
Posted 1 year ago # -
personally the most inconsiderate people I have come across are fishermen on towpaths they take up large sections of path with their gear and them damn pole things are just ridicules got challenged by one the other week told him he should try fishing on the other side of the bank rather than use a 5mtr+ pole
Posted 1 year ago # -
re: point 2) - I think the problem with not stopping trail building is that you're seen as condoning it and they may have legal implications if someone injures themselves.
Yes, I see that. The owner of the wood has recently removed some "features" that were particularly sketchy, including some gap jumps that have caused problems for passing horse riders; quite understandable. I predict that a combined user/owner group will form before too long to co-operate on multi-use issues.
the other issue with 'perpetual' cheeky trails is that after 20(?) years of continuous access there may be a 'right' in place which makes the land worth less
Not sure about this. Are you saying that a field/moor/wood has reduced salable value if it is crossed by trail? Or maybe this is specific to trails adjacent to residential property?
I absolutely agree that trail users, doing any activity, should not inconvenience other trail users or the work and privacy of the landowner. And all of us should be concerned about maintaining the good condition of trails. In my experience landowners are positively the worst culprits for damaging trails and the environment.
That's the bridleway sign, lying on the ground where it was run-down:
Posted 1 year ago # -
Sort of playing Devils Advocate here but you'd complain if you found a walker wandering round at a trail centre.
On FC land, walkers can walk where they like.
Posted 1 year ago # -
So let me get this straight...In Engerland, you can't ride a bike anywhere you like? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
Posted 1 year ago # -
Are you saying that a field/moor/wood has reduced salable value if it is crossed by trail? Or maybe this is specific to trails adjacent to residential property?
Certsinly near urban areas land with rights of way on it is worth less as development opportunities may be reduced.
Posted 1 year ago # -
My understanding is that the law in England says you have no right to cycle or ride a horse on a footpath but doesn't say you MAY not. Could be wrong though.
Bang on the money!
Pah, in the interest of anal levels accuracy, I'm going to have to qualify my own statement -
You have no recorded right to cycle or ride a horse on a footpath but doesn't say you MAY not
Posted 1 year ago # -
I had an encounter with a walker a few weeks ago...
It was on a moderately steep downhill, so I passed him as wide as possible and at walking pace. He told me I shouldn't be riding there since it was a footpath. I said that I knew it was a footpath, but I couldn't see the harm in riding it when under control and in the current (dry) conditions.
We talked for quite a few minutes and his main complaint was that some bikers go too fast and don't leave enough room when passing. When I pointed out that this could equally well happen on a bridleway and that the problem was those particular bikers being idiots rather than the classification of the path they were on... he conceded.
We parted ways with him saying that I had ruined his arguments and he wished all bikers were considerate. Quite a few more minds out there to change (including idiot bikers), but some can be changed.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Aidan - good story. I had the same a while ago, a walker said "you shouldn't be here this is a FP" to which I gave the stock answer of "yes, how silly" and then explained to him that the path we were on was obviously used by the farmer cos I was riding in a bloody great tractor rut. I was therefore doing no harm, it was a wide flat trail, I hadn't buzzed him or ridden fast and had been polite and friendly.
Amazingly, after a second or two's thought, he conceded that it was silly that the trail was FP and we wished each other a nice day and carried on our respective ways.
My attitude varies depending on the person accosting me. I've done everything from playing the little lost biker routine to ignoring them to (on one occasion recently) telling a violent old lady to f off.
Posted 1 year ago # -
IIRC, re: the 20 year rule, the Landowner or other appropriate person only has to show there have been steps to oppose the use of the path / trail. This can take all sorts of forms (signs, barriers, talking to some "tresspassers" etc). Just because one person (or a number of them) get away with unchallenged use doesn't then mean a RoW is established i.e. landowner doesn't have to catch everyone, just one person.
RoW can be diverted, developments can be arranged to preserve or accomodate them. The establishment of a RoW does not automatically mean £0 land value, irrespective or urban or rural setting although magnitude / gross land value can be different.
After 6 pm? That sounds rather arbitrary, to the point where it's a meaningless, personal little rule. Much like lots of access law
I agree with the sentiments of being open about your use, polite, firm and adopting a share-and-share-alike attitude. There's knobs in all walks of life, some on foot, some in cars, some on bikes but most folk are alright in the round, on the whole
As someone pointed out, FC land is almost always open access for walkers. Trail centres aren't sensible places to be walking but they're still often legally entitled to be there. After all, lots of trail centres incoporate facilities for the family, kids, ramblers, with nature and sculpture trails etc. So it's not like you couldn't reasonably guess there'll be a few out and about around the trails.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Just got back from a week with Doug @ BasqueMTB (bloody great holiday). On the first day there was a rambling organised event, so a lot of people out and about, and every single person we passed smiled, said hello, stepped out of our way, cheered us on and generally made us feel super welcome. It really was a stark contrast with the attitude we get in the UK.
Posted 1 year ago # -
polite militancy
Posted 1 year ago # -
polite militancy
Yes, I've unintentionally coined an oxymoronic expression
But I feel it conveys the sentiment.
Posted 1 year ago # -
We were riding on an Alp in Switzerland and some localish psycho pulled a bigknife on us. I didnt see it but it goes to show its not just England.
(its was on Toboggan iirc)
Posted 1 year ago # -
its was on Toboggan iirc
as if that trail isn't scary enough
Posted 1 year ago # -
I've been told off for riding a footpath once and that was by the landowner - pleaded ignorance (I honestly didn't know it was 'their' land) and said I'd got the route off a website :S
Overall though, I do most of my riding on footpaths. They offer much better options and in 7 years of living in Calderdale, have only had that one 'telling off' and every single time I ride, I meet pleasant people who are, like me, out and about, enjoying the countryside.
just make out to be an ill educated Scot
I'm biting my hand off trying not to make a witty comment about that...Posted 1 year ago # -
Toboggan in Verbier? Oddly, I had a group of frenchies try and tell me I shouldn't be riding on a trail there when we were out there with BV. I told them in my best french to "**** off" which considering I only know how to say that in english, came out very like "**** off".
Hey, I was a brit abroad, what was I meant to do
Posted 1 year ago # -
Having just come back from rural France where I rode in the local forest.
There were marked trails for MTBs, horses and walkers, some shared some seperate. In general it seems everyone uses all of them (tyre tracks on the walking paths and footprints on the MTB tracks).
Saw a few walkers, all were lovely.
However on my local trails it's not the same story.
My riding is generally either footpaths in local woodland or unclassified tracks in a large deer park where bikes have been arbitrarily been banned apart from a the tarmac track running through it.
Ironically at busy times this tarmac strip is covered in dogs off leads, small childrens and fat people out for a waddle.
If someone challenges me and I hear them (I use an iPod on solo rides) then I use the "silly isn't it" defence which whilst being mildly amusing probably isn't going to win hearts and minds, in fact I have been called a Bar Steward and C U Next Tuesday in a couple of run ins but these are very rare.
Has to be said that the vast majority of run ins I have had have been in the afore mentioned park not in the woods on legit footpaths.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Having damaged my knee I find it painful to walk, fortunately cycling does not aggrevate my knee and helps me to remain mobile. Although I'm not 'disabled' (no blue badge), I regard my bike as a means of mobility (much like a motability scooter is).
Posted 11 months ago # -
I think of these challenges as irrational and selective vigilantism. You're not offending against the walker, so why they feel the need to complain is beyond me. I hope they'd all be as quick to help out a victim of a mugging or catch a bike thief in the act.....
I guess we're easy targets, less scary than horse riders, 4x4s or crossers to deal with.
As said above, mainly a UK (English) problem - small minds and small country is a bad combo.
ps - had a great day yesterday on the bike selflessly keeping footpaths clear and barely saw a walker using any of them.
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
