I have had some short discussions with the rangers. There is a possibility for us as MTBers to get involved in trailbuilding / maintenance with permission on the hill.

Lets put yesterdays argument behind us and try to work together to improve things on the hill for all. I am intending to put my energies into work in the pentlands in the main but would be willing to help here as well.

A meeting has been suggested in 2 or three weeks time to get the ball rolling

I have a copy of the feasibility study now if anyone want to see it. It the main its about creating a family friendly circuit of the hill and the possibility of a jump spot down by corstorphine road. email inprofiles

From the email from the rangers

SO on to Corstorphine, where Pete had a different remit — to look at the site and try to find ways to accommodate more cyclists without creating conflict with other users such as families with kids, old people and dog walkers. We have had some serious problems with trails built on/near badger setts, or in a line which would jump over a formal path.

When you read the report, keep that in mind. For the bulk of the hill, we’re really just trying to find alternate lines or better path intersections, to remove the potential for conflict.

The one area that we thought could be better developed, and a more likely chance of a specific trail / area for MTBs would be on the south face of the hill, after the narrow point near the Zoo fence, the grassy slope down to the old Beech Nursery off Corstorphine Road (where there are lots of existing jumps, that could be fixed up!)

Lets put yesterdays argument behind us

😆

you’re such a tool sometimes TJ (see you Thursday.. mibbie)

At least its progress. I would be interested in developing some of the more advanced features. The jump track at the bottom would be awrite for kids and would be an easy job. Theres not enough proposed to stop unofficial building though which is a shame. On the southside the only new path reqd would be from the gate up to where the path opens up. Thats about the only new path needed there so thats easy as well.

There will be no “more advanced features” built there officially except the possible jump park. Its not an appropriate location. Thats quite clear.

Do you know the jump bit at bonally? Thats a tolerated area of jumps and berms. Might be more your thing.

Ysee theres the problem. All those features that folk are already riding will just be incorporated into unofficial trails. This is the problem we are trying to solve. The report says that quite a few of these features could be left as they are with just basic resurfacing work which is exactly what I would be interested in seeing done.

Thats not what the rangers or the report say – its quite clear.

If you want to carry on like that then I cannot get involved.

I give in.

Good – you werent really adding much. Theres a few bits of the report that mention that and I will try and dig them out and post them later.

Bigthunder – I am perfectly willing to try to get a group organised and get permissions for trailbuilding work on corstorphine hill.

It is quite clear from the limited contact I have had with the rangers and the report commissioned that what you want to do will not be sanctioned in any form.

If anyone would like a copy of the report I do have one – my email is in my profiles

May I suggest you two exchange phone numbers, arrange a meeting and actually sit down face-to-face? Egos, as well as other distractions, tend to get in the way of constructive discussion on an internet forum.

Kit – this thread was intended to reach out to to others who might be interested not for further debate between bigthunder and I

Tj – I couldnt work with you in any group. I cant stand your selective attitude and your refusal to answer simple points. Really tedious. Ive got that report as well(as you know) and you are picking and choosing from it to suit yourself. Ive not read it all properly coz its tricky on my wee phone but it certainly covers some of the points I was interested in. Also calling me a vandal hasnt put you in good stead with me and we should sort that out face to face. It will be an interesting meeting with the ranger thats for sure.

not for further debate between bigthunder and I

And how’s that plan working out for you 😉

Thats what my post about a group WAS doing.

Bigthunder. I apologised to you yesterday for being antagonistic.

I intended this to try to help create a group and to find some common ground and to work together for the common good.

I am sorry I got involved at all now.

This is going well. If anyone would like to send me the report, andrew@blackjack.f9.co.uk, I’l referee if you like.

TJ I feel you’re taking the worst possible interpretation of everything bigthunder has to say- quick example, it’s the obvious one:

“I would be interested in developing some of the more advanced features.” which it seems is totally compatible with the email’s comment “For the bulk of the hill, we’re really just trying to find alternate lines or better path intersections, to remove the potential for conflict.”

But that gets the response, “There will be no “more advanced features” built there officially, duh”

Bigthunder hasn’t said “I want to build more advanced features”; he’s said he wants to develop what’s already there. Which is exactly what he was saying in the other thread too- legitimise the old builds, make them more sustainable and solid, and by doing so the rangers get to retake control of them as well- exactly the same as at Bonaly, and not at all incompatible with the email you’ve provided. But you’ve read something else entirely into his words from what I can see.

It’s a shame if it comes to lines-in-the-sand because as far as I can tell you’re on the same side, and both want what you think is best for the place.

You didnt apologise to me at all yesterday – that post went out to northwind. That was also for being antagonistic not for calling me a vandal. Im a 40yr old man with kids for crying out. Nobody. Wanted you to create a group all that was asked for was advice and yours was rubbish. Didnt cover any points and was just full of opinion. You are better sticking to the pentlands and I am better. Trying to make progress with my local spot.

bigthunder – Member

You didnt apologise to me at all yesterday – that post went out to northwind.

Dunno mate… “Bigthunder have a genuine apology as I obviously came across far more antagonistically than intended” is what he said.

bigthunder – as provocative as TJ is, you do come across as someone who’s trying to plough his own furrow for his own gain. Lots of “I” and “my” going on, instead of “we” and “our”. Corstorphine Hill is not yours alone and group efforts are much more likely to succeed than lone heroes.

Northwind Im pushing my tech abilities with adding an attachment to an email from my phone. Sorry. I will try and post the report tonight when I get to my computa and mrs bigthunders help! Smell it – the post wont fail mate – I expected this and welcome all the input. It cant fail – the trails are already there and being ridden so I can only end up with what I already have! Northwinds right tho – I just want the best for the hill for all.

Northwind – I will send you the report and leave you to it.

Yes we both want what is best and are prepared to put our efforts in but our views on what is acceptable are too far apart and if he wants to continue building trails like the one on yesterdays post then I cannot get involved as I consider that to be very wrong.

Kit – I get what you are saying but Im not at the we or us stage yet. First I meet the rangers to see if there is potential to develop with permission and then,if there is, I start a group and then it becomes we and us. I thought about it the other way around ie use a group to try and generate more interest but its the permission thats the big thing with me. Do you think thats the right way to go or should I form a group first? Thats what the original post was about!

Tj – yet again the point is getting missed. I dont want to build any more trails. I want to stabilise the ones that are already there. Interestingly enough I dont think our views are too far apart – I dont want trails on badger setts or running across walkers paths either as two examples.

BIgthunder – the point is not getting missed. IMO the trail you built that you showed on yesterdays thread is unacceptable. that is my opinion.

The purpose of the “jump park” down by corstorphine road is an alternative to building lines like you did. If the jump park is developed people would have less need to build like you did – that the aim. You would have virtually a free hand to build there from what I can see.

I do accept you have been more careful than some about where you are building and our aims are similar – its just our ideas on how to get there are too far apart.

i am realy sorry I buggered this up. This was supposed to be a positive thread 🙁

bigthunder, I think you need the explicit backing/support of a group.

However, I’m on TJ’s side with regards the use of the hill. I know you have stressed that you only wish to improve sections with the Ranger’s support, but unfortunately better access = more popular = more illicit trails. See Bonaly/White Hill as an example of how tolerated use of the hill has led to trail building has gotten a little out of hand (in my opinion), although in that case does not conflict with walkers so much, unlike Cor. Hill would certainly do.

Good luck to you, but as they say on Dragon’s Den: “I’m out” 😉

Seen evidence of unofficial trail/feature development across a few sites around Edinburgh – Corstorphine Hill, Ravelston, Hermitage, the woods up behind Craigie Farm, along the cycle path to Roseburn and usually it ends up in big holes dug to build mounds, that are invariably reinforced with branches/sticks pulled off trees which I’d say isn’t ideal and just builds the case against mtbers. Where done without permission I’d be of the viewpoint it’s not on. Would it not be more prudent to find out what permissions and developments can happen first? Or seek permission before doing any modifications?

What about Hailes Quarry Park? There’s a pump track there, might there not be scope for further development at that location for more advanced features? Just a thought.

BT – I wish you all the luck with your project; the pic was just a comment on this thread. As a somewhat disinterested observer I think you should back away from any debate with tj on this matter. It took precisely 2 posts from tj to return to the same crap as yesterday. Why not just ask who might help you and take discussion away from the forum and hope tj just backs away from the issue, even if he doesn’t it sounds like any future discussions will be had in the real world.

FFS this thread is seriously depressing and pathetic.

TJ, you have put a lot of effort into the Pentlands trail days and it has been excellent and a snapshot of what is to come hopefully. Let this thing with CH drop. BT is in contact with the rangers and there will be a plan proposed, let’s not go assuming anything until all is clear. 🙄

The rangers will not approve any plan that they are not happy with…end of.

We can’t stop illegal trail building (BT, i’m not saying you’re doing anything illegal!). Once the Ranges have a plan, lets get everyone involved, dig, tidy and eat cake!

Peace.

Said it before and I’ll say it again now – TJ, by example of your posts yesterday and today in this thread you have proven you’re sh1te at communicating with people over the internet. I realise that could be harsh but blimey, what a funk up. Take a step back and a careful look will you.

I don’t get why you’ve taken it on yourself to talk to the Rangers when BT already said he was. By all means invite yourself along with him but what you’ve done makes me very suspicious and is at least ill advised, worse it’s potentially manipulative and conniving.

You refuse to get off your arse and meet in person which most anyone knows is the best way of engaging with people and for that reason as well I think your involvement sounds like a bloody awful idea. Not that anything can be done to stop you because it’s a free country but, hey, if you were part of a group I was involved in I’d be seriously worried.

BT – I suggest you try and take the higher ground and rise above stuff e.g. your obviously nettled response to TJ. As understandable as it might be you have to avoid that approach IMO. Whilst you might not mean to do it with people that “matter” it’s best practice not to do it at all. I mean that as friendly advice based on my experience in this field (at least 6 years as SingletrAction’s point of contact between the volunteer group and Forestry Commission), not as an insult 😎

And there was me thinking TJ had managed to turn a corner yesterday. Leopard can’t change its spots, eh?

Rhetorical question: Define “advanced feature” 🙄

Thanks fellas. As it stands I have a couple of meetings lined up so hopefully something will come of them. Where abouts is Hailes quarry?

Hailes Quarry Park is behind the bus depot at longstone. The pump track is up the top near the play park at the canal.

Hailes Quarry Park

Pump track doesn’t yet appear on that view, but it goes in and out of the trees near the play park.

Cool BT, let us know what happens! 🙂

Said it before and I’ll say it again now – TJ, by example of your posts yesterday and today in this thread you have proven you’re sh1te at communicating with people over the internet. I realise that could be harsh but blimey, what a funk up.

Accepted 🙁

However he rest of your post is really rather too harsh.

Why did I speak to the rangers? Because I wanted to know directly what was acceptable and planned and I wanted a copy of the report.

I wanted to get involved to try to help. I have already done some work on path repair and thought my input could be of use

clealry I have bolloxed it. I will step away

Pg – a good example is a natural rock drop. There is one on the hill with a natural line in and out but after the drop the run off is full of rocks and a bit uneven. My idea is that you remove the rocks and rake the run off smooth. Its out the way and not the sort of thing anyone else will use. Due to quarrying activity theres a few bits like this.

Always thought the Quarry near Craigie Farm would be good for stuff too. No idea who owns it though, or what would be permitted, if anything.

The point I was trying to make is that one rider’s advanced feature is another rider’s “6 inch step”. you can’t define “advanced”. Best not to use the term at all really.

Must have a look at that – cheers bazookajoe!

Ok I get yer point PG. How about techy feature?

And Craigie Farm has a nice cafe and ice cream! and sells Stewart beer in minikegs. Some messing in the quarry, then a cuppa. All speculative of course.