looks like freeride area is being flatened for log cabins.never mind we gain another skills area!!

gt plans

They have plenty of forests. Can they not put the log cabins somewhere else?

Unless there’s been a change since I last spoke to the rangers at Glentress about this, any trails that are being removed as part of this plan won’t get removed until their replacements have been built. One effect is that the freeride trails will move nearer to the Peel and the main road, which will make them more accessible for riders (and for ambulances).

no mention of any new trails in article.I would imagine any new freeride trails will be tame in comparison to the ones that are there at the moment.
Have been hearing about all these plans for a while now.Was hoping it would be much needed new red/black trails..no such luck by the look of things.

I think it makes a lot more sense to have the freeride area at the bottom, saves the drive up and conflict with riders crossing the track on the blue/red/black descent. A new freeride area would be sweet anyway.

The new trails will incorporate elements of the ‘Freeride’ area, 🙄

Hope there’s some sort of deal whereby the cabins make an ongoing maintenance contribution to the trails.

Agree with @markyboy that new waymarked trails are needed (especially if hoping to entice people to stay in said cabins).

A new mountain bike skills area will be built along with a number of new biking taster trails for all levels.

Sounds good with cabins for folks to stay in too.

given the budget of the FC I wouldn’t hold out any hope of any new trails. Join the TVTA and contribute to the ongoing success of the unofficial building.

what is the point of a taster trail??green route is a taster trail.any trail building over the last ten years within the seven stanes seems to be aimed at families/beginners.

markyboy – Member
no mention of any new trails in article.I would imagine any new freeride trails will be tame in comparison to the ones that are there at the moment.

Why do you assume that?

markyboy

I seem to remember the research showed the greatest demand is for blue trails

Bigjim..probably right.Seems to be the way it is going in the tweed valley,any new decent trails are being built by riders for riders.This seems to suit the fc at the moment.

What’s the bets that the cabins shut off the middle of the forest and a lame pump track is provided as a mitigation measure by the terrible cafe/shop thing that was put in the wrong place facing the wrong way? I would love to be wrong

Dont know why it bothers me as i dont ride at gt much now.Just had heard about all these upcoming plans,rumours of trails linking gt/inners and golfie.To find out its a housing development! 🙁

It would be a shame to lose the current freeride area, even if it was replaced. It was such a great set up for building up skills.

Losing the big wall ride that’s been shut for so long will be a criminal waste. A big feature that was actually really easy to ride completely spoilt by beaurocracy.

markyboy – Member
Bigjim..probably right.Seems to be the way it is going in the tweed valley,any new decent trails are being built by riders for riders.This seems to suit the fc at the moment

The status quo has been great for us, used to be that FC would tear down unofficial trails, now they turn a blind eye and all the best stuff in the valley is blooming.

Sure it’d be great to get new TC stuff, but austerity says nay.

There’s never been a better time to MTB in that area as the time we live in.

The enthusiast mtb community has shown it can build its own world class trails with almost minimal FC input, ie all the off piste stuff at gt, inners, golfie, thornielee, yair, etc, etc. This is largely the focus of the enthusiast rider now, but not something you’re going to take your family down on their first forest holiday.

The FC have no duty to provide you with such trails themselves, they have a more general duty to provide leisure and access to all. They also have a duty to generate revenue from the forest estate https://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-9ccc78

Given the obvious reluctance of the enthusiast mtber, as regularly demonstrated on here, to even pay a fiver a day to park their Audi to ride their £5k Santa Cruz on trails, their focus is unsurprisingly going to have to be on more reliable forms of income such as accommodation and family riding. The council masterplan focus is always going to be on more inclusive forms of mtbing, ie whole families, bringing good revenue into the area, so again, accommodation and family friendly activities, rather than catering for stingy enduroists.

I wouldn’t have thought the freeride area was the best place to build cabins on

I have never once heard anyone say “I’m going out to do some Free riding” flatten the things and put the cash into developing or improving the trail network.

Bigjim +1. The focus of this is not people who visit regularly. The £5k santa Cruz and Audi point is painfully true, but then how would they be able to get the finance for such things if they paid for parking.

gfrew88 – Member
I have never once heard anyone say “I’m going out to do some Free riding” flatten the things and put the cash into developing or improving the trail network.

You’ve really never seen people taking DH bikes there?

Forest Holidays can GTF. Sick of them ruining perfectly campsites, once affordable to all now turned into middle class havens with cabins and hot tubs going for over a grand a week. ****.

Can I suggest they rename it “Trail Centre Parcs”?

Obviously going for the Mumsnet crowd, eh?

😉

km79 – Member

Forest Holidays can GTF. Sick of them ruining perfectly campsites, once affordable to all now turned into middle class havens with cabins and hot tubs going for over a grand a week.

suits the boutique bike riders lol

Like transition you mean?…. 😉

Only reason they’ve chosen that area to build is so they can (ab)use the existing access road.
Hope they don’t close the Buzzards Nest car park to cyclists. Never use it myself but important for beginners and families to bypass that first climb.
Wouldn’t miss the freeride area, but they better leave Berm Baby Berm the **** alone!

Fill yer boots…

https://www.scotborders.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/1160/glentress_masterplan_guidance.pdf

First time there recently and impressed by the freeride and skills area. Something for everyone and progressive.

I can understand relocating to somewhere accessible, but then numbers will go up, and thus possibly accidents. That you have to make an effort to get to it means people may put a bit of thought into the risks, turn up with the right gear etc.

As a southerner, I thought, this is what Swinley needs. Ah but, Glentress doesn’t need what Swinley is doing with freeride. Relocate to the entrance for better ambulance access and then never open it because too much of a risk 😉

Nobeerinthefridge – Member

Like transition you mean?….

transition isn’t boutique they are just overpriced lol

Moar tits or GTFO

Hope there’s some sort of deal whereby the cabins make an ongoing maintenance contribution to the trails.

You mean like the car parking fees that so many complain about?

scotroutes – Member

Fill yer boots…

https://www.scotborders.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/1160/glentress_masterplan_guidance.pdf

so its basically a plan to build cabins

Some entitled opinions on here. That whole area is amazing for riding, if one of the landowners has to change things around to try and balance it’s shrinking budget, get out there and work to develop the other stuff.

@DickBarton, i’ll never understand people complaining about / dodging the parking charges, i find them a bargain for the facilities on offer, and even park there to use the changing rooms if i want to do a road ride in the area.

We all like new trails, and volume(km) of trails for all abilities are a key factor for attracting visitors to not just come for the day, but to stay in the area. I’d love to be able to come and book a cabin for a week and ride 200km of waymarked green/blue/red trails. The current trail network gives no incentive to stay in (or travel a long way to) the area as you can ride it all in a day. To do that needs some sort of sustainable income that can be re-invested into the forest, so hopefully some sort of deal has been struck so the cabins help provide that.

I was up at Ardgartan on Loch Long this morning for a walk and a bit of fishing, an area that used to have a couple of really good caravan/camping sites (one ran by the Forestry Commission) which at this time of year would always be buzzing with a great mix of people – families, groups, solo, hillwalkers, boating people, fishing, cycling. All ages and from all over the place. Cost a couple quid per night.

Nowadays Forest Holidays have got a hold of it and its full of cabins, no tents/tourers allowed (phased out over their first couple years ownership) – cost for this week £1300 to £1700. The one thing everyone I saw had in common was a miserable look on their faces. You can always tell the first weekend of the English school holidays, must be the long drive up.

If the initial phase takes off a Glentress then expect expansion to follow. They wont be interested in the fiver parking and the trails when they can charge that amount for a cabin.

Interesting opinions. I’ve offered up my services for the board of the tvta as I’m interested in assisting with the governance and management of the whole trail system both in and out of the FC management.
I could go all the way to 1987 when I rode at glentress, when the 7stanes project was conceived the majority of riders would be doing what was called xc then and the rail network reflects that I think. The general move to steeper and more tech enduro and freeride means a new set of trails to be built which inners and the golfybhave done well. Like all things it’s progression and the Audi/Santa Cruz statements are rude and unfair, donyou have to drive a works van to be gnar these days ? I think that’s exactly the sort of reverse snobbery that p1sses me off the most. Stop moaning and either get involved or at least try and supportive.

I’ve said this a couple of times on facebook groups but the problem is the same as it’s always been- Glentress is a money maker for the area but a money pit for the FC. People keep saying “X is what will bring in more people” but the fact is, more people would only make the FC’s problems worse. More erosion, more repairs, more ranger callouts to accidents. More moany pricks when there’s a puddle or a trail is closed because (gasp) they want to harvest some trees to sell or because the visitor’s centre doesn’t have the right sort of coffee. But not any more money (parking fees, hah)

That’s all fine, as long as they’re funded for it. It’s good economics, to have public funds underpin a community. But they’re not funded for it. Simple as that. So, this is a way for them to get money into the forest. They’d much rather just get a bag of money and spend it on fun things but that’s not an option.

As ChrisL mentioned, the plan is for all replacement trails to be completed before the originals are closed. Forget what it says in the article, we got that straight from the FC. They won’t be like for like- some features are pretty much unused, some would be built differently today, but there’s nothing in the freeride that’ll be hard to reproduce (in fact it’s the easiest bit of GT to move). It’s even possible we’ll get a skills area that doesn’t suck, and enough parking.

Having a… dare I say it, a hub, at the bottom of the hill, makes total sense. Right now the cafe (yes, it’s in the wrong place) is totally divorced from the trails, it’s weird. Who doesn’t like the idea of sitting in the cafe watching their mates fall off on the jumps (or their kids on the pump track)?

It’s still a loss. Being able to start in the middle of the trails and do wee loops with the freeride as a base is great, it’s part of what makes GT what it is imo. The freeride frankly is no loss provided the new build is as good, and the intention is that it will be. And disruption of other trails should be minimal- most won’t be touched at all (wee bit worried about Zoom or Bust though, it falls in the “cabin area” on the map)

Is it what anyone here wants? No. But would you rather see it just carry on with no money, held together with spit and love? (or, in the end, closed entirely). I’m just back from a week in Afan and everyone who moans about Glentress trails being unloved should give that a go to see what decline really means.

bigjim – Member

The enthusiast mtb community has shown it can build its own world class trails with almost minimal FC input, ie all the off piste stuff at gt, inners, golfie, thornielee, yair, etc, etc.

Almost all of the offpiste at GT was built with considerable FC input, for what it’s worth.

deadkenny – Member

That you have to make an effort to get to it means people may put a bit of thought into the risks, turn up with the right gear etc.

Or, drive up to the top car park.

Oh, and for everyone who feels really strongly about making glentress better, about fixing up worn out trails or adding to the network, you would be most welcome:

It’s even possible we’ll get a skills area that doesn’t suck,

I thought it wasn’t that bad. It’s tame to anyone with skills, but for a lot of people who have zero it’s a good starter to learn basics on.

I’ve said this a couple of times on facebook groups but the problem is the same as it’s always been- Glentress is a money maker for the area but a money pit for the FC

I guess so. Though the other thing I felt about visiting the place was just how great the trails were, how well maintained and designed. It would be sad to lose the quality in an effort to make things more efficient (cut costs).

I’d be happy to pay more for such a fine place. Sadly like most places, a lot want it all for free, despite rocking up on £5k bikes.