In case anyone is interested (or can remember this) – http://www.scottishmountainbikeframework.org/ – it's finally landed.

Off to have a read of it, but initial glance suggests it is full of promise but not sure how it will be delivered coherently.

Still, at least it is finally out for everyone to see – I'm not trying to sound negative about it, but my initial thoughts are that it is a box-ticking exercise rather than a genuine interest in getting something sorted and progressed – mainly due to the reliance on the councils and how strapped they are for cash and getting things sorted on-the-ground – I'm just not convinced it's going to fly…

I heard a BBC interview with one of the Pentlands park rangers discussing this yesterday morning. The BBC interviewer seemed to be trying to get the ranger to say there were conflict problems between riders and walkers, and that there were erosion issues caused by bike use. The rangers just said that there were very, very few issues given the level of use the Pentlands gets from both walkers and MTBers, and that the bikes could go anywhere they walkers go although there are a few places (hilltops primarily) that they advise the riders to avoid if possible.

Will have a look through it later today and post some comments. Just starting to get involved with promoting cycling in the local area

I have a little project progressing slowly but nicely in my local woods. Startes of as a project under the Woodlands in and around town banner. Will only ever be green with bits of blue grade and suitable for small kids and parents. Will be near the new school and the Community Council have taken it on board making FC ranger a happy chap.
Depends atm on how much snow/frost/thak/rain damage other trails suffer will affect start/finish promise but atm Easter school hols is whats being aimed for.

Laudable aims.

I am sceptical though – I fear that we'll end up with networks of groomed trails and pressure to keep off the rest.

I really hope it works.

My main interest is that it claims to fill the [geographical] gaps of trail centre distribution. Hopefully this will mean that we get a significant trail not to far from Glasgow. Either the expansion of Carron Valley or my preference would be somewhere in the Trossachs. I'm not holding my breath.

In reality I think it will be a lot of 'off-road' cycle ways and the further expansion of sustrans type routes. A good think in itself but not of much interest to me.

Expansion of the Carron valley trails would be nice, certainly nice and close for me, but there are loads of natural trails out there anyway so hardly a problem.

well I can only talk for myself but I work for Scotlands largest council and I work on most of the cycle projects and there are very little is any plans to invest in mountain biking.

Pretty much all our money (which i can tell you isnt much) is going on cycle routes to improve commuting and urban movement for cyclists.

> I work for Scotlands largest council and I work on most of the cycle projects and there are very little is any plans to invest in mountain biking.<

*cough* Cathkin Braes *cough*

It's this sort of thing that bothers me.

Here is the start of the creeping restrictions. Basically remove our rights instead of proper policing of numpties.

I don't trust organisations to work in our best interests.

The BBC interviewer seemed to be trying to get the ranger to say there were conflict problems

Shock horror!

But why FFS if its only available as a download is it in portrait-format, we don't all have huge screens and/or a want to print it out.

Why do people do this, put it in 'landscape'!

And 11.8m people in the UK own an MTB… yeah, right.

technically that has already been done and also if you had seen the numbers very little of it was paid for by the local authority most was scottish goverment funding and sportscotland

And 11.8m people in the UK own an MTB… yeah, right.

Most people I know, who don't even use a bike, own an MTB of sorts.

What also worries me is the wording of that PDF. Effectively saying ad-hoc developments are not good and that there's a role for locals and local businesses providing they work under the rules of the framework. I.e. if you have a local trail space you're not welcome to add anything of your own unless they were planning to add it themselves, then you're welcome to volunteer to help them make cash-bringing trails?

Had a very quick skim of but didn't spot anything new tbh…

>What also worries me is the wording of that PDF. Effectively saying ad-hoc developments are not good and that there's a role for locals and local businesses providing they work under the rules of the framework<

Yup – that's really what all this is about.

Bear in mind this is now the sum total of 6 years fannying around by FCS and co.