Today I was investigating the new trails and, before you ask, yes they were the ones signed as ‘open’.

Whilst riding Stickler, I came across a bloke with an off the lead dog! I told him that the trail was for mountain bikes only and he had a good chance of getting injured to which he replied ‘yes I know’. 🙄

Anyway, was riding on a new trail which was quite steep and came across a bloke, possibly orienteer, walking along. Again, I told him it was for mountain bikes and he could get injured.

Upon finishing my ride I popped into Reception to see if I could speak with the Crown Estate Ranger but unfortunately he wasn’t around. The very helpful Receptionist phoned Crown Estate and handed me the phone so I could explain the events.

I made it clear that the trails I had been using had signs at both ends stating they were for mountain bikes. My concern was that with more people hearing that some new trails are open then come the weekend it would be busy with accidents waiting to happen.

The Crown Estate Ranger will phone me tomorrow but in the meantime if anyone has had a similar experience on the new trails, please post up or e-mail in profile.

I am extremely angry that mountain bikers are being put at risk due to some sense of entitlement by other people.

Please feel free to pass this information on to any others. Thanks.

It will happen, get over it 🙂

It will happen, get over it

This.
What’s the problem? Who cares? 🙂

CG post your concerns up here

http://www.facebook.com/groups/SwinleyforestMTB/

or here

http://www.facebook.com/groups/Swinley/

And next time you are over this way pick up that damn Antler before I bin it 😡

I had the same experience with a dog on Stickler on Sunday. Riding along and suddenly a dog bounded across the trail in front of me, I think he belonged to a couple of riders who looked to be calling for a dog in the distance – he was definitely making his way towards them. That was the second time I have had a close encounter of the canine type on that trail, last time was in summer when the bracken was high and I came around a corner to see a couple of little dogs running towards me, they obviously knew the trail and were cutting corners to stay ahead of their owner.

The new signposts will say bikes only, but I am not sure if the plan is to ban dogs on the new trails or not?

Although I recognise your concerns, is this not a feature of the thin end of the wedge of trail user division? If we want full access to the countryside, as cyclists, we have to accept other users on ‘our’ trails just as walkers would have to accept us on footpaths. Added to which, come the first sunny spring weekend the place will be bedlam anyway and due caution will have to be exercised.

I told him that the trail was for mountain bikes only and he had a good chance of getting injured

Only if you’re going to fast to avoid anyone that may be on the same trail as you right? MTB trail or not, you need to be aware of dogs and walkers – closed and enforced MTB-only trails is a risky thing to wish for..

I am extremely angry that mountain bikers are being put at risk due to some sense of entitlement by other people.

Like walkers get angry about many of us using footpaths.. a bit of due care and give and take is the only way.

I think you need to be very certain of what rights exist for what types of users on the trails before you can know if (dog) walkers really are ‘in the wrong place’ in a legal sense.

what is the attraction of walking on those armoured and bermed trails though, if not just some sense of entitlement.

And now bikers are confined to those trails, or will be, then people can walk/run in a lot more places without the possibility of a mtb appearing.

If you are going to hit one of these people just remember to lean into them.

It works well to avoid being pushed into the path of traffic with pedestrians that step off the pavement without looking, so it probably will also help to not be knocked off the trail into some tree stump.

I think you need to be very certain of what rights exist for what types of users on the trails before you can know if (dog) walkers really are ‘in the wrong place’ in a legal sense.

But it is crown estate land, so surely if they deem that that trail is for mtbs only, then so be it.

The trails are there to help the estate manage risk better, and allowing a free-for-all on trails that have clearly been built for riding with some speed (otherwise why is it a red run) will not accomplish this and will lead to more law-suits against the estate.

I was up there on Sunday. It’s definately a bit of a feeding frenzy as the trails start to open and people are going to be excited to ride the new stuff – i guess a few curious walkers are to be expected too, especially as the signage is pretty vague at present.

On the whole speed / going too fast thing, and looking out for walkers, all i can say is that i would usually be 100% behind this, but some of the new trails are clearly designed and constructed to be quick and twisty (some much quicker than the ones they replaced IMHO). Unless you ride the trails at a much lower pace than (seemingly) intended, walkers and riders on the same trail doesn’t seem like a recipe for success.

Lots of people riding trails both ways too, so be careful on those blind corners….

I think you need to be very certain of what rights exist for what types of users on the trails before you can know if (dog) walkers really are ‘in the wrong place’ in a legal sense.
But it is crown estate land, so surely if they deem that that trail is for mtbs only, then so be it.

The trails are there to help the estate manage risk better, and allowing a free-for-all on trails that have clearly been built for riding with some speed (otherwise why is it a red run) will not accomplish this and will lead to more law-suits against the estate.

This – but we instantly lose that argument next time we have a run into a walker or runner on a non way marked trail. Be careful what we wish for.

While ago at stainburn I was walking down the Descent line, having been to get a spade (was a dig day) and met some people walking up it, saying you have to be careful cos of all the bikes, don’t they go fast – someone could get hurt. Well yes, I replied, not yet elaborating just cos I wanted to see what they said next. They said, Well, it is a right of way, and showed me their OS map, pointing to the STRAIGHT AS A RULER dashed line that went up the forest. Anyone been on the Stainburn DL will know it is very very wiggly so as to get the most out of the hill. That, and the dashed line they were pointing to was black, so not a PROW – and is 2 metres wide up the hill, you really can’t miss it. Conclusion? Some people are just morons, and you should always ride as if a coach load of morons have just been released onto the trail, if only for your own sake.

Problem we have in the UK is there isnt enough space for all of us..

You’re always going to have user-conflict.

You’re always going to have those who want user-specific trails.

You’re always going to get those who want to be able to ride wherever they want, how they want.

Its a lack of tolerance & a lack of space that has lead to CG’s spot o’ bother. Its not a problem thats going to go away any time soon either..

As Frank Zappa once said (at least I think it was him..) “Do what you want, do what you will – just dont spoilt your neighbours thrill…”

I for one try to make sure that I don’t upset anyone whilst I’m out on my bike, what right do I have to do that to someone?
(It doesnt mean I always play by the rules though… 😉 )

Yo chillax !!
U iz 2 uptite.
Trails is trails, be kind and generous to other users.
Man.

If we want full access to the countryside, as cyclists, we have to accept other users on ‘our’ trails just as walkers would have to accept us on footpaths.

Generally yes, but in this case we have already been booted out of the whole forest and restricted to MTB ghettos, we no longer have full access at Swinley. So it’s a bit shit that we don’t even have those to ourselves. The walkers now have the whole forest to themselves, now they want to walk all over the pittance we have left? Not really fair play imo.

closed and enforced MTB-only trails is a risky thing to wish for..

We didn’t wish for it. This IS the bad consequences you are warning us about.

On the whole speed / going too fast thing, and looking out for walkers, all i can say is that i would usually be 100% behind this, but some of the new trails are clearly designed and constructed to be quick and twisty (some much quicker than the ones they replaced IMHO). Unless you ride the trails at a much lower pace than (seemingly) intended, walkers and riders on the same trail doesn’t seem like a recipe for success.

As in the difference of riding style in the 2 videos in this Swinley thread.(although admittedly not the same trail)

Hey CG at least it wasn’t the naked rambler as he passed through Basingstoke yesterday on his way south. 😯

Human nature dictates that some people just ignore signs (that’s if they even see them). Hence why many MTBers ride footpaths et el. Can’t really see anything being done about it.

BTW, I once hit Summer Lightning (on Leith Hill) only to find 2 horses trotting along the first section. ‘kin stupid or what. They had to have seen the signs but chose to ignore them.

I understand your frustrations CG, but presumably you were well away from the lookout so it’s possible that the walker is a local who doesn’t realise the changes that are being made.

The optimist in me says that once people realise what’s happening they’ll steer well clear of the MTB trails. I don’t know too many people that would purposely walk somewhere they’re likely to get run into, especially not if they’re dog owners as they won’t want Rover getting hurt either – NHS is free, vets cost a fortune!

Thats why the natural stuff is so good never see anybody on it much.Just watch out.

So they’re walking cheeky footpaths… what’s your take on cheeky trails?

hats why the natural stuff is so good never see anybody on it much.Just watch out.

but you won’t be able to ride the natural stuff on the crown estate soon as you will be restricted to the trails.

Or maybe you will, you just won’t have a leg to stand on if you try to sue them for an accident – but who in their right mind would when riding on natural stuff.

I see it as more of an issue if they don’t make the trails exclusive to mtbers, they are inviting accidents purely from how the trails have been built.

Andy – don’t do Facebook any more so any chance of you doing a C & P job? Please please please don’t get rid of the antler. 🙂

Jason – thanks for that, will add to my list. 🙂

Crown Estate have made changes for mtb’ers to protect themselves against legal action. Fair enough. But the problem hasn’t been solved if Brainless of Bracknell ignores signs. Perhaps what’s needed is very large signs?

I am concerned that if an accident happened due to a walker/dog/ etc., who would pay for the repairs to my bike? Would I need to take them to Court? How could I insist on being told their ID?

Another point, the NHS thought it was OK for me to wait 9 months for a shoulder op following a cycling accident. Try living in pain, it ain’t easy!

In conclusion, at the moment the Crown Estate do not appear to be exonerated from any eventuality on the new trails.

Interesting times!

mrlebowski – Member

Problem we have in the UK is there isnt enough space for all of us..

Problem with England is that there’s lots of space but you’ve been corralled into a tiny proportion of it, and now the response to the inevitable contention is to try and restrict it even further.

IMO 😉

I dont ride crown estates.If i crash its my own fault i am not out to sue anybody.As i said before where i ride i dont come across to many people never had a problem with dog walkers/Runners/Horse riders etc.Only the odd MTBiker with no idea and thats only started in the last few years 😆

Lets be honest, if things like this bother you, then just don’t ride there. I live within riding distance of Swinley and avoid it like the plague because its overcrowded and most of the singletrack is thrashed to death or poorly designed/constructed (new stuff excepted because I’ve not seen it) I gave up going there more than once a year 4 or more years ago now. It’s just a poor trail centre, why anyone would travel more than about 15-20 minutes to get there is beyond me, unlike say, the Surrey Hills, which is a nice, pretty, big area that you can get lost in for a day and not see too many other riders even on the busiest of summer Sundays.

I’m just happy when I find a trail to be honest. I have no idea where I’m going at Swinley. I get lost everytime. I wish I knew where all these named trails were!

I was up there the other day though and was confused as to if there are rules on which way the trail is supposed to be ridden. If the trail sign is facing me, I guess im pointing the right way?!!

Problem with England is that there’s lots of space but you’ve been corralled into a tiny proportion of it, and now the response to the inevitable contention is to try and restrict it even further.

Each to their own.

Having lived in the US for a few years I now find the UK kind of crowded..

and for the record. I think Swinley is great! Although I have to admit if had to travel much more than 30 mins I’d try and find somewhere else….

Cheeky trails, the other side.
Unfortunate but that’s how it is.

And on a walking website elsewhere in the ether, someone is posting up the exact same concerns but from the walker’s point of view…(concern that a fellow walker will be injured by a MTBer)
On a dog walker’s website elsewhere, they are posting exactly the same thing…(concern that a fellow dog walker will be injured by a MTBer)
And on the Orienteering website, they aren’t posting anything as apparently they never get lost so no need to seek ‘advice’…

I’m still not convinced segregation works. By excluding user groups do you actually create resentment amongst them? I can see the point of it, but in places with lots of different user groups in a relatively enclosed space there’s just not enough room for all of us. In Scotland and Wales there’s more room, so less chance of conflict as everyone has more space.

manage your speed, it might be a down rider on the next blind corner.

alert users to single use trail status

carry on.

I’m still not convinced segregation works.

well it didn’t work in the US.

but in this case the mountain bikers are effectively restricted to a very small percentage of the forest if they keep to the trails – how much surface area do they cover?

Let’s say 2% whereas the walkers, etc have the other 98%, so it is a bit selfish to decide they want that 2% as well!

I’m happy with what I’ve got tbh. Cheeky trails here where I am work just fine.

I live within riding distance of Swinley and avoid it like the plague

I absolutely loved it, and I’d go there over and over again to ride the same trails. Mostly at night mind, so it wasn’t crowded.

I used to ride expecting the unexpected, same as I do everywhere else.

How on earth can you nearly hit something on stickler – its flat with no trees

Eyes up is the rule i’d say!

I’ve had dogs run out on me as well in Swinley. No, its not nice, but i realise that i’m the one doing 20mph – so its up to me to be in a position to scrub the speed of

We just have to live with the fact that the trails are there to be shared.

Just imagine if all the ramblers got annoyed with us bikers when we’re out riding natural trails?? 🙂

I can’t fathom people walking on the made up trails, however I met at least 3 mtbers riding at speed the wrong way on the new one way trails having gone right past some no entry signs. And if it was anyone on here who careered the wrong way towards me and my little lass on the new ‘blue’ trail and glowered at me when you had to stop then I was just willing you to open your mouth so I could f*****g start on you!

How on earth can you nearly hit something on stickler – its flat with no trees

All it takes is a dog that’s received no training coupled with a muppet owner. 🙂

We just have to live with the fact that the trails are there to be shared.

I thought the benefit of these new trails was that we wouldn’t have to share thus avoiding any Crown Estate liability claims. ❓