Best to talk to FE about it although if they have started I suspect you might struggle to change anything (especially now a contractor is on site). However, as others have said, quite often a lot of people in FE know very little about MTBing and even less about any loose groups of riders looking for something a bit challenging. Get in touch and talk to them and you might stand a chance of saving something (by re-routing existing work) or if there's a next phase. Just hit the Forestry wwww and start ringing until you get to the right person. A beat forester is good but there might also be members of the area's recreation team involved. Dealing with either can be a mixed experience.
Just because it's a working forest doesn't mean trails and other facilities cannot or should not be preserved / treated as temporary. Anecdotal comment to me from a beat forester active in MTBing indicated income for "an area that might well include where you are" from recreation (so a lot of stuff, not just MTB) exceeded income from forestry operations for the first time last year. They're a Govt quango desparate to break even (never mind make a profit), so IMO cash talks.
I find this focus (and frankly hiding behind) H&S issues cobblers. MTB is an activity which posses an unavoidable, inherent element of risk. Most "MTBers" accept this and would not have a leg to stand on in court (IMO). It is very similar to a case regarding climbing on LA land decades ago. FE are only liable if what they have built is unsafe or unsuitable. Just because something is hard and someone might fall off is irrelevant, so long as some obvious precautions are taken (signage, information, grading). They would only be truly liable if what they built (or allowed to be built) caused the accident through its failure i.e. (extreme example) rider gets to top of northshore, structure collapses because it's not bolted together properly, rider injured, sue FE.
I'm no lawyer and that's just my opinion (albeit with some experience in H&S, building trails, dealing with FE).
FE will always try and build stuff that is inclusive to the widest possible user group (quite rightly, really). Pouring lots of money just into specialist, technical trails is hard to justify for the number of people likely to use (compared to how many might get into cycling from easier stuff) and the amount of revenue it might generate (families are far bigger cash-cows than "proper" MTBers, IMO). But that's not to say you can't use whatever they put in as a backbone for further, more interesting development.
Remember, FE managed land is generally free access. So long as you don't "build" a trail then you can ride where you like. Oh, and the majority of sites they manage are part of the Public Estate i.e. the nations i.e. ours.
I'm ranting. If you actually want some specific advice or help (maybe, but we're quite busy) email me timsellors[at]googlemail[dot]com.
Tim, SingletrAction
