Viewing 14 posts - 41 through 54 (of 54 total)
  • The loss of trails – Forestry Commission corporate vandalism
  • Stu
    Full Member

    Is anybody else experiencing this?

    Yep, the wall at the witches trails in Fort William was flattened last April to this:

    Don't have a before pic but imagine the base of a dry stone wall and that's pretty much what it was.

    Can anything be done about it?

    Doubt it…

    To: lochaber.district@forestry.gsi.gov.uk
    Subject: Witches Trail: The Wall

    Hi there.

    I was recently riding your trail, and noticed that The Wall section had been subject to some major sanitisation. While I realise the drive to have consistency in the grading of the trail centres within the FC's remit, I feel that this has spoilt what was one of the more entertaining sections of trails for experienced riders, as well as lowering the standard for events such as the Scottish XC Champs being held on the trails in June of this year.

    Can I ask why this work was carried out, rather than creating a lower-graded 'by-pass' or parallel trail, leaving the technical sections as opt-in for those who wish to challenge themselves?

    Thanks for your time, I look forward to your response.

    FC response:

    One of the criticisms of the trail network at the FC / Nevis Range venue was that apart from a short skills loop and miles of forest road, there is a big gap in the provision of grades of trails which allow less expirianced riders to build up both their skills and stamina. Conversley what we have an abundance of is red trails on FC ground including the soon to be launched new red route at Nevis Range and the existing down hill black.

    As part of the trail review that we are undertaking nationally we held an open public workshop at the Lochaber college, and it was in part, as a response to feed back from this that we carried out the regrading work on this section. This means that we will be getting closer to a stacked loop system where we will have a Blue loop and the Red route starting from Nevis Range. Giving a better choice for the wide range of trail users and abilites that visit the centre.

    At the same time we are updating the leaflet and interpretation panels to reflect these changes including a long overdue combined lealfet containing info for both the Downhill and XC routes as a one stop shop for info for visitors. Hope to have this launched in time for the world cup in June.

    A quick response to what has been a lenghty consultation. Copied this to Kirsty Mann who led the review of the trails in case I have missed any points

    Please don't hesitate to give me a call if you would like to discuss
    further.

    Regards

    Craig

    Craig Millar
    Communities, Recreation & Tourism.
    Forestry Commission Scotland
    Lochaber Forest District
    Direct 01786 222133
    Mobile 07876 478230

    To sum it up they had a brief local public consultation that few folk knew about (a lot of people travel from all over the UK to ride there) and decided to do what they wanted to do anyway. They didn't even consult the Scottish XC race organisers who use it for the Scottish champs course:

    Bill Ross

    I notice a comment from Craig Millar of the Forestry Commission, that they carried out an open public workshop in Fort William prior to carrying out the work. Well they didn't contact the SXC who indirectly represent a significant number of the racers in Scotland and as a consequence have failed to gain sufficient credibility for their plan. Over the past 3 years they have devastated the most technical sections of the course in an attempt to standardise the grading, however all they have succeeded in doing is making a fantastic course technically very easy.

    woodsman
    Free Member

    Yep, it's about to happen in Sussex! A few threads downs from this thread.

    http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/tilgate-forest-mtb-paying-to-ride-there

    MrAgreeable
    Full Member

    fairly unique in terms of proximity to population, which counts for quite a lot on the funding side of things.

    In the end it's been the prospect of boosting tourism, not population as such, that's landed the funding. Having looked quite hard at the grants that are out there, I'm still not entirely sure how they did it. Bristol isn't exactly off the radar for most visitors to the region.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    Scienceofficer
    Free Member

    Complimentary isn't it? Bristol is seen as a major hub, with good facilities nearby. Plus, there's the pressure of use from the native population which isn't going to go away, especially considering the relative health and size of the Bristol MTB community.

    MrAgreeable
    Full Member

    You mean complementary, right? 😉

    That's kind of the mystery, the trails are well used already, and I doubt people will be travelling miles to ride the new stuff they put in. Not that I'm complaining, it's been a long time coming.

    rOcKeTdOg
    Full Member

    The Wyre Forest also seems to be suffering from similar, albeit they are not constructing 8' wide family friendly trails, just devastating the forest in general, will soon become the wyre series of copses with large areas of scrub land in between, seems every time we ride there a section of singletrack has been covered in felled trees.

    it's a working forest though, not a trail centre, the Fc gets no revenue from mtbs, they get cash for trees though, they will plant more and the cycle starts again, you just need to be around in about 25 years time.

    wasn't CG wanting us to support some trail building down south by the Fc, we tried to point out it would be a tarmac path but she couldn't see it

    Scienceofficer
    Free Member

    It would be nice if they were complimentary!
    😆

    Cheeky-Monkey
    Free Member

    The FC develop the major trail centres like the Stanes, the Welsh ones, Dalby, etc and you get decent singletrack, trail features, etc. Generally they focus spending on these and derive revenue from MTB activities at these – ity makes economic sense for them. The rest of the forests/woodland is pot luck – I live near Wharncliffe and you find your own trails there and they change according to felling, weather conditions, etc. The FC has never spent any money on Wharncliffe for bikers beyond some signposting and they probably never will. I still love biking there though and you're free to go pretty much where you like (so far).

    LOL

    The local guys, under the SingeltrAction banner, tried for several years to develop things at Wharncliffe. However, not even the support of World class DH legend and local Dr Peat was enough. Consensus on the ground with the guys who really pushed it was the problems were the Beat Forester not being interested (or made to be interested) and the support from Sherwood's Rec' Ranger (Chris Bray). Fair play he had the Pines to do but then again we didn't really need him to be very involved as we've built the odd bit of trail before 😉

    There are still riders in Sheffield trying to make things happen (see recent Bikeradar article). IMO it is a crime proper development at Wharncliffe hasn't happened as it fits beautifully with all sorts of needs and desires. Sadly it seems to be an all too often encountered situation where FE can't or won't engage and would rather stick their head in the sand and not respond than come out with some straigh-talking honesty. Better to know clearly where you stand and why IMO.

    NB: I think FE have done some great stuff and will acknowledge it where I see it (Dalby, Stainburn etc) but there's no point ignoring the bad stuff because that's what makes the biggest and longest lasting impression.

    Gutting because some of the Sheffield locals put in huge amounts of time, effort and their own money to try and make it work. That FE have squandered all that is disgraceful.

    I think FE often fail to appreciate and understand volunteers. We may well not appreciate them but at least they're paid and have a job description that includes dealing with us. The ball is firmly in their court / within their control to educate us. Volunteer groups can be great at informally policing and carrrying out much higher levels of supervision and maintenance than FE can for little to no cost. They also provide a route for engagement and education. But, if they don't give volunteers something (like trail projects to work on and I don't mean filling potholes and tidying up) then they'll loose all the engagement and goodwill and you'll just have loads of people doing their own stuff.

    Scienceofficer
    Free Member

    But, if they don't give volunteers something (like trail projects to work on and I don't mean filling potholes and tidying up) then they'll loose all the engagement and goodwill and you'll just have loads of people doing their own stuff.

    Oh yes. That's exactly where we are.

    sheffield43
    Free Member

    Sadly it seems to be an all too often encountered situation where FE can't or won't engage and would rather stick their head in the sand and not respond than come out with some straigh-talking honesty. Better to know clearly where you stand and why IMO.

    Agreed – I think everyone now understands only too well where the FC stands regarding trail development at Wharncliffe – they're not interested!

    It seems to me that they cynically tried to get volunteers to solve some of their issues with MTB'ing interacting with other forest users under the mantle of trail development.

    Your lucky you have access to FC woods. Both of my local woods have access limited to a short length of bridle path. All the rest is restrited as let to shooting syndicates.

    antigee
    Full Member

    It seems to me that they cynically tried to get volunteers to solve some of their issues with MTB'ing interacting with other forest users under the mantle of trail development.

    think this is true and i'd be a bit unhappy if i'd spent my time trail building – positive outcome was that open access to wharncliffe woods was maintained and that mtb'ers showed that we could set up an effective body that could relate with other users and be sensitive to them

    as to the general issue of trail sanitising a positive outcome is that it means that cycling is accepted and i would try and view the trails that are intended to appeal to a larger user group as a means of access to developing viable and non conflicting single track

    this doesn't mean i'm 100% in favour of trail taming (and seen some shocking examples where it is unclear who benefits) – need to be on the front end of what is happening (hopefully like the newly formed Sheffield group) and input and get agencies at the planning stage to look at alternatives and keep all parties happy

    [pennys]0[worth]

    jd-boy
    Free Member

    FC is a goverment body, we pay there wages in our Taxes, they dont put road tax on there vehicles, we own the forests, we SHOULD have a lot more say in what they can and cannot do.

    DickBarton
    Full Member

    Actually they do make money from the MTB community – although in the grand scheme of things it probably doesn't wash their faces by a long shot – paying for parking, paying for FC facilities like cafes (although admittedly there are very very few FC run cafes) – they do make money from us – if it isn't priced properly then that is their issue if they feel they don't make enough.

    Want to put an event on (when I was doing this) – that'll be £1.50 per head on top of the fee charged for the permissions (wasn't a major issue at the time) so they are making money for doing nothing – the events had their own insurance so it wasn't even to give us insurance cover for the day.

    They like to plead poverty but I'm sure there are many areas where vast improvements could be made that would save thousands and could have the money directed to more appropriate areas – whether MTB trails (for family, beginners, enthusiasts and pros) is part of that appropriateness remains to be seen…but it is a largely inefficient group (as is most government-based groups).

Viewing 14 posts - 41 through 54 (of 54 total)

The topic ‘The loss of trails – Forestry Commission corporate vandalism’ is closed to new replies.