When you see the work being carried out by Derbyshire County Council on the sunken track at Rushup Edge it’s not hard to see why there’s been an outcry…
It’s one of the least sympathetic bits of trail maintenance we’ve seen with inappropriate materials being used destroying the local character of the sunken track and to be honest we were at a bit of a loss to understand why it was being carried out given that the existing substrate was bedrock and posed few challenges or dangers to users.
Exactly why an iconic and popular track has deserved such treatment is something of a puzzle.
Today saw a group from Peak District MTB holding a picnic to protest the works and survey the damage done so far. Workers. council representatives and contractors were conspicuous by their absence.
Hear our interview with Peak District MTB here.
We’ve been in contact with Derbyshire County Council today and asked the following questions:
1) How was the need for the work identified
2) What is the intended outcome of the works
3) Was any consultation carried out with user groups?
4) Why is a limestone based aggregate being used? Was there any environmental impact of this carried out?
5) Why has your PROW team disengaged from discussions with Peak District MTB as a user group?
6) Are your PROW team willing to consult and carry out more sympathetic maintenance with volunteers contributing time, skills and opening possibilities of partnership funding?
7) As a contributor to Visitor Safety in the Countryside Group how does this work fit with it’s principles? http://vscg.co.uk
…particularly the fundamental principles… http://vscg.co.uk/guiding-principles/fundamentals …
8) “Communication is not an afterthought at Derbyshire County Council – it plays a vital role in everything we do.” – DCC Communications Strategy. How does your PROW approach to consultation fit with your communications strategy?
Once we’ve had a reply expect a further story to follow up on this.
Comments (9)
Comments Closed
Have a need to thank you guys. Just one more reason I will always be a subscriber 🙂
Good work – thanks for giving this story some well deserved coverage.
They’ve Artexed the Sistine Chapel ceiling.
Thanks for the feedback 🙂
“Repairing” a bridleway on the Dark Peak using limestone? That’s insane. Is it even **legal**? Surely the Peak NP should be complaining that it’s inappropriate & out of character for the area. What is the point — why doesn’t DCC just tar over everything & be done with it? It looks like that’s what they actually want to do.
Good stuff STW, I’ve included a link in my correspondence with DCC.
I was beginning to lose faith with Singletrack magazine, I know it got larger, but it gained alot more adverts (adding the ability to turn them off if your a premium member on the website was a touch though! 🙂 ) and started becoming alot like the other bumf mags… and don’t even get me started on the spam emails from the Tuesday treats competition (although I maybe blame myself for not reading the small print for entereing the competition). This article has renewed my faith, it’s drawing attention to these issues that are key to mountain biking that I want to see and read about, not have dubious biking related products like tea, beer and non technical clothing pushed infront of me (so glad CX got it’s on magazine before I unsubscribed!).
The response….
http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/leisure/countryside/access/latest-work/chapel-gate/default.asp
If you follow the link above there is a reference to the Local Access Forum meetings with some dates. If I’m reading it correctly the next one is on Thursday 4th December. Tricky date and time (10.30am) but if anyone can get to it…
This kind of thing infuriates me, it’s just such a criminal waste of money. DCC will have sent someone up there with a clipboard, tick list and an agenda. it’ll then be filled in and wow oh my gosh we need to flatten it. So so stupid. Hmm well there could be a risk well step one states remove the risk (said with adenoids), I mean it’s pathetic.