[Closed] Bath - Brown's Folly (aka Sally in the Woods) - Under attack from local Tories..

I think the comments on the newspaper thread sum up the situation and answers perfectly - really professional and very well argued points, well done 8)

It's happening everywhere I'm afraid.

I'm amazed that in these times of 'austerity' so much money can be found to enforce stupid rules about access, or flatten vast tracts of the countryside so ramblers don't have to have to worry about tweaking a toe nail or suchlike.

The problem is that 'they' (the hunter wellied brigade) think that just because they have spent half a million on a house in the countryside, they have the 'right' to ban everyone they don't like from sullying the view from their turrets.

They will invent any pretext on which to base a total over reaction and blanket bans and enforcement.

Very soon all we will be allowed to do is sit in front of the telly and eat ourselves to death. Ball games? No, you can't play them there because Nigel's landrover got hit once by a tennis ball. Mountain biking? No, one of you went within five metres of a rambler once. The fact that they deliberately stood in the middle of the trail to block as much as possible is irrelevant.

They will win in the end, so you might as well ride it while you can.

Good luck with this. I've been following it a while, and all parties seem to be pretty much entrenched. You can tell by the tone of the Mercury article, its very much a them and us type situation.

Its a shame something couldn't be done officially, like the Bristol, but not sure AWT are at all interested.

GW would do well to think about how many cyclist there are out there. Not just regarding Browns, but as a whole in Bath+. Perhaps we could drum up support for an opposition candidate that takes cycling (in all its forms) seriously.

It's up to local riders to come to an agreement with the landowners.

If it's owned by a wildlife group does it have protected status or is it a recognised nature deserve? I'd love to see better access rules but if there is no legal right of way it needs sensible discussions to reach an amicable arrangement with the landowners to get a permissive right of access.

There is probably just a very small minority of riders who ride with disregard for other users of the woods.

This is no different in many ways than people who use the public roads as a recetrack or drive dangerously. Of course nobody suggests banning cars/bikes/lorries etc from the road as a solution as it is clearly not the way.

I agree with the policing of the woods and the reporting of any type of antisocial behaviour, by anyone.

A few dedicated tracks for bikes would be a good move and has been 100% proven successful in many other similar situations.

As mentioned on the comments of the newspaper article they would probably be built and maintained by volunteers at no cost, liasing with the land owners and in sympathy with the surroundings and other users.

I see no real problem here that cannot be easily dealt with. 🙂

Wow. Malcom cupis is a real nob. Hope he doesn't get elected.

Could we build a trail there that would ride as good as what's there now? That follows roughly the same route? I'm sure there would be plenty of volunteers but its a huge job.

The folly is the first of a 3 section route along the valley. The last section is getting very popular as a DH destination. If we make a trail at the folly will those other sections get highlighted? The 'you've got trails over there so don't ride here' argument?

At the moment I think a voluntary ban is our best way forward, eg no riding 9am to 5pm, maybe none at all in nov-feb.

Wrecker, careful what you say. You may receive a visit from the plod if you start making enemies with MC. But, your right.

Wow. Malcom cupis is a real nob. Hope he doesn't get elected.

Depends. If you have large number of like-minded nobs in the area he probably will be.

He comes across as someone who will represent the land-owning NIMBY tendency quite vociferously.

The paths are narrow and uneven with rocky surfaces and some very steep descents over sheer cliffs in places.

It is simply not the place to mix mountain bikers who, by definition, are out for sport and are therefore not going to be content to meander at walking pace

Best of luck getting shared acces - it is what we got locally
It sounds like it will be hard to arrange this amicably but, whatever we think of it, some cyclists are going to ride it no matter what

Thanks for the link Andy.

I think the comments sections of the article are very considerate and display MTB in as positive light as possible. It is great that the MTB community around Bath appear open minded to keeping everyone happy and strive for positive solutions.

Whenever I've been up there, there only ever seems to be people walking around the tower. It is extremely rare to see anyone, be it a walker or cyclist, South of where another footpath goes through the wall (heading East) in to Monkton Farleigh. It would be interesting to know where the public feel the "problem" areas are and I suspect that avoiding the paths around the tower itself perhaps by providing a cycle route to bypass the tower) may present a compromise and still keep some of the other fun sections accessible to MTBers.

To be honest, I can't see any attraction of riding in the woods at the top of the hill since the logging has churned up the ground and left rotting trees all over the place- it is quite a mess up there for everyone, walkers, riders and wildlife! I can only the sections heading south of the tower for a few 100m as an area really requiring a bit of looking in to for everyone.

Sally in the Woods (as I understand the section across from the main road) is actually a bridleway so no worries there for the time being. That path shares a lot of characteristics with the footpaths around BF yet is a designated right of way for walkers, horses and cyclists.

As correctly pointed out, most people seem to also walk in areas not designated as footpaths so should incur the same wrath (or worse!) of the landowner as a cyclist on a footpath IMO yet I have never come across this anywhere.

Best of luck to all involved for finding a positive solution for everyone. Everyone should be able to enjoy the countryside in harmony 😀

P.S. Who is leading the crackdown on MTB? Is it Malcolm Cupis? Seems like an interesting guy. One would hope that the apparent passions for motorbiking, sports cars and 4x4 green laning might offer potential for an open mind for others wishing to enjoy hobbies in the great outdoors.

Knob?

Oh well, I've been called worst. Today.

Look, I know that Analogue Andy desperately wants to depict me as some hate-filled, bicycle bashing harbinger of evil, but the truth is completely different.

For the benefit of those not from Bath, I grew up in the countryside around the city, I used to revel in mountain biking and hiking and generally being outdoors, and then I had a nasty accident that wasn't my fault that left me permanently knackered and unable to do these things. I do not hate bicycles, I love bicycles. I do not resent you lot, I envy you.

Let's clear up a few things. First of all, my status. I am not a Councillor and I am not "leading a crackdown on MTB." I am a Council candidate for a ward in the centre of Bath and yes, I am a Conservative and yes, I do know that Analogue Andy doesn't like Conservatives and wants to try to turn everything into an opportunity to express his scorn for Conservatives. These things are irrelevant.

I'm also a journalist and the Bath Mercury is the pilot of a range of online local newspapers.

This story has nothing to do with politics. It has nothing to do with Conservatives or my candidacy, it is all about a news story in the Bath Mercury.

So why is it in the Bath Mercury? Because I've been walking at Brown's Folly for more than 40 years, since I was a tiny child. I'm generally up there at least twice a week. I know a lot of people who go up there regularly and we talk. I've seen an increase in mountain bikers through the summer and I've seen quite a few of them, myself, behaving stupidly and completely inconsiderately. An increasing number of people who I know and meet regularly who walk there have reported the same thing.

What's the problem with Brown's Folly?

You can break it down into two things, riding off the paths and riding on the paths.

Off the paths it is a SSSI. You can read why here http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1002510

When you ride off the paths you cause damage to protected species and Nature England, which is responsible for policing every SSSI, knows that people are riding off the paths up there and sent me an email a few weeks ago saying that they were planning a crackdown. The fine for damaging protected species in a SSSI is up to £20,000. So you could be riding off the path up there and suddenly find yourself stopped by a Nature England Inspector, arrested and fined heavily.

If you know it is an SSSI and choose to ignore this then you deserve the consequences. If you don't know then you deserve to be told before you get nailed, because Nature England won't consider ignorance to be much of an excuse.

The other problem relates to riding on the paths. The reason mountain bikers like it so much is that it is challenging and I understand this. The reason it is challenging is that the paths are narrow, rocky and have unguarded descents of over 100ft in places.

I walk with a stick, slowly. I can't run away or jump out of the way. I've been up there this summer with my dogs and my wife on several occasions and found a group MTB riders belting around a blind corner on a narrow path which you can't step off with a dry stone wall on one side and an almost sheer drop on the other. It's bloody dangerous. I've got YouTube video links to riders doing exactly this.

Let's be honest, you do this for sport and I understand that. I can easily understand the thrill. As someone pointed out I'm big into fast cars and motorcycles. I fly small aeroplanes, I've done parachuting and bunjee jumping. I'm not some boring old git who wants to spoil fun or limit freedom. Bending regulations for great experiences is something I completely understand, so long as it doesn't imperil other people. MTB riders don't want to bimble around on paths like these in case they meet some dullard coming round the corner with his wife and dogs, they want to ride quickly, experience the thrill, challenge themselves.

This is the problem. It would be a great place to do these things if it wasn't for the fact that it isn't a place in the middle of nowhere that is empty of other people, it is easily accessible and used a lot. And the needs of people who use it put them in direct conflict with each other.

I have spoken to plenty of walkers up there who report that they have had dogs run over, near misses, been forced off the paths above steep falls, startled, sworn at and generally treated with a total lack of respect. And there is a big sign at the entrance that clearly states that bikes should not be ridden there, as well as repeater signs at points along the trail, many of which have been ripped off.

If MTB riders could ride carefully and consideratly in small numbers then I don't think there would be much of a problem, but YouTube works as well for you as it does for me. Have a look at the videos on YouTube and you will see the problem for yourself.

So, what do I think should be done? Firstly, the off-path issue. MTB riders should not ride off the paths and cause damage to protected species. I would hope that every person who reads this would agree. No excuses, it is wrong.If Nature England does what it has told me it will do and sends Inspectors there who nick people, I think they only have themselves to blame.

Secondly, on-path. A couple of riders have told me that they only ride there as a link between other places, rather than seeing it as a destination in its own right. I have to say I struggle to believe this from the way in which many riders ride there. That and the fact that riders have set up a club which meets there every Wednesday evening and calls itself "Folly Flyers".

If it is a link between other places I would urge riders to be ultra cautious on the paths and think about who you might come across. Ride alone or in small groups and always be ready to stop.

I don't believe that very many riders will feel that this is advice that they want to pay any heed to.

I think the hills around Bath lend themselves to MTB riding and I think Bath needs a dedicated facility that is purpose designed and built, that could incorporate a challenging trail for experienced riders and a more family-friendly trail alongside. I don't see why this can't be achievable.

I have to say though that for all the reasons I have explained here I think Brown's Folly is completely the wrong place for MTB riders to continue to behave as they have been. Somebody is going to get nailed by Nature England. Somebody is going to get badly hurt riding on the paths. I won't get any satisfaction at all from saying "I told you so".

Look, I know that Analogue Andy desperately wants to depict me as some hate-filled, bicycle bashing harbinger of evil, but the truth is completely different.

This goes two ways. Considering the damage that unrestrained dogs do to flora and fauna (and the fact that they do not stick to the paths), you should also insist that ALL dogs are kept on a lead in this area. Not to do so would make you a massive hypocrite.

it would seem as tho wrecker read your comments on the mercury page and formed his own opinion of you.

So you could be riding off the path up there and suddenly find yourself stopped by a Nature England Inspector, arrested and fined heavily.

Why would you even perpetuate this lie?

Since when have Natural England had a team of 'inspectors' with a power of arrest?

To even suggest it is so is underpants of the finest order

In addition to this, the current SSSI report for the site, only a few weeks old, lists nearly all of the site in favourable condition, does not express any concerns over current access arrangements and does not even mention mountain biking or off road cycling, let alone classify it as a problem needing action to protect the integrity of the SSSI units

If you have concerns over trail user conflict, then fine, lets discuss them and find a solution, but to dress them up in the camouflage of concern for nature on a protected site is not only disingenuous but downright underhanded.

I would be more than happy to discuss with you ways of managing the problems caused by mountainbikers, the finer balances of SSSI designation, mitigation measures and ways of minimising conflict between different user groups - however running around spouting utter lies is not the way to start off the conversation.

👿

wow the Vanderman has reared his idiotic head again!!!

Anybody who causes damage to protected flora and fauna in a SSSI is liable to the same penalty, regardless of whether they are a cyclist or a walker.

Anybody who causes damage to protected flora and fauna in a SSSI is liable to the same penalty, regardless of whether they are a cyclist or a walker.

So, you've chosen not to clarify or explain your outright lie that people could be arrested by Natural England 'inspectors'

Nor have you chosen to explain why, despite your claims, the NE SSSI site review does not mention any concerns whatsoever over current levels of access or use by anyone, let alone by bicycles - although just a few minutes ago you were claiming that they were so concerned over it that they are planning to arrest people with powers they don't even have.

Underpants!

Anybody who causes damage to protected flora and fauna in a SSSI is liable to the same penalty, regardless of whether they are a cyclist or a walker.

So you keep your dogs are kept on a lead in this SSSI then? If not, as a responsible person who is going to extreme lengths to point out potential damage done by others, you had better start.

[img] [/img]

Whats happened here is that Mr Cupis has made the fatal mistake of trying to use the sites SSSI designation as a catch all excuse to support his own primary argument of 'think of the poor little doggies and old people who might get run over'

Unfortunately in the process he's leaped into a bear pit of people who know more about the subjects of both i) conservation and ii) managing recreational access and minimisation of trail user conflict than he does, and is now suffering the inevitable result as the validity and veracity of his argument falls apart, I have no doubt that the inevitable result of this will be more wild and unsubstantiated claims followed shortly thereafter by him taking offence and flouncing off claiming we're abusing him.

Malcolm, for what its worth my offer of trying to offer you advice on methods of minimising conflict stands, this is an area of some expertise for some of us round here, who have worked extensively with organisations like the Forestry Commission, National Trust, and yes, Natural England to solve exactly these type of problems in a cooperative and respectful manner that leads to positive outcomes, since inclusion sees a much more effective solution with better compliance.

Somehow I doubt you'll take me up on the offer though...

So why is it in the Bath Mercury?

[Because I've been walking at Brown's Folly for more than 40 years, since I was a tiny child. I'm generally up there at least twice a week. I know a lot of people who go up there regularly and we talk. I've seen an increase in mountain bikers through the summer and I've seen quite a few of them, myself, behaving stupidly and completely inconsiderately. An increasing number of people who I know and meet regularly who walk there have reported the same thing]

Nothing to do with being a Director of the holding Company behind the Bath Mercury then......

I've ridden there, normally alone but sometimes in small groups. Before I moved (and wrecked my back!) I was there 3 times a week as part of my loop, normally ending by dropping down to the viaduct, then up the back of the university hill and down through the (illegal) university trails.
The only piece of 'conflict' I've ever had is when I stopped to let a couple of walkers come past and their stupid colly came up and bit me (check my posting history, it's there) Other than that, all walkers, young and old have been courteous as I have to them. Yes, I can travel a lot faster than them, however normally they move aside when I approach from behind, and I stop when we are head on. People, especially right next to a city, tend to know how to get on with each other.
As for the sign vandalising, go up there later at night and you may well find your culprits. I'd be looking for the large groups of yoofs smoking weed and breaking things, not the middle aged, slightly tubby mountain biker getting his kicks after putting the kids to bed....!
I agree with all of AnalogueAndy's comments, and I'm pretty sure that the post above is from the Vanderwhatispillock, not the actual author of the Bath Chronical artcle.

Flounce off?

Look, I don't need to be here. I've registered and contributed because I think I'm making reasonable points in a discussion about a place I care very much about and a situation I'm very concerned about, which a lot of other people have expressed concern about.

Natural England has been in touch with me and have given me the information I've described above. If it is wrong then I'm surprised to put it mildly.

I'm choosing to engage with you because I would like a reasonable solution to a worrying situation. Not a keyboard war that creates a lot of heat and no light. I'm happy to meet anybody who is concerned. I'm happy to talk about solutions. I'm not here to embark on a war in your living room.

After reading the long post from mcupis I've got to say that I do not recognize the picture he paints of the current situation at the Folly. Everyone I know rides responsibly, slows down or stops for walkers, and stays on the paths. We are predominately talking about a bunch of middle aged, middle class, well behaved men here. I would say that I have never seen any irresponsible riding at the Folly.

HOWEVER I do agree with him to some extent on what he thinks should be done. Firstly:

Firstly, the off-path issue. MTB riders should not ride off the paths......etc etc stay on the paths

Fully agree with that.

I'm not sure he is correct on this one though:

Secondly, on-path. A couple of riders have told me that they only ride there as a link between other places, rather than seeing it as a destination in its own right......

I would say in my experience that this is not quite correct. The main path can lend itself to part of a longer loop this is true. However it would be one of the highlights of any ride, not a mere linking section.

It is the quality of the riding there that is the heart of the problem. People have been riding the Folly main path for over 20 years because it is very good to ride. It is a true classic section: if you set out to design a MTB course you would struggle to make one as good as has evolved at the Folly. There is nothing else quite like it.

It is this that leads me to the opinion that attempts to enforce a no cycling policy are futile. Nothing that has been done towards this so far has made the least bit of difference. The fact that cycling at the Folly is or isn't against the law is not relevant. All the fences, 'blocked' paths, patrolling, and signs over the years have done nothing to deter mountain bikers and only a fool would think that more of the same approach will change anything.

In my opinion the only option that AWT has is to approach the local groups and come to a policy of agreed use. That could be a time or seasonal based voluntary ban, or it could be sticking to certain less populated routes only. Whatever it is, a discussion needs to happen.

pwnage of the highest order. Have and "ATTABOY" ninfan.

suddenly find yourself stopped by a Nature England Inspector, arrested and fined heavily.

😆

As if.

Right. Here are some videos.

Llama, your post is very reasonable, but I'm interested to see how your comments about usage square with what we see here, which is far more typical of what I have seen increasingly this summer and which other walkers have been describing to me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIhfUELTUnE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O33Cl34THWg

Is this another case of the "if you'd only play nicer and do what The Man says, you can have the moon on a stick at some point in the future"? Because if it is, we've already done it lots of times and it's getting a bit tiresome.

All the additional threats and noise make it impossible to hear the real point, so I just assume that today's nimby is just saying "enjoy your riding folks and don't forget to be nice". Has worked so far.

T1000, as I described above, I own the Bath Mercury. It is the pilot of a series of online local newspapers in South West England. I own Techspeak Ltd which publishes the Bath Mercury. No mystery. I'm not sure what point you seek to make.

and another thing

I've got YouTube video links to riders doing exactly this.

Post the links here then lets see them.

IF there are irresponsible MTBers let's oust them and condemn them with all the other irresponsible users of the Folly (litterers, drug takers, drinking teenagers, vandals, uncontrolled dogs etc etc etc)

(xpost will look at the videos)

Yeah, I find the music on those YouTube videos offensive too. What was your point again?

It's amazing how mtb riders can go anywhere in Scotland and the sky does not fall in, but deviate a millimeter in England, and it's doom according to the NIMBYs.

May I suggest you give the local authorities a dose of democratic action?

mrbelowski, I would like riders not to ride off the paths and damage protected species. I know this may sound a bit boring but I genuinely care.

I don't mind sharing the paths with mountain bikers.

Hang on I'm going to say that again, with emphasis.

I DON'T MIND SHARING THE PATHS WITH MOUNTAIN BIKERS.

So long as those mountain bikers are behaving responsibly, considerately and safely.

I've come across mountain bikers who do and I don't have a problem with them.

I've come across mountain bikers who don't and I do have a problem with them.

I've come across increasing numbers of mountain bikers who don't through the summer and have been told by lots of other walkers that they have too.

If people were careful, considerate and responsible there would be no problem.

If you are a careful, considerate and responsible person then I would hope that you might agree with this. Careful, considerate and responsible mountain bike riders deserve more freedom. Their freedom is threatened by the actions of inconsiderate, selfish idiots.

I want to deal with inconsiderate, selfish idiots, not careful, considerate and responsible mountain bikers.

dannyh - Member

I'm amazed that in these times of 'austerity' so much money can be found to enforce stupid rules about access, or flatten vast tracts of the countryside so ramblers don't have to have to worry about tweaking a toe nail or suchlike.

Ah, you've made a basic error there, austerity's not about saving money, it's about rich people taking things away from everyone else. This particular bit of trail austerity fits right in

I want to deal with inconsiderate, selfish idiots, not careful, considerate and responsible mountain bikers.

So why the call to ban all of them then? By the same logic, do we ban all walkers from the woods just because some of them are there to vandalise and take drugs?

first one:

3 people riding the main path in 2011. A small group I think you would agree. The one filming even has a bell on his bike.

at 1:18 they go past 2 people on foot quite slowly. I can't see any conflict here. The people moved out the way. They didn't look scared to me. One of them looked like they were smiling.

at 3:09 they go past 3 walkers again quite slowly as they carry over a fallen tree. The walkers didn't look the least bit put out to me. I stepped through it and the one at the front looked like they were smiling.

All I draw from this is that it is a multi-use path and people usualyl are pleasant and smile at each other.

I'll look at some later but the day job calls

What dull videos. They're also very old and during my skim through I honestly can't see what issue they demonstrate.

While out on my road bike I've been run off the road, spat on, had things thrown at me and been abused. If I posted on PistonHeads suggesting that drivers shouldn't be allowed on roads I wouldn't expect much in the way of apology or constructive response.

Not sure what you're expecting to achieve in this thread, other than giving fuel to your own burning resentment of people who aren't the same as you

WTF, two of those youtube links the riders are going so slow they don't have the momentum to carry them over simple roots.

I see no high speed in any of the videos, am I missing something?

I'm not calling for the banning of them. They are already banned. There is a big sign up at the entrance that states "no cycling anywhere on the site".

Even Analogue Andy, in his original post here, clearly makes this point.

Malcolm, your posts sound reasonable in themselves you'll have to see this in the context that we hear unfounded allegations of cyclists causing harm/risk/AIDs to everyone including children on a regular basis and it's pretty tiresome. I can't see the youtube vids here but even if they show bad behaviour, I would suggest that's not the norm and we could probably come up with videos of dog walkers letting their animals foul and causing damage, walkers going off piste, people vandalising and so on.

As has been said, show some evidence that there are acutally accidents happening or even real near missed (because perception of near misses is not the same as it there actually being near misses) and also answer the questions put to you (about you inaccurate claims about arrests, etc and also about keeping your own dogs on leads) and you will likely get a more constructive discussion.

I appreciate you taking the effort to come to this in a seemingly constructive manner but you need to be aware that you will be taken to task for being yet another fundamental bike hater unless you can show that your focus is not only on cyclists and that you're working off fact rather than anecdote and opinion.

FWIW, I'm not a local. I've ridden the trails in question once. I don't believe I killed, maimed or injured anyone. I don't see any fundamental difference between this area and many many others where things work just fine without unnecessary intervention.

I think the first video is the most interesting - have a look where they meet the walkers at the end, no problem, everyone happy, smiling faces and courtesy all round

If we had examples of real conflict or problems then it would be a valid concern, however so far it seems to be 'perception' - you might like to have a look at Countryside agency CRN 32 which goes into this issue in some detail, but sums it up quite nicely with the comment that:

[i]"In the main, route users accommodate others by changing their speed and pattern of travel: cyclists slow down, while walkers move in more of a straight line and speed up.The research found that, when people gather together to talk about conflict, they talk it up and their recollection of how many others they met while on the route escalates.Their perceptions of conflict were much higher than that actually experienced."[/i]

None of the videos seem to support the 'damaging the SSSI' argument, in fact they're riding on fairly established trails that appear to have been there for a long time.

The simple answer of course would be to put a waymarked and dedicated trail in, which would tend to focus riders away from areas of conservation importance and reduce the incidence of conflict with other users.

Flicked through those videos, but as they were pretty slow, I got bored.

Also- film of some cheerful bumblers from 2007, 2011, 2012 and 2013 doesn't really work as evidence of hordes of thuggish inconsiderate mountain bikers from 'this summer' does it?

[T1000, as I described above, I own the Bath Mercury. It is the pilot of a series of online local newspapers in South West England. I own Techspeak Ltd which publishes the Bath Mercury. No mystery. I'm not sure what point you seek to make.]

It good that you’ve made that clear in this post, which is something your previous post didn’t do, I was curious as to why this had appeared on the Bath Mercury rather than in the Bath Cronicle

First video - carnage! those walkers went down like skittles. NOT.
People leaping for safety? no
Dogs run over? No
High speed riding? No
riders careering down 100ft cliffs. Sadly not.
Riding off-path? Nah. What kind of rider does that anyway? Everyone I know actively seeks out paths. And paths don't appear out of nowhere, you know. They are lines worn by human (or animal) use.
Haven't watched the others but if they are all as dull as that I don't think I'll bother.
This all sounds like some pet rant by some tuppenny wannabe politician who's bought himself a newspaper so he can make his opinions and prejudices sound more important than anyone else's.
I was born and grew up in Bath, btw. It was always full of people like him.

can't see the 2nd one through my work's proxy

the 3rd one

3 people on MTBs in 2013. They stay on paths, although not the main path at the top, still an established path. They did not encounter anyone. Not one person.

Is it because they look like they are going fast?

Well there are a few things to say about that. First, I've seen enough of these to know that it is not nearly as fast as it looks. Second, don't confuse going fast with not being able to stop in the space you can see.

Funnily enough YouTube recommends me this video:

Completely irresponsible and highly dangerous behavior at the Folly yet not a single mountain biker in sight.

Have you got any videos that contain actual evidence of irresponsible mountain biking?

Malcom, thanks for posting on here and opening up the debate. I have read your posts and can understand your perspective... If I have any thoughts for now, its to stop posting on here and meet with the OP somewhere convivial to talk it through (tea, cake, pan pipes, calming interior decor etc etc)...

Whatever information is presented here as has been mentioned in other posts, is well meaning but as often as not, will not actually produce positive action. Slugging it out in "I said , you said" style is almost certainly counter productive and divisive .... see the different interpretation of the videos for instance.

Meet with the OP, talk in through, agree a way forward the come back again with an update.

Just read the article again - nice how Avon's wildlife trust manager is so concerned that someone might get hurt that he's "left fallen trees across paths to disrupt routes". Clearly this will improve safety.

I must be getting cynical in my old age, but this local politician & newspaper owner appears to be targetting a minority group in order to sell a few papers and buy a few votes

I did wonder that but let's give him the benefit of the doubt for now, eh... Malcolm, show us that's wrong...

I DON'T MIND SHARING THE PATHS WITH MOUNTAIN BIKERS.

So long as those mountain bikers are behaving responsibly, considerately and safely.

I've come across mountain bikers who do and I don't have a problem with them.

I've come across mountain bikers who don't and I do have a problem with them.

Together with the 20 odd years of use and our archaic messed up access laws it means a more progressive approach is needed, stamping your feet and demanding that mtbers just disappear is a futile attempt at tide turning.

I DON'T MIND SHARING THE PATHS WITH MOUNTAIN BIKERS.
So long as those mountain bikers are behaving responsibly, considerately and safely.

I've come across mountain bikers who do and I don't have a problem with them.

I've come across mountain bikers who don't and I do have a problem with them.

So why isn't the article about misbehaving and inconsiderate mountain bikers (a minority)? It sounds like we are largely in agreement, but the article seems to contradict this.

The real story here is that the AWT are not allowing reasonable users access to the land when there is a long established tradition of responsible use causing little conflict and damage.

Let the mercury run that then.

[quote=mcupis ]what we see here, which is far more typical of what I have seen increasingly this summer and which other walkers have been describing to me.
>

>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIhfUELTUnE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O33Cl34THWg

[quote=mcupis ]I DON'T MIND SHARING THE PATHS WITH MOUNTAIN BIKERS.
So long as those mountain bikers are behaving responsibly, considerately and safely.
I've come across mountain bikers who do and I don't have a problem with them.

Which is exactly what your videos - which you describe as typical of recent riding - show, so I'm confused. Given you're happy with people riding like this, what is the problem?

It doesn't seem to be going well, does it Mr Cupis? When I read the comments on the article you seem to have attracted support from a foaming USA conspiracy theorist and, er...yourself.
You'd think if it was such a problem many of the maimed walkers or their surviving relatives would be on voicing their support.

Reading between the lines

I am a Council candidate for a ward in the centre of Bath

What minority group can I whip up a frenzy about to enhance my prospects of being elected?

I'm big into fast cars and motorbikes

Roadies you are next 😉

[url= http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/3/section/1 ]Link[/url] - An occupier of premises owes a duty to another (not being his visitor) in respect of any such risk ... if ... he is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe that it exists

Avon Wildlife Trust’s Reserves Manager Joe Middleton: -
We have left fallen trees across paths to disrupt routes

As alluded to above and in the link, I wonder what AWT's reasonable level of protection is? [url= http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Ratcliff-v-McConnell.php ]Ratcliff[/url] sets a pretty high standard.

If you look at why it's a SSSI...

[i]Brown's Folly is a nationally important wintering roost for bats and supports a calcareous grassland community with a restricted distribution in England. Semi-natural broadleaved woodland and calcareous scrub with a flora and fauna of local interest, also occur.[/i]

Don't ride in the caves people, don't disturb the bats.

/puts batbike away.

Brown's Folly is a nationally important wintering roost for bats and supports a calcareous grassland community with a restricted distribution in England. Semi-natural broadleaved woodland and calcareous scrub with a flora and fauna of local interest, also occur.

Don't ride in the caves people, don't disturb the bats.

Plus the grassland is fenced off and everyone I know stays clear.

Despite people setting bonfires and leaving empty beer cans.

Malcolm! Have you been trawling the internet looking for quotes you can use for your next Bath Mercury article / party-political mouthpiece? 😆

Look, I know that Analogue Andy desperately wants to depict me as some hate-filled, bicycle bashing harbinger of evil, but the truth is completely different.

I don't need to depict you as one Malcolm, you do a very good job of that yourself, even if you do come here pretending that you're an "ex" mountain biker. (That did make me chuckle!)

Yes, STW, I'm afraid Malcolm has lots of 'form' it's not just the aforementioned Brown's Folly article. He and his Tory Chums poor scorn on any form of cycling and any money that's spent to encourage or support it.

For some misguided reason he sees that as a vote winner..

Thank you to everyone who's responded to the detailed comments he's made regards the status of these woods and the claimed 'damage' 'danger' and 'illegality' of us riding there (Damage = this is a once industrial landscape, it has been commercially logged, via an access road, fencing has been erected across the site and yes, shock of all horrors people actually use them - even hiking boots cause "damage" as we all know. "Danger" - as has been said, I've been riding there for more than 30 years, in groups and solo, and walking and caving there for far longer (the hill is riddled with stone mines). I've NEVER seen anyone endanger anyone (except themselves occasionally!). Regards the "illegality" - yes there is no legal right of way for bikes through the woods - odd that given the stone was once dragged out by pit ponies. That's the nature of access rights in this country - hit and miss, designed a century ago when MTBs didn't exist..

I'll come back to some of Mr Cupis' comments later - in the meantime Daisy and Mary (both keen MTBers) want their tea!

If you look at why it's a SSSI...

Brown's Folly is a nationally important wintering roost for bats and supports a calcareous grassland community with a restricted distribution in England. Semi-natural broadleaved woodland and calcareous scrub with a flora and fauna of local interest, also occur.

Don't ride in the caves people, don't disturb the bats.

Although interestingly, the caves and old mines are maintained by local cavers, there is still (controlled) public access with voluntary restrictions in place during bat hibernation season and the bat population seems to be thriving; that's outside of any control by Avon Wildlife Trust.

So if the cavers, public and bats can all get on fine I don't see why MTBers and walkers can't.

Nice to see that that Mike Vandeman is still sitting at his computer frantically googling for MTB stories that he can wade into. Maybe he's aiming for the title of longest-serving internet troll. It can go up there on his wall along with his conviction of assaulting a mountain biker...

[quote=mcupis ]I do not hate bicycles, I love bicycles.

I found this article where Malcolm explains how much he loves bicycles
http://www.bathmercury.com/anger-grows-undemocratic-seven-dials-scheme/

😐 politics = make a mess of everything, blame someone else,

I really do not get where this seemingly inbred hatred of cyclists in the UK comes from. I have lived in Germany, where pedestrians, cyclists & drivers co exist well (despite it being enshrined in law) with families out riding on Sundays.
I am a walker, dog walker, Mountain Biker & driver and find being polite & courteous to other trail/road users goes a long way (It is a shame a minority though don't reciprocate) whatever mode of transport or the legality of using a trail is. We should have the same Right to Roam laws as they have in Scotland in England & Wales.
People should be encouraged to get out into the outdoors and take exercise, not have NIMBY obstacles thrown in their way. This would lead to a reduction in a burden on the NHS.
Having lived just outside Bath for a few years, the town is a pain in the @rse to drive & park, you would have thought that more cycling & walking and the resulting reduction in congestion & pollution would be welcomed.
We could also do with some INTEGRITY instilled into politicians, councillors & journalists, instead of trying slimey underhand, pitch fork mentality scaremongering tactics, to further their own careers.

Oh well done aracer

those unwilling or unable to comply with their ruthless and pathological contempt for what people actually need or want to do.”

Dont worry he is not talking about helping cyclists there

The truth is that bikes are ridden by a tiny minority of people – about two per cent of journeys made nationally are by bicycle – and are completely irrelevant as a practical transport proposition for the vast majority of people who just want to be left alone to get on with busy and complicated lives.

We could also do with some INTEGRITY instilled into politicians, councillors & journalists, instead of trying slimey underhand, pitch fork mentality scaremongering tactics, to further their own careers.

^This.

I'm heartily sick of politicians of all parties because of this. I despair, I really do. The newspaper hacks aren't far behind in my estimation either.

Sadly this does seem like yet another example of two faced lying politicians. I doubt Malcolm will be back now...

On the positive though the stw stereotype er older rider actually means that these days we're much better at organising resistance to this sort of thing. It's easy to sideline yoof bmxers. Much harder to do the same with mtbers who are part of the establishment.

I'm relatively new to mountain biking and was looking at this forum to find out more about local areas for a ride. This thread has inspired me to sign up to the forum!

Having read mcupis' article and comments I would draw the conclusion that he really isn't worth bothering about. A quick google of his name comes up with some interesting stuff. He appears to spend a lot of time on the internet spreading his "views" which are often focussed on anti-cycling.

He quotes in his earlier post:

I do not hate bicycles, I love bicycles. I do not resent you lot, I envy you.

However, this is what he says on other forums:

[i]Welcome to Bristol. But only if you are on a bicycle. Otherwise hand over your wallet and ****** off.[/i]

He seems to have a chip on his shoulder about safety, free speech, his right to drive motorbikes and cars and parking ....(interesting life!). A few other quotes from mcupis below:

[i]As a result people are starting to feel that cycling campaigners are devious, mistrustful and unreliable. If, as you say, cycling is less dangerous than motorcycling, as a motorcyclist can I ask where my motorcycle lanes and priority measures are?[/i]

And another:

[i]Dominic T is a typical extreme lefty. He isn't interested in what people want, need or aspire to. He couldn't care less about their circumstances. He just wants to force everybody to live how he wants them to live. Forget democracy, he knows he is right and that is all that matters to him.[/i]

And when it comes to suggesting that his 4x4 recreation should be restricted he says this:

[i] But the number of legal byways is being heavily reduced after campaigning from militant hikers and mountain bikers. Should I just accept that I should be banned from the countryside because I have no other way of accessing it or should I choose to ignore the closures and use them illegally?

Based on this my conclusion is the he comes across as a bit of a sad person with some "issues". There is probably a psychological term for these issues so we shouldn't be too hard on him.

Better to ignore him, go out for a bike ride, get muddy and enjoy the outdoors...

aracer - Member

> mcupis » I do not hate bicycles, I love bicycles.

I found this article where Malcolm explains how much he loves bicycles
http://www.bathmercury.com/anger-grows-undemocratic-seven-dials-scheme/
/p>

Yes, thanks, and SpecUSUK, there's loads of brilliant Malcolm Quotes

He posts on Twitter as @blokeinbath @bathmercury and @kingsmeadbath (plus others?)

Unbelievable. Try to positively engage with people and end up being targeted for a personal smear campaign backed up with quotes out of context.

I campaign against all illegal use of the countryside and rights of way.

In context the point I was making above was that closing byways to motor vehicles only affects people who are inclined to obey the law. Illegal off-roaders will not obey new closures and they are the people who treat others with no regard.

In the same way that illegal mountain bikers choose to ignore the law in places like Brown's Folly.

I've reported illegal off-roaders to the Police before. http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/towns/devizesheadlines/8887228.Illegal_riders_put_Erlestoke_walkers_to_fright/

I appeared on BBC Street Patrol UK last month (Series 2 episode 2) and did a five minute piece condoning illegal 4x4 users in the Mendips.

I care passionately about the countryside and I campaign against all illegal users, regardless of what transport method they use, especially in and around Bath and Somerset.

I support greater freedom for those who obey the law and treat other people with respect, regardless of the form of transport.

Why do you condone illegal 4 x 4 use on the Mendip Hills ?

I don't. I campaign against illegal 4x4 use on the Mendip Hills.

Just realised I mistyped earlier.

I CONDEMN illegal 4x4s. If you go to the episode on I-player you will see me condemning them in the strongest terms.

Malcolm, could you post links to your newspaper articles where you target other illegal use of the area in question where actual damage is caused or laws broken - dogs off leads, fouling, people doing drugs, etc?

That way we'll be able to see that there's balance and that this isn't just rabble rousing using cyclists as an easy target.

Oh and can you answer the question posed several times about why you made false claims about inspectors and arrest?

illegal mountain bikers

Careful there Malcolm,

As you no doubt well know, using a motor vehicle off-road without permission from the landowner or on a right of way of a lower classification is a direct criminal offence under the road traffic act

Whereas any claim of criminal offences rather than civil trespass on Browns Folly is a far more dubious proposition, whereby you would have to prove that someone had knowingly and intentionally or recklessly damaged or disturbed a protected site - thats a very different thing to what you've claimed on here so far, and have still not delivered any support for your assertion that damage is being done to any of the protected characteristics of the site - so far all you've actually demonstrated is that some people have been riding bicycles on existing well used tracks there, and even your own video 'evidence' shows an absence of conflict with other users.

So, lets be a little more careful with the 'illegal' word unless you can substantiate it

Since we're on the issue of 'illegality' of course Malcolm, Perhaps we should shift back in time to 2009, then cycling was [u]legalised [/u] in the Royal Victoria park:

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/Ride-park/story-11317371-detail/story.html

About which you said :

There is a perfectly good road that goes all around Victoria Park. Cars move very slowly around it - it's perfectly safe and fun to cycle around.Why can't cyclists use that, instead of a gravel footpath that will put them in conflict with elderly pedestrians, children and dogs?

So Malcolm, lets not pretend this is anything to do with illegality shall we...

probably also worth recalling that despite claiming to be a libertarian you called the police because of parody twitter accounts lampooning you:

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/councillor-Malcolm-Cupis-calls-police-spoof/story-19922660-detail/story.html

Was this another example of your determination to crack down on 'illegality'? 😆 Would hate to see them cropping up again, wouldn't we?

Nemesis, if people draw my attention to illegal behaviour of any sort that is evidenced I will run a story on it.

As I have explained, I have discussed it with Natural England and they have told me that they have inspectors with powers of arrest and the fine can be up to £20,000. As I said before, if this is not true I am surprised.

if people draw my attention to illegal behaviour of any sort that is evidenced I will run a story on it.

So what was illegal about people lampooning you on twitter? 😆

Of course you've [b]still[/b] not demonstrated any form of illegality at browns folly - so in absence of you showing me any proof of actual illegality we're talking civil trespass and nothing more

And you're supposed to be a libertarian 😆

Ninfan you would be right if it wasn't a SSSI. This is governed by Section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. It is a law.

I don't know what point you are trying to make with the Victoria Park link. One pathway has been designated dual use.

Ninfan you would be right if it wasn't a SSSI. This governed by Section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. It is a law.

Riding a bicycle on a SSSI is not a criminal offence

you know this very well

Intentionally or recklessly destroying or disturbing protected species or features of a SSSI in the knowledge of such [u]is[/u] of course a criminal offence

its a non sequitur to claim that the former automatically amounts to a commission of the latter, especially since your own evidence is that bikes are being ridden on existing paths.