Forum menu
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...
you're doing the typical outgroup thing, lashing out at the entire group due to the (alleged) actions of a few. It's something cyclists see a lot on the roads aswell and has been said we're getting a bit tired of it.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:
. That is nice of him, he is our friend:)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:
A bit hypocritical perhaps?[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:
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.
So you advocate ignoring the signs saying no cycling anywhere on the site because it doesn't suit you?
So if I did the same with a motorbike or a Land Rover you'd think it was equally acceptable?
So you're backtracking on the claim of criminality then. Thanks.
So you advocate ignoring the signs saying no cycling anywhere on the site because it doesn't suit you?So if I did the same with a motorbike or a Land Rover you'd think it was equally acceptable?
But thats not what you claimed!
the former is a civil trespass
the latter is a criminal offence (S34 Road Traffic Act)
one is illegal, the other isn't
You've stressed here your concern over the 'illegality' of people riding their bikes there - I've pointed out to you (fairly clearly and effectively I'd like to think) that it isn't!
If I put up a sign in my pub saying 'do not read the bath chronicle' it would not make it [u]illegal [/u]to do so would it?
No I'm not.
Two issues.
1. Riding off the paths. Inevitably causing damage to protected species. Against the law.
2. Riding on the paths. Trespass and dangerous to walkers.
If you condemn riding off the paths I am happy.
As I have said, I don't mind sharing the paths with careful, considerate cyclists. But I and many other people have seen increasing numbers of cyclists who do not behave carefully and considerately. Who use the paths as a racetrack.
The landowner says there should be no cycling. Not me.
Inevitably causing damage to protected species.
[b]inevitably?[/b]
Which species, what damage?
Anyone run over a bat recently?
The NE site report and condition survey, dated 1st October 2014, does not express any such concerns!
I really hope no tax payers money pays for your time.
I posted a link to the SSSI designation earlier. There are loads of protected plant species there including, if I remember rightly, eight or nine species of orchid alone. You might not appreciate their value or significance but that is not the point.
I state again
The NE site report and condition survey, dated 1st October 2014, does not express any such concerns!
so what are you basing your claims of damage on?
Instead of waisting your time campaigning about the possibility that there might be some badly behaved mtbers (and the will be some) why don't you campaign for a trail Centre to be created? Mtbers will be happy, somewhere they can have input to making and then using. The supposedly traumatised walkers will be happy as the bikers (In the main) will be in the trail Centre. Positive moves are always better than negative ones...
I think that thee were two ways to approach the issue:
1. start a "Ban them all campaign"
2. work with all the stakeholder groups
you chose 1, I would hope that the internet argument can be paused whilst you have a cup of tea and a biscuit and then decide to go and talk to the stakeholder groups in person more widely than you currently have in the spirit of trying to get a successful solution
as for the SSSI and the protection of it I would be asking Natural England for support for a discretionary dog exclusion restriction under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. The presence of dogs both on and off the lead will have a measureable impact on the Flora and fauna which make up the reasons for designation. Such orders can be restricted to time of year and also apply to PROW. These orders will have a measureable benefit to the SSSI condition.