[Closed] For those who ride the Hurtwood land on the Surrey hills...

the best interests of the wider mountain biking society

What is this society of which you speak ?
All I see is loads of DFLs 'rocking up' on a Sunday morning, skanking the trails for a couple of hours then beggaring off back home.

it's likely that sanctioned trails would never have come to pass without years of cheeky trails before them

More than 'likely' there would be little or no mtb 'scene' without the efforts of the cheeky builders and the 'numpties' would still be spinning their bling round Richmond Park of a Sunday

What is this society of which you speak ?

Anyone who rides a bike, grouped together in a 'society' to distinguish them from those people who have [i]explicitly stated[/i] that they couldn't care less if anyone else has places to ride, i.e., haighd2.

Not sure what this 'scene' is of which you speak, Hilldodger, but I am sure that there would be plenty of people on bicycles cycling up and down the Surrey Hills' bridleways with or without trails. Don't misunderstand me: I love bermy trails, but there are other elements to mountain biking which I've no doubt we all enjoy.

Not sure what this 'scene' is of which you speak

The 'scene' is here, aka talking about something rather than just doing it 😉

but I am sure that there would be plenty of people on bicycles cycling up and down the Surrey Hills' bridleways with or without trails

I agree totally, but there would certainly [i]not[/i] be carparks full of high end cars carrying high end bikes ridden by high end twerps yahooing and high fiving everytime they managed to not fall off.

“futon river crossing - So many double standards in the post above!”
“njee20 - You joined just to post that? You sound like a bit of an elitist moron, move on somewhere else if you feel so strongly, I doubt you'll be missed!”

Ah name calling when you don’t agree, stay classy sandiego. I joined this forum because it thought you guys where having a relatively sensible debate about trail access in my local area. If you’re a fan of childish name calling I think its you that should move on.

Elitist, yes that’s pretty much my point we should be elitist and keep the good stuff secret. Yes I have double standards and that’s because unlike others here im not proposing some grand narrative or overriding moral code of conduct about what land owners/ riders should be doing. Im just saying it how I see it and that means inevitably there are contradictions. Its not fair that ppl ride stuff that I build without helping and its not fair that landowners have stuff built illegally on their land but short of razor wire fence and armed guards these things will go on and both parties will just have to accept that. Im not saying hurtwood should do this or that, im just saying what im going to do. Im not even saying they were wrong to knock down radlane or freebourne’s ‘holey trail’. I understand the reasons they did it but it hasn’t solved the problem of erosion or more illegal trail building has it. Also id point out hiding behind liability issues is a cowards way out its an excuse that landowners use to add weight o their argument. All liability issues can be avoided if there is sufficient rider commitment and a willing landowner. Look at wisely. Anyway id love to know the stats on successful land owner payouts to riders of illegal trails (in the uk)? Maybe the trainee lawyer can help here? Having said that it is the owners prerogative to do as they please on their own land if they want rid of a trail then so be it. I accept that. What im saying is that a) that trail is never going to be fully gone and b) all that will happen is builders go elsewhere. The problem dosnt go away.

Someone said earlier ‘what gives trail builders the right to build on private land?’ ‘how would they like it if I built something int heir garden?’. The answer is if I had a garden/ could afford my own house and you built mtb jumps/trails in it id be stoked. Also its not a fair comparison between a domestic garden and a large ish estate . But in all seriousness the real answer to these questions is trails builders are not in the right but what land owners need to understand is not everyone respects the rules. some people have watched fight club one too many times. Some people just go and take what they want and ultimately you cant stop them. This isn’t right or just but it is a fact.

Joolsburgerb -
I respect all types of mtb riding (even trials) this isnt really an interdiscipline thing I recognize that there are a lot of xc riders who are skilled and have the right attitude to trails. Having said that in my experience people who build/maintain trails are usually more freeride/dh types although there are exceptions. What im really saying is what type of riding your doing be it xc dh or whatever that’s not really the issue. the issue is people who don’t put anything back into the scene in terms of graft. Anyone who has a dig ride ratio worse than 40:60 needs to accept that they are part of the problem.

winterfold - I agree signs are ugly and over used already. Trail centres are like nuclear power stations, they are often a good idea but none wants one in their back yard.

langy - I hear what your saying and at the moment it seem like the people representing riders in the surrey are treating mtb like a homogenous single entity who all have the same wants. Here, unlike in the issue of trail maintenance and trail respect, riding disciple is an issue and getting the authorities to understand the distinctions between sub groups and their various wants is the way forward. Possibly. Im not fussed im just going to keep hoping my latest trails don’t get too popular.

The point I really want to drive home is rights or wrongs are irrelevant. People are going to continue building steep trails / jumps/ drops and theres nothing that can be done to stop this. Landowners will prob continue knocking things down when its too ugly/ dangerous or erosive. People will continue raping trails with no consideration for the environment / builders. In 30 years when our Chinese over lords turn the whole area into high rise they aren’t going to give two hoots about any of this.

Hmmm...

So the amount of time you can afford to spend riding and the car you drive is an indication of your level of seriousness and riding ability.

Envy is such an ugly thing. Personally high fives and smiles all round make me smile. But then I'm not a ****.

I will add I am all for trail building and completely understand your desire to push limits and ride stuff that you find fun and a challenge the problem is simply that in the Surrey Hills care needs to be taken and the landowners wishes respected, surely the big stuff on Leith is enough to keep you happy? That's a good 20 foot step down over there just for starters...

dig:ride ratio of 40:60.

What a crock - think how many trails there'd be if everyone did that!

Claiming some sort of ownership over "your" trail? It is much better to ride a trail that already exists than make another one for fear of upsetting the digger!

As far as I can see you built a trail, and people have ridden it, and now it's looking a bit sorry. And?

Its only 'your trail' if the landowner agrees and lets you build a specific trail and even then they'd probably frown if you claimed 'ownership'
😆

I'm a Trust member and I'm against a trail centre because it would mean (almost certainly) someone who didn't build the trails coming and making money of the back of it and acting like they own the place. It would have to be a pretty community minded proposal for me to think it would be an improvement on the status quo - ie one with hardly any profit in.

It's a bit of a messy compromise the way it is at the moment, but it's organic and real, and we're Brits - we're great at messy compromises so we can muddle through.

hora - the Ranger seems to think there is new stuff being built (or maybe just becoming more known about) but wasn't particularly specific as you can imagine. His main concern is sorting out the obvious eyesores and fall lines to stop erosion and people crashing onto fire roads or car parks. He seems to know cheeky building is unstoppable and just wishes it happened on Leith and Winterfold so it was someone else's problem 🙂

mr murdoch was the incident you speak off at redlands car park on coldharbour lane last sunday between 12 and 3 if so it could well have been us. In our defence if you ride off before a reply can be uttered then you only have yourself to blame.

Again I would reiterate what ive said above about name calling lets not get personal.

I don’t see myself as a white night I don’t dig for recognition And on the whole I dont get involved in trail access debates with landowners. I dig for myself so I have something to enjoy. if other people want to ride it then fine I cant stop them anyway so there’s no point getting bent out of shape.

What I would say though is your right I dont really give a damn about other people, i am selfish, if they want something to ride they should provide it for themselves. I dont think im an amazing rider I know there are a lot better in this area when I say we should be elitist I mean in terms of building commitment rather than riding ability. Lets keep things local and low key. However riding ability should come into it a bit difficult features should be used to warn off riders who have no business on that trail. if I found a line I was too pussy to ride I would leave it alone note it down and come back and ride it when I had grown a pair I wouldn’t build a pussy out line round it or skid up and down the lip or run about on it. Or cut the landing away or fill the gap in. why does everything have to be to the level of the lowest common denominator? People who do this kind of thing are causing yet more trails to be built.

no 40 60 is good think about how well maintained the traisl would be if everyone did that

So the amount of time you can afford to spend riding and the car you drive is an indication of your level of seriousness and riding ability.

As far as I can see you built a trail, and people have ridden it, and now it's looking a bit sorry. And?

maybe i should go back and fix it? but im not inclined to as everything we put into it was torn down/ flattened. when we left it i assumed it would become over grown and was urprised to find it was being used as single track.

joolsburger - Member
But then I'm not a *

And so once again we descend from discussion to insults, are you sure you're not a *

haighd2

couple of points - there is quite a lot of willingness among riders (just from this forum there are plenty, mostly locals) to put some effort into maintaining the existing/sanctioned network - but that has not been translated into meaningful effort because of a lack of organisation. Apparently this is being sorted. In the meantime if something obviously needs doing eg draining people could just get off their bikes and do something about it - the Ranger would much rather we did this than rode round it and made the trail bigger or create a new line. Ultimately some 'sanitisation' of the existing network would probably be to the advantage of the cheeky builders as if those trails are more sustainable people are less likely to look elsewhere and come across the 'secret' stuff.

Just from the point of view of someone who lives in the area (ish) I much prefer the more natural look and feel of the freeride trails er to the West of the area to the more obviously built stuff with concrete etc on Leith. I can see why those trail pixies come out.

Lets keep things local and low key.

Building cheeky trails on land where riders are allowed access by the landowner/trust arent exactly the low key way of doing things. Local is a very relative term in that part of the southeast.

POV from someone who grew up just the other side of the A3

Haighhd2 does raise some very valid points and I tend to agree with him.

RIDING IN THE RAIN AND WINTER IS KILLING OUR TRAILS.

Without him and the like the Surrey Hills would not be the riding honeypot that it is now - he is almost his own worst enemy for all that hard work put in to Rad Lane, Freebore etc.

Please continue building the steep stuff 😉

There are some brilliant trail builders about here - Tatto dave, Simon from Nirvana, Haighhd2, Roger - I salute you all

Those weekend warriors you talk about don't have time to find the good stuff....let them trash Rad Lane and Barrys

Loving the dig:ride ratio! PMSL.

Ignoring the silliness.

There is a lot of challenging stuff over on Leith on the east face. I'm sure some of the stuff I've ridden over there is a bit cheeky but it's also low traffic so I hardly see anyone when I'm there perhaps for some that may be a better option than Pitch which is obviously contentious right now.

This issue really boils down to popularity and the easily found sanctioned stuff is used by lots of people and is obviously in need of repair in places. However it's also a working wood and essentially a big tree farm so the talk of erosion and natural versus built doesn't resonate with me look at what the logging does eyesore wise. In that regard I'm all for more work to create and maintain trails in the ilk of Barrys etc which despite being disregarded by the hard core are still bloody good trails and fun to ride at speed.

I am given to understand that the real issue is one of liability for injury, not only when Jeff from accounts over cooks it on something beyond his skill but more so from people riding the bridleways and more accessible public areas in an irresponsible way. Sadly there is no easy cure for that other than having a word with people when you see it. For example the footpath at the bottom of BKB which is clearly marked as no bikes yet 90% of people seem to ride anyway and **** everyone else..

Maybe it would be better if bikes had to pay a nominal daily or annual fee for trail upkeep a la Swinley. Then subsequently trails were more clearly way marked and those with issues of erosion were managed and that something could be worked out with the landowners that allowed for a loonies area of DH and freeridey stuff or allowed for more expert lines to be created in parallel to the existing runs. This would require a lot of good communication beween us and the landowners and that seems a bit out of kilter with this underground ideal that some people have. I think it would be better if cheeky trails didn't have to be rebuilt all the time and the only way to get people on side and not destroying your good work is to work with them otherwise it will always be this way.

wow easy on the compliments there nick, i only have a 40:60 ratio because i dig dirt jumps the majority of the time and ive only prob built one trail every two years up on the hills.

There is a lot of challenging stuff over on Leith on the east face

Sssssshhhhhhh!

Anyone who has a dig ride ratio worse than 40:60 needs to accept that they are part of the problem.

This statement has made me properly lol on an otherwise dull lunch break. Thanks.

Yes sorry that was dim...

Nah, plenty of room for everyone, people need to relax, we're all doing it for the same reason.

Maybe the issue here is just respect for the trails - the goal being to ride a trail with as little impact as possible (skids are for kids, etc).

So no matter whether the trail was built or not, people should not ride it if they are going to damage it - which covers riding all trails when it is too muddy for them, or ridding built trails when your skill level isn't enough to manage the trail without damaging it (too much).

The name-calling of these less-skilled riders attempting stuff they shouldn't is not too dissimilair to to cursing of skiers and showboarders coming down some sweet black run and scrapping all the snow from it because they can't take the fall line.

Any maybe mtbers should be forced to take out some form of insurance to ride so they landowner is not faced with a potential liability problem. After all you have to take specific insurance to go off-piste skiing, or be faced with a potentially big bill. If I fall off on a black it is my problem, not the ski resorts problem for pisting a run that was too steep.

i was with you till you started talking about insurance. riders insurance is going to be prohibitively expensive?
i dont seee whats funny about 60:40 ride:dig some people who build dirt jumps are prob operating at 20:80.

Haighd2, Dango and Ewan couldnt agree more with you. As one of the two builders of the 'T' series, XP, the 'original' BKB line and numerous other trails in the area, its depressing seeing the trails in such a poor state. We would regularly go up and spend many hours fixing trails, removing deliberate trail debris, re-routing straight lined corners! prior to going out for a ride only to go back during the week and to fix it all again. Why some riders want to straight line through twisty singletrack is beyond me.

All the trails we have built in the past have been pure singletrack with very few obstacles and once the trail was finished we would quite often let other riders know where they were for ALL to enjoy. Although we were the builders of many of the 'cheeky' trails, looking at the current situation up at Holmbury/Pitch I am against any new trails being built and time should be spent maintaining what already there.

Dandylineandmurdoch, I realy feel for you, it must of been so upsetting not getting a response to your cheery 'hello' you realy do sound like a pompus nob.

There are some brilliant trail builders about here - Tatto dave, [b]Simon from Nirvana[/b], Haighhd2, Roger - I salute you all

Are you serious? Name one trail that goon was responsible for that's any good?

I thought he just renamed over peoples trails or built sketchy as f*** stuff that had interior painted doors as part of the safety net to stop newbies falling into holes (Bury Hill)

I suppose there could be levels on insurance based on what level of cover you wanted to take out, but the key thing would be the removal of the liability from the landowner.

The minimum insurance level would cover the costs associated with retrieving you from his land if you had a bad accident - after all you would want someone to help you get to hospital if you piled on a run and bust both legs and some ribs, for example.

For example the footpath at the bottom of BKB which is clearly marked as no bikes yet 90% of people seem to ride anyway and **** everyone else

Got to agree with that. I really don't understand why you'd be so bothered about 200m of flat track rather than the road if you're heading to Peaslake, particularly if it's one of the points of contention with locals.

Maybe it's just me but I think this is the most depressing thread I've ever read on here.

With this level of aggression towards each other how long is it going to be before I see a fight on the trails? This sounds like arsehole surfers fighting over a wave.

I don't see how you can prohibit people from riding trails built on public land. Nor can you can't just close the trapdoor, pull up the ladder and say "sorry, this sport is full, no more beginners". People become better riders by riding more difficult trails - they'll screw it up at first but then learn.

One of the things that got me into riding in the first place was that it was that it was a friendly sport. This thread seems to reinforce the feeling I've had out at trail centres recently - that the sport has now succumbed to a lot of macho bullshit one upmanship.

The last time someone did some research around the Surrey Hills didn't something like 90% of people on bikes classify themselves as 'Freeriders' 🙂

Without sounding like a complete hippie - can we go back to being nice to each other and riding our bikes?

dango - haha i thought so too, fair play if someones building bad stuff call them out about it. but at least hes trying.

tunerguy- i personally feel that liability is just a smoke screen/ excuse used by landowners.its good to see you thinking of ways around it. however in the uk we have the nhs who take you to hospital for free right? on a side note this eradication of risk and reliance on insurance is a symptom of modernity we should discourgae it. mtb is dangerous, life is dangerous. ppl need to take responsibilty for thier actions not rely on insurance.

Yes, but it might be difficult getting you off from some remote area of pitch - maybe needing a helicopter like those seen on Swinley on a reasonably regular basis.

With this level of aggression towards each other how long is it going to be before I see a fight on the trails?

mtb is dangerous, life is dangerous. ppl need to take responsibilty for their actions not rely on insurance.

and we will have to wear helmets...

that the sport has now succumbed to a lot of macho bullshit one upmanship.

can we go back to being nice to each other and riding our bikes?

But it is not sniping at novices, it is sniping at people with no respect for the trails, or for other people, like the guys who built the trail.

For instance at the jump gully at Swinley there are often novices piling down there on cheap bikes with no helmets, etc. That's ok but they will expect the people around them to help pick them up or call for the warnden when they fail to 'style' a jump and land badly and end up a bloody mess. I don't mind doing that if they have made their best effort to mitigate any such accident, but if they haven't they are showing no respect to anyone else around.

You can take that to extremes though and it would still make as much sense. For example you could say that [i]any[/i] rider riding for performance and falling off from time to time is being irresponsible.

If the guy is going to attempt something risky then he must take as many precautions as possible, then if he has an accident that is fair enough. Bit like leaving a route plan before going into the mountains so mountain rescue have a reasonable chance of finding someone and not wasting huge resources because the guy was negligent in his responsibilities.

I can just see the court case 'Smith vs The Pitch Trail Pixies'.

Who exactly are they going to sue? The owners have taken reasonable steps to stop illicit trail building but it's going to happen. So it's a red herring, but I don't get much of an impression of people being litigious or thinking anything other than that they are accountable for their actions. Let's hope so.

And what exactly are the difficulties in getting injured people off any of the hills? It doesnt seem any more or any less difficult than anywhere else 'rural'. I am sure one of the local rock stars will have a helipad somewhere if the rangers pickup or paramedics quad bike is not exciting enough.

simons_nicolai-uk

I think if you read through it again you will realise this thread is much more like a slightly contentious school governors or parish council meeting than hardcore surfers fighting. For a start most people can spell, and there has only been one rude word used. It's the Interwebs nice people can talk big without having to worry about the consequences.

I do think more people could get off their bike and check out a trail before heading down it for the first time rather than realising halfway down its a bit trickier than they were expecting. That's not calling anyone a numpty or saying they cant ride the trails, but just common sense.

Dango, you would be suprised

Plenty of the the original redlands stuff, grievous angel and reclemation on ranmore (2 great little trails)

i agree - not a great fan of his social skills or shop but at least he is out there building.

If the guy is going to attempt something risky then he must take as many precautions as possible.

But, quite rightly, there's no 'licence' or 'test' for biking though - you just get a bike and go ride. We all [s]did[/s] do stupid things [s]when we started out[/s]* and you learn from the other people out on the trails. If they sneer at you as a 'newbie' where are you going to learn from?

land badly and end up a bloody mess.

Which hurts. Which is part of learning. So you either get better and stop hurting yourself so often or get thicker and carry on.

*says the man who ended up in crumpled heap last summer when out riding by himself.

I don't see how you can prohibit people from riding trails built on public land

That's a different argument. The Surrey Hills is not public land. Mountain biking is (up until now) enthusiastically supported by the landowners who not unreasonably, expect a say in what goes on. What may change this, is the unsanctioned trailbuilding that some riders STILL seem to want to indulge in to the detrement of us all. The ranger has better things to do than act as an enforcement officer and keep putting these unwanted trails "beyond use". If it ever gets to the stage of the Bray family (for instance) simply giving up the whole thing as a lost cause because of these selfish idiots, then I suppose we can all become ramblers, because that's going to be the only way we'll be granted access.

Oh, and I find it depressing that despite this argument having been done exhaustively to death already, the "Look at me, I'm an Outlaw" brigade STILL HAVE NOT GOT THE POINT. 🙁

And what exactly are the difficulties in getting injured people off any of the hills?

Most trails are near any roads or open spaces - so you are going to have to guide the ambulance to the nearest access point and then guide the paramedics up some bridleway (hopefully) for maybe several miles at walking pace as they bring their stretcher and other kit - meanwhile the injured party is getting cold, bleeding, going into shock, etc. And then there is the return journey to the ambulance.

I helped a horse rider that was thrown a while ago and it took a long time to get the paramedics to her, and that was on the flat, pretty open Chobham common.

I do think more people could get off their bike and check out a trail before heading down it for the first time rather than realising halfway down its a bit trickier than they were expecting

I did that on the last dodgy looking trail I tried at Tunnel Hill, and then promptly faceplanted on it 🙁

Mr Woppit - I think we agree. Regardless of whether the trail should be there or not I was referring to the attitude of "I've built this trail on *land that does not belong to me and across which public trails exist which people are allowed to ride* and I'm pissed off that *people other than me* have had the cheek to find it and ride it.

Oh, and as far as Simon is concerned, the hills are not his personal "I'll do as I bl**dy please" playground just because he happens to own a local bike shop.

In my opinion.