Forum menu
a. We were on a CC-CC club ride and had just stopped to regroup by the side of the road, but were admittedly standing a couple of metres into their land. Road bike? Behave.
b. She knows me now, but all was amicable...
Can't remember if I've mentioned this before but in the last few weeks a very important group of individuals have been lending their support to our campaign, and I have to put my hands up and admit I never really considered them....LOCAL RESIDENTS.
To be honest I didn't really think that many would be cyclists or support what we do but they are there for sure. They are well aware of where we have come from on this issue and have been busy contacting Natural England opposing the recent restrictions. The issues of digging and jump constructions is obviously opposed and we as a campaign we support this approach anyway.
We are indeed garteful at this time for their very valuable support. So this is not a case of "not in my back yard" but rather of "hey, actually, I'd like to ride in my back yard thank you very much!!!"
bump
OK, after what now seems an age we are going to find out what Natural England are going to allow us to ride in Cranham and under what conditions. We meet on Monday afternoon. It has been quite sometime since our last meting in November 2011, but this was out of our hands. We also understand that Natural England will have had to consult various other parties in this process and still carry out their other day to day duties in the county.
All riders can be assured that we will come to agreement with Natural England only if we believe it is a solution that we believe riders will accept and we feel they will adhere to. If we agree to only a very few tracks being made available for us to use then realistically we could not expect riders not to "stray" onto the other ones. We have been very encouraged by the level of local interest in this issue and the support for riding to be allowed. The last thing local residents need is conflict in the woodland they live near to and enjoy as much as we do.
We will be in a position to announce the outcome of our negotiations at the Royal William in Cranham on the evening of Thursday 8th (starts at 19:30). If you cannot attend then of course we will send out emails giving details and update the forum thread on Singletrack. Whatever the outcome, good or bad I believe we have engaged with all the right parties and in only a positive manner. Natural England should be looking at more important issues as far as I am concerned, not restricting what is generally a very responsible group of users enjoying the woods along with those on foot and on horse.
Cheers, Roger.
Good as the natives are getting restless.Passed along Buckholt road Saturday afternoon on road bike saw a few riders in there.
Gotta watch those natives... they'll be firing blow darts if we don't get a satisfactory resolution!!! Battle plans drawn up, just waiting for the C130 to parachute us in now.....
would at the end of the day have restricted riding in a beautiful place rather than no riding in a beautiful place - well done all involved, good luck for monday
I'll second that, good luck for tomorrow.
Whatever the outcome, see you thursday!
Good luck Rog!
I can confirm that we did have our meeting with Robert Wolstenholme (NE) and Bill Ayers (Land Agent).
Bill was in effect representing the majority landowner of Buckholt Wood, a Mrs H. I. Birchall. At no stage was the land belonging to Mr and Mrs Tyson mentioned although having spoken to her only a week ago it was suggested that discussions with her had been taking place. Strange.
I can confirm an offer was made for us to continue cycling in the area(and a formal "Access Licence" agreement was placed in front of us to sign).
We had several questions about their proposal and said that we would respond to them after presenting this at our rider consultation meeting this Thursday 8th.
googley googley
In those early years of Scouting permission had been given by Major Sir John Birchall, who was County Commisisioner and the owner of the Buckholt Wood which overlooks the pottery, for Scouts to camp there. This opportunity was undertaken by many boys and their leaders until, in 1945, Mr Edwards gave not only the old pottery to Gloucestershire Scouts but also other land in the village including a field above the pottery, Daniel's Grove, and two pieces of land on Cranham Common. Access was also given to a lake for swimming.
http://www.scoutcentre.org.uk/1/history.html
DONT KNOW WHAT RELEVANCE THIS HAS - BUT I WAS BORED!
Try this more accurate identification.
Duntisbourne Abbots, GL7 7JS.....
That all sounds positive then, that they at least see us still riding there, concerning about the tyson's not being mentioned though...i hope that getting something in place for the rest wont hamper getting the shrine, ie people riding it whilst negotiations with tysons are ongoing and they get annoyed
will just wait and see - good work though rog, see you thurs
My feeling, and having spoken to a few others i am not alone on this, is whatever the outcome of these discussions the routes that exist will get ridden. Harsh though it may seem but the Tysons will have to accept that the shrine is going to be used and they will have precious little control over that.
An offer has been made. I have not said whether we believe it is good or bad though. It all kicks off from Thurday evening though.
I look forward to hearing how generous they have been 😉
Remember there's the meeting tonight!!!
oh... 😕
Totally not happy about being confined to just one piece of singletrack and some cruddy shared-use bridleway - that will just get trashed by too much 'mixed use' traffic. The nature (gradient, width, surface, etc.) of the proposed trail won't keep the "sport riders" or the "family riders" happy. It is a farce.
Credit to Roger and Mike for their hard work, but this local Natural England guy+Landowners+Cranham reps, don't seem to have a clue about xc singletrack riding.
I'll see you guys on the trails, before they all grow over and are lost.
[i]local Natural England guy+Landowners+Cranham reps, don't seem to have a clue about xc singletrack riding[/i]
Why would they or should they? And I thought that the chap from Cranham seemed eminently sensible, he seemed to want to, in the nicest possible way, bang the heads of the two sides together and get then to agree something.
Whoever the fella was (stood by the wall at the front) that explained the position of NE and the landowner made it pretty plain - historic use or not and barring in-depth legal arguments, we have no real right to be there. NE have a job to do to protect sensitive areas, if they see us as a threat to those area they are doing their statutory duty to prevent access. What we have to do is persuade them that we are not a threat, and the best way to do that is by calm negotiation and not by throwing any toys out of any prams.
And yes, credit to Roger et all for all their work.
"throwing any toys out of any prams"
Getting personal and implying that frustrated riders are babies/immature, won't help us as a group either.
ihn
+1 from me
That wasn't my intention, apologies if that's how it came across.
I meant as a group, if we expect them to understand our position we need to understand theirs too. And also understand that, if an agreement is the objective, we will probably not get agreed access to everything we currently have.
I agree that what has been offered is too little, so the current excellent work being done by Roger et al needs to continue, as does the collective discipline and restraint being shown by the riding community. We'll only convince them that we can control ourselves post-agreement if prove that we can control ourselves now.
Roger - you made a comment last night about getting your life back. If you want any 'hands-on' help in the negotiations etc, I'm happy to do what I can.
IHN
I will be putting out a summary statement soon about our current stance / future actions. Watch this space. It was Mike Purnell from Bigfoot who was doing a superb job of fronting the debate last night and did a far better job than me as I am better at "behind the scenes" type work. We have had several offers of assistance and should we need some we will of course let riders know. For now I feel that a compact rep group is needed in front of landowners / NE etc. Superb turnout of about 80 last night, and most were riders. Very mature debate and well behaved. Well done all. All good things come to those who wait - just hope the wait is going to be short.
i understand their position, but i also understand the wider picture that they are missing, the riders exist, if you ban them from places it puts more pressure onto other spots, such as leckhampton hill.
The best solution is to look at the wider picture and try and spread the load.
If what is being outlined is the best offer then....
Ah, sorry, I got there late (thought it started at 8, oops) and thought you were the standing up and talking chap.
Anyway, the offer stands.
Hi all,
As Roger said - thanks all for the great turnout last night, for the support, suggestions and opinions. Give us a couple of days to gather our thoughts and attempt to sum up everything we heard in a response back to NE.
Oh and I'll also be doing some riding this weekend in an attempt to get away from all this - in South Wales, not Cranham I hasten to add.
Wherever you're riding, have a good one.
Hi i thought it was a good meeting.Reading between the lines i think the NE guy is using the same idea on the Tysons land for the Buckholt wood which may not apply.
No one has had a chance to ask the lady owner of Buckholt wood if she does or doesnt mind?.The previous owner of the Shine was happy that the wood was being used.
If they can give us the wall why not the rest???????.
Also i wonder if the NE guy has the authority to say cyclists can use a footpath?sure the ramblers association would have something to say about this.ITS ALL A MINE FIELD.Happy Riding.Good work by the boys out front.Hope they dont get caught in there if its a no no 🙄
If the NE guy is the owners agent then he is perfectly in his rights to dictate terms.
As for use of a footpath, no issue, as long as the landowner doesn't mind you can drive on a footpath if you want. Only issue is racing bikes on bridleways which is a no no, even with permission.
A little light [url= http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/special/sssi/unitlist.cfm?sssi_id=1003801 ]reading[/url] if anyone wants to read a bit more about the SSSI units. Unit 12 is the one we were discussing last night.
EWGS = English Woodlands Grant Scheme which I guess = public money.
you weren't thinking that this was natural woodland that was being protected were you?
Ah well 🙁
Just some quick points for all to note.
79 attended the meeting with representation from several clubs / groups, individual riders, retailers, residents, the local grazier and the Chairman of Cranham Common Management Committee.
We are putting together a comprehensive response to NE / landowner of Buckholt Wood and will post this up here when finalised. The proposal made by the landowner was rejected by at the meeting. It was agreed that as we have got this far we would pursue further negotiation until Easter only. Beyond that we would look at pulling out of discussions. SO.... please can we try and stay away from the area until Easter - four weeks time. Again, this is to demonstrate the co-operation of the local riding ciommunity and their support for us to try and reach a settlement.
Thanks as ever for your support and amazing to see such a great turn out last night and listen to very mature and responsible debate.
Cheers. Roger.
Please see below a copy og the formal response sent to Natural England tonight. We have also requested a meeting on site to actually walk some of the trails on March 23rd.
What happened at the public meeting at the Royal William on 08/03/12
Representatives of Cheltenham & County Cycling Club and Bigfoot Mountain Biking Club presented the trail access offer made by the owner of Buckholt Woods (made via Natural England and the owner's forestry manager) to the wider cycling community.
We had an excellent turnout - around 80 people, with a good mix of club riders, unaffiliated riders, local Cranham residents (riders and non-riders) and a local farmer. Around two thirds of the people there were unaffiliated with CC-CC or Bigfoot.
We also very much welcomed the presence and contributions of Mark Crowther (chair of Cranham Common Management Committee), who is keen for us all to reach an amicable and workable agreement.
As you might expect we had a wide range of opinions, ideas and suggestions expressed, but the very clear message was that the cycling community could not accept the current Buckholt Woods offer of wide shared use bridleway/leisure rider type trails, plus the Wall singletrack trail.
Given the wide and continuing use of the area by walkers and horses, the cycling community feels somewhat victimised for what it considers to be a worthwhile, low impact leisure pursuit. Although they are aware of the importance of the Beech woods, they do not believe their activities have a negative impact and do not understand why such a big issue is being made of the levels of riding around Cranham.
They asked us to continue discussions with Natural England, but on a strictly time-limited basis. The cycling community has given us another month to sort this out (up to Easter), then they will start to ride the area again. We should expect some increases in riding in the area between now and then anyway - although we were supported by the vast majority, we do not expect complete compliance.
What we would like to happen next
We would like to work with Natural England, the forestry manager and the owner to find a workable solution to cycling in Buckholt Woods.
Given the established and stable network of singletracks in Buckholt Woods, we need to establish managed use of a viable end to end singletrack route plus the established singletrack loops on our map.
Although the majority of cyclists at the meeting were what we would categorise as XC/singletrack riders, there were also people there who are interested in more relaxed leisure cycling. They are also keen to establish permitted use of bridleway type trails, so we mustn't forget them.
It was clear that attempting to force all woodland users onto the same ground was felt to be undesirable.
What we can offer in return
We believe we can ‘nudge’ the cycling community with an extensive and effective communications network - via cycling clubs, internet forums, shops, email distribution groups. We would use this to manage and vary trail use and behaviours now and in the future. We believe what’s happened over the last few months demonstrates this.
Experience elsewhere indicates that trail blockages, whether deliberate or as a side effect of forestry operations, simply result in the trails moving. The cycling doesn’t stop.
There are local precedents for amicable agreements, for example Leckhampton Hill.
We feel that access to the wider trail network will beneficially distribute riders around the area, rather than concentrating them on a very small number of trails. We do not expect overall traffic levels to increase, but with an agreement and working lines of communication in place we believe the situation can be managed.
A couple of examples:
- Where seasonal or temporary variations need to be made, for example during forestry operations
- Where the precise route of trails needs to be modified
- Although this area is out of scope for this discussion, a local variation of the Shrine trail to avoid the West Tump. This was raised by CCMC as a particular bone of contention for local residents that could have been worked on if the necessary liaison existed.
We would draw up a code of conduct so that all cyclists know what is expected of them. This would include recognition that we do not have exclusive use of any trail - for example if a cyclist finds a horse or walker on the trail, even singletrack, they must be courteous and considerate.
We would not allow the construction of jumps or the unauthorised creation of new trails.
Although we don’t think we’ll be entering into a legal agreement, we can say that CC-CC and Bigfoot riders have appropriate third party insurance in place, as this is a requirement for club membership.
We could limit the size of club groups.
Next steps
We would welcome the opportunity to continue discussions via Natural England, including a more detailed onsite walk of some of the trails.
Roger, is there a map of the area split into land ownership? Just interested to see who owns what. Also, is there a map of your proposed route overlayed by the NE proposal?
Dimmadan,
We are dealing with the landowner of the largest area we ride, Buckholt Wood, a Mrs Birchall. The Tysons own Buckle Wood East of Buckholt, the area of the Shrine etc. The proposed route they offered is close to where we ride in some places, but the bridleway type tracks, not necessarily our singletrack which can be only metres away. Also some of our best technical singletrack routes have not been considered by them at this stage, something we are insisting happens.
Anyway, NE have come back to us very quickly and are keen to meet us very soon. We are trying to organise a meeting in the woods this week or early next week. We feel that they "may" still be misunderstanding us and demonstrating the minimal impact of our tracks during a meeting might help.
Hi
Just came across this post, I cycle through the area on my commute to work (generally spring to early Winter) between Cheltenham and Quedgley. Noticed the recent message at LL Cheltenham but was too late to attend the meeting. More than happy to help if required, would love to be able to keep using the woods.
Tim
I've been riding up there over the last 11yrs and have kept to my part of the deal not riding up there since first seeing this thread, maybe a tad before.
Speaking to Ryan @ LL other day seemed as though the 2 blokes setting traps and other obstacles round that way come from Brockworth but what I'm more interested in is the fact have they been caught or not by Police yet or atleast questioned over their peculiar stunts?
Atleast glad to hear that there was a good turn out and that N.E. need to sort out quicker imo as there's absolutely no way that cyclists in the woods is going to impact on the long term conservation of the woodland imo.
Hell it brings business to the local pubs which surely must be on side?
anyway enough is enough sooner or later and I'll be up there again but until I hear a bit more back from you guys then is Pope's wood alright to ride?
To me it's typical Cotswold snobby BS which is a let's make it tough for the lower types just for the sake of it.
[i]To me it's typical Cotswold snobby BS which is a let's make it tough for the lower types just for the sake of it.[/i]
I have to say, that's not my impression of the problem in this case. more a case of new landowner worried about their liability for damage to a SSSI.
Plus, it's important to remember that there's never been a right of access to the stuff in the woods, we've simply been lucky that the previous owner(s) didn't mind.
Good luck with the meeting with NE Roger, I'm sure calm common sense can come to a reasonable solution.
Oh yes, definitely so but there is a certain amount of BS too to add into the mix.
I live not far from Cranham and the locals seem alright at the pub atleast but not had a problem when seeing owner's of the Sawmill (not sure what their names are).
Do NE actually know what they're talking about though, re "nature" and conservation? I base this on my extensive knowledge of watching one programme on the telly, where the NE bods were castigating that fella that owned Honister slate mine over his paths / via ferrata. As I recall the conversation went something along the lines of:
NE bod: This flora has been here since the last ice age and you're damaging it irreperably, it'll take tens of thousands of years to recover
Honister bloke: This ground was cut by miners about a hundred years ago
Not sure if that helps, but it certainly coloured my view of the "expertise" that NE bring the the debate...
To be honest we have done well in Cranham for the last 22 years.All those trails were built on private land.sooner or later someone was going to kick up a fuss.
Will keep riding them tho.
Will keep riding them tho.
+1
Spent an hour and a half with our NE contact walking our trail this afternoon. Good exchange of our desires and NEs requirements. Not forgetting the landowners in all this. Good progress made I feel. We are starting to get into the nitty gritty of negotiation now I feel. Still some work to do but I am more confident of an agreement that suits all than only a few days ago. I will update via this forum and email contacts as soon as I can. Keep the faith. And yes NE do know what they are doing and we must respect this.