[Closed] Has anyone ever 'been done' for riding a cheeky trail?

Rudeboy, I hope you're not trying to deny that mountain biking has an evironmental impact, because that would be ridiculous. It does, as does all human activity, and in certain conditions it can be the most noticeable form of damage to the landscape.

Really? Care to provide proof of this? So, mountain bikes cause more damage than building a motorway through a rural area? Or as much as plonking a nuclear power station in the middle of the countryside?

Well, we'd all better stop right away, then!

You probably don't have to worry about any of this though, because after riding a footpath you can bugger off back to London, to your rented flat...

Yes, I can. Aren't I lucky? 😀

Come on, get a grip. We're talking about responsible people, using the countryside in a responsible and respectful manner. And deciding for themselves, when the 'laws' make no sense.

Long and short of it; most places that are footpaths, are suitable for mountain bikes as well. Therefore, mountain bikes ought to be allowed on them. Restricting access causes conflict and tension between users, more than if those silly restrictions were lifted.

EG; I was once riding along the coast, from St. Austell to Truro. I set off along what was clearly marked as a bridleway. This then stopped abruptly, and became a footpath. There was no difference in the nature of the trail, the number of people using it, or anything. It just ceased to be a bridleway, and became a footpath. Like **** was I going to turn round, and have to make a massive detour, so I just carried on. Further along, the path once more became a bridleway. This situation was repeated several times along the route. One section of bridleway was even inaccessible without using the footpath! Just stupid.

All along the route, I slowed down and stopped for others, and was courteous and polite to everyone. Most people were friendly, and said hello. Some stopped to ask how far I was going and stuff. All very pleasant.

Only quite near the end, after 40 odd miles in the hot sun, did I encounter Angry Man. Some miserable old bastard, with a very ugly wife, having a right go at me.

That section I was on was a bridleway. I remarked upon this, and showed him on the map. He still carried on, and then threatened to 'physically restrain me from continuing'.

I cheerfully pointed out that he and his wife's bodies might not be discovered for some time, from the rocks below, were he to attempt such an act.

It din't spoil my day, but I'm sure it spoiled his. And he was wrong.

What do you do? Some folk just don't seem to think that they should share things with others.

clearfelling doesn't exactly respect the environment...

Which is why it's subject to a lot more restrictions than walking or mountain biking.

As for that matter is building a motorway, or a nuclear power station.

Rudeboy, I take it you know that bridleways and footpaths can be reclassified? It doesn't happen through people whinging on internet forums though.

In any case Allmannsretten (sp? not too hot my Norsk) doesn't neccesitate the same access rights for cyclists as other users (hikers, skiiers...).

Having been to Norway a few times, as far as I am aware, the same rights extend to cyclists as do to skiers, horseriders, etc. They don't extend to motorised vehicles. There are some who want to restrict these rights, to exclude mtbers, but most people don't have any issue with it.

At the end of the day its down to common sense. If you're somewhere you shouldn't and get busted, take it on the chin, plead ignorance and be humble. Don't get into a fight as usually the people who pull you up already have a chip on their shoulder and verbal arguements just reinforce their (already) skewed view. I usually try to be sickeningly nice to them just to make them look even more unreasonable!
A lot of the time it doesn't make logical sense being denied access to certain routes, but who said access laws were always logical?
The worst i had was some old bid starts to have a pop at me for riding down a FP, even though i kept well back from her. She shut up when i informed her that my driveway actually led into the FP and therefore i was effectively riding along my own road!

Restricting access causes conflict and tension between users, more than if those silly restrictions were lifted.

Indeed, if restrictions were based on a more coherent and logical system rather than seemingly archaic laws then a lot of frustration could be avoided. However, the transgression of "the laws" causes as much if not more conflict and tension between users as their imposition in the first place.

In my opinion, avoiding conflict where possible (even if it seems ridiculous) is the best means of improving/maintaining access for the many rather than the few in the long term. This means acting responsibly, even if there is no danger of getting caught or being prosecuted.

Rudeboy, without wanting to get into the ins and outs of it as it's not relevant to this thread, as I understand the concept of Allmannsretten in Norway (viewed from the Swedish perspective where there is a marginally different but broadly similar concept) is that what you say is largely true in practice. However, there are places you will find no cycling signs etc, and I'm not even sure to what extent the concept is adopted into the Landslag or common law. As you probably know, most Scandinavians act very much according to societal norms (akin to little England's "what would the neighbours say?") rather than the letter of the law. Or, as I like to think of it, Scandinavia: Land of the free, home of the self-regulating.

I didn't see it mention yet, but now I'm leaving with a botanist, I feel very bad about all those MTBikers riding in SSSI or any protected woods for their rare plants. Sometimes it's only one rare plant available in the whole UK, and it's just be trashed by a bike,and that's the end.

But surely that same plant could just as easily be trashed by someone on foot, no?

Therefore, shoon't walkers also be barred from those areas?

I've yet to see any evidence that mtbers cause considerably more environmental damage than walkers.

In some cases walkers are restricted - sections of land have been left out of area access (right to roam)for environmental reasons. Damage is difficult to prove - hence to MX prosecutions for no tax etc rather than habitat damage.

I got stopped recently by two rangers in Holyrood park, in Edinburgh. Told that bikes weren't allowed and to dismount. I didn't know what the score was myself (it's the Queen's land I think), but was happy to comply - they were cool about it and we had a chat, I was only arsing around on a new build in any case.

It was on the radical road for those who know it, not deep in the bog.

The one time I was told by a walker that I shouldn't be on a particular path I took great pleasure in pointing out that there was no ROW so she was as guilty as me. I then challenged her if she know the landowner, and she did not. I smugly pointed out that the landowner of the spot we stood on was Sustrans who had recently purchased the land to turn it into a cycletrack. I think I won that one.

The only time I get any sort of grief around here is on bank holidays from grockles. the rest of the time anything seems to go within reason.

Garry_Lager

It was on the radical road for those who know it

Radical road you say? I should move there.

But surely that same plant could just as easily be trashed by someone on foot, no?

Rudeboy, you sound like some bloke I had a go at for riding an MX bike round my local mountain bike trail. His response was "It's a bike trail innit?" and "There aren't any signs saying you can't". 🙄

I prefer to get all existential about these arguements, i.e. nothing matters. Most people can't cope with this though so we have to have arguments about where we can and can't ride bikes over the earth.

Where I like to ride the most was once an industrial wasteland (old qarries going back to Roman times) that has now become overgrown and is now being protected by 'conservationists'. So every so often I get moaned at by walkers or the trustee (while he sit on his horse) or the countryside rangers.

At what point did it all become so important to preserve something in an artificial stasis for all eternity, instead of just getting on and using it for simple physical pleasures; it's an arrogance that goes back to the Victorians and the our notions of empire and a 'green and pleasant land' (f you Jerusalem) that government, councils, wildlife trust etc knows what's the best for everything and everybody, compounded by our archaic land ownership laws designed to oppress and control what we do and where we do it.

I'm all for asking people to avoid certain spots, like Snowdon on a summers afternoon, or Mam Tor to Lose Hill, but I'm fed up with being told not to, don't do etc

Erosion more-or-less relates to weight. Rider on bike is fractionally heavier than hiker - a difference not worth worrying about. Horse, on the other hand...

And farm/forestry/4x4 vehicles are the real culprits IMO - several bridleways on the Mendip had their surface destroyed last autumn by farm and forestry work. Will they be re-surfaced? Will they heck.

[img] [/img]

I have only been "advised" once, by the factor at Rowberrow Wood*, when caught riding on a private track that criss-crosses the bridleway. I pointed out that I had just passed 10 teenage girls on ponies from the local riding school - he rolled his eyes. It was amicable and I rode away. But if it happens again, I'm going to be complaining about those trashed bridleways not being repaired.

*tip don't go riding off-trail around there if you can hear gunshots - they're shooting at grouse and you might get shot accidentally.

Rudeboy, you sound like some bloke I had a go at for riding an MX bike round my local mountain bike trail.

Then you've seriously misunderstood my point, I'm afraid. Can't help you any more.

Erosion is mostly a factor of ground pressure and shear force at the soil and tyre/hoof/foot interface, rather than pure weight, at least it is where anthropogenic and animal factors are involved.

I have much to say on this matter, but I'd probably bore myself, let alone you lot.

😐

I don't buy the "X trashes the countryside the same or worse than mountain bikers" argument. It may be true, but it doesn't absolve you of responsibility for your actions. It's like saying, "In a few million years' time the sun will expand to engulf the earth, so hey ho, let's trash the place". Anyway, Snowdon, that's just a big pile of rock isn't it? 🙂

Garry Lager, me too (well a few eyars ago on my 21st)

Druidh was going to look into the statutory basis for no bikes on Arthur's seat, dunno if he managed it, he's been pretty busy since he stoppped working. Makes sense to me in practical terms, it could be carnage up there.

RudeBoy - Member
I'm with Barnes on this. We suffer from some of the most restrictive access to the countryside, in Yerp. Possibly the World. In other countries, such as Norway, you can ride a bike more or less anywhere, bar cultivated fields, areas with livestock with young, and within a certain distance of anyone's home. Anything else is more or less fair game...

I'll ride wherever I feel it's suitable to. As SFB says, 'it's our country'.

Scotland has access laws similar to Norway. I'm surprised you lot haven't all emigrated up here 😀

We'll even speak a version of English to you, and throw in some nifty mountains to ride on.

I'm surprised you lot haven't all emigrated up here

It rains all the time, and the food's crap! 😉

Hey I'm famous at last 😀

Moaned, grumbled at etc. Usually by dog walkers with uncontrolled dogs.

I used to ride the moors between llandegla and rhos almost nightly when i lived round there and had ridden them for nigh on twenty years, we had a change of keepers and was chased and stopped one night by the new keeper and told to keep off his footpaths.It was only after pointing out i was the guy who had been closing his gates and taking rubbish home that they left behind -he used to turn a blind eye to me after that.The adjoining forest was covered by the water board and their ranger was very pro mtb as he claimed that we helped keep the foot paths clear.

hmmm, well, ive had people threaten harm me, my bike, my friends etc, all for riding on 'cheeky trails. Hasnt put me off though, as my local rides still consist of about 80 percent 'illegal' riding. If only i lived somewhere where the bridleways were actually any good...

the bikers ride it, it becomes a trail, then the dog walkers walk it and decide its a footpath so block it whenever the mood takes them.
so the bikers clear it and ride it again, but now its getting obvious, so the groups of walkers walk it as well as the dog walkers.
thats the beginning of the end because
then the cheeky horse riders ride it, and like mountain bikers they are happy that its only them using it, so its ok.
now the trail is blatant and if the landowner doesnt block its use totally its not long before the MXrs get to it, soon to be followed by the 4x4s and intensive equestrian use.

then it rains.

nobody can use the trail at all, so over a year the quagmire is quickly covered with holly and brambles and fallen trees so the trail, footpath, bridleway disappears.

And the cycle begins again soobalias? To be honest, the only person in the above scenario losing out is the landowner. And that's probably only in an abstract way. Also, perhaps those who cause the least erosion are losing out because the trail becomes unusable but not by their actions.

must confess to riding on the odd footpath,ahem,and recently was met at the end of one route by the local rozzers.(we heard the sirens coming from a distance) :cry:(night ride)

fortunatly they turned a blind eye, but we might be not so lucky in future.never mind,the nights are creeping out,no need fer lights soon 😀

I'll ride wherever I feel it's suitable to. As SFB says, 'it's our country'.

Must not agree with RB and SFB..... Must.... resist.......

fortunatly they turned a blind eye

what could they do you for, an offensive beard ??

have been flagged down by a "weekend warrior" peak park warden who demanded my address - naturally i obliged and pointed out that the peak park will have on record a lot of correspondence from me about their poor performance at implementing policy and that maintaining the many historical anomolies in the peak including the one i was riding wasn't acceptable (bridleway in S Yorks/footpath in Derbyshire - 300yr old pack horse route - NT land & check out all the verbosity about cycle access in their policies) - also i pointed out that i campaigned for many years with the sheffield campaign for moorland access including publishing trespass walks
think i bored him to death and heard no more

simple viewpoint and best wayforward - write to yr MP - CROW needs revising to allow horse and cycle access to all CROW land excluding SSI (if any exist)

as to prior to CROW found that a game warden with dogs and guns was usually persuasive - mind you been back at mooned at them since

Be nice in the Peak if they would open up footpaths to riders after dark...
O.. we do that anyway 😉

What really gets my back up is that round here, we have two decent bits of Forestry Commission controlled woods, one has short length of bridle path with the remainder being "restricted access" & the other al"restricted access"

Restrictions are due to the fact that its all been used for shooting.

So the rest of us tax payers can't use it.

Perhaps I should strap a shotgun to the back of my bike western style.

Got severely told off for riding my bike along the glider "runway" on the Long Mynd the other week. Fair enough I suppose!!

There's a lot of talk here about damage to the environment and "someone else" possibly suffering because of us lot riding cheekily. One thing not mentioned much is the land-owners who "discourage" use of their land. I have 2 scars across my upper arms from a piece of bailing twine strung across a BRIDLEWAY. I dread to think how the farmer discourages bikers from the footpaths. I also dread to think what would have happened to me if it had caught me round the neck.

riding on a footpath would constitute trespass, which is a civil offence and not prosecutable as such

I thought it was made a criminal offence under the Criminal Justice Act 1996?

I'll ride wherever I feel it's suitable to

What happens when people disagree on what's suitable? 4x4 drivers think it's suitable to drive up on the Beacons and utterly demolish the trails. Horse riders also think it's suitable to ride up around Castell Coch and plough up the trails so they're unrideable. So 'whatever you feel is suitable' is not really a good yardstick I'm afraid.

So 'whatever you feel is suitable' is not really a good yardstick I'm afraid.

Depends whether you are a responsible person or not. I'm not sure if SofB is! 😛

Personally I kind of lean towards thinking that people should be able to ride where they want, within reason. I think taking big groups of bikers on an organised ride to popular spots and riding footpaths is taking the piss slightly though.

All property is theft anyway. 😉

A few thoughts

There is a big difference between being cheeky localy where you know about likely conflict and being cheeky on some one elses patch. National parks in particular are an area where I think eveyone needs to be responsible. We don't want an MTB back lash caused by complaints about illegal riding

Most of te arguments on here seem to support footpath use by responsible motor bike riders. Personally I generally obey the rules cos the rules also protect me ans the trails

Most important whether the trail is legal or not

Be polite
Minimise surface damage
ride in good control

I got caught riding somewhere I shouldn't have been and got told to go, so I accepted it as we were sort of lost (new ride we hadn't done) and started to go down the trail/path to get off and 5 minutes later on the way down a huge guy who was fell running came up behind us and was really rude and told us to get lost!
I gave him my 2pence worth back to which he replied "you what sunshine" and proceeded to run after me! needless to say I bobbed it and razzed off at high speed! as he was about 6.4 (no joke).
I think if he would have caught me he would have punched me and forgot about a fine 🙁
Moral of the story don't ride where you not supposed to and don't p**s off fell runners 🙁

I got stopped recently by two rangers in Holyrood park, in Edinburgh. Told that bikes weren't allowed and to dismount. I didn't know what the score was myself (it's the Queen's land I think), but was happy to comply - they were cool about it and we had a chat, I was only arsing around on a new build in any case.

It was on the radical road for those who know it, not deep in the bog.

Mr Aggreeable: Time for a Geography Lesson

You've put across a point of view, but one which is not shared by most of the people who determine access rights in the UK.

Scotland has a much more open approach to responsible access. Scotland is part of the UK. Your statement may apply to England, Wales and NI but not to the whole of the UK.

Garry_Lager - Member

I got stopped recently by two rangers in Holyrood park, in Edinburgh. Told that bikes weren't allowed and to dismount. I didn't know what the score was myself (it's the Queen's land I think), but was happy to comply - they were cool about it and we had a chat, I was only arsing around on a new build in any case.

It was on the radical road for those who know it, not deep in the bog.

This is an interesting one that really needs to be tested in court. Does the land reform act take precedence over the archaic bylaws that cover the park? No one knows. i ride in the park a fair amount - using the principles of "responsibility" as enshrined in the access code - ie not at weekends or during peak tourist season and I give way to walkers.

There are one or two nice interesting bits of descent in the park.

As for the erosion issue - it very much depends on the soil type and many other factors - one difference is that bikes cut lines in the turf so can lead to water runnoff which causes very quick erosion. Some routes I know are very obviously badly eroded by bikes

poly -
Scotland has a much more open approach to responsible access. Scotland is part of the UK. Your statement may apply to England, Wales and NI but not to the whole of the UK.

We can thank our viking ancestors for that tradition, now law.

This is an interesting one that really needs to be tested in court. Does the land reform act take precedence over the archaic bylaws that cover the park? No one knows.

TJ, doesn't need tested in court at all. The LRA does not apply. If I get time I'll look up the relevant clauses for you later. Not sure if this was 100% by design or was a loophole that no one foresaw. It strikes me as a stupid anomoly that H.M. would probably prefer not to have - as it makes them appear not to be in touch with even other land owners never mind the populus.

Poly - If you are sure but I ain't 🙂

I very much doubt its owt to do with HM - as she has a very good record of allowing access - for example the Balmoral estate has a far smaller exclusion area than numpties like Glaog want.