Just reading that the ladder drops at Cwm Carn have gone, apparently so have the ones at Ewok Village in Glentress, also so has one from Sherwood Pines. Is there a concerted policy by the forestry commission to remove ladder drops?
would imagine there have been too many injuries so H.S.E. will have taken action.
Same with any "work place" which an FE/FC forest is.
Unfortunate fact of life.
If only the same law could be applied to the potholes in our roads!!!!!!!!!!
H&S invariably seems to get the blame but you might also want to bear in mind that wooden features have to be renewed every few years as they rot.
IIRC, the ones at Cwmcarn were pretty new. Was looking forward to learning drops there, surely injury is an accepted part of the sport ???
It is not an unfortunate fact of life, it is an ufortunate fact of the ridiculous society we live in.
Why don't they ban cars too? They cause more accidents than ladder drops.
Something needs to be done about this nanny culture soon, I don't know what, but it can't continue. Maybe the FC needs to change the way their insurance, if they have any, is worded to put the responsibility on the rider. Or, sign up to ride schemes seem to work at places like Esher Shore (I know private land), Chicksands etc so perhaps that is the answer. I'd be happy to sign a waiver before I rode.
They had been up about three years IIRC so may have been getting a bit long in the tooth. The other problem was they were at a very exposed site. I know one experienced rider who messed himself up big style after being blown off to the side of the landing by a big gust of wind.
Is this a ladder drop? Not on FC land, tho:
[img] 
[/img]
Mikey74, waivers and signs have no legal effect. If someone decides to sue you and it can be shown that you didn't take all reasonable precautions to ensure their safety, you are screwed.
As a government agency, the FC actually self-insure, and any payout they make has to come out of their limited budget. If they had a string of successful claims against them, they would be in a very difficult position. I think it's pretty encouraging that they recognise people want to do these activities on their land. There is still a proper full-length DH course there for anyone who fancies pushing their limits.
The landing looks a bit flat on that one 😯
Could add that to the Olympics - wooden thingy riding.
Househusband, that's either a ladder drop or a very confused pier.
that's not a ladder drop, there's no ladder there. a ladder drop has a ladder that can be rolled - albeit a very steep ladder.
What precautions are there on the DH course? Surely people are more likely to injure themselves there?
I just can't see what the FC could reasonably do other than signs TBH. Things like skateparks have inherently dangerous things built, and are on Council land so must be insured. Something isn't quite right here.
Skateparks are different because they're very common and a known risk that insurers etc. have done their maths on. I'm sure i saw some stats on them that said they'd actually discovered skateparks to be way less bad for injuries than football pitches.
Joe
Richpenny, from my conversations with our FC staff it's not about eliminating the risk, it's about making it obvious to deter less skilful riders and making sure that the build quality and maintenance of the trail is up to scratch.
the ladder drops at Sherwood Pines were both unofficial I believe, and explains why fc removed them.
The small ladder on the Kitchener trail is sadly missed by me and my riding buddies, it seems official trail obstacles now need to have a warning sign with them to indicate higher risk/ bail out options. Seeing how many families (kids with stabilisers- mums with sandals etc) I see on the Kitchener at weekends its removal shouldn't have been a surprise.
Still at least 5 ladder drops at Tress - 1 on the pie run, 4 on the black optional section of the last descent (on waymarked trails anyway 😉 ). The Ewok stuff was removed as it was rotten, though I thought there was still some of the woodwork left. Not been through there in ages though.
FFS - this is nowt to do with "health and safety" There are still ladder drops on the freeride at GT and IIRC thr timber features at ewoc village are being rebuilt as they were rotting away.
H&S assessments for stuff like this is merely about minimisiug risk not eliminating it - so the stuff needs to be well built and sturdy and to have decent landings. Then its fine with a warning sign to say - "dangerous ladder drop - experienced riders only" like you see all over the FC trail centres
Yeah, I forgot about the freeride stuff at Tress. Still loads there! 🙂
I think at times it IS to do with it, i.e. paranoid knee-jerk H&S rather than application of the real H&S requirements, but I know of a couple that still exist, albeit small ones. Never really liked them before but with the advent of my new cleats I feel confident on them again!
Well, maybe they have been there for ages and just removed for replacement, does anyone actually know? The first time I went there I saw the freeride bit, which they were at the top of, being built. Thus I assumed they were quite new.
we constantly maintain herts shore and the stuff we 1st built 6 yrs ago has all been redone and so on....
[img] 
[/img]
Is that one?
I thought the problem with the Cwmcarn ones was that they were not very accessible for emergency services and very exposed to the wind. Surely in that case it's actually quite sensible to move them somewhere else?
you mean these ones, i dont technically think they are ladder drops
[img] 
[/img]
i think they got rid of teh ones at chicksands a while back???
RealMan, that's not really steep enough. Imagine a ladder. Very steep. You can roll it if you have the balls, but if not, you launch off the top
liek this
[img] 
[/img]
have you considered that wood rots and loses structural properties? some are more prone than others to it
no idea what these different sections were built from, but they will have a life expectancy and their replacement may not have been budgeted for
Yeah, a lot of people cried "health and safety gone mad" when they closed Ewok Village but the fact is they didn't so much tear it down, as give it a kick and watch it collapse, it lasted longer than planned but it was knackered and had to go. There are plans (and I think budgets, if I caught Andy right) for a replacement, though since I'm a complete pussy I wasn't paying that much attention when it was discussed.
I think that there's a problem with the proliferation of warning signs. If you warn people about each and every obstacle, no matter how minor, they very soon lose their impact. The orange 'downhill' routes at Sherwood Pines being a prime example.
Still lovin, the glentress drops... no full face or rear suss required - let it fly!
[img] 
[/img]
a ladder drop is a ladder you ride off with a vertical drop. a ladder with a roll down is a ladder drop with a bail out!
fact
The ambulance access is pretty good at Cwm Carn, thanks to the Forest Drive. I can attest to this as my girlfriend had a nasty OTB there and spent the evening in Newport A & E having gravel scrubbed out of her arms.
There seems to be a lot of speculation here and very little information. With the Chicky closure a while back, everyone was up in arms about it but there turned out to be two sides to the story. From my experience of dealing with them I think land managers need to be a lot better about getting the message out to mountain bikers if a trail has to be closed or decommissioned. On the other hand, riders should be giving the powers that be a bit more credit than they currently do.
And nbt, I think Jedi is right here. If you look at the NSMBA website, they refer to any wooden bridge, even a steep roll that you could also punt off the top of, as a "ladder".
http://www.nsmba.bc.ca/structures/structuresmistakes.htm
Seeing that this style of riding originated in Canada, it seems fair to use their terminology. Must dash, I'm off for a bro-down. 🙂
Funny you should start this thread now, this illegally built ladder(ish) drop at Stainburn Forest is probably about to get torn down. It's been there about a year and even in the recent felling work the FC contractor left it standing. Unfortunately, it's been built directly below a badger set and just recently someone has started building DH lines right thru the set. This leaves us with no option but to either inform FC about it or destroy it ourselves (SingletrAction)which is what FC will do anyway.
[img] 
[/img]
more info about it here if you're interested [url] http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/stainburn-unauthorised-downhill-trail-building ][/url]
Surely that could be uprooted before the FC destroy it and relocated to somewhere quieter?
If you compare it to some of the FC authorised structures above, I don't think the FC structural engineer would be keen on it. 😉 SingletrAction can't get involved in relocating something like that, we need to keep FC on our side.
That thing at Staiburn looks pretty shonky to me anyway.
what the badger set?
Anyone thought of the curved wallride at GT? So much money encased in development through man hours and materials, open for 2 weeks, then closed again for no real reason. I think as an industry we need to look to other already established sports to see how they manage the risk. If they feel like it, a first time skier can travel to any snowpark, head for the pro line and launch a 30-40 foot kicker. Yet they still build them, and people get hurt, but no one sues the park builders. Are mountain bikers just slightly more retarded than our powder based bretherin? Perhaps. Perhaps a situation where everyone who wants to ride FC land has to join for a small fee (say, £1, for life) and sign a waiver. Problem sorted.
pigyn.
Waivers make no difference. You can only be sued if you are negligent and you cannot contract out of negligence.
I think there were real issues with that wallrides construction / shape / surface that reared their head after construction that no one foresaw - half a dozen in hospital the first weekend it was open or something like that - hence it would be negligent not to shut it until remedial action is taken.
Two things;
1) Forestry issued a spec on wooden structures - from memory, it has to be pressure treated timber, and replaced after a certain number of years. Someone with a copy of the spec will be able to say for sure.
2) It's not so much the expense of being sued that's the problem (FC / FE self-insures as a government body, so if they lose a case, it come out of the general purse) but the loss of man-hours - it takes a beat forester out of the loop for months to prepare for a case. In practice, that means less maintenance and building - and less time to look after trails.
I'm loving the kneejerk H&S gone MAAAAD! reactions here, but it's worth taking a look at how these decisions are reached before reaching for the Daily Mail.
Pigyn, one difference between mountain biking and skiing is pay-to-play. Another is that the risks are pretty well known to insurers, and so it's easier to insure, as Joemarshall (Hi, Joe!) says about skateparks.
FFS - this is nowt to do with "health and safety" There are still ladder drops on the freeride at GT and IIRC thr timber features at ewoc village are being rebuilt as they were rotting away.H&S assessments for stuff like this is merely about minimisiug risk not eliminating it - so the stuff needs to be well built and sturdy and to have decent landings. Then its fine with a warning sign to say - "dangerous ladder drop - experienced riders only" like you see all over the FC trail centres
Well said that man!
Futureboy (HSE Advisor)
Plenty of ladder drops over Cannock Chase DH area, all FC approved. Some are fkign bad ass muthaz, esp on Walleater plus some new ones built on Balboa. Theyz iz notz 4 jeyboyz.
Part of 'Walleater' named after the famous cock svcking ex-pat.
[img] 
[/img]
As I understand it (from someone posting on another forum who spoke directly to people involved, so it's sort of got some provenance) the ladder drops at Cwmcarn were removed after a lad broke his next or some similar serious accident on them. The whole area was refurbished not long before so the drops weren't structurally unsafe. The guy posting this is local to Cwmcarn and said he met the injured lads dad in the Freeride area, the Dad started asking questions about the drops and then explained what had happened to his son and then went on to say he was planning to sue the FC at which point to OP clammed up and rode off.
Could all be tinternet myth but the post o the other forum seemed pretty credible, judge for yourself [url= http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12624288&highlight=cwmcarn+ladder+drops ]here[/url].
There were never any ladder drops at the Ewok village anyway. I think there was maybe one exit point that you had to lift the front wheel a wee bit, but I'm almost sure it was all rollable.
Stumpyjon, that may well be true, but it doesn't mean it was the FC's rationale for removing them.
Fingers crossed we've not had any issues with our officially built drops on Cannock Chase, the one Scruff has shown above is by far the biggest we have there and it isn't wonky as that picture appears to show it.
thats a very depressing story about the dad trying to sue the FC
but thats our modern society i guess
Where's the landing for that one in Cannock? Looks like you would land in that bush!
I remember watching some kids sessioning the ones at Cwmcarn with no helmets, on battered supermarket bikes riding them to destruction. One of them, had snapped his chain so was doing it chainless with a partially taco-ed rear wheel and after each drop the bike was getting more and more knackered, and he was seeing how long it would take to snap it. Which is fair enough, however without helmet/gloves or any form of protection it seemed a bit of a stupid thing to do, but he was ignoring the adults warning him that he was going to really hurt himself as he knew better 😐
At that point I kinda guessed the drops days were numbered, as it was inevitable that someone was going to really hurt themselves, and it was unlikely to be little tarquin/jimmay/timmays fault but the evil FC for allowing the structures to exist.
grumm, it's just behind the bush, that picture is deceptive (in every way except the jump's size)
i bet that's a REALLY small bike leant against it too.
For anyone that thinks it is bit depressing that the landowner gets sued just imagine yourself in the same situation. You're paralysed, your life is finished, you have no insurance and someone is going to have to look after you for the next 50 years - the land owner is insured and you are claiming on their insurance for costs that you could never meet in any other way. Doesn't sound so silly when you put it like that.
glenP- troll?
(bite- yes it does, you do something dangerous and take responsibility for yourself).
The thing is you can only sue successfully if the landowner was negligent - and that is not easy to do - for example in the case that richc posted above there would be no possibility of a claim as there was no negliegence on behalf of the landowner.
The sorts of things that could be negligent would be structures collapsing under you, big drops round blind corners without warning signs and so on.
None of the trailcentres I have ridden have any possibility of the landowner being negligent in any way. Trails are marked and graded and structures built to recognised standards and maintained.
Scruff - not trolling at all. I feel the same as you - except I'm not delusional about how much my life outlook would change if something terrible did happen. Quite right that there has to be some negligence for the action to succeed, but you would go as low as you needed to if you were desperate enough.
The thing is you can only sue successfully if the landowner was negligent - and that is not easy to do - for example in the case that richc posted above there would be no possibility of a claim
Things is as others have said, the landowners don't want the hassle of having to deal with the lawyers and courts, so its easier to take anything down that will obviously hurt you if you mess it up.
Also I believe its a little different with regards to minors as well.
Duty of care is no different for minors, but I can imagine that parents of hurt children are a bit more litigious than your average adult.
Good morning Scruff 😉
Afternoon William !
I dont really do wood work - riding or building - talking to someone who does a couple of months back about this type of thing.
Their view was the broad area of northshore was probably due some fairly hefty review of construction standards. Changes mainly in terms standards and dimensions of timber used for construction.
Sounded like official sanctioned woodwork would all be machined and treated - no more natural and much more boardwalk and much much chunkier. Minimun dimensions set for different parts of the structure depending ond loadings and stresses. It also sounded like directives covering working from height etc could have an impact on gantry / tall structures.
THe FC should do what the guy's in whistler do.
I.e they mke the entrance to the trail very technical, and if you are not able to ride that then you should not be on the trail.
the drop offs in question were wide sturdy and grippy and not very high off the ground at all infact
I for one think it's too easy to be self righteous behind a keyboard. Some examples of lawsuits seem ridiculous (like the dad showing off to his son and the sunglasses one) but I would never say "never" - any one of us could end up like glenp's example.
That said it beggars belief how some folk will throw themselves down stuff with no apparent knowledge of their own ability.
I'll just add my voice to the chorus - the Ewok Village at Glentress was taken down because it was rotten. Plans are afoot to replace it with something similar, though recently the paperwork required for trail building in FC centres has increased dramatically, so it is maybe not progressing as fast as anyone would like - and "anyone" includes the MTB rangers and trailbuilders, not just regular riders.
This is on the Cwmdown webpage - sorry can't do the linky thingy...
http://www.cwmdown.co.uk/blog/northshore-drops-removed-from-freeride-section
Just so you know, FC have removed the 3 wooden, northshore style drop off's from the freeride section. This is due to a very, very, very, very, very high number of accidents.
Makes your last point adequately cynic-al. I couldn't see anything dangerous about them at all. Unless of course you have no idea how to ride them, just like the fella in the vid. FWIW, I'm rubbish at stuff like that, so just rolled the little one.
the beauty of ladder drops are they are a constant platform so learning how to do drops from them are relitively easier than natural drops that can have uneven take offs etc...
thats not a ladder drop its a booter
THe FC should do what the guy's in whistler do.I.e they mke the entrance to the trail very technical, and if you are not able to ride that then you should not be on the trail.
That's advice I've heard from Forestry myself. 🙂
The catch is that, to a certain extent, Forestry (and any trailbuilder doing it on a sanctioned basis) have to cater to a wide variety of ability. If you build a trail only 10% of keen mountain bikers can ride, you alienate the other 90%. If you build something too tame, then you get complaints too. The compromise we've found that seems to work well is to build trails that are perfectly ridable at slower speeds, but get progressively more difficult to ride fast. If you're constantly on the brakes, then they will have poor flow, as well. Which is why it's always funny to hear Internet Heroes complaining about how crumby they are. 😀
Wooden structures are a bit binary - you can either ride them or not. I'm a fairly reasonable rider, but they freak the hell out of me - mostly for the reasons GlenP gives, actually. It's easy to put a back on a jump, so slow / unconfident riders can roll it, as with a ladder drop, but it's a heck of a lot easier to do it with dirt than with wood.
I think the sanctioned trailbuilders making stuff with wood (Esher, Chicksands, FC/FE guys and the rest) are bally heroes, not only for going out there and doing it, but for wading through the necessary paperwork and specifications and planning to make it happen. In contrast, building stuff out of earth is a ton easier.
[i]booter[/i]
made up word ! 😛
spoke to some of the guys building at Chicksands a while back and they said that they had specifications to work to from the F-C, with width/height ratios etc which some of their old stuff didnt comply with.
In terms of glenp's comments about suing for insurance, I'm sure many of us would consider it when faced with a lifetime of fulltime medical care for ourselves or a loved one. Last year there was a case of a kid getting accidently kicked in the head on a bouncy castle at a neighbours party. They sued the neighbours for negligence. I'm sure they are all still on speaking terms, but blaming their neighbours, who had liability insurance as part of their household insurance (as many of us do) meant they could potentially fund their seriously injured son's care and enhance the quality of his life.
One of the first (successful) court cases for MTBing in a trail centre in the US involved a guy crashing on a bridge in the ski resort. He won, as the bridge was built of longitudinally laid logs, and his wheel dropped between two logs and stuck. IIRC he broke his neck. His argument was that he was prepared for the risks on the trails in the hills, but the bridge was negligently designed and an unneccessary risk.
booter is not made up! 🙂
The last long wooded section has now been removed from the black at Glentress.
This is disappointing as it was always fun to ride. I doubt this was removed due to being rotten as it looked perfectly fine about a month or so ago.
Does anyone have a definitive answer as to why these are being removed from trails.
The last long wooded section has now been removed from the black at Glentress.
If you mean the elevated wooden bit on Double X (the section after the Ewok Village) then that was removed because either it was rotting or it was otherwise in a poor state of repair. The trailbuilders at Glentress definitely intend to replace it and to build something to replace the Ewok Village.
Response from the FC found here ([ http://www.mtb-wales.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=16&tid=22455&page=2&orderdate= ]) on the MTB-Wales forum:
We have removed the drop offs because their history of accidents is placing too much of a burden on FC management time. As landowner we have a duty of care to our visitors and have to report, record and investigate any accidents. The number and severity of accidents at the drop offs has stacked up over time and we have now decided it is too much to bear. Our original risk control measures of improved sunage and particularly the wind sock have helped, but the problem has not gone away. The small drop off is the largest culpret
Rather than out good money after bad, we do not intend to replace this feature on the current site of the free ride. It is .too exposed and too far from the car park. (having ridden hard to get there, riders don't turn down the chance of trying the drop offs even if conditions are bad). We are looking at other options to relocate these types of features.elsewhere at Cwmcarn.
Overall, our commitment and that of our partners, to Cwmcarn is very high. It is one of the busiest MTB sites in Wales and we are seeking to maintain its high standards.
Mabie darkside is still there. Irode it (most of it) this weekend for the first time. Found it quite difficult and impossible, for me, in places. its seen better days and probably could do with some work to improve the bits the people fall off a lot. Apart for those its holding up well.
In terms of glenp's comments about suing for insurance, I'm sure many of us would consider it when faced with a lifetime of fulltime medical care for ourselves or a loved one.
Of course you would, but that doesn't make it right, in the same way that the parents of a child killed in an RTA would call for capital punishment every time.
Looking at your two examples, am I correct in thinking that the bouncy castle case was unsucessful? I kinda hope so! What next, you take your neighbours kids to the swings and they sue you when their kid falls off. Do you really want to end up like the US? Suing should NEVER be the default response to an accident. In the second case clearly there is negligence, and people learn from it, simple risk assessments stop that. What worries me is that a lot of this stuff will stop being built because people can't afford to defend the legal cases. **** that, I want to be challenged when riding and if I crash it's 99% certain to be my fault.
Afan is now littered with warning signs on every slightly technical feature... Not sure if it's coincidental but the signage is all new and everywhere and slightly over the top...
Richpenny, if you want to learn to ride drops that badly, your local town centre is a much better place to start than an exposed mountain side in Wales.