Forum menu
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.