Forum menu
Been riding round there for a decade and know how to spot them. Primarily to be sure I can keep out of their way. Get to know their favourite spots.
To be honest they give themselves away at times smoking 😉
Anyway, despite the current bylaw and without consultation prior to the review, they've fenced off another area.
https://www.byelawsreview.com/
With the closure of the permanent bases in Germany the pressure is on to turn these areas back to training areas rather than a dog toilet/ playground for the locals.
There's hardly any troops left in Germany (a couple of thousand) and most of those are staying so there's not going to be a big influx.
they won’t want to use “dogshit woods”
If this is really such an issue why don't they put up signs about 'Troops training - pick up your do poop' like they do in other areas of the UK???
And they appreciate the fact that they cannot use training pyrotechnics because of the risk Joe public bumbling into them and hurting themselves
They quite happily use blank rounds, smoke grenades, illumination flares etc with the current access arrangements and there isn't any problem. They even let off small explosve charges on Minley, just closing off the local area when they're there. Never been a problem.
If I had a job where I got shot at I’d want make sure I could train properly and that this need had a priority
Realistically, in the future the army is likely to be deployed in areas where they will be alongside civilians such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. The most realistic training is where there are civilians wandering around, like there will be when they're deployed.
There’s hardly any troops left in Germany (a couple of thousand) and most of those are staying so there’s not going to be a big influx.
The influx has already happened, the real estate has contracted in the UK, the pressure is on the remaining areas
Troops training – pick up your do poop’ like they do in other areas of the UK???
Do they? Never seen one, have you made this up?
They quite happily use blank rounds, smoke grenades, illumination flares etc with the current access arrangements and there isn’t any problem. They even let off small explosve charges on Minley, just closing off the local area when they’re there. Never been a problem.
How do you know? Do you get to see the range logs? How many times have people strayed into
Areas and stopped activity? How many areas are not used due to pressure from locals freelancing wherever they like?
Realistically, in the future the army is likely to be deployed in areas where they will be alongside civilians such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. The most realistic training is where there are civilians wandering around, like there will be when they’re deployed.
Makes you wonder why they use troops as civilians for exercises when Joe public will wander around for free? Could it be due to the dangers of wandering around troops which might be accepted on operations but not in peacetime UK?
Hi Big_n_daft,
The mountain biking, walking and running community have tried many times to have a discussion with DIO over the last 10+ years.
To have a discussion both sides have to respect each other and be willing to listen to the other sides views.
Alternatively you can just change the rules by ramming them through in 30 days after 30+ years with a token consultation and put a big fence round it all. The latter is what's been happening (Deepcut, Long Valley).
The military land is utilised for training and also filming (Jurrasic Park, Witchers, James Bond) and Motor Cross races that really tear things up which sort of goes against the whole SSI / Dartford Warbler argument.
Consideration and respect from both sides is the key, the land was common until the military requistioned it with the understanding that there would still be access (why else recognise that in the current 1976 by laws) . You can't access something if you put a great big fence round it.
I don't disagree that consultation is key to this.
The DIO probably don't have the right people to do this and probably don't get that they need people with the skills to engage publicly.
Hi, I just wanted to say a huge thank you for your support and for everyone who signed the petition (6k and rising) The MOD have now delayed the publishing of the new Bye Laws for access to the military lands and increased the consultation days from 35 to 60 when they do publish. We aren't out of the woods (sorry for the pun) but its great to see progress and a route to constructive dialogue opening.
The MOD statement reads
"As you will appreciate constructing new byelaws is a complex process and it is imperative that we get this right before formal public consultation can begin. We are currently experiencing delays, and therefore will not be able to begin the Public Consultation period in April 2020 as previously expected. We will give notice of the commencement of the Public Consultation in advance through this website.
Additionally, due to the interest we have decided that we will extend the period of public consultation to 60 days.
We have already received a large volume of correspondence from members of the public, responsible bodies and others concerning this review, most of which has been supportive, and for which we are grateful. Inevitably however there have been some who have contacted us with expressions of concern and even a misconception that as a result of the review access which had previously been enjoyed will in future be denied. This could not be further from the case.
The language and mapping in particular needs updating and other aspects including the blanket prohibition on cycling is something that we aim to address.
As always the detail is what counts. The lands were "appropriated" by the MOD using the Part2 of the Military Lands Act of 1892 and the subsequent 1976 bye laws applied these state that "no person shall ride a horse, bicycle or tricycle or drive a vehicle of any kind elsewere than of a carrigeway of such road".
So in effect the woods that we have all been riding in for years are not to be used for bikes etc, except apart from a few DIO chaps explaining this everyone has been. The issue is that they could issue new bye laws which allow cycling on specific paths - think swinley marked trails perhaps close to the edge of the forest and be seen to be "improving" access when in fact in practical terms the opposite would be true. If it formed a national path they could even get the gravel / road fans to accept this as a positive thing. In one move the MTB community would lose the access they have had for years.
We have to wait now for the publishing of the bye laws proposal but I belive that continued open dialogue will be the key. The reason for this revised approach is that the MOD has had "large volume of correspondence from members of the public" its you that have made the difference and I would encourage you all to continue to support the campaign.
Never seen one, have you made this up?
Here you go, clearly not made up.
In other areas the DIO (Defence Infrastructure Organisation) take part in the 'Take the Lead' campaign about responsible dog ownership, see page 86 here
, but in the Aldershot area they seem relectant to engage with the local community............
Hi, if anyone has an old map (pre-1888) of the Aldershot area can they PM me. You can see that the area's we are talking about are shown on this handy site and the BS WD (Border Stone War Dept markings cover a much smaller area. Would be interesting to see when the land requistion took place.
Ok, just briefly.i work in a capacity involved in this, have done for a while. Simples, the heathland (which is actually quite rare globally. (Very infact) fairs much better with no Joe public around. It's extremely valuable to most rare ground nesting birds (I've seen a few). Average Joe public with their 2 lovely labradoodles or cockapoos running roughshod around on a lovely walk are not helping at all. So a blanket ban is much simpler to enforce...
Average Joe public with their 2 lovely labradoodles or cockapoos running roughshod around on a lovely walk are not helping at all. So a blanket ban is much simpler to enforce…
If it's so rare and needs protecting, then everyone should be banned, but no...squaddies crawling through the undergrowth is OK, or every year allowing a few hundred motorbikes to carve new trails through the vegetation and leaving a foot-deep, water-filled ditch where there was barely a mark is also OK because they pay? How about failure to clean up the decades of crap and pollution that contaminated land now needs fencing off about hardly make you a responsible guardian. Having lived nearby for 30 years I'd say that the MOD has contributed more to the destruction / mismanagement of habitat than a few members of public.
I don't believe that this is about ground nesting birds, a lot of these training areas are woodland, not heathland and so don't support GNBs anyway.
Signs are already up requiring dog walkers to keep their dogs to the paths or on a lead. That could be put into the byelaws with a hefty fine as the consequence, no need to fence everything off.
Just to bump this up..... I gather review about to start in a few days time. Time to write to MP and Councillors if not already done. I just fired another one off to Gove (not optimistic) and county councillor.