Forum menu
If yer that bothered about saving the earth think about REAL problems such as pollution!
I work for a waste company so already do my bit for the earth by recycling all the crap other people throw out. Therefore i can drive my car as fast and hard as i like and not have to worry about the planet!! I dont hug trees and think that nuclear power (despite Japan at the moment) is the future. Its not about that. I know that erosion happens both natural and man made, thats not the point. This whole thing is about a path thats say 3ft wide, people not riding on it and making it about 10ft wide plus. Its next to a nature reserve and if things keep going on as they are, the Peak police could just shut it.
someone shows a little bit of concern for their local area and loads of people mouth off and give them hassle... that really is a sorry state of affairs.
Elfin I wish I had the same amount of time to compose my posts as you do but I'm in a hurry so I'll just have to settle for calling you a jumped up arrogant soapbox wielding holier than thou muppet who thinks far more of his own opinion than anyone else does. No doubt you will run straight to the mods and report me but unlike you I don't need stw to feel like people listen to me.
Shaggmeister, are you actually saying you don't care in the slightest about the longevity of the trails you ride? Typical shaggy response; 'It wasn't me'. IGMC.
I think the OP has actually raised an interesting and important question.
If you want to keep Cycle Access to these sort of areas long term, then I Think the only real solutions are to find a way of passing on the message about sticking to the trail without getting too "Preachey" MTBers are a pretty diverse group these days and while the message might sink it quite quickly with the 30-45 peaks pootler your 18-25 Dandy-horsist/IT manager, might need a different approach.
You need the majority onboard and understanding that the way we are percieved by other countryside users and the various organisations with an interest has a direct corelation to the levels of access MTBs are likely to get.
Getting regular local volunteer groups for trail maintenance organised (far easier said than done) is one way of sorting damage and being seen as a group to be taking the issue seriously and doing something about it, there's simply not the funding sloshing about for public bodies to do it for us and it's far easier for them to place a ban on bikes than facilitate access for a group that is generally seen to be doing more harm than good...
The fact is that bikes will cause a degree of damage, you can't escape that, the amount of errosion and it's impact may well vary between different environments, but if the long term goal is to open up access and have MTBers seen as a group who have a positive impact then I think the volunteer side of things needs to pick up and damage hotspots need to be addressed first by MTBers, before it gets to the point where Walkers, landowners and public bodies start trying to get us removed.
I'm not talking "Big Society" here, this is pure self interest, as a group we need to promote a bit more of a "Pro-active, Responsible Countryside usage" policy...
cooleaa, you've hit the nail square on the head with that post.
Tom, Hora would be proud
Comparisons with roads, cathedrals, open cast coal mines etc. are specious. All of these places have impact assessments carried out before they are built, and they are also viewed as having much greater benefits to society than the impacts they create. I don't think anyone on here would argue that roads are basically useless things that exist only to provide a handful of middle class people with recreation.
In addition, a lot of the areas that suffer visible user damage from bikes are particularly special to a lot of people, either from a conservation point of view, or just for the way they look and feel. We need to start by acknowledging that, rather than just saying "f--k you, I'll ride where I like", otherwise we will continue to have restrictions imposed on us rather than discussed with us.
cooleaa, you've hit the nail square on the head with that post.Tom, Hora would be proud
Cheers, but that's just a few words on a forum, Following up with action is the trickier part.
That and making sure that the "MTBers as responsible, community minded types" paradigm is noticed by the right people, maybe not waiting with a shovel full of grit by a pot hole for a walker to come by as you tip it in, pat it down and Shout [I]"Look I'm fixing the trail, I'm one of those Mountain bikers! We're all really thoughtful you know!"[/I]
But maybe emailing the Peaks Authority for permission to carry out, and/or advice on trail maintenance and showing willing, it all helps massage opinions our way.
note my earlier comments on a peak pootle repair ride
Elfin I wish I had the same amount of time to compose my posts as you do but I'm in a hurry so I'll just have to settle for calling you a jumped up arrogant soapbox wielding holier than thou muppet who thinks far more of his own opinion than anyone else does. No doubt you will run straight to the mods and report me but unlike you I don't need stw to feel like people listen to me.Shaggmeister, are you actually saying you don't care in the slightest about the longevity of the trails you ride? Typical shaggy response; 'It wasn't me'. IGMC.
Your totally missing the point. No one is anti trail-maintance or riding sensibly they just think in the big scale of thing its not important.
As I mentioned before the question is are bothered about the damage riding is doing to the countryside or are you bothered about the damage riding is doing to "YOUR" trails and "YOUR" enjoyment of them. I think alot of people seem more bothered that the trails are becoming boring to ride rather than anything else.
I do obviously sympathise with the people who put in a lot of effort building the trails and would for instance never ride a trail before it opened. I heard a lot of people were riding the monkey trail at cannock before it opened which might explain why the trail filled with braking bumps so quickly, and I feel bad for the extra work the chase trails crew do in their time off.
But frankly I dont think the fact the trail is a foot wider and looks a mess is going to have more of an affect on the wildlife of the region than if it looks smart. Whats going to have an effect is the fact the hundreds of mtbers are riding past. I cant see that any type of riding in the country is a good thing for the countryside. But I am in no way suggesting access should be restricted. Its just one of thoose things we live on a small island with a lot of people.
Also the areas I ride are often forested and often have large scale forestry opperations going on when you see a forestry vehicles driving over the land it makes you feel that the actions of even a large number of MTBer is irrelevent. The other area I cycle ie chilterns tend to have a large number of horsey types and when you see the damage a horse can do to the trail again MTBing seems neither here nor there.
People who ride in straight line or go round puddles do create more work for the people who look after the trails (which is a reasonable complaint). The fact that they make the trails boring is neither here nor there and the people who are complain are just being selfish and bascially dont want begineers on their "LAND". I just cant see riding in straight line and going round puddles has a detrimental effect on the countryside/wildlife in large parts of the country or at least most of area I ride in.
There obviously maybe special areas (ie tops of cairgorns) or even whole areas ie Scotland that are different but frankly everywhere south of the peak poor riding is neither here nor there, the countryside will recover. The fact that 40million people or what ever live in that area probably has alot more effect, which is what the picture of the M3 cutting was trying to suggest.
Mr agreeable, cookeaa, spot on.
Podge, probably the only thing hora and I have in common. At least I hope so...
scu98rkr
How on earth you think paths will all the soil washed away down to bedrock will "heal themselves" is beyond me
I love the use of "people who look after the trails" Thats right its not your need to be responsible - someone else will clear up your mess.
[i]People who ride in straight line or go round puddles do create more work for the people who look after the trails (which is a reasonable complaint). The fact that they make the trails boring is neither here nor there and the people who are complain are just being selfish and bascially dont want begineers on their "LAND".[/i]
Chipping holds on a climbing route makes that route easier for beginners, but is totally against the ethics and spirit of the sport.
That's what cutting corners, creating pussy lines is equivalent to and we should likewise discourage it.
There is no bedrock its just mud. This is what Im on about, people are at cross purposes. See my pictures from above.
Did you read my post to the end, I said I know nothing about where you live ie Scotland.
That's what cutting corners, creating pussy lines is equivalent to and we should likewise discourage it.
Im not saying we should try and discourage it but overall its neither here nor there when a couple of weeks later they decide to drive tonnes of logging equipment over the trail.
People are getting really annoyed with the posts above but not considering the area they are in.
Also climbing is nt equivalent the rocks take hundreds of years to weather and frequently climbing can spend this process up immensely. The sort of areas im on about change season by seasons never mind year by year.
Some real wilful ignorance on display here. Things like soil structure, vegetation, ground cover are all important, and people who think they can separate this from impact on wildlife need to do some reading, or even just talk to an ecologist for 5 minutes - how do you think ecosystems work?
Some of this country's wildlife is robust and adaptable, some require really specific food sources and habitat types in order to live and breed. Unless we want to live in a country where the only wild animals are foxes and pigeons eating out of bins, we need to keep what little diversity we have left and protect delicate habitats that took thousands of years to form.
Going back to erosion, what you see time and time again as a mountain biker is trails that used to be 1 foot wide becoming five or ten times that width thanks to people riding off the trail, braiding the lines, and eventually going off to create a new trail somewhere else when they get bored with the rutted mess the original has become. None of this needs to happen.
And no, not all forests are clear cut every few years either... 🙄
Some real wilful ignorance on display here. Things like soil structure, vegetation, ground cover are all important, and people who think they can separate this from impact on wildlife need to do some reading, or even just talk to an ecologist for 5 minutes - how do you think ecosystems work?
I do agree with this why the real answer is there should be no MTBing. Surely the numbers of riders and the numbers of trails are more important than how they ride.
Im not saying any of these things listed above arent bad they are but surely have the creation of trails in the first place and the numbers of people using them makes such as bigger impact than anything else.
As I have stated before in my opinion if you really wanted to reduce the effect MTB has on the countryside. You'd be better off forcing the MTBer's into several small areas around the country and allowing them to do what they want to them area (including riding in straight lines !) and allowing the rest of the countryside to continue as normal.
Im absolutely certain everytime I go for a night ride and my lights startle a deer/badger or even when I sneak off the trail to go for a wee (because some animal wont like the smell of it) I am doing more damage to the countryside than when I ride round a puddle.
I do agree with this why the real answer is there should be no MTBing.
Wrong. The real, practical answer is that you take more of an interest in where you ride, don't lump "the countryside" into one big mass - some bits are clearly nicer and more valuable than others, but I doubt most MTBers know or care which ones - and try and minimise the impact.
[i]Some of this country's wildlife is robust and adaptable, some require really specific food sources and habitat types in order to live and breed. Unless we want to live in a country where the only wild animals are foxes and pigeons eating out of bins, we need to keep what little diversity we have left and protect delicate habitats that took thousands of years to form.[/i]
I don't think there are any issues of mountain biking specifically affecting species diversity though are there?
Wrong. The real, practical answer is that you take more of an interest in where you ride, don't lump "the countryside" into one big mass - some bits are clearly nicer and more valuable than others, but I doubt most MTBers know or care which ones - and try and minimise the impact.
Again I agree. I have said my posts dont apply to large areas of the countryside In fact I think Im the only person to have said that. Im not really sure how you can minimise the impact though except by not riding there.
Slowrider- who are u to tell me i don't give a shit about the trails! The podge, tandem jeremy, your all being pathatic! Some of the best trails we have is through erosion! Erosion is something you will never be able to stop its part of life get over it! Your obviously blinded to whats really going on out there! Certain trails do need looking after i appreciate that, i do my bit of helping out from time to time , but its something you'll never stop, what do u want from people!! Stop ya moaning!
[i]Im absolutely certain everytime I go for a night ride and my lights startle a deer/badger or even when I sneak off the trail to go for a wee (because some animal wont like the smell of it) I am doing more damage to the countryside than when I ride round a puddle.[/i]
Really? I'm guessing startling deer and badgers with bike lights has very little effect on them and certainly won't make they abandon habitat.
I never thought I'd do this but:
TJ +1
On a wider not - where do all these calls of hypocrisy, etc. come from?
The sane voices that I have heard have asked for responsible riding to try and [b]limit[/b] (not stop) erosion and trail widening for aesthetic, ecological, access and ride quality reasons. Where many of the apparent "others don't so why should I", " there is global warming to worry about so screw everything else" or "horses cause more damage so I don't have to care" reasons come from I have no idea.
Interestingly those on the "don't give a crap" side of the fence seem to assume that those advocating responsibility are as selfish as they are, hence the "you just don't want your trails damaging, etc." rather than realising that we are advocating responsibility nationwide, not just for the trails we ride on. 🙄
It would appear the STW is either infested by poor trollers or sociopaths. Either way I feel rather sickened by some of the comments on this thread. I can't see those attitudes helping anyone or anything, anywhere, anyway, anytime.
I don't think there are any issues of mountain biking specifically affecting species diversity though are there?
Don't think it's quite in the same league as deep sea fishing or cutting down a rain forest. 😉
However it's stupid to pretend that your activity doesn't have an impact, when in fact what you mean is it doesn't have an impact that you're aware of.
[i]However it's stupid to pretend that your activity doesn't have an impact, when in fact what you mean is it doesn't have an impact that you're aware of. [/i]
I think I'm fairly happy that riding a bike along an already established path won't have any impact on species diversity :o)
Interestingly those on the "don't give a cr*p" side of the fence seem to assume that those advocating responsibility are as selfish as they are, hence the "you just don't want your trails damaging, etc." rather than realising that we are advocating responsibility nationwide, not just for the trails we ride on.
There is no-one on the "don't give a cr*p" side of the fence. you are imagining that. I do "give a cr*p" but for the area of the country I live in, I think there are many things I could do which would help limit the impact of my mtbing. (ignoring giving up riding)
1. Dont drive to ride
2. Dont night ride
3. Only ride in "official" trail centre areas (in my case ride to swinley and only ride there in the day)
4. Dont encourage friends to take up MTBing
- as I think the numbers of MTBer are more important than the type of riding
- I brought a newbie riding on Sunday and no matter how many times I told him not to skid he kept doing it
5. Only ride on my own
6. Ride slowly
7. Ride through puddles
Theres just so much more I could do before I need to start thinking about whether I ride though puddles in my opinion.
(note if the area is stoney and Im wet I will ride through puddles. This weekend I went round about 5 puddles in two days riding. The very fact there were still puddles there in the SE after a month without raining suggested to me the trails was never going to dry out and frankly I was better widening it and going round.)
I think I'm fairly happy that riding a bike along an already established path won't have any impact on species diversity :o)
Personally I think your wrong and agree with Mr.Agreeable, but my conclusions from his are different.
Personally I reckon what ever I do in the countryside will probably have a negative impact therefore it doesnt matter if I ride round puddles.
Im not really sure how you can minimise the impact though except by not riding there.
How about
Find out about where you ride, and why there might be reasons for keeping riding limited or even giving it a miss entirely (and no, "everything south of the Peaks" is not necessarily fair game). Websites like Nature on the Map are a good start.
Don't ride when the ground is soft.
Don't widen the trail beause you fancy it.
Don't start to build new trails by skimming off the surface of the ground with a spade (seen this a lot at local DH tracks and it really makes me cringe).
Don't build a new trail 10 yards from one that's shagged, as chances are it'll soon be in the same state.
Get involved with local trail maintenance, or set up your own group (if I can do this, anyone can).
I have nothing worthwhile to add
I think I'm fairly happy that riding a bike along an already established path won't have any impact on species diversity :o)
I'd concur. I don't think anyone's arguing for more restrictions on where we can ride, just a bit of thoughtfulness and self-regulation.
woop, I'm pathetic. personal insults ROCK!
Don't ride when the ground is soft.
No this is wrong you cant issue general rules like that. Its doesnt work.
What you might mean is in the area you live in Dont ride when the ground is soft but Im not even convinced by that.
Pictures again Bridleway in chilterns in summer and Winter.
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/pimpmasterjazz/503592098/ ]Winter[/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/pimpmasterjazz/2628905026/ ]Summer[/url]
Frankly that first bridleway is in good condition for the winter I've seen ones much worse chewed up normally by horses and its been happening for centuries. They always go back to normal in summer and the process continues.
The main reason not to cycle there in winter is because its not fun and your'll be covered in mud.
First you can ban the horses from the trail in winter before your banning me I might be light enough not to cause damage if horses didnt go over it.
Don't widen the trail beause you fancy it.
Also Im not convinced by this often the trail will widen then find some ground that is sustainable and stop, although not always.
[i]Its been proven that skidding is actually better for trails than slow braking and riding around the puddles causes less long term damage than straight through them.[/i]
Could you post a link to this 'proof' please? :o)
They always go back to normal in summer and the process continues.
This may come as a shock, but not all trails do this. And your comments about horses are just a variation of the "roads cause worse erosion" argument.
A tiny fraction of the countryside is accessible to horse riders and they're welcome to virtually all of it. I very much doubt horses have a cheeky trails equivalent, have you ever tried lifting one over a stile?
I didnt say that did I ? I said the opposite you cant assume all trails are the same. And therefore issue rules for all trails
ie
Don't ride when the ground is soft.
I mean how would that work in a sandy area the ground is always soft.
horses dont have cheeky trails equivalent
Im not convinced by that I've seen plenty of horse tracks that arent on bridleways, I suppose they might be the landowners but I doubt it.]
Though out my posts I have been saying people are looking at things from different perspectives generally thoose from muddy areas in the SE tend to more it'll heal itself and the further north you get the more people are like you need to be a careful rider. So there is the point we're arguing about different things.
I have nothing worthwhile to add
LHS, thats a no then and you're just posting BS then. 🙄
If this arguement stood then all trails would surely be huge, like 50m wide! They arent as it constantly grows back where it doesnt get ridden.
What is of more concern is paving the trails with slabs. Now that should be banned, trail destruction at its worst. Who wants this? Walkers, Riders, Horsey folk??? None of the above id say. Even walkers would get bored to hell of walking along sanitised trails
If this arguement stood then all trails would surely be huge, like 50m wide! They arent as it constantly grows back where it doesnt get ridden.
For a large part of the country I think this is true, whether the trails which remain are fun to ride is another matter, but dont confuse wanting some nice trails to cycle down with being an eco-saint.
If this arguement stood then all trails would surely be huge, like 50m wide! They arent as it constantly grows back where it doesnt get ridden.
Due to the trails getting eroded and wider and wider....
What is of more concern is paving the trails with slabs.
...this happens, that's what Fix the Fells are repairing.
If this arguement stood then all trails would surely be huge, like 50m wide!
Trails don't generally widen this way. They widen a certain amount and then people will either braid them (create a short new section of trail that rejoins later on) or go off and build a new trail elsewhere.
it constantly grows back where it doesnt get ridden.
If by "it" then you mean "leafy green stuff" then yes it does happen. However it doesn't follow that what grows back would be what grew there before. If you ploughed up a wild flower meadow you'd get grass growing back very quickly, but the plant life would be drastically changed.
What is of more concern is paving the trails with slabs.
I'm sure the people doing this paving will take your views into account if you air them solely through the universal mouthpiece that is the STW forum. 🙄
Surely the way to keep bridleways and waymarked paths in good condition is for everyone to make up their own routes is it not?
Its gotta be better for the environment to have an occasional mtb go over it and have time to recover than thousands of mtb's all following the same path.
Are we gonna start killing Wildlife who make up their own paths too? As i said in previous post I regularly follow some deer paths to find new routes. Just makes it more fun.
Its been proven that skidding is actually better for trails than slow braking and riding around the puddles causes less long term damage than straight through them.
This makes absolutely no sense!
I have nothing worthwhile to add
I think I've finally worked out how to express what Im trying to say.
I think their are some people on this thread who are overstating the impact of some actions which they can control(or easily change) or of which they are not responsible for. (ie erosion caused by poor cycling technique, riding through puddles etc)
Where as they are choosing to ignore or understate the impact of actions which would mean they would have to seriously change how they enjoy mtbing(ie Creation of new Trails, Encouraging more people to MTB, Driving to trails, Night Riding etc)
PS im not suggesting these things should be stopped (Creation of new Trails, Encouraging more people to MTB, Driving to trails, Night Riding), just that not riding through puddles etc is unlikely to save the British countryside.
Like I said LHS, you're just posting BS, how plain do you want it. You've reeled people in when they fall for it, not when they think you're just writing shite 🙄
Edit: Posted before LHS edited to "I have nothing worthwhile to add" Point proved. 😆
Shaggmeister- brilliant!! You manage to take a question about your previous post and get all righteously indignant about it. If only I knew I could cause so much offence so easily I wouldn't try so hard. You havent been taking lessons from elfin have you? It must be stressful trying to inflict your view on everyone else with such force so I'll forgive your outburst. The 'typical shaggy' remark I made was a reference to the popular hit 'it wasn't me' by shaggy. Perhaps I should try less hard to be funny too...