Forum menu
If we’re talking about safety (which we aren’t, because the ban isn’t about safety, it’s about the trail being busy), then surely sending riders, who are much more likely to find themselves in tricky situations (broken bones etc) than walkers, up after 5pm is a bigger danger?
the trail being busy means there is a safety issue. you can't unlink the 2 things
Someone needs to ride down it at a very busy time wearing a video camera, post the result on YouTube and then get everyone to Like it. That way, anyone looking for it there will see how shit it is and be put off.
Then compare it to someone riding down ben lomond or ben nevis at a busy time. Compare and contrast the live and let live attitude. (tbh I suspect the reality isn't that much different down south, might be different in the town halls, but on the hills? I've never experience anything but support and encouragement/astonishment)
tbh the easiest thing would just be to build a mountain bike route down the hill. Separate walkers and bikers paths. Job jobbed.
ninfan
Since we are ‘banned’ from virtually all the good, natural trails in the UK owing to them being footpathsBollocks, you need to get out and explore more.
This is fair comment
the trail being busy means there is a safety issue. you can’t unlink the 2 things
automatically a safety issue? Nah.
Arguably there is more of a safety issue on quieter trails where riders are likely to reach higher speeds and are less likely to expect to encounter other users.
As I referred to in my original post, justifying a voluntary restriction based on the safety argument could have much wider repercussions.
As I referred to in my original post, justifying a voluntary restriction based on the safety argument could have much wider repercussions.
Ah the slippery slope, this has been in place for a very long time now, what other restrictions have come from this? It's a BW in a very unique location.
Since we are ‘banned’ from virtually all the good, natural trails in the UK owing to them being footpaths
Bollocks, you need to get out and explore more.
This is fair comment
No I don't think it is - I explore a lot...and the best trails I find tend to be illegal - Of course it depends what you like to ride.
I find bridleways are good for getting to the top of the mountain.
But the most crucial thing is not where but when to ride - and that goes for Bridleways and footpaths. The former are normally busier than the latter.
It’s a BW in a very unique location.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mountains_and_hills_of_the_British_Isles_by_height
Unique in that there's 276 peaks over 3000ft in the UK? Of which only 30 you aren't allowed to take a bike up?
There are plenty of hills that are also very busy that have no restrictions on cyclists.
<div class="bbp-reply-author">FunkyDunc
<div class="bbp-author-role"></div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
Because people interpret a sign that says ‘No Cycling’ to mean no bikes allowed.
Then that needs fixed. The solution to people misinterpreting the agreement isn't for everyone to act like their misinterpretation is correct.
Riding and pushing within the actual terms of the agreement isn't "childish".
Unique in that there’s 276 peaks over 3000ft in the UK? Of which only 30 you aren’t allowed to take a bike up?
Easily accessible, highest in Wales, part of the dreaded 3 peaks, few hours drive from major populations, relatively straight forward walk, so yeah fairly unique. This is one you can take a bike up... there are just some long standing restrictions that have been in place for a number of years in peak season.
oh and as others have mentioned..... it's one of the least rewarding experiences to slog up and ride down stopping and slowing to walking pace all the way. It's a great system to stop you wasting a few hours of your life.
Then that needs fixed. The solution to people misinterpreting the agreement isn’t for everyone to act like their misinterpretation is correct.
See also: All the other things that some cyclists do that some non-cyclists are convinced are illegal - two abreast, not using a cycle path, not wearing a helmet, not having/using a bell...
It's a good agreement, we should follow it, but not exceed it based on the whims of some walkers who half-read/misinterpreted the sign. And we should remember that the minority group is already being very generous - cyclists are voluntarily giving up a fair chunk of their statutory access rights in the interests of public safety.
> Unique in that there’s 276 peaks over 3000ft in the UK? Of which only 30 you aren’t allowed to take a bike up?
> There are plenty of hills that are also very busy that have no restrictions on cyclists.
But it's the only one with a train delivering thousands of tourists to the top and it takes "very busy" to another level on fine summer days.
Unique in that there’s 276 peaks over 3000ft in the UK? Of which only 30 you aren’t allowed to take a bike up?
Completely disingenuous. What is the number of 3000ft peaks in Wales that you can/ can't take a bike up in midsummer?
One guy asked “Are you allowed to ride here then?” in a tone that lead me to believe he knew the answer, but I played along
I’ve had similar conversations in the Peaks before when I’ve been pushing the bike on a FP link where I’ve been questioned on why I’m not riding and people have seemed pleased to know that I’m not riding there because I know I shouldn’t and am heading somewhere that there is no such problem.
Especially in these days of smartphones, cameras and social media, “you never know who’s watching” has never been truer.
Due to the ridiculous system for rights of way in England and Wales, one, and it's Snowdon. Maybe if the national park opened up some more of the peaks the pressure would be removed from Snowdon.
Last time I walked up there was a mid teens lad with a downhill bike & full face pushing up late morning. I spoke to him re the agreement & he wasn't bothered in the slightest as he said that was the only time he could do it due to his parents dropping him off & picking him up. All the time there are those with their own excuse as to why it isn't an issue to them there will be potential problems. I suspect that even if it had been against the law he'd have risked it as it would have added to the challenge & adrenalin hit he was looking for.
Due to the ridiculous system for rights of way in England and Wales
Try living outside of the UK.....
Since we are ‘banned’ from virtually all the good, natural trails in the UK owing to them being footpaths
Speak for yourself.
I just find the idea of bans and restrictions mental. If people are coming to ride down a hill, it means there a market there and that could be an operchancity to help boost the local economy.
Rather than restrict access, open it up, build more trails. everyones happen. (well apart from the people that think uk hills and uplands are natural undiscovered wild areas! 😆 )
Misread this title and thought there was a ban on riding Swindon for a moment!
I have no idea of the history, as I've never been to Snowdonia, but I was up Ben Nevis on saturday, and the idea of taking bike anywhere near that place with that many people is a bit daft. I reckon there were over 1000 people on the hill the same time as us, most of them too ignorant to respond to a cheery 'morning' never mind someone on a bike.
I see the keyboard warriors are out in force this morning.
You don't know man, you weren't there!
I'll put my hand up and state I've yet to go up any UK mountain by any means (king of regret these days not climbing Cader Idris when we lived in Dolgellau in the early 1980s when I was a nipper), but given how Snowdon is the highest peak in Wales, could the national Trust (or whoever owns the land surrounding the peak) not provide two cyclist only routes... One going up, one going down?
Charge a (small?) fee to upkeep the bike-only routes, winner winner chicken dinner! 😉
, could the national Trust (or whoever owns the land surrounding the peak) not provide two cyclist only routes… One going up, one going down?
Charge a (small?)
Want to put the quote in per m for building it 😉
The whole point of taking your mountain bike to the mountains is that they are not bike park / trail centres. We have plenty of those and they are great. Riding big mountains is a completely different undertaking. More wild, remote, unforgiving, even dangerous. We definitely don't need bike trails on them. That would remove the whole reason for visiting.
More wild, remote, dangerous.
It's Snowdon! It's got a path all the way and a cafe at the top!
There's plenty of remote and wild riding round there but Snowdon isn't it
Want to put the quote in per m for building it
They are resurfacing (well putting in a surface that isn't mud) part of the Leeds-Liverpool canal towpath, cost is somewhere between £150,000 and £200,000 for 2.7km. I've heard of costs of £100 per metre for canal towpath work, doing something similar up a mountain and making it fit in it going to be at least as much.
I wonder how many people in this thread have actually ridden up Snowdon and how many are suffering from "internet outrage" about someone daring to restrict their riding?
I rode up a couple of years back on the last weekend before the summer restrictions came into place and can offer a few insights:
- There was still plenty of snow at the top, even relatively far into the year. Perfectly rideable, but some sections of the village path were a push as a result
- The cafe was still closed. They had only cut the train through the snow a couple of days earlier. Not sure if this is typical.
- There were loads of people out even then. We rode down the ranger's path and this wasn't so bad, but the village path would have been a constant dodge of people. I can't begin to think what it would be like in August
- Some people were riding down the ranger's path like it was a closed downhill course and almost scattering walkers as they went. Really poor form and, frankly, they were a bunch of cocks. Really sad to have seen this.
- I didn't find it so hard to adhere to the rules - we simply arranged a trip to coincide with the last weekend of open access and rode up. I am very grateful for the campaigners who have worked hard to ensure that this access is maintained and certainly wouldn't have ridden up during the restriction.
- It was pretty obvious from talking to other people that it was a pretty fragile arrangement and that it wouldn't take a lot for the whole mountain to be reclassified as "footpaths" and bikes to be eradicated altogether. This would have been a shame.
- Bugger me, it's a bloody winch up! I've done it, I wouldn't feel a need to do it again...
Come on people - it's not so hard. Ride up in the off-season, or make an early morning / late evening of it and then we can all enjoy biking up Snowdon for years to come.
It’s Snowdon! It’s got a path all the way and a cafe at the top!
There’s plenty of remote and wild riding round there but Snowdon isn’t it
I said mountains - I didn't specify which one!
I wonder how many people in this thread have actually ridden up Snowdon and how many are suffering from “internet outrage” about someone daring to restrict their riding?
Probably 8 to 10 times sometimes cut short as it was Feb and common sense was a thing.
Again wouldn't want to do it between 10 and 5 on a mice day. Done some early morning missions up there and even comity down a out 9 was too.busy to really enjoy the lower sections.
P Jay – no it’s not ok to go up at 3, that’s why the ban is 10-5. Why did you think that would be ok, was the ban not clear? Post 5 gives more than enough time to get up and down and makes for quiet trails.
I don't think that's right, whilst I've never seen a sub-section to the rules that says "pushing is okay" I've looked into it a few times and most people agreed it was within the rules and the spirit of the agreement.
I'm sensing a lot of hostility around Snowdon, a lot of anti-walker, anti-'tourist' feeling and perception that there's a lot of anti-cyclist feeling.
Truthfully, we must have spoken to a dozen groups of descending walkers on way up. I sensed a few disapproving looks, but my Mate reckons it was just me being paranoid. Everyone we spoke to was friendly, most asked in a joking fashion why we were carrying / pushing bikes and not riding and we'd explain why, no one said anything negative and no one, made an arse of themselves to slow us up. We smiled and said hello and everyone else did the same, even the ones in Gortex and walking sticks.
As for time, we set off at 2ish hoping / expecting a 2 ish hour climb, sit in the cafe for a bit and descend. It actually took just over 3 hours, by the time we scoffed some food and took some pics etc we didn't set back down till 7ish. Due to getting lost and a bit of a crash we didn't get back to the van until it was getting dark. We didn't see a soul on the Rangers Path.
Frankly, if anyone is considering it, it's worth considering if it's actually worth it. For us it was a almost a box to tick. It's not easy shoving your bike up. We read some on-line guide (Might have been MBR) which talks about an easy pedal up, it's really not, it's very steep in parts, merely steep in others and very loose rocky and a challenging, but fun descent on Rangers, I'll be honest and after the initial ride down from the top it was beyond me, very loose, rocks of every size from golf balls to golf cars in size, blind drops from a few inches to shoulder height. Admittedly due to the whole getting lost thing we missed the lower rangers and telegraph, maybe it was especially hard as it was just so dry everything was loose, but I spent more time tripoding trying to find lines than riding.
I'm glad I did it, I had a great day out, but I've had a lot more fun at Antor or Coed which was pretty close.
I’ve ridden a few mountains and would not like to ride them busy or even less than busy. It not only has safety implications but ruins your ride as you have to slow down. I decended Ben lomond after 6.20pm and still had about 4 groups of people to slow down for.
http://www.mbr.co.uk/news/trail_news/snowdon-bike-access-risk-375686
I can't spell this out any clearer. Don't frikken ride during the voluntary ban.
I comply with the current agreement. However, the agreement is very one-sided. I don’t have a problem with a reasonable degree of bias towards the larger user group - but the current agreement is by no means as balanced as it should be.
I am also unsure that this agreement is helpful to the wider-debate of access. To my mind it reinforces the attitude that people who cycle are a marginal group that represent a danger to others using the outdoors and are generally have an undesired impact on the environment. Education and awareness would deliver a better long-term result IMHO.
The negotiation process has been ongoing for years, and it continues to be. If you look at my second post it shows just how many organisations were and are involved in keeping access for the MTB community.
NWMBA are just one group that represents us. If it wasn't for groups such as this, and MTB Wales we would not be allowed up full stop. The hours and effort people put in can be ruined by an idiotic minority.
So far the process has been a success, and we have been praised by various access groups that represent all users of the National Park. In order to continue the work we have to show we are responsible and flexible. We have ,until recently, been seen as the new upstarts who want access to already crowded places.
We are being heard and we are making progress, but incidents like this take us 2 steps backwards.
Since we are ‘banned’ from virtually all the good, natural trails in the UK owing to them being footpaths
Only England and Wales, in Scotland we're much more forward thinking.
However, the agreement is very one-sided. I don’t have a problem with a reasonable degree of bias towards the larger user group – but the current agreement is by no means as balanced as it should be.
Agree. Maybe there should be a ban on walkers after 5pm so we get a clear run down. Fair's fair.
I do think there have been some knobbish comments on here, from people who seem to think F*** you to other people we have to share outdoor space with, and that the 'tourists' that crowd up Snowdon should just have to put up with us.
I do get that we should challenge the access laws in England and Wales, and I often exercise my views on that by riding designated footpaths and 'bits of cheek', but generally try not to be a knob about it, and crucially, choose the time and place so that it's quieter and less likely to piss other people off.
A bit of mutual respect and consideration to other users goes a long way and is just basic human decency. We live on a crowded island and whether we are bikists, tourists, mountaineers, families with children, horse-riders, dog walkers etc etc, space is often at a premium in lots of places in the countryside. In the same way that those of us who commute or ride tarmac feel unsafe when a car rushes past with little consideration for our safety, I think on Snowdon, at busy times, we need to put ourselves in the shoes/boots/flip-flops of those walking up and down and think what it feels to have a bunch of MTBs hurtling down, scattering slate and shale at 30mph.
The voluntary ban is just an admittedly imperfect solution to try and make sure a little respect, consideration and common sense goes around.
On balance the whole ‘voluntary agreement’ or ‘ban’ or whatever seems to work reasonably well on a mountain that is probably too busy at peak times for mountain bike riders to get what they want from a descent.
However, I do wonder if anyone has asked foot-based users if they’d be interested in a quid pro quo and mirror-image ban in high season - no walkers or runners before 9 or after 5 or whatever it is?
They tell us to get stuffed, of course, because the organised ramblers are often a bunch of miserable old ****s who have a lot of time on their hands to write letters of complaint etc.
In this particular case, the sheer busyness of the trails make it actually impractical that all user groups can enjoy it in the manner they want to. Fair enough. But a lot of of the MRAs will not view it as a successful voluntary agreement. They will view it as a ‘victory over those hooligans*’.
*Hooligan = anyone who wants to enjoy the countryside in a manner with which they disagree.
Quote from the access bod in the MBR article:
Cyclists should also be mindful that under Countryside Act 1968, they should give way to both pedestrians and horse riders at all times on a bridleway, and failure to do so (that is riding in a manner which is deemed to be reckless) is a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988.
I'm aware of the first half of this - can anyone point me towards the clause in the RTA 1988 that covers the second assertion (other than on a public road)? Having trouble finding much in the Act except that which refers to mechanically-propelled vehicles on BWs.
Presumably, said access bod believes that a failure to give way to horse riders and pedestrians could constitute an offence of dangerous cycling under the 1988 act.
I’ve been up there a good few times on my bike and on foot.
Riding in the mountains is fun, the views, the big day out feel, riding at ‘altitude’ with drops and valleys below you is ace. You can’t compare it to Stiniog or CyB, as good as they are.
I’ve pushed up the Llanberis path from about 4pm on a crappy day and had nothing but positive/jokey comments. No hassle. Take your shades off, make some eye contact and treat people as you normally would.
Helvellyn is also fun, just need to Ben Nevis now...
@monkeysfeet. I applaud what you're doing but if you can't convince the powers that be that they'll always have to accept a number of asshats who don't give a shit then inevitably the access will get shut down.
I abide by the "voluntary" agreement but if the day ever comes that they hit with the ban stick all bets are off and me and my mates will en-masse ignore it and ride whenever we want, safe in the knowledge that, realistically, there's sod all that can be done.
But I'm firmly with you. As an anarchist the best way to prove you don't need rules is to act in a way that shows you don't need 'em 😉
Presumably, said access bod believes that a failure to give way to horse riders and pedestrians could constitute an offence of dangerous cycling under the 1988 act.
Didn't realise BWs were considered as roads for the purposes of the act. Every day's a school day.:)
I applaud what you’re doing but if you can’t convince the powers that be that they’ll always have to accept a number of asshats who don’t give a shit then inevitably the access will get shut down.
+1 .There will always be those who choose not to abide by the agreement and just decide to ride the BWs as is their right, or who somehow aren't aware of the voluntary restrictions. The National Park et al will have to decide whether this justifies a full ban, which is unlikely to improve matters, and may even worsen them. Have they got the resources to enforce it?
I'm guessing there is an upsurge in people breaching the agreement which starts around the beginning of May each year...might be a bit early to tell if things are better/worse/the same as previous years. Still I guess the dire warnings will help get the word out.