[Closed] Walna Scar Sanitisation.

I'm sure most walkers would rather walk on a rougher, narrow path instead of something you could drive a double-decker bus on too

An interesting thread, and it does concern me that there seams to be a policy of letting the trails get washed out first,rather than preventetive "cheaper" methods of cleaning gullys out or chanelling surface water off the paths in the first place.

Years ago lengths-men were employed to maintain potholes, and water drainage, so that horses and carts could negotiate the high lakeland passes safely, maybe we should all play a part and report errosion to the national parks before routes are badly effected.

The "fix the fells" project do seem hellbent on making Bridleways difficult to ride though, and a classic example is the drainage gullys on Dollywagon.
The walkers/mountainbikers are avoiding the pitching and walking down the sides eroding another part of the landscape for future repair,daft really.

Why build a road wide enough for a landrover from ill bell to yoke (south of High street)when its only a footpath? 😕

Theres no doubt some rights of way need repairing but consideration should be made to all users,and the work done should be relevant to the landscape and done in a sustainable way.

I'm sure most walkers would rather walk on a rougher, narrow path instead of something you could drive a double-decker bus on too.

boxelder - But once it's decided, it has to be done to certain standards, including minimum widths.

I'm sure most walkers would rather walk on a rougher, narrow path instead of something you could drive a double-decker bus on too.

This is the key for me - I am a walker as well as a biker, and I seriously question how many people walking in the higher fells really want a wide, smooth road to walk on. As above I am quite happy for repair work to be carried out of course but I think it should be sympathetic to the setting as well as the users of the path.

I'm sorry but I despair of the idea that we need to make our precious countryside easy and safe and tame.

Is not what I said at all and to claim that these trails have to remain eroded messes because its "rough, steep, difficult terrain" is fatuous.

Classic straw man. Where did I say it had to stay eroded and shouldn't be maintained ever?

Agree totally. Walna Sacr and Garburn were built, and extensively used, in the past for foot and hoofed traffic, as the easiest routes between settlements. To claim that they shouldn't be surfaced is daft.

In the past Walna Scar was surfaced to allow traffic like horse and carts etc - AFAIK it is almost never used for this kind of thing any more and even 4x4s are banned at the moment so why does it need a road type surface?

Seems to me there is a sizeable chunk of folk on here who like to ride wide, loose bouldery tracks at speed - The Beast in the Peak, Walna etc. Prbably nice for making you feel the £££ spent on 'all mountain' bikes was worth it. Not a criticism

Definitely sounds like a criticism to me.

It's probably the fact that even amongst mountain bikers we can't agree what should be done that contributes to the fact that we don't really have a voice in these matters. If 5 people say 'this route is really great for biking' but one person (like TJ who's never ridden there) says 'it's rubbish anyway' they will probably listen to the one that shouts the loudest.

Definitely sounds like a criticism to me.

That's probably because it's written and you can't hear it! I'm critical of those riders who will only ride the trails that give them the technical challenge they crave (though WS wasn't very technical). They're not bothered about other trails, or the wider cycling/hill going community, so long as what they want to do is still available. I think you'd agree that mountain biking began as a way to get around and through the hills and that padding up and pushing a full sus bike to the top of a pass to blat back down is fairly recent (the fun!) - and I know it's what the Marin clunker pioneers did.

I've had some feedbcak already to enquiries I've made and as ChrisE has said in the past the Walna and Garburn situations go back to NERC and the change of status. Walna has been surfaced by the National Park however, to Bridleway standard (not to do with off road vehicles) - according to Bridleway Society.

Grumm - I think you're fairly local to me. Lets have a group of us meet up with a map to highlight the 'best bits' and then I'll meet up with the ROW officer. PM me if interested (I'm not averse to ragging down passes on a full susser - though may bring a CX bike)

Just sent you an email boxelder.

I'm sorry but I despair of the idea that we need to make our precious countryside easy and safe and tame.

Classic straw man. Where did I say it had to [s]stay eroded and shouldn't be maintained ever?[/s] be made into a smooth metalled surface?

I do feel very strongly that the anti "sanitisation" argument is basically a very selfish one. "We like it rough and eroded and sod any other users".

I'm not even going to bother - it's really no wonder the vast majority of people on this forum find you so irritating. I'm sure you'd like to believe it's because you are boldly speaking the truth that people don't want to hear, but it's really not.

Really? I think you don't like to hear opinions that do not match with your own so as you have no answer to the message you attack the messenger

You did exactly what you accused me of doing.

Where did I say

that we need to make our precious countryside easy and safe and tame.

You tried to make out I did, you tried to make out that this old cart track was some remote high mountain pass when actually it was the easiest route between two places. You want it to remain an eroded mess so you can enjoy it despite the fact it spoils it for others

Its all about being sustainable at reasoable cost and providing a path that is for all.

Argh trying not to get drawn into this....

OK, you are actually arguing for sanitisation and creating smooth trails in the name of accessibility for all, even the old and infirm etc, which is precisely attempting to make the more difficult parts of the countryside easy and safe and tame. So not a straw man at all unlike what you said, which is that I was arguing it shouldn't be maintained at all - which I never did.

The route you have been discussing at length, which AFAIK you have never even been on, goes up to nearly 2000ft/600m - at the top in winter it can be extremely bleak, cold and exposed. It's not just a gentle walk up a little hill for the vast, vast majority of people - in fact you are the one being patronising and elitist by suggesting that it is.

You want it to remain an eroded mess so you can enjoy it despite the fact it spoils it for others

Wrong again - I already said that for me it wasn't that great anyway. Your argument can easily be turned on it's head - you want it to be resurfaced in this way so that others can enjoy it (if anyone actually will enjoy it more) despite the fact it spoils it for some mountain bikers, who are trail users too remember. I'd like to see some evidence (one of your favourite demands) showing that this kind of resurfacing was requested by walkers/a majority of users, and will encourage more of them to use the route.

Yet again - I'm very happy for drainage/resurfacing work to be done, but I think importing vast amounts of gravel to make a wide, smooth fire road type surface isn't sympathetic to the surroundings, doesn't last long (and so is a waste of public money) and is of very little benefit to anyone.

OK, you are actually arguing for sanitisation and creating smooth trails in the name of accessibility for all, even the old and infirm etc, which is precisely attempting to make the more difficult parts of the countryside easy and safe and tame.

No I did not - find a quote where I say that. You want the argument to be black and white. I understand it is not.

We actually want the same thing to a great extent- the difference is I understand that the only way to do this without huge cost of hand building a trail is to do it in this sort of way. You need to either hand build / helicopter in materials or use machinery on the ground which requires width and a smoothish surface

How on earth do you think it can be repaired without a gravel surface?

Unlike you I have actually tried to do something about this - organising MTBers to get active in local trail repair so as to get trail repair that is sympathetic to the wishes of MTbers without excluding the vast majority of users

Your attempts to claim this old cart track that exists because its the easiest route between two places as some sort of extreme trail is ridiculous. I have been on it as I have much of the lake district. It will allways have had somesort of surfacing

so - how do you want it repaired? What methods would you use?

Walna Scar Pass is remarkably gently graded for the most part and is also in good repair. It makes you wish more mountain paths were like this.

http://www.jbutler.org.uk/Lakes/Coniston/060414.shtml

I understand that the only way to do this without huge cost of hand building a trail is to do it in this sort of way.

You do? Evidence? Because from what I've seen of this type of surfacing if we get another couple of harsh-ish winter it will fall apart again, except this time there will be a load more loose gravel covering everything. Surely it would be more cost-effective in the long run to do some repairs that would actually last. Even the rock armouring with drainage ditches on Dollywagon (which I don't much like riding either) at least seems like it's built to last, and is relatively sympathetic to the surroundings.

Walna Scar Pass is remarkably gently graded for the most part and is also in good repair. It makes you wish more mountain paths were like this.

Oh well that proves it then - some other guy said it on some other website so it must be true. What a great argument. Notice though how he refers to it as a mountain path, which you keep saying it isn't. 😆

The vast, vast majority of people who come to the Lakes don't walk up into the hills - it can be crawling in Ambleside but if you walk up a hill for half an hour you can often barely see a soul. I highly doubt this is because the masses are crying out to be able to walk up a big wide fire road style path. Again I'd like to see some evidence that this is the case. I've never tried to claim that WSR is extreme, but neither is it a stroll round the park like you suggest, and nor should we try and turn it into one.

And again I tell you I have never suggested it should be " a big wide fire road style path." You should try read what I posted.

I asked you how you would repair it if you don't want it done this way - which is to standards developed over years and if done to the standards will last for many years.

boxelder

I've had some feedbcak already to enquiries I've made and as ChrisE has said in the past the Walna and Garburn situations go back to NERC and the change of status. Walna has been surfaced by the National Park however, to Bridleway standard (not to do with off road vehicles) - according to Bridleway Society.

You claimed no one wanted or would want a well maintained path -well that is someone who does. Thats all it is

I've never tried to claim that WSR is extreme

Grum
goes up to nearly 2000ft/600m - at the top in winter it can be extremely bleak, cold and exposed. It's not just a gentle walk up a little hill

Grum
reasonably high level mountain passes into a smooth high street so that they are 'accessible'? I'm sorry but it's mountainous countryside, by it's very nature it is rough, steep, difficult terrain.

And again I tell you I have never suggested it should be " a big wide fire road style path." You should try read what I posted.

Except that you are arguing in favour of the work that's been done which is exactly that. You really would argue black is white wouldn't you.

You claimed no one wanted or would want a well maintained path -well that is someone who does. Thats all it is

No, I didn't.

And where in those quotes does it say anything about Walna Scar Road being extreme?

Why do you suckers take the bait?

Personally I don't see Walna Scar as worth the 2hr drive from Manchester. Its ok, just not worth that bloody long climb from the otherside. Who cares if its sanitised?

chakaping - yup, i know, stupid 😳

And great attitude hora - 'it's too far away from me to bother with so I don't care'. I hope they bulldoze your favourite local trails (not that WS was one of my favourites as I keep having to repeat).

im off on my bike to cause some erosion,

Like Grum I very much doubt the making of a path has opened up Walna Scar for access for many people. It must be a small number who can only walk up steep hils if it is smooth.
It would be interestng to see that stats are as to how many new "users" now access the path compared to how many MTB'ers no longer use the route. This is not elitist to suggest there was no point doing it , especially when wlakers access i far greater than ours and now they sanatise the bits we can ride so they can walk ...how kind.

We have limited access rights as is and sanitising these routes will only lead to more MTB ers riding footpaths which is hardly ideal.

I see your point but its not a trail. Its a Bridleway and has to serve many different users though. Chapel Gate was santised recently so it just means we cherry pick from the other trails nearby and comeback to it at a later date.

After all there are alot of older walkers who would appreciate a decent trail I bet.

Bridleways works are always going to put some peoples backs up. Ultimately its a difficult balancing act. The main thing to try and keep hold of is everything weathers and evolves. Chapel gate is an intresting there is the Hora line that it has been totally sanitised and ruined because it doesnt fit with what hora wants from a ride. I think it had got to a point where it needed work, for me the changes mean I can now ride something that was unrideable. Although I do still find the water bars tricky because I'm not a master manualer so I have work hard to avoid going over the bars.

On Chapel Gate- I can see why it was sanitised.

Its not fair for say a family out for a ride in the Peaks together using a map to start down Chapel Gate then find its literally unrideable for them almost to the point that its dangerous and could hurt someone.

Why is it fair to a relative small percentage of riders but unfair for any other potential countryside users?

We think about ourselves too much don't we? After all, horses, leisure/occasional cyclists and walkers also like to have reasonable access.

Therefore I have no issue with occasional sanitisation of a bridleway.

Its about access and enjoyment for all after all.

In the Lakes, I've seen a number of examples of bridleways that have been repaired, but the 'cheat' track going straight up the hill side has received the work, rather than the still visible track zig zagging up the hillside. Repairing the original zig zag route would help reduce conflict, due to lower bike speeds, would maintain the interest of most mountain bikers who like a technical challenge and would suit most walkers by giving a better gradient, with (hopefully) better footing. Does anyone know why the 'cheat' tracks are the one that are repaired?

I'm sure about 10 years ago everyone was moaning about the sanitisation of WS, I could be wrong but it seems now that people are grumbling about the sanitisation of an already sanitised trail?

Why is it fair to a relative small percentage of riders but unfair for any other potential countryside users?

I dunno. I don't tend to see that many cyclists when I'm out. I've seen ALOT of roadies but not reems of mountain bikers.

Sat we were out for 5hours in the Peaks and if I'm honest we saw 6 others- and they were all together.

Its not 'theirs' and its not 'ours' its everyones. So I most certainly wouldn't want horse riders to be put off riding a route because its badly maintained. Everyone should have access to experience a bridleway at somepoint if they desired.

'Us' wanting it as 'core' as possible isn't always fair on other users.

I've had a few replies to enquiries now, but the most informative comes from the Lake District National Park. They provided the following info freely and so I'm sure they won't mind if I share it here:

Hi Andy

Thanks for your query – which has been passed to me as we look after the rights of way in the National Park on behalf of CCC.

With regard to Walna Scar, we have been looking after this route for many years now, and are constantly having to try and restore it to a fit condition for use for everyone who has a right to use it, namely – walkers, horse-riders and cyclists. Much of this has been patching up, rather than full scale restoration.

The main problem was that the track in places had developed over time into a bowl shape which just funnelled the water down its length, stripping path materials and depositing them into Cove Beck. Its damaged state was a danger to some users, and restricted access to local emergency services such as Mountain Rescue (as well as the owners of the surrounding land).

We also have an obligation to ensure that the path surface and drainage is maintained. In many places rainwater run-off is unchecked, meaning soil is washed away, exposing the sub-soil and bare rock, filling reservoirs with sediment and interfering with fish breeding. The higher rate of run-off can also contribute to flooding further down the catchment.

The works that are being completed at Walna, are being delivered by highly experienced and skilled LDNP staff. The sub soiling technique is a sympathetic design using locally-won materials forming a well drained, sustainable path using the existing aggregate for its construction and surface. The technique is identical to that used to build many of Lakeland’s pack horse and mining tracks – traditional to the area and in accordance with strict best practice guidelines. Its cambered profile sheds water into the adjacent gutter. The finished track will settle down by up to 300mm - 450mm over the next couple of years and should last at least 15 to 20 years, with appropriate maintenance.

You ask about possible future changes, and this raises a number of interesting points.

· Firstly you ask about potential upgrades to byways (BOATS) – well, this is a possibility for the Park Head Road – but it is more likely to become a restricted byway (see next point). However, even it became a BOAT – it doesn’t mean that we would automatically ‘improve’ the route. Basically, the standard required for this type of bridleway in the fells means that they will be usable by 4x4s. So, there’s little real difference in the quality of surface. At the moment there’s no actual planned work on Park Head Road.

· Garburn Pass has recently been confirmed as a Restricted Byway – which is a route open to all traffic except motorised vehicles. Basically this means everything up to horse and carts. Again, the standard we would look to see routes such as Garburn Pass are the standards suitable for an all-purpose bridleway used by walkers, horse-riders and cyclists.

· So - any potential changes to the legal status is not likely to impact upon the maintenance regime.

Of interest to me is the question of consultation over changes. With regard to physical alterations, it is not our standard practice to consult user bodies when carrying out our basic statutory duties. Mainly because it is just that – a duty, and something we have to do. However, we do consult widely when carrying out legal changes to the rights of way network – such as creations, diversions, and modifications. I am aware that the cycling community is under-represented in these consultations (we consult CTC only), and would like to rectify this. So, through this e-mail, I wonder if IMBA (or you) could let me know if they/you would like to be consulted on legal changes to the rights of way network – and if so, whom should we contact.

If there are any other bodies that you can think of that you feel would help or benefit from being consulted – then please do let me know.

Reading about the way in which the work has been carried out, I'm hopeful it will become a decent descent within a couple of years, and will remain rideable uphill (the way I always seem to do it) for longer.
I'll aim to get out and have a decent look soon.
I'm going to reply about the consultation too, if anyone would like to become involved - my email is in my profile. I'm certain we can't change a great deal just yet, but small acorns and all that.

Nice and clear answer, cheers Boxelder.

Good work Boxelder..

Thank you boxelder for sharing that.

Grum - I think you should read it and aknowledge that that trail is being repaired in the best way and understand why it is.

Grum - I think you should [s]read it and aknowledge that that trail is being repaired in the best way[/s] ignore TJ's comment as it will wind you up, and understand why it [s]is[/s] will.

Though I don't entirely disagree with either of you.

Ach - you are probably right boxelder and perhaps I owe Grum an apology for being a wind up.......... Its been a long hard day

I've never found Walna Scar that special. Compared to Parkamoor/Nibthwaite which we usually do before riding round the lake and pushing up to it, and the fun bit off to the right by the car park. it was always just something to ride down.

Grum - I think you should read it and aknowledge that that trail is being repaired in the best way and understand why it is.

Let's hope so eh? Having seen previous efforts and the mention of 'patching up' I remain to be convinced though.

The technique is identical to that used to build many of Lakeland’s pack horse and mining tracks – traditional to the area and in accordance with strict best practice guidelines.

I'm still not sure why we are still building mine cart track across passes like this though.

While you have to give LDNP credit for a swift and detailed response (and boxelder for getting it), it's not hugely encouraging IMO. If I've read it rightly then Garburn is going to get similar treatment at some point soon, they don't consult about this kind of resurfacing work and have no plans to.

Ach - you are probably right boxelder and perhaps I owe Grum an apology for being a wind up.......... Its been a long hard day

Aw, come here and have a cuddle big boy.

I've never found Walna Scar that special. Compared to Parkamoor/Nibthwaite

Totally agree - just did that Nibthwaite descent yesterday and it's fantastic. I wonder what the chances are of that getting gravelled over? What is the status of that section?

A stream.

Hmmmm. Echo comments above - well done to boxelder & LDPA for the fast response. However, I do find the response worrying, that the objective is to have BWs usable by walkers, horses and cyclists. Presumably this can only result in a greater number of sanitisation projects.

Oh well I'll stick to the footpaths I guess! (Indeed I would actually - selfishly I suppose - oppose upgrade of footpaths to BW status if sanitisation is a risk)

[IMG] [/IMG]

[IMG] [/IMG]

[IMG] [/IMG]

One of the best bits....gone.. 🙁

You probably genuinely could drive a mobility scooter up there now. 😯

Aw man that's terrible. And it looks bloody awful. I do hope garburn isn't next 😥

That almost brings a tear to my eye. Gutted!!

What a mess,is it the new Coniston bypass?

samcamsdad - Member

That almost brings a tear to my eye. Gutted!!

You just beat me to it, I was going to say the same.

Some folk are saying what is so special about it? Don't look at it on its own, look at it as part of a bigger ride! Coniston, Torver, Broughton Moor, Stephenson Ground, Carter Ground, Brack Barrow to Seathwaite (also sanitised now), pint, crisps and a pickled egg in the Newfield Inn, up Walna Scar, down the other side and back to Coniston. There are lots of little add-ons and cheeky bits in between these places when you know the area. It all adds up to a quality ride! I actually like the challenge of riding up Walna Scar...wouldn't want to do it now to ride down the "motorway" though!

el_boufador - Member

However, I do find the response worrying, that the objective is to have BWs usable by walkers, horses and cyclists.

Wait, what?

Glad I cleared Walna Scar last time I rode it as the chance to redeem myself has gone along with the challenge. However, its still a great climb and a beautiful place to be so I am sure I'll still be riding over it, up and down on my big fat full suspension bike pleasuring my self as I go

Last week at both the top and bottom of Garbun all the comments related to how washed out the trail was. The climb was especially difficult and the decent unrelenting but all good fun.

Last time I was coming down NanBield they were sanitising the top section.

But mother nature will undo man's triffling works in a couple of big storms....

They have done a pretty good job on that, i see a road where a badly eroded one used to be, good access for the land owner, walkers and cyclists, what is the problem, the artificial situation where you have an eroded track, giving tubby middle aged men on bicycles a rush of adrenaline, is niether here nor there, it ain't a trail center where the TTF's have just been ironed out 😆

ps. sorry but that is the way the world sees it.

mother nature will undo man's triffling works

They've done it with trifle? Bonus.

Yes when I read that back Northwind I realised the point I was trying to make was very poorly made!

Does the fact that a mode of transport is allowed to use a trail legally oblige the authority to maintain it to particular standard? I'd guess probably not. Do you have to be able tor drive a bus down a BOAT for instance? No of course you don't.

If you've ridden any volume of lakes trails you'll know there are BWs around which range from easy flat trails (like walna scar is now by the looks of it) to the sort of stuff which is so steep and technical I cannot image a horse ever went up or down it (e.g. stuff off the high stile range, rosset pike, dollywaggon pike). How far will the park push their policy of making BWs accessible to all groups who are legally allowed to use them? Will it be regardless of whether there is evidence that those groups actually have the inclination to use them - due to steepness etc).

FWIW I wouldn't want any of the unridable ROWs we can legally use 'upgraded' to make them more accessible to us either.

el_boufador - Member

Does the fact that a mode of transport is allowed to use a trail legally oblige the authority to maintain it to particular standard?

I'm pretty sure they do- bridleways have to be passable by horses. But not cyclists funnilly enough.

Holy ****ing shit!

They've built a trail centre out of it. I will raise a glass to Walna Scar of old tonight.

Drac - nope - they have..............

The works that are being completed at Walna, are being delivered by highly experienced and skilled LDNP staff. The sub soiling technique is a sympathetic design using locally-won materials forming a well drained, sustainable path using the existing aggregate for its construction and surface. The technique is identical to that used to build many of Lakeland’s pack horse and mining tracks – [b]traditional to the area and in accordance with strict best practice guidelines[/b]. Its cambered profile sheds water into the adjacent gutter. The finished track will settle down by up to 300mm - 450mm over the next couple of years and should last at least 15 to 20 years, with appropriate maintenance.

Ie exactly what needed to be done to it.

Morning TJ.

morning 🙂

It really does amaze me that someone on a mountain bike forum can have quite such a hard-on for this kind of resurfacing. It literally looks smoother than the street outside my house. Great surface for a route around a city park but for a mountain path (as your link described it TJ 😉 ), really?

Do you want every mountain path to look like that TJ?

I wasn't a big fan of WSR before but I still think that's a great shame - it really does look like like the trail around Richmond Park.

It might be 'historically correct', it might be 'best practice' but it's not the sort of trail that attracts me on either foot or a bike. There's nothing worse than finding a favourite bit of trail has disappeared into something you could ride on a Brompton.

And Garburn is next?

Garburn is next? Plenty more in the area to ride isn't there?

Read this Hora (and others making similar comments)...

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came%E2%80%A6 ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came%E2%80%A6[/url]

🙂

😆

Grum - I don't know why you keep saying that. its simply that I understand the reasons why its been done like that and can see the wider picture. No I don't want ever mountain path to be like that but neither do I want to see every path erode down to bedrock with piles of rubble.

that path will blend in over time and be what it always was

How do you suggest it is repaired / maintained?

Cha****ng - you should be ashamed of yourself

How do you suggest it is repaired / maintained?

OK, maybe with some bigger rocks and less fine gravel, and a bit narrower - so it looks and feels less like a road and more like a mountain path. I'm sure it's not impossible - well it's definitely not actually as it's been done elsewhere.

Garburn is next? Plenty more in the area to ride isn't there?

Yup, until they get round to levelling them as well. They did part of Moor Lane in Grizedale a bit ago too which was another good descent. Oh well.....

*looks at OS Map for interesting looking footpaths to ride instead*

grum - Member

"How do you suggest it is repaired / maintained?"

OK, maybe with some bigger rocks and less fine gravel, and a bit narrower - so it looks and feels less like a road and more like a mountain path. I'm sure it's not impossible.

Hand cobbled / hand built you mean? Or do you mean not using the fine gravel to bind it? Without the fine stuff the path surface will not be stable.

the first is enormously labour intensive and expensive, the second will not last any time at all.

You helped out with some path repair once and suddenly you are an expert, surprise surprise.

The first option might be initially expensive but is probably more sustainable in the long run surely (which is what you claim to support). What's been done seems more like a quick fix which probably won't last, but when it does inevitably erode and disintegrate there will be several tons of loose gravel everywhere. The guy from LDNP admitted it was 'patching up, rather than full scale restoration.'

The option they've gone for is also much uglier and less sympathetic to the surroundings.

Grum - look at the answer from the people who did it.

I know you are disappointed this has been done but you really need to look at the long view.

As for

What's been done seems more like a quick fix which probably won't last, but when it does inevitably erode and disintegrate there will be several tons of loose gravel everywhere.

Handbuilding that length of path would be prohibitively expensive.

The guy from LDNP admitted it was 'patching up, rather than full scale restoration.'

The works that are being completed at Walna, are being delivered by highly experienced and skilled LDNP staff. The sub soiling technique is a sympathetic design using locally-won materials forming a well drained, sustainable path using the existing aggregate for its construction and surface. The technique is identical to that used to build many of Lakeland’s pack horse and mining tracks – traditional to the area and in accordance with strict best practice guidelines. Its cambered profile sheds water into the adjacent gutter. The finished track will settle down by up to 300mm - 450mm over the next couple of years and should last at least 15 to 20 years, with appropriate maintenance.

Grum, stop winding him up, he'd only just calmed down!.

As for you, Fergal, stop trying to get a rise.

*looks at OS Map for interesting looking footpaths to ride instead*

I quite like the big cobbles/settes that form the lung busting zig zags up Gatesgarth Pass. They are perfect for pack-horses! And they are a fair challenge to mtb riders up and down. And strangely they are perfect for walking on too!

Courtesy of the much adored Mr Barnes a photo of said cobbles
[img] [/img]
And unlike stone chippings and their technique this method really does last.

I would perfer not to but if they keep sanitising the bridleways I will be going down the same route as junkyard and grum.I.E. using footpaths. If I wanted to go on a "road" like Walna scar now is I would go to Llandegla.

But Walna Scar is a ROAD! Or at least it used to be.

Ho hum!

Another lovely ride disappears. The scenery is still stunning but the trail is now a sad shadow of what made it special in the first price. Have a look at the film "Find" to see what it once was and why it was such a lovely trail to ride. Every time a route gets improved, it just encourages to ride more cheeky stuff......not that I ever need an excuse for that. Ha! Ha!

What's the story with Nan Bield? Don't tell me they're making a cobblers of that as well now?

How has Moor Lane in Grizedale lasted since the last lot of improvements?

As a walker, I find no pleasure in walking up such routes. Give me a rocky and uneven path in preference every day of the week. If I want to walk on pavements, there's plenty to chose from.

Like I said, Ho hum!

Slightly off topic but maybe their next route to upgrade should be Ben MacDhui? Much too much in the way of loose and rocky trail up there. 😀

I can't wait to ride Walna Scar after the first heavy frost of the year. Why ride on rocky exposed bedrock when you can ride down a wheel sucking, frost heave covered motorway instead eh? Much more satisfying...........

Last time I went down Nan Bield in the summer there were piles of stone chippings at the top and they'd started to repair fairly extensive erosion damage. Not been down it since.

What's the story with Nan Bield?

They've built up the corners on the switchbacks(kentmere side), TBH its hasn't ruined it and it needed to be done before they got to deep and collapsed.

Interesting thread, and some really good contributions (especially boxelder, rangerbill etc.). Apologies for the extended monologue below – but I was musing this thread earlier...

There is a myth perpetuated (including by some on here) that ramblers and horse riders (for example) are all in support of this kind of work being carried out. This simply isn't the case. Many enjoy rougher tracks, less visually intrusive paths and more 'natural' feeling routes. And this isn't about 'accessibility' either. A friend of a colleague has published some good studies involving blind walkers organisations, suggesting that part of the value they find in being able to use off-road routes is the engagement offered by different and unpredictable surfaces – not merely a uniform road that can be repeated anywhere (albeit amongst some pretty scenery). The fact is that there are a whole range of motivations that make people want to be able to access a particular area or route – and not all will be compatible, all the time.

The current system of ROW/ access legislation/ policy/ practice does not seem to acknowledge this, and rather presupposes that if a user is able to access a route that is all that matters, and the nature of the route itself is immaterial. In fact, judging by my experience, and the views expressed on the thread, the very material of a route is crucial to the experience of many of us. Walkers, fell runners, mtber's, horse riders, climbers and so on all seem to enjoy particular routes for their very difference, rather than their uniformity. Why is it not possible for authorities to have an attitude towards access that celebrates and promotes this diversity, rather than one that suppresses difference and tends towards a misguided understanding of why access is important in the first place?

The difficulty then clearly is how to deal with or manage issues around 'damage' to routes, and the impact that users have on the routes they clearly value. How do you feasibly manage access without infringing on rights or fundamentally changing the nature of that access? I can't help thinking that having a planning system that is based on a notion of limited rights against a backdrop of presumed non-rights (all of course based on reductive and contested historical precedent) doesn't help, as it confers the entire responsibility regarding access to 'authority' and absolves us from any personal responsibility. 'They' provide it, 'we' use it. It seems if they ensure access where legally required to do so they have done their job (regardless of the nature of this or how this is achieved), and as long as we remain legal in our access (regardless of the potential effects of legal or non-legal use), all will be well. It's hardly surprising that this system ends up creating or adding to tensions between individuals, and does little to address the reasons why such intensive and controversial management of access is seen to be necessary.

Anyway, to get back towards the thread...

It does seem bizarre that local authorities can be seen to 'improve' ROW in a (sometimes) heavy-handed manner with little consequence, while at the same time a whole host of groups like Natural England (IIRC?) , John Muir Trust, Mountaineering Council, and Ramblers Scotland are actively involved in working or campaigning against large engineered works carried out by private estates – leading in some cases to prosecution, and in others to the active removal of precisely these types of [s]track[/s] road.

John Muir Trust, Mountaineering Council, and Ramblers Scotland are actively involved in working or campaigning against large engineered works carried out by private estates – leading in some cases to prosecution, and in others to the active removal of precisely these types of track road.

Not quite - there is a subtle but important difference. In the case of the walna scar [i]road[/i] it is an old route that has been rebuilt to best practices copying how it would have built earlier. The tracks objected to on the highland estates are new ones bulldozed thru the landscape with no thought for its impact.

How many people here are members of CTC or actively get involved in local campaigning groups?

If you don't vote you don't get listened to so stop yer whingin

Not quite - there is a subtle but important difference. In the case of the walna scar road it is an old route that has been rebuilt to best practices copying how it would have built earlier.

But the question is [i]why[/i]? It longer serves the purpose it was originally built for.

How many people here are members of CTC or actively get involved in local campaigning groups?

If you don't vote you don't get listened to so stop yer whingin

I'm not at the mo but I'm thinking of joining IMBA and trying to get involved in some consultation groups or whatever. Although as the guy from LDNP said they aren't going to consult anyone about work like this anyway.

When I showed Katie the WSR photos she pointed out that the mountain rescue teams would now have more work to do because the "woman in unsuitable shoes" who seems to be the source of most of their callouts will now be able to get further up the hill before twisting her ankle.

To state that the recent Walna Scar route is “copying how it would have been built earlier” is misleading. The most recent improvements have been carried out in the way they have in order to utilise newer techniques that take advantage of modern technologies, and therefore do not rely on skilled and labour intensive methods of management and repair that were the only option in the past. The form of subsoiling, reversal and drainage works being carried out in the way they have at Walna Scar are only made possible by relatively modern machinery, so whilst to imply that this is merely an extension of past practice (how ever valid or arbitrary this might be argued to be as a determining factor) may have some validity within the past decade, it is certainly not accurate within even my limited memory, and certainly not over the lifetime of a route that is centuries old.

bajsyckel

the Lake District National Park.

The sub soiling technique is a sympathetic design using locally-won materials forming a well drained, sustainable path using the existing aggregate for its construction and surface. The technique is identical to that used to build many of Lakeland’s pack horse and mining tracks – traditional to the area and in accordance with strict best practice guidelines.

From the responsible people in charge. I tend to believe them

From the responsible people in charge. I tend to believe them

Ah yes, blind faith in what the people in charge say - I've noticed that as one of your traits on all sorts of other topics.