Forum menu
Quantum difference in pressure of use
So, more of a reason to spread that pressure over more trails to minimise the impact. (I didn't realise Manchester and Derby were so close to the Eastern Moors, because they're not. When I lived in Matlock, going to the Eastern Moors was a rare outing. When I lived in Sheffield, I was there all the time)
Our local trails definitely suffer from oversharing on social media etc...as they are cheeky and then the inevitable happens and the landowner gets the bulldozers out and they are gone again. But it's a balance. We and the regular trail builders know that we are not really allowed there but being discrete and building discretely with a natural look doesn't attract attention and these trails tend to stay. But big group rides, social media and then the inevitable massive built features mean the balance gets tipped in favour of bulldozers again. Repeat on a yearly basis....
I haven’t been there for 30 years because I don’t want to be part of that problem.
Cool, there's zero reason to have a pop of folks that do though. There's endless studies that how that tyres have about the same impact as feet. This is long established. I know that route off the front of Stoodley and the folks that walk it outnumber the mountain bikers by about 20:1, and we're not doing 20 times the damage.
Nice
Just once, just let it go, you don't need to make every single thread that you ever contribute to; about you.
It’s nothing to do with that, it’s just about population density and pressure of use.
Would more places to ride ease the pressure - possibly.
But the problems aren't even comparable.
Almost 4x more people live within an hours drive of the Peak District, than live in the ENTIRITY OF SCOTLAND.
The pentlands is a park area next to a growing city of Edinburgh and surrounded b y commuter towns, We still have right to roam there and its higher population density than much of England.
In that context the Pentlands is about the same size as the Dark Peak. Sheffield has a 20% larger population than Edinburgh, and Sheffield is less than 3% of that 1 hour catchment area of the Peak.
I'm surprised someone / the FC / United Utilities / Severn Trent haven't built a trail center somewhere like Fairholmes, between the "good" it would do taking the pressure off the bridleways and the money to be made by being a proper trail center closer to the population centers than North Wales or Hamsterley.
Almost 4x more people live within an hours drive of the Peak District, than live in the ENTIRITY OF SCOTLAND.
22 million folk? I'm surprised.
The whole "I'll ride where I want because its spreads out the damage" is balls. Look at the massive scar that is Alpine or whatever its called that was once a nice hidden footpath. None of the other tracks round that way are improving because somewhere els is taking the load.
By all means ride where you like but dont assume some higher morality because of it.
I’m surprised someone / the FC / United Utilities / Severn Trent haven’t built a trail center somewhere like Fairholmes, between the “good” it would do taking the pressure off the bridleways and the money to be made by being a proper trail center closer to the population centers than North Wales or Hamsterley.
I dont entirely see the logic of this, Ladybower is a honeytrap for all outdoor sports, encouraging more people there is unlikly to result in many positives, you literally cannot get more pople up that valley some days.
When people talk about this i'm never quite sure which aspect they are coming from. Is it because they are A) concerned about the environment and the loss of habitat B) concerned that the trails they ride will not be as good the next time they ride them?
22 million folk? I’m surprised.
Yup, well 20million, so only 3.7x if you wanted the exact figure.
https://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/learning-about/news/mediacentrefacts
I’m surprised someone / the FC / United Utilities / Severn Trent haven’t built a trail center somewhere like Fairholmes, between the “good” it would do taking the pressure off the bridleways and the money to be made by being a proper trail center closer to the population centers than North Wales or Hamsterley.
British Cycling were at one point interested in creating a MTB "training centre" somewhere in the Goyt Valley and there have been various ideas for small-scale trail centres in and around various parts of the Peak District. Not CyB or BPW scale but some properly built and maintained trails to complement the existing BW network.
Hopefully @Pook and PDMTB's efforts eventually come to something.
22 million folk? I’m surprised.
Here you go TJ:
Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Leeds/Huddersfield, Derby, Stoke-on-Trent, Nottingham... The whole PD is surrounded by big towns and cities and encircled by motorways. M1 to the east, M6 to the west and the M62 across the top meaning very easy access for easily 20m people.
It can be both.
It can, but i doubt people are getting so animated about both aspects in equal measure
The whole “I’ll ride where I want because its spreads out the damage” is balls.
It's not balls, but it is imperfect. The popular lines are always going to get the most hammer irrespective of what access rights exist. This 'policy of confinement' has seen the bridleways on the Mendips be obliterated this last 5-10 years.
With social media and e-bikes, the genie is well out of the bottle. It's to the detriment of nearly all natural trails I ride and there is no going back.
What needs to change is how we think about our land management to accommodate the extra load, but thats like turning a supertanker with an oar.
Trail advocacy is the beginnings of that and is the future, but it's imperfect too, resulting in increasing ghettoisation of mtb to specific riding venues. At least we are kinda familiar with that - the sport has being doing that to itself for the last 25 years anyway.
If you want a trail to survive in anything approaching its original form, either armour it and give it a maintenance budget, or make it difficult to find on the ground and keep it off any social media. Even then, the current vogue for 'riding off piste' means it might not be safe.
Look at the massive scar that is Alpine or whatever its called that was once a nice hidden footpath
Yep, can't argue that it isn't pretty grim
Ladybower is a honeytrap
But this is also true, and TBH given the fact that the whole area is entirely man made, and the area around Lockerbrook that is currently being hacked to pieces by the Forestry looks equally scarred makes me think that any damage that cyclists can do pales by comparison.
It can, but i doubt people are getting so animated about both aspects in equal measure
I think it's fair to hold an opinion that either no one should ride a trail when it's wet so that it's not spoilt when it's dried out and can deal with far more traffic.
Even a bit of "locals only" is forgivable, a handful of people riding something muddy from their door seems fair, it's less damaging than lots of people driving past other trails to get there or who could also have ridden their local trails (or just dragged the road bike out).
I think it’s fair to hold an opinion that either no one should ride a trail when it’s wet so that it’s not spoilt when it’s dried out and can deal with far more traffic
I think it's also fair to hold the opinion that it's only bikers who think like this. Very few horse riders or walkers IME change where they plan to walk or ride ahead of time solely based on the conditions they're likely to encounter.
Staying clear of an awesome trail in the wet so that it rides better in the summer is extremely sensible. However, hoping someone else will avoid an awesome trail so that they don't make it worse for someone (a local) who they don't know is wishful thinking and probably beyond a reasonable expectation.
I also think that if you are going to ride cheeky trails then you should always commit to the trail as it is and not create wide cheat (Strava?) lines all over the place. Sometimes a bit of wear can make a line a lot harder and more challenging (a few in Glentress come to mind) and so that can be a good thing. But always stick to the trail
Provides opportunity for an access discussion that.
I don't think the problem with overusing stuff near the OP picture in the winter is as much a question of eroding rights of way (they're not rights of way) as much it is destroying someone's hard work to make the trail. No dig no ride seems fair in winter to me. I'm surprised the builders haven't put signs up, but maybe they don't actually care themselves / don't want to attract attention / don't think anyone would listen
However, hoping someone else will avoid an awesome trail so that they don’t make it worse for someone (a local) who they don’t know is wishful thinking and probably beyond a reasonable expectation.
The entire Scottish access system is based on this principle, and it pretty much works.
The whole “I’ll ride where I want because its spreads out the damage” is balls
So you dispute the idea that having the same number of riders spread over a greater number of trails will reduce the maximum amount of damage to a trail? That's illogical.
I also think that if you are going to ride cheeky trails then you should always commit to the trail as it is and not create wide cheat (Strava?) lines all over the place.
People have been creating "cheat lines" for decades, long before Strava existed. Sometimes to avoid a path of mud, sometimes to make a trail easier or faster, sometimes to actually include a technical feature....
A descent I used to ride a lot in Wales when I was at uni there had about 6-8 lines down a hillside in various places. One line became 3, one of those split further, they rejoined and divided and rejoined and branched off again but all ended up in the same place. You could ride about 20 different individual routes down the hill.
So you dispute the idea that having the same number of riders spread over a greater number of trails will reduce the maximum amount of damage to a trail? That’s illogical.
I dispute the fact that is such a simple matter, if all trails were created equal then you'd have a point but the majority of interesting rights of way, in and around Ladybower are bridleways & the vast majority of people interested in riding something else are already doing it.
But this is also true, and TBH given the fact that the whole area is entirely man made, and the area around Lockerbrook that is currently being hacked to pieces by the Forestry looks equally scarred makes me think that any damage that cyclists can do pales by comparison.
I'm not sure "I'm shit but less shit than someone else" is really the best defence but you do raise a far point that its a working landscape that has been massively changed in the last 100 years so at what point do we say "this" is the moment in time where we feel its is / was at its best.
I think it’s also fair to hold the opinion that it’s only bikers who think like this. Very few horse riders or walkers IME change where they plan to walk or ride ahead of time solely based on the conditions they’re likely to encounter.
Another good point but to mountain bikesrs the trail condition is far more of the experience than it is for many other user groups.
So you dispute the idea that having the same number of riders spread over a greater number of trails will reduce the maximum amount of damage to a trail? That’s illogical.
It's worth noting that bike riders aren't the only thing that may damage trails, around my area downhill trails tend to be the waterways after heavy rain, and areas of the trail are prone to being washed away in flooding, think this thread is being too broad in the discussion, so everyone's feeding in their own personal trails/experiences, i.e. cross country loops in open areas against DH runs in GT and so on.
However, hoping someone else will avoid an awesome trail so that they don’t make it worse for someone (a local) who they don’t know is wishful thinking and probably beyond a reasonable expectation.
The entire Scottish access system is based on this principle, and it pretty much works.
Can you explain? People in Scotland avoid everyone else's trails?
Its about responsible access which includes such things as not riding muddy trails in the wet etc Scottish access is a balance of rights and responsibilities.
Its about responsible access which includes such things as not riding muddy trails in the wet etc Scottish access is a balance of rights and responsibilities.
Does it cover access during specific time periods during the day, i.e. do you have a right to go roaming in the gloaming?
Its about <em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji';">responsibleaccess which includes such things as not riding muddy trails in the wet etc Scottish access is a balance of rights and responsibilities.
I get that. But that wasn't the point i was making.
Or you could come to Scotland and rise what you like when it’s in a fit condition to ride.
@munrobiker please try not to be smug no matter how hard it feels. Makes you look like a dick. No-one on here in England and Wales supports the status quo.
Regarding the original question I think there's a critical mass. In Wales there are thousands of trails and few people, so posting new trails on SM will take the pressure off those spots. If people only knew about say, Wylie, they'd all be there, but now people can go to the other places too which are places I certainly hadn't heard of until relatively recently.
However when the number of potential riders exceed the capacity of all available decent trails, then it makes sense to keep people on certain trails that can then be maintained, like they did on a micro scale at Swinley. In that case you don't want people riding your lesser known trails or your cheeky.
"Sheffield – and Manchester. And Derby. And a big motorway either side. Quantum difference in pressure of use, "
Ever heard of Glasgow? That's by the Pentlands too. The population density thing is claptrap - most people here are concentrated in a small patch in the middle. To get to the empty stuff travel is required.
The 20 million thing is interesting - would take in the West Midlands but that's near to the Staffordshire corner of the Peak, I remember it was a fairly long journey up to the East Peak (climbing in those days).
Quantum as in as small as it can be. Agreed.
People in Scotland avoid everyone else’s trails?
In my limited experience the fact that there are no designated rights of way means people ride wherever, which creates trails that can't be mapped on stuff like OS maps, this can make them rather hard to find unless you know they are there or you put time into exploring an area.
In E+W I can go most places, break out a map and find some riding - and of course, so can everyone else.
thats not the case IME molgrips. I use maps to find trails and geograph to see what they are like with a bit of exploring as well
Paths and tracks are on maps in Scotland too. The exploring bit is good fun, you can have a dull or hard work experience but when you find something good (as you usually do) it's quite a buzz. I do leave a few clues behind on Geograph.
Likes of Strava are the problem.
They don't give a 💩 if they are making billions from the data collected.
I've found loads of Strava trails not in my patch.
I'm dreading the day a segment appears on some of my cheeky trails. 🙁
Staying away at the moment for trail preservation and not piss off 📴 the landowner.
Keep Stumm.
“Sheffield – and Manchester. And Derby. And a big motorway either side. Quantum difference in pressure of use, “
Ever heard of Glasgow?
Yep it's a small town in the West of Scotland isn't it?
To keep banging on about population densities, Greater Manchester (so excluding Liverpool, Cheshire, South Lancs etc) alone is over half of Scotland (Greater Glasgow for comparison is about 1/5th of Scotland).
Scotland isn't home to some sort of inherently more responsible breed of Mountainbikers, it's just that some cheeky tail developments at Golfie (which the Scottish Access Code doesn't allow for, access =/= digging) are akin to the proverbial tree falling in a forest compared to say Winhill.
my rides werent entirely on bridleways didn’t seem like the wisest thing to do
Why ? You're not going to get arrested for it ? No-one is going to come knocking on your door saying "oi, why were you on my land".
fasgadh
Free MemberEver heard of Glasgow? That’s by the Pentlands too. The population density thing is claptrap – most people here are concentrated in a small patch in the middle. To get to the empty stuff travel is required.
Exactly this. I understand why people get it wrong, it's unintuitive but it's frustrating when people keep getting it wrong. By definition the empty land is where the people aren't, while the riding pressures are where the people are.