[Closed] Help Ban 4x4s on Stanage + the Roych

no.. cant support banning someones legitimate acess rights so you can exercise yours in exclusivity..

ban this today and whose the next target..

ban the ramblers and you might actually see progress.. no organised groups calling for the exclusion of others.. no groups calling for thier rights to take precedence over others.. no closure of parts of the pennine way due to erosion caused soley by walkers..no groups of 40 tramping down ambleside highstreet in gortex jackets and hiking boots to buy more gortex and hiking boots.

Yeah! Then ban locals selling the houses to newcomers for a profit!

Keep local homes in Cumbria for locals only!

Those pesky ramblers.

Surely if 'your' enjoyment impinges on someone else's there is a problem. Motorised objects do cause this, if you have to put effort in you usually get something 'out'-- whether walking, cycling, sailing,climbing,horseriding,kite flying....but to press a pedal or throttle does not count imo-

fao hora, "I have more respect for ramblers. They got US access in the first place", I think you mean the "British Workers Sports federation", see para 2: http://www.socialist.net/the-kinder-scout-trespass-80-years-on.htm or even wiki

Good news though, looks like mtb was in in the 30s
http://www.wcml.org.uk/contents/activists/benny-rothman/

Surely if 'your' enjoyment impinges on someone else's there is a problem. Motorised objects do cause this, if you have to put effort in you usually get something 'out'-- whether walking, cycling, sailing,climbing,horseriding,kite flying....but to press a pedal or throttle does not count imo-

That's just veiled prejudice against fat people in camo. How else are they going to enjoy the outdoors if they can't drive through it? It's not like they can walk or ride mountain bikes.

Seriously though, anyone who doubts what brilliant fun off-roading is, simply needs to pop over to YouTube and do a search on Roych Clough.

Hang on - how cool is this?

And this is exciting - great soundtrack too!!!

I'm not sure what my case is, but I rest it anyway... 😉

My grandad was on the Kinder trespass when they got shot at by 'gamekeepers' with police standing by watching.....

I think a happy compromise would be to exclude series landrovers from the TRO.

"Damage" usually means "sweet tech trails" to me- look at how Rushup Edge used to be! Now it's boring. And NBT's photo shows me a man than can't ride a bike and a great bit of trail.

I feel the Park Authority is doing the most "damage" by putting thousands of tons of gravel and dozens of drainage ditches on trails like this. Not only does it ruin enjoyment for a lot of users (cyclists and walkers- who goes for a ramble to walk on graded gravel trails?) they are also incredibly ugly.

Also, once they've been banned from most places they're just going to start using trails illegally. Including ones they weren't allowed on in the first place.

I've e-mailed them saying I don't support the ban. Please can everyone else who is commenting do the same, I fear the 4x4 lobbyists won't have much of a voice and just posting on here won't help.

roych@peakdistrict.gov.uk

long.causeway@peakdistrict.gov.uk

(BTW- I'm not a 4x4 driver nor do I own a crosser. I do live in the Peak though and want everyone to enjoy it)

Oh, and as an aside, how often do you actually see green laners out there? I've only seen about 4 groups in the last year. Similarly, saying "it makes it too hard for horse riders"- when do you ever see horses in the Peak away from the Roman Road out of Hope and Jagger's Clough?

Yeah I have to say nbt your picture of that trail looks ace! Can't say I'm a massive fan of 4x4s (anywhere in fact 😉 ) but I don't want to see them banned everywhere. I have seen some pretty irresponsible behaviour from 4x4s and motorbikes though - they can cause a very large mount of erosion very quickly compared to any other trail user.

Still not compared to what a bit of bad weather can do though. And I agree that the real vandalism is just dumping tonnes of gravel all over everything. Pointless and ugly.

Fantastic post Schnor

I think one of the key points is that, in the grand scheme of things, localised wear as might be found on a path, but usually has no wider impact, just consider the way wildlife flourishes just yards away from tank tracks in areas used by the MoD! To those who still worry about the disturbance any user group has on the narrow linear paths across wild areas I normally suggest that the solution is to close nearby car parks!

To top it all off we only need to consider the huge amount of erosion caused by walkers in any "honeypot" location such as the Peaks, Snowdon, the Lakeland fells etc. With either fortune being spent on extensive stone pitching being done or leaving scars like that on the South Summit of Snowdon.

Of course if any wear is attributed to anyone but walkers the usual course of action is to try to exclude them, not spend money on path construction and maintenance.

I've had some very enjoyable off road motorbike rides so I won't be supporting a ban either. I can't personally see the attraction of taking a four wheerer down trails like that, but each to their own.

Maybe a 25mph limit on unsurfaced roads would satisfy the 'be seen to be doing something' requirement where there's conflict between different groups without unduly affecting legitimate and responsible off-roaders?

No support from me either - I'm an ex 4x4 owner (who'll be getting another one ASAP) and have seen loads of really good tracks closed off over the last decade.
I've never driven Stanage, but would very much like to.
- I've driven Strata Florida in Wales though - and that was ace!

I'll agree there are some real c**ts that drive 4x4s, but the rudest, and most unpleasant people we ever me out on the hills were militant ramblers who thought we shouldn't be there... and to be fair there are some real T**ts riding bikes aswell... each to their own I reckon.

schnor - Member
Apologies in advance, this is just my incoherent saturday morning thoughts!

Working in a RoW team of five (formerly nine, but thats another story) I'm depressed to know I'm the only one who isnt anti-offroader. Our network is less than 2% BOAT / R Byways, although we do have a fairly extensive network of UCR's in the south of the county, which are (supposed to be) looked after by the Highways Department....

What do all these abbreviations mean?
Not knocking what you are writing just that I do not have a clue.

Maybe a 25mph limit on unsurfaced roads would satisfy the 'be seen to be doing something' requirement where there's conflict between different groups without unduly affecting legitimate and responsible off-roaders?

I go faster than that on the pushbike and I'm not a fast rider.

The average speed of a motorbike on green lanes is around 11mph. Aside from a minority of idiots (who'll continue to ride illegally after you've banned the good guys) most trailbikers ride considerately.

"be seen to do something" - Maybe they should remind the ramblers that they don't own the countryside?

Munro lots. Theres even a Horse riding centre there. Improve conditions and youd see more horses about.

If youve ever ridden a horse youll know it can be harder than other forms of bike/green laning etc.

Plus my concern is ONE section of the Peaks; Roych circa 50ms. NOT all access to 4x4s.

Yes I too like techy but I also want capable safe access to other users. Roych Clough isnt sustainable.

nope - not for me either...

not a fan of 4x4s on stanage, but have managed to live with it and pass safely when they always block the same section and end up grinding axle

unfortunately the biggest idiots on the trails are the cyclists and walkers imo, and its the 4x4's, cross bikes, horses that do the most damage to the ground

[img] [/img]

Leave the poor sods alone 🙄

supporting any ban of any user seems a pretty unwise thing to do as a mountain biker.

THIS

Somewhere the ramblers have a thread asking them to protest at out rights

the countryside is for all they have limited access as is and I have no problem supporting their use to use the countryside how they wish to as it is for all of us to use
Problem is we just think abut what we want and not fair access to all - we are outnumbered by ramblers so we should help other minorities

Were i am they keep the trails interesting where they ride IMHO

Zokes that analogy has no links to Roych as its alot quieter for walkers. the side erosion/widening on Roych is caused by cyclists* being unable to use the bridleway due the dangerous nature/condition now. Access should be everyone but would you ride a horse there safely? Let alone a bike?

Snowdon's a bridleway, but I've never seen any horses up there. And Roych looks a lot tamer than something like the Snowdon Ranger - again a bridleway, and a track lots of riders enjoy.

If you want access for everyone, perhaps it should be resurfaced to allow wheelchair users? That'll make it a fun decent on a bike I'm sure. 🙄 I'm really not sure mountain biking is the sport for you if you class Roych as dangerous. Riding a bike is dangerous - you might fall off and everything.

Or did you mean simply that [u]you[/u] find it a bit too technical ❓

Oh, and as for noise - Snowdon would be a lot quieter [u]without[/u] the walkers.

I didn't say I didn't enjoy that bit of trail, and I must point out that's not me in the photo - in fact I enjoyed it so much I rode back up and rode it again 🙂 And Zokes, Hora rode it too before you start pointing fingers - We have pictorial evidence even.

The point i'm making is that there's damage. OK, it's damage we like, but it's getting towards the state that it was in before it was rebuilt. The council, like it or not, have a duty to maintain the roads to a certain standard, and the point will be reached where the council will have to do something about it. As [b]schnor[/b] says above, the PROW teams and budgets are shrinking and thus the problem is that the council cannot always be proactive in addressing a small problem before it becomes a big problem that costs a lot more to fix. In the case or the Roych, they threw an awful lot of money at it, and it held up for a while, but it's crumbling now. I don't know about you but I would prefer that money was spent on more important things.

With rights comes responsibilty. Yes, 4*4s have a right to use that track, and I'm sure that every single one of them will say they use it responsibly, but nevertheless the damage is being done and the council is duty bound to fix that. What we like as MTBers simply does not come into the equation in legal terms: although we have a [b]permissive[/b] right to use bridleways, the law explicitly states that bicycles should not be taken into account when considering the appropriate surfacing for a trail. It's only through the graces of the PDNP ROW officers inviting MTB groups to consult that we had anything to do with Roych Clough in the first place, and given that I know the guys, I can say that they wouldn't be considering a TRO if they thought there was an alternative

anyway, it's saturday and I'm off to Revolution later. Say hi if you see me

Well put nbt

Can I add Ive met TWO rude walkers in the Peaks. The rest have been very friendly. Same with the Lakes yet Ive met countless miserable and rude riders. I guess the walkers are merely reacting to 15stone of petulent children on their expensive toys.

The big difference between walkers making motorways on Snowdon or wherever, is that that is millions of walkers a year.

If you look at somewhere like Wolven's Lane in the Surrey Hills, they counted what they considered to be a massive number of 4x4s, something like 100 in a day on a summer weekend, and that was absolutely trashing it, to the point where if it rained, even the 4x4s could get through - at one point they were driving through the hedge into a field, along the field, then back through the hedge to avoid the worst bit.

Similarly with mountain bikes - look at the damage to trails after a big race with hundreds of participants; even the big lap races like Mountain Mayhem - whilst it gets bad, it's absoultely nothing in comparison to the damage of 50 or so off roaders having a race.

So to compare them to mountain bikes or walkers is a bit disingenuous. Yes walkers and mountain bikers do damage to tracks, but the difference is that up Snowdon, a track is being repaired for something like half million bikers and walkers. Whereas even in popular places like Roych Clough, at least the same level of repair works is required for probably 5 or 10 thousand people a year at most.

hora - I'd suggest that someone not capable of walking Roych (whatever it's condition) probably shouldn't be that far from safety anyway - where would they be heading - Kinder and down Jacobs maybe? Not exactly a flat pavement is it?

Sorry federalski, there are so many acronyms I tend to rely on them too much!

(P)RoW = (Public) Right of Way (Footpaths, Bridleways, BOATS, RB's)

BOAT = Byway Open to All Traffic. Pretty much like any tarmac road, it can be used by mechanically propelled vehicles (basically motor vehicles) all the way down to walkers.

RB's = Restricted byways, can be used by everything other than motor vehicles. The law changed recently, there used to be paths called RUPPs (roads used as public paths) which sometimes had vehicular rights, but these were all reclassified as RB's without vehicular rights

UCR = Green lane = Generic term for a surfaced / unsurfaced public road without classification (like A / B / C road). It starts to get tricky if you need to check if a specific track is public, but generally speaking these are tracks with small green circles on a 25k OS map.

Somewhere the ramblers have a thread asking them to protest at out rights

Go on then, where is it? Link?

The damage in the Peak is entirely unproblematic, though. It's not ugly like a graded Park Authority Approved trail. No one struggles with walking it and it's not an eyesore. And if it's only 4x4s that do this damage then why is the Beast how it is? Somehow that has got lots rougher over the last few years and 4x4 users can't use it. Perhaps the biggest erosional tragedy in the Peak is the footpath over Stanage. Walkers dodging the mud, walking in massive lines and generally being inconsiderate has widen the path massively, making it ugly and damaging habitat. 4x4s generally stick to a trail and don't go around stuff.

I will agree however that walkers are generally nice- we ride footpaths in the Lakes and Peak a LOT these days (trails is trails innit?) and I've had only one altercation with some walkers on the Telegraph Trail. They were saying it wasn't a bridleway, so I pointed out it wasn't a footpath either and they were most apologetic. Similar story to Zokes though- they wondered why I wasn't at a trail centre.

Also, hora, strange that you're dead against 4x4s here while on pistonheads in May you were in favour of 4x4's using Chapel Gate and at the least not discouraging it on Roych Clough 🙄

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=195&t=1118463&mid=0&i=100&nmt=Peak+District+Laning&mid=0

BWD - http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21978 (may be members only, and I'll admit on the whole it's a similar tone to this thread- "Ban them? Why?")

Go on then, where is it? Link?

Oops posted that before I read to the end of the thread

From my TRF Days. If you not like seeing motorised transport out on the trail, go ride on a footpath or bridleway.
[IMG] [/IMG]

And if it's only 4x4s that do this damage then why is the Beast how it is? Somehow that has got lots rougher over the last few years and 4x4 users can't use it.

I can't recall anyone saying only 4*4s did damage - I certainly didn't, and I will agree that ALL trail use has some sort of impact, that's why trails develop. Motorised traffic has a substantially bigger impact than non-motorised traffic, though.

In the case of The Beast, the problem is water damage, and although it's getting worse, it's not increasing as rapidly as Roych CLough, and is due in part to years of under-investmant: had the problem been caught early enough, it wouldn't be nearly as bad as it is now. Sadly it wasn't, so it's only going to continue to get worse. More fun for bikes, until the point that the council is force to do something about it, at which point all the bikers will be up in arms about councils "ruining" trails...

All legal for us trail bikes. The only hassle we had from from a group mountain bikers....
[IMG] [/IMG]

Groups like the TRF do more to promote access and conservation than any group I've been involved with to date.
[IMG] [/IMG]

Groups like the TRF do more to promote access and conservation than any group I've been involved with to date.

That's great, but I doubt you'll convince hora - he seems concerned that mountain biking might be a little dangerous

munrobiker - Member

BWD - http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=21978 (may be members only, and I'll admit on the whole it's a similar tone to this thread- "Ban them? Why?")

That's just a single stroppy individual not 'The Ramblers' though. The inference was that there was that the organisation was demanding that bikes be banned, but I've yet to see any evidence for that at all any more than this thread proves that mountain biking organisations want to ban 4x4s.

munrobiker when did I ever say I was against 4x4s? I said and I repeat ONE section of Roych Clough is now dangerous to other users. It needs attention/discussing. It will become over s anitised like Chapel Gate though.

Devils advocate- if I fall on Roych and break my collarbone could I sue the council for negligence?

Someone will.

Devils advocate- if I fall on Roych and break my collarbone could I sue the council for negligence?

Someone will.

Best get it tarmacced or fenced off completely then 🙄

I did say Devils Advocate...

A couple of years ago it did happen apparently involving a Bridleway/rider!

As I said. Better close it then - it all seems very dangerous out there 🙄

Yep leaves the cheeky for us riders ... 😉

[quote=Daisy_Duke ]All legal for us trail bikes. The only hassle we had from from a group mountain bikers....

really, you post a pic of a bike more than hub deep? Do you really think that's a great image to portray? Legal it may be, but see my post earlier about responsibility. ok, sometimes you have little choice other than to crack on and finish, but I've seen trail bikes spraying mud all over the place in places such as the packhorse trail outside of marsden - I personally wil only ride that trail on an MTB when it's either bone dry or frozen solid yet that particular group of bikers were very insistent that it should be a road and thus they were perfectly within their rights to ride it no matter what. ****s

I'm interested that you regard the state of the Beast as a "problem". How so? Walkers still happily walk up it. Riders still happily ride down it. Unless you want the whole of the Peak turning into a sanitised trail centre type place I don't really understand your objection to the trails being in the state they are in. If you think the trails are a "problem" why not go and join all the fat blokes from Rotherham at Sherwood Pines?

I know you are a better rider than you are making out here, don't try and paint the Peak as a place for families to take their kids on a 5 mile pootle, it's an area of hilly, rugged countryside, not centreparks.

And I'd disagree that the damage is as quick as you make out. Stanage has been in a similar state for around 10 years. It's not as different as you are suggesting. Have you seen what mountain bikes are doing to the trail from Whinstone Lee Tor to the Ladybower in that goes straight down the hill? You can see it from quite a way away now. That is damage. Widening a path is far worse than dislodging the odd rock on one that is already well defined.

And where are these 4x4s and bikes going to go when you ban them from here? To "destroy" the handful of trails left to them more?

And if Roych Clough is so "dangerous", should we helicopter a blanket of hardcore over the Lakes of Snowdonia? I'm with Zokes on this- it's not a manicured nature trail, it's a National Park.

Sorry, are you asking me or hora or someone else? In the case that you're speaking to me -

sonmeone else mentioned the beast - I simply responded. I enjoy riding it, but that doesn't do anything to alter the fact that the trail is changing and becoming more eroded. As I said earlier, what we as MTBers enjoy and want doesn't come into it, the authorities have a legal responsgbility that they are duty bound to uphold. Unless the law changes, then at some point - and it may be several years away - they will do some remedial work on The Beast. that may be sympathetic, or it may just be throwing loads of hardcore on it. It'll depend on things like the money available and the people running the project

and yes, the trail at Whinstone Lee Torr is in a terrible state. Ideally, trails such as that would be rerouted to use a path that didn't cause such damage, but rerouting trails is a massive legal task and as such is not likely to happen. Alternatively, if more trails were legally accessible to bikes, the number would be more spread out rather than concentrated on "honeypot" trails. Again though this is a massive task and one that's very unlikely to happen

I've deliberately avoided opening this thread as i'm fully in favour of opening up more access rights to the countryside (thankfully i live in scotland) for everyone irrespective of how they wish to to travel whether that be 4x4, bike - enduro or cycle, horse, or on foot, and i thought this thread would be filled with the righteous outpouring of "not in my back yard" responses but i have to commend the vast majority of the posters on here for their considered and reasoned arguments regarding allowing more access for 4x4's.

There's no point in myself adding anything as now the thread has grown to 4 pages it has all been covered by previous posts, as a side note the only problem i have had in scotland regarding access rights has come from ignorant walkers/ramblers (pretty much all english) out in the Galloway hills who take offence at mtb's on the trails and footpaths despite myself and others usually always yielding to them, when you point out the fact that Scotland has open land access rights and freedom to roam as long as you do not cause wilful damage this usually results in a barrage of "tutting, head shaking" and the occasional comment of "that would be changed if i had my way", even had one old arse jabbing me in the chest with one of his walking poles whilst having a hairy fit shouting at me "you have no right to be here, vandalism...it's just vandalism.

I'd welcome more 4x4's, enduro bikes, trials bikes, mtbs etc..etc...the more the better and perhaps we could start to shove the ramblers lobby back into the corner they belong in.

Soma this what I dont 'get', all walkers that I meet seem to be cheery. Even the ones on footpaths when Im obviously in the wrong! You do slow right down to a crawl well before you reach them? I find this 'yields/shows obvious respect. Whereas a fair few times Ive shouted THANK YOU you miserable **** to riders who wont even mutter thanks. These are the ones who get walkers backs up.

there is a different 'headspace' when walking in the country, mostly relaxed,at ease,getting away from all the hustle of life-- last thing anyone want is a rude reminder of that

The inference was that there was that the organisation was demanding that bikes be banned,

The point was that other countryside users dont like us accessing the countryside on bikes. You can get bogged down on the term ramblers and wonder what it meant to imply [ nothing tbh, a walker someone who rambles] if you wish, saying walkers would have prevented this but does not alter the sentence. The ban thing seems to be you over egging the pudding again and taking an over rich interpretation of what i said

Some walkers moan about us was all i was saying
Believe what you want

Somewhere the ramblers have a thread asking them to protest at out rights

Of course i slow down to a crawl when i meet them, that's a given surely?, you'd have to be a pretty ignorant fker to blast past them at speed or more often than not if i'm traversing a hillside or climbing i come to a complete stop and move myself and the bike off the path and allow them to pass at their own pace, usually accompanied with a cheery comment and chat for a minute regarding the weather/amount of climbing left etc before remounting and carrying on, i've never openly abused the ignorant few who've stood deliberately in the way either or those who've verbally berated me/us, when confrontations do occur i tend to offer them a card with my name and contact details/phone number etc and inform them that if they have a problem then they either contact the police or the local council rights of way officer who will put them right with regards to access laws in Scotland, at this they usually start muttering under their breath and you begin to realise that some arguments you will never win - bit like arguing on a web forum eh?, and the best response is a cheery "goodbye, enjoy yourselves folks" before continuing on your way.

Soma this what I dont 'get', all walkers that I meet seem to be cheery

I find the same when out on the motorbike. First off I rarely meet others on the byways. The vast majority (95% +) are polite friendly and courteous.

A lot of the focus of this thread is on the issue of erosion and damage. The main reason PDNPA is trying to totally ban motors from these two lanes is because it wants to preserve it's perception of tranquility for walkers.

Levels of use of the routes, from PDNPA's own figures, show that 80% of the motorised use occurs at the weekend. Exactly at the same time when most walkers use it. The routes are little used by anyone on weekdays.

Motor groups have suggested a ban during summer weekends only. PDNPA continue to pursue a total ban.

The only obvious conclusion to this is that PDNPA are bowing to pressure from local nimbys and an extremists element of walkers that think they own the countryside - hardly surprising when authority consistently bows to their wishes despite it being detrimental to all other users.