[Closed] Ladybower, where's this bit then?

Without watching it I'm going to say this includes the highly controversial bit directly up from the bridge and this thread will turn into an argument about riding ethics.

And how about after watching it? Where's the bridge?

And how about after watching it?

I'd still tend to agree with Podge 😉

Without wanting to get into an ethics argument, are those trails frowned upon? They seem far enough away from cafes and walkers that riders don’t really cause any grief.

They were fairly busy with riders last time I was there, though.

Excellent stuff... certainly something to consider for August 🙂

I've given a locaish mate the job of seeking them out before we come up.

The land owner (one of the biggest and most influential in the area) knows about them and is not happy, until off piste riding and building is curbed they hugely reluctant to work with the locals to legitimise any further development of the area.

The woodland stuff is more of an issue for the land owner as there's more scope for injury and financial penalty to them.

The open moorland stuff is more of an issue for locals as it's become a massive visible scar across the hill and as such attracted the vocal NIMBY crew.

Everyone who rides this should be made to sit through the local access forum meetings to see how much of a ball ache the issue is.

Everyone who rides this should be made to sit through the local access forum meetings to see how much of a ball ache the issue is.

IT's OK, we're not locals 🙂

As always, publishing the details of sensitive trails on a public forum breaks rule 1.

Amazing that people don't get that.🤔

With all the digging that's been going on it wont be long before they are closed or even worse a bad accident.

Some of the stuff is steep and extreme in places and very easy to get well out of your depth with very little wiggle room when it goes wrong.

On a weekend its now very busy with people sessioning bits of it

Agree with what's been said above, I cant envisage a good outcome.

The fact that the whole Win Hill area had new fences put up not long ago should provide the hint that you aren't allowed to ride in there, yet mtbers seem to think that they are entitled to ride, and dig, wherever they please. As @thepodge says, all this is doing damage to any talks to gain legitimate mtb trails.

The Win Hill trails have been compared to Wharncliffe, however, there is one huge difference, in that you are allowed to ride in Wharncliffe.

The other major difference between Win Hill and Wharncliffe is the about of walkers and general public about. On a summer weekend the place is packed as we all know and that increases the likelihood of conflict. As @Tracey says I can’t see it ending well.

The Win Hill trails have been compared to Wharncliffe, however, there is one huge difference, in that you are allowed to ride in Wharncliffe.

I'm happy to ride wherever with the lad, we're novices to the Peaks and just browsing Google/Youtube as to where we ride for the 'big boys' rides.... we've got plenty of family stuff, some walking, chilling etc... but as we've travelled to the Peaks we'd like a bit of riding for a day or 2... Me, i prefer the trail stuff in that video instead of the jump park section, but he'd prefer at least some time on the jumps for sure.
If Wharncliffe has more trailsy type stuff then i'm more than happy to go.

It seems almost everyone on win hill is there to ride the off piste now. It absolutely exploded last summer. I don't think Tommy c hype helped the situation!

100% north side of Win Hill. just follow your nose (or strava heat map) its awesome.

not sure there are any issues with most of the trails but the big jumpy bermy ones at the far end (known as narnia) have always been contentious with land owners... then again, the work thats gone into them! id be suprised anyone would put that much effort into somthing likely to be destroyed....

IT’s OK, we’re not locals

Probably an idea to take that video down. It just provides ammunition that a minority will use against the majority of mountain bikers.
Same happened with green-laning: from lots of access to almost none. Public opinion is fickle, yet powerful.

I don’t think Tommy c hype helped the situation!

he did the same at Heptonstall last year.  Filmed in the hills 100 yards from where I used to live and it went nuts the following weeks. I don't want to blame him directly, I think folk are getting in touch with him and asking him to ride their local gnarr...but when he puts it on line, it goes crazy.

He did a bit of mea-culpa video a few weeks ago now, and some of the comments on it were dumb as shit when it came to riding obviously controversial stuff.

At our end of the Peak District (Hayfield/New Mills end), all out door types get on. However when you start mtbing in the honey pot spots there are lots of visitors (ramblers, day trippers etc) who see us as racing around and ruining the countryside, this just causes conflict.
It takes years to grow a good reputation of riding our mtbikes with consideration and care, but only months can destroy this.

Maybe Wharncliffe would be a better option.

Probably an idea to take that video down. It just provides ammunition that a minority will use against the majority of mountain bikers.

we can't edit posts after 15 mins.

The other major difference between Win Hill and Wharncliffe is the about of walkers and general public about. On a summer weekend the place is packed as we all know and that increases the likelihood of conflict.

That's not true IME. Walkers around Win Hill are on the bridleways, footpaths and up at the summit. The only time you might pass is on the bridleways that are used as uphill links by riders. No one is really walking in the woods, and certainly not up or down the steep built MTB trails. IMO, riding fast on the bridleways elsewhere in the peak is far more likely to bring conflict between walkers and riders.

IMO Win Hill ticks a lot of boxes for not causing issues:
a) trails in the woods - not a visual eyesore
b) away from walkers
c) easily accessible
a) a big hill / lots of space for trails

I've never really understood the ins and outs of the 'liability' argument, but clearly it's an issue for landowners. But beyond that, I can't see too much downside here. It would be a real shame to lose them, and advertising them via these forum posts and YouTube videos will only increase the chance of that, so let's not do that.

Where's that circular argume earning sign?

Firstly, the main access point is a big scar over open moorland which is very visible. Secondly, people have to lift their bikes over fences then climb over them. Making it obvious they shouldn't be there. Thirdly, the trails spit you out on bridleways and many of those exits are very steep. So all it takes is bad timing for potential conflict.

Where’s that circular argume earning sign?

I don't think so. I'm trying to understand why some people might have a problem with the trails, since I don't like conflict. But also arguing to keep the status quo - hence not wanting to advertise them. The two views are not exclusive.

Or maybe I've missed something?

Not sure which fence you're climbing over, there's more than one gate that can be used. Same with access path, it's an existing bridleway up to win hill, no? And I have never seen a single walker in there.

It's a shame if the landowner isn't down with it - I'm inclined to agree that it gets people off the packed bridleways and out of sight. Some of them are shitting steep though I can see how that would cause concern

There are no bridleways to the summit of Win Hill itself. Yes, there are some gates in the fence, but many of these dont allow public access. Where public access is provided, via signed gates to footpaths and bridleways in the woods, do these give cart blanche to ride wherever?

The land owner (one of the biggest and most influential in the area) knows about them and is not happy, until off piste riding and building is curbed they hugely reluctant to work with the locals to legitimise any further development of the area.

I can think of three ‘biggest most influential’ land owners in the area.  There is a campaign to get one of them to pay his inheritance tax because of not allowing cyclists on tracks in one of his other estates so there isn’t much chance of him saying yes to anything cycling related anyway.

Another seems to have a track record of employing people to accidentally shoot birds of prey on his land.

I always thought that the forested bits were Severn Trent land?

I don’t think so. I’m trying to understand why some people might have a problem with the trails, since I don’t like conflict. But also arguing to keep the status quo – hence not wanting to advertise them. The two views are not exclusive.

Or maybe I’ve missed something?

Well...I would imagine the landowner who is liable for anyone spanging themselves on their land will be pissed off.  At the end of the day it's their land and it's being damaged.

I would also imagine the likes of Ride Sheffield, Peak MTB who put hours/days/months/years of effort trying to get legitimate access for everyone will be pretty pissed off at their efforts being undermined.

At the end of the day it’s their land and it’s being damaged.

Is it being damaged?

I know it's a long way from "leave no trace", but some trails through an industrial plantation isn't really "damage", is it? If people start nailing thing to trees, or felling them, then it might well be.

I'm with the "keep it quiet, and keep the entrances/exits hidden" approach. Multiple exits onto often used tracks is asking for trouble.

Sorry i asked now 😀

It's a bit too late to keep it quiet. And there are multiple entry and exit points all along that side of the hill. Looks fun though.

Pretty sure alpkit used some of it to promote one of their new bikes, so maybe it's fine and we can all ride it guilt free?

I would also imagine the likes of Ride Sheffield, Peak MTB who put hours/days/months/years of effort trying to get legitimate access for everyone will be pretty pissed off at their efforts being undermined.

I can understand that but with some of the local landowners you are dealing with getting on for 900 yeas of privilege and another you are dealing with Severn Trent so the chance of progress is remote at best

So many people riding now if everybody stuck to the bridleways and no "off piste" at all there is a potential for alot more conflict with other users especially with all the electric motorbikes. Need to apply common sense not damage fences, trees etc and exercise care on what you have not ridden before. If a land owner is dead against you doing it then you need to consider elsewhere. Maybe a ban on head angles below 68 will stop these crazy steep trails 😉

@weeksy - head to wharny, you'll find every type of trail in there - all above board.

Is it being damaged?

No, probably not.

I nearly put inverted commas around "damaged" but at the end of the day, they'll probably see it as something they have to sort, so therefore "damaged".

but where does the wood/logs come from that is used to support jumps? im guessing that the builders dont carry it in with them. This was confirmed when i saw trail builders carrying bow saws.

id class that as damage.

If a land owner is dead against you doing it then you need to consider elsewhere

I don't necessarily agree. If everyone did that then walkers would still have no access to various places. ( Kinder Trespass)

Now whilst I accept that cyclists are generally deemed as being subhuman in the UK and so we couldn't possibly expect more than crumbs...

another you are dealing with Severn Trent so the chance of progress is remote at best

its early days still, but the relationship with Severn Trent and Peak District MTB appears strong - permissive bridleway up Elmin Pitts is evidence of this. I understand the Severn Trent contact is young and understands things well from the MTB side. Personally, if people kept it off Social Media, didn’t build large gap features and left it looking vaguely natural, I think it could have a future and largely ignored. The way it’s going I think the trails are on borrowed time.

And I have seen walkers and birders in there. A fair amount.

Weeksy, no need to apologise for asking. I would assume that most people on here and most riders in general sometimes ride cheeky stuff.

The problems start when people strava them or upload to trail forks. Film them and upload for all to see. Its all done innocently however its this that then gets used against us all in arguments as to why we shouldn't be there.

its early days still, but the relationship with Severn Trent

is it? I’ve been riding there for 20 years so it’s not as if it’sa new issue that needs resolving.

I’m at the stage that if it’s just a couple of us out then footpath, bridleway, unknown status trails are all fair game. If I’m with a big group then I’m much more aware of the need to be seen to be on bridleways.

i do wonder if various brands posting videos from their riders are aware they are made on illegal trails when they promote them

I think everyone should stop riding these fun, challenging trails. We should make friends with the land owners and with a bit of luck in about 15 years we might have an official 6 feet wide rollerblade track with no scary features on it.

but where does the wood/logs come from that is used to support jumps

fallen tree's. nobody is chopping down healthy ones that's for sure!

i do wonder if various brands posting videos from their riders are aware they are made on illegal trails when they promote them

They probably have varying levels of awareness and responsibility about it, but I don't expect it comes up much in marketing meetings. Just not on the radar until an advocacy group kicks off when there's a particularly blatant example.

Taking Win Hill in particular out of the equation, there's a strong argument to be made that riding (and filming) on unauthorised trails helps normalise the activity. But as ever there's a balance to be struck and the endless YouTube vids from Tommy C Hype and his wannabes are a bit alarming for those of us who prefer good old-fashioned word-of-mouth.

Let's not call them "illegal trails" BTW.

@erictwinge - the fallen trees that don't belong to them?

Pipedream I know, but I always thought a series of trails thorough those forests would go a long way to alleviating user conflict, but also make it a great spot for bikers, out of which a load of other businesses could benefit.

If all of the forests around Ladybower had Coed Y Brenin style trails built all around them, on the proviso that there was no illegal digging (again, dream on!) then that would take a lot of stress off the other trails that are getting very eroded. There's potential for miles of routes around there, but the forest owner obviously isn't interested, and i expect the inhabitants of the Derwent and Hope Valley think there's too many visitors already.

@pieface.

That's exactly the plan and the landowner is very interested, in fact they proposed more than expected but... They want "us" to make the first move.

They want “us” to make the first move.

Which is to stop riding the stuff that is currently there I guess?

@teenrat not sure where you've got this info from...
"The Win Hill trails have been compared to Wharncliffe, however, there is one huge difference, in that you are allowed to ride in Wharncliffe."
"head to wharny, you’ll find every type of trail in there – all above board."

The only permitted riding in Wharncliffe is on official rights of way and fireroads, none of the mtb trails are permitted or above board. Even the old red xc loop no longer officially exists and has been designed and delisted by FC.

That’s exactly the plan and the landowner is very interested, in fact they proposed more than expected but… They want “us” to make the first move.

The problem is that organisations like RideSheffield and Eastern Moors Partnership etc don’t actually represent all MTBers who are a diverse group with occasionally aligned interests. Whilst I would broadly support cycle lines and extra gentle trails around reservoirs, I probably won’t use them a whole lot. Similarly, RideSheffield has done some decent work in getting permission for us to ride some former footpaths. Which is all great, but they’re not trails I’d choose to ride a lot and actually I’d probably ride them cheekily anyway.

The point is, @thepodge, does your organisation really represent the 50/01 or TommyC Hype Kru wannabes riding at Win Hill? Probably not. So you telling people not to ride great trails that are - as we have agreed - fairly harmless, is a bit toothless unless there’s a clear ‘carrot’ for you to wave at them.

Similar to the Kinder mass trespass - those guys didn’t win their extra rights by passively obliging a landowner.

The land owner can work with us or against us.

But at the end of the day as long as you're ok, everyone else can go **** themselves.

This isn't a comment on Ladybower itself, I couldn't help but notice in a woodland not too far from me, that now it has lots of interesting trails that nobody descends on the footpaths anymore which is a bonus.

It’s people riding bikes in woods ffs, some people need to have a day off.

p.s the trails in said woods are class, hats off to the trail builders.

< But at the end of the day as long as you’re ok, everyone else can go **** themselves. >

For me, kind of, yeah.

Just because you/ride Sheffield/whatever organisation wants something doesn’t mean the rest of us do. These ‘really promising discussions’ with the land owners have been going on for probably decades and nothing ever comes of it, thankfully.

To the first poster, I’d say crack on and have a go if you want, but if it’s wet that area gets extra slick so bare that in mind. Oh and any of the climbs back up to the top are awful!

Its about responsibility and respect.

But your right. **** anyone who stops me having fun.

@markspark ride sheffield aren’t of the view that these are bad trails and people shouldn’t ride them. There should be some sensible building, folks should avoid them when wet/easily damaged etc but they’re a great place to ride.

I would also imagine the likes of Ride Sheffield, Peak MTB who put hours/days/months/years of effort trying to get legitimate access for everyone will be pretty pissed off at their efforts being undermined.

Which is somewhat undermined when many members of these groups ride this stuff themselves. They just don't shout about it.

Anyway - saw thread title, knew thepodge would be in like a rat up a drainpipe (again). Dropped in to check my assumption and, yep, post number 2.

I was also pretty much certain the "just stop riding it and the landowner will let us ride it" argument would be prominent - again, two out of two. I must by psychic.

You whistle it and I'll sing it.

"Local trails for local people dee-dum-dee-dee, Local trails for local people dee-dum-dee-dee".

I don't know the tune, what song is it ?

If this thread proves anything it's that people don't observe rule #1 and don't particularly care about others, so long as they are having fun f#@k everyone else.

If this thread proves anything it’s that people don’t observe rule #1 and don’t particularly care about others, so long as they are having fun f#@k everyone else.

That's how some people come across.

I don’t know the tune, what song is it ?

Ask thepodge.

He wrote the tune and the lyrics, at this rate he is probably also working on some sort of dance interpretation too...

FWIW I would advocate NOT asking this sort of stuff on an open forum. A few minutes research would show which forum members might be locals - or even a thread asking for locals to make themselves known - so it can be done via PM.

But if anything is guaranteed to get my back up it is people playing the holier than thou act whilst they or there mates do the exact stuff they are telling everyone else not to. That is also in violation of rule #1.

Let's not get too polarised here. I can definitely see two sides to this. I fully respect people who are actually engaging with landowners to try to increase access. They are putting in the effort where I ( and almost everyone else) are not.

However the MTB access laws in this country are an utter joke. We should have much more access than we do. It's quite scary how many of us actually believe that it's ok for us to have sod all rights. No wonder the powers that be also think this.
Whaddabout the Kinder Trespass? Do all the threaddies here advocating cap doffing think that the KTers were out of order? Were they getting beyond themselves asking demanding access to someone else's land? How dare they. How would they have liked it if LordShaggedHisSister came traipsing across their ginnel just because he felt like it?

[ Whilst firmly bearing in mind rule 1] we need to be mindful of the fact that we are citizens of this country too. Our taxes pay the numerous grants and subsidies that many landowners depend on. The water companies have just as much legal obligation to provide exercise and recreation opportunities to cyclists as they do ramblers.

Fair enough, when cyclists break rule 1, it looks bad. But ramblers etc also break rule 1 occasionally and they still have almost unlimited access to the whole uplands of England.

People above are fretting about the highly visible scar that cyclists have worn and saying it is an obvious eyesore... Once you get past the SorryWeShouldntBeHere deference stance that cyclists are always expected to abide by, the obvious conclusion is WGAS. It's a path, there are thousands of miles of roads and paths across the Peak District. Most of them nobody GAS about. But because this is evil cyclists then it's deemed to be sacreligous.

Anyway. I'm waffling. But despite what I said above, I'd like to reiterate my thanks to the people who are trying to get access improved. At least you are trying.

the fallen trees that don’t belong to them?

Serious or in jest, that has to be a contender for post of the year.

FWIW I would advocate NOT asking this sort of stuff on an open forum

Yeah, that's pretty much where I am, I've no worries with folk riding cheeky, but 1. don't tell any-one, and 2. don't wind folk up about it.

 it is people playing the holier than thou act whilst they or there mates do the exact stuff they are telling everyone else not to

Also this. There's a vanishingly small number of us that can, hand on heart, say they don't ever ride where they shouldn't, so you can't get wound up about someone else finding your sneaky DH run (but see above)

Yeah, that’s pretty much where I am, I’ve no worries with folk riding cheeky, but 1. don’t tell any-one, and 2. don’t wind folk up about it.

And how exactly would a person who's never been to the area know this ? There's a video of some cool trails on Youtube, how exactly would I know whether they're allowed or not ?

Sure you'll say "do some research" but isn't that exactly what i'm doing by asking on here ? How exactly would someone else be expected to gain the information on them ?

1+ With the don’t ask on an open forum crowd.

It’s just asking to get stuff shut down. A rider already sadly died at the top of WH earlier in the month (some type of medical episode), the last thing needed is an influx of riders now.

1+ With the don’t ask on an open forum crowd.

How would you get the information then ?

I’d maybe ask myself if my knowing about it is more important than the risk of it being fenced or dozed.

My first thought wouldn’t be to put a clip on a pretty obvious forum. First I’d speak to people I actually know from riding.

I’d maybe ask myself if my knowing about it is more important than the risk of it being fenced or dozed.

My first thought wouldn’t be to put a clip in on pretty obvious forum. First I’d speak to people I actually know from riding.

1. LOL WTF
2. How would i know who ? I don't know anyone in the Peaks, at all.... i've been there once in my life. A forum is for discussing things...

I'm confused

Which is somewhat undermined when many members of these groups ride this stuff themselves.

Are you unfairly conflating the two local advocacy groups here?

I believe someone from RS has clarified their position above. I really can't imagine any of the PDMTB committee would be riding these trails, but maybe you know better?

@Weeksy, I think you’ve just made your point perfectly well.

As long as you’re ok, thats all that matters.

Peace out man.

@Weeksy, I think you’ve just made your point perfectly well.

As long as you’re ok, thats all that matters.

where and how ? OK, so answer me this... you wanted to come down to West Berks and ride as you're staying locally for work.

Who would you ask and where would you ask them ?

How would you get the information then ?

1) Start a thread asking for advice in general about riding in the area then PM a couple of respondees with your true question?

2) Have a Google of similar thread titles in STW and identify a couple of likely helpers from that. Then PM them?

3) Have a closer look at the 'sick vids' you are watching, work out roughly where they might be. Look at an OS map and put two and two together?

4) Have a look at associated local FB riders groups. Identify a couple of cheeky-friendly bods and PM them via Facebook?

5) Look on Strava because someone will have put it on there - probably stupidly IMO.

There's five pretty simple options for you. Good enough?

@Weeksy have you read the comments on the clip?

have you read the comments on the clip?

No... i don't really read things like that.

Maybe do so. There might be just a few clues there…

Maybe do so. There might be just a few clues there…

Sure, i'll be the one in the wrong here, despite the fact i've never been within 10 miles of the place, let alone ever ridden the bloody trails... LOL.

Hell, just being helpful. It’ll mean you get the answer quicker (it is in the YT comments…) and hopefully mean the trails are there for everyone, for longer.

and hopefully mean the trails are there for everyone, for longer

Well they're not there for everyone, as you all keep pointing out 😀

Everyone that can read, I suppose. 😉