New Forest National Park Authority – latest anti-cycling nonsense

Draft Charter:

http://www.ctc.org.uk/news/20150121-ctc-sustrans-united-discriminatory-new-forest-charter

http://www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/cycle-charter

🙄

And this is a country that is supposedly so proud of its cycling and participation.

So long as you do it somewhere else, of course.

NIMBYs

In the end, it’ll come down to financial interests. If enough people start to stay away, and make it clear why they’re doing so, affecting the livelihoods of people living there then they’ll change. Or turn it into a gated ghetto for rich people.

How about restricting the number of cars entering the forest to 1000 per day.

Do other NPA’s act in this way? Do NPA’s actually follow any guidelines?

What a ghastly attitude.

Or turn it into a gated ghetto for rich people.

This.

So the rich can sit behind their gates getting ever more paranoid about the ‘threat’ posed by the proles.

If ever a mass “trespass” was called for….

So,

Basically – restrict numbers of bikes, and make them wear number plates for identification in case of incident.

The only ‘incident’ I remember in the last few years was when a resident threw tacs all over the road and some chap broke his collar bone.

It is really sad they level of hatred they seem to be pointing at cyclists. It won’t stop with sportives they already managed to stop the funding which was supposed to be for family hire bike centre too.

quite.

Much more of this nimbiest bollox from the NFPA and they’ll soon see what a few more than 1,000 people have to say.

Based on a a very light read, the proposal is on the size of events (max 1000 riders) not the number of cyclists in the forest per se. It’s not stopping access by individuals, groups of mates, club runs etc.

If events are compromising use/enjoyment of the NP for others, it seems a reasonable position as long as comparable restrictions apply to other groups (car rallies, horseathons etc).

The NP is a shared resource not a bike park.

“To reduce inconvenience to other road users, including local residents, businesses and other cyclists, please accept a maximum of 1,000 riders. If another cycling event is planned for the same day, using the same roads, the total number of riders should not exceed 1,000.”

Seems reasonable to me.

remember when some rail company banned bikes on trains, so a large number of people turned up with non-banned objects larger than bikes….

illogical regs deserve petulant responses.

Appears to be entirely voluntary and therefore unenforceable?

Got to wonder what they’d do if a bunch of people just ‘happened’ to be riding along the same route as a sportive or similar at the same time? After all they aren’t held on closed courses.

Wonder if someone tried to stop you from riding if there’d be any legal comback?

illogical regs deserve petulant responses.

Group ride anyone?

Perhaps a few thousand cyclists all riding in a big bunch, but really slowly so as not to spook the horses?

Seems to be a charter – as in this is what we’d like you to do. No reason to adhere to it. Do they have an equivalent one for point to point meets, runs and hikes? Some (but not all) of the requirements seem pretty reasonable.

Perhaps a few thousand cyclists all riding in a big bunch, but really slowly so as not to spook the horses?

sounds like a very dull day out 😉

Anybody here with lots of money who can find some euro law that can be thrown at them?

Seems reasonable to me.

Presumably you back a limit on 1,000 vehicles attending other New Forest events too?

Maybe if we all hired an elephant each and wandered round on that for the weekend … 😆

Based on a a very light read, the proposal is on the size of events (max 1000 riders) not the number of cyclists in the forest per se. It’s not stopping access by individuals, groups of mates, club runs etc.

If events are compromising use/enjoyment of the NP for others, it seems a reasonable position as long as comparable restrictions apply to other groups (car rallies, horseathons etc).

The NP is a shared resource not a bike park.

“To reduce inconvenience to other road users, including local residents, businesses and other cyclists, please accept a maximum of 1,000 riders. If another cycling event is planned for the same day, using the same roads, the total number of riders should not exceed 1,000.”

Seems reasonable to me.

+1

matt, unfortunately this will be the thin end of the wedge. Once certain protacols have been established to treat cyclists differently to other users of the forest it will become accepted that cyclists need to be ‘managed’ and make it easier for more drastic interventions to be introduced. Its a direction of travel and an approach that is completely at odds with encouraging cycling within the forest.

The New Forest is a total disaster story as far as cycling is concerned and the NPA should be disgusted with itself. The opportunity was there to create a world leading public space with park and ride, cycle paths, conservation areas, childrens educational areas etc etc and all they have done is pander to the lowest common denominator and ruined it for all.

The NP is a shared resource not a bike park.

Current government advice on mass cycling events in national parks suggests they are to be encouraged, unlike events like the new forest motor show.

Parks are attractive locations for large-scale community, charitable or other events and festivals such as organised charity walks, cycling events, cultural and musical events and fairs. Events should be encouraged which fully engage local communities and visitors, showcase ‘greener living’, minimise harm to the environment and help to interpret and encourage access to Parks. Such events can be significantly beneficial to achieving Park purposes and deliver economic and social benefits to local communities. Events with the potential to harm the special qualities of a Park, such as caravan and vehicle rallies and large music festivals, will need to be controlled.

[arsehole]Who cares its flat and swampy there anyway..[/arsehole]

Maybe if we all hired an elephant each and wandered round on that for the weekend

….as long as you display a number front & back!

matt, unfortunately this will be the thin end of the wedge.

Perhaps, or perhaps not.

If the proposal itself is reasonable, go with it, take it for what it is.

If the wedge gets thicker, kick back then, with a strong case of “we already agreed to A, we’re reasonable people, but now you also want B, it’s not justified and that’s not on”.

“To reduce inconvenience to other road users, including local residents, businesses and other cyclists, please accept a maximum of 1,000 riders. If another cycling event is planned for the same day, using the same roads, the total number of riders should not exceed 1,000.”

Seems reasonable to me.

Quantify that inconvenience and compare it to the impact of other events and user groups within the park and it might be reasonable. Single out a user group on the basis of prejudice and then write a charter restricting them without conducting any research and you’re not being reasonable.

Who cares its flat and swampy there anyway..

Hey, not true! There are 2 or 3 areas where it’s just swampy.

What the heck are the pony round ups and why do they take precedence?

So, as the meeting was at 9:30, did anyone go and have they voted for it?

British Cycling, CTC and Sustrans have released a joint statement explaining their opposition, and it sums it up well:

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/11741880._Cap_on_cyclists_could_lead_to_more_aggression_from_motorists__warn_leading_cycling_groups/?ref=mr

Cycling groups won’t sign up to it, so no, it won’t be enfoceable. I think the point that needs to be remembered is that it is basically an attempt to persecute cyclists based on prejudiced whim of a small minority of locals. It is utterly unfair when compared to treatment of other user groups. I think cyclists need to make a stand to prevent this spreading, and as suggested in the statement above, a negative attitude to cyclists does not need fuelling any further.

http://www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/news/article/679/cycle_events_organisers_charter_approved_by_new_forest_national_park_authority

A charter to guide large scale cycling events in the New Forest has been supported by the New Forest National Park Authority.

All the key statutory organisations (police, highways, councils) and many other organisations in the National Park have backed the charter, which contains 30 clauses setting out best practice on organising cycling events in the New Forest.

Last year the National Park Authority joined with the District Council’s Safety Advisory Group (SAG) to set up a Cycling Liaison Group following unacceptable behaviour by a minority of both riders and residents and a rise in complaints about cycling events.

The Cycling Liaison Group agreed all but two clauses, one of which was a cap of 1,000 riders per day.

New Forest National Park Authority Chairman Oliver Crosthwaite-Eyre said: ‘The vast majority of cycle events are under this threshold and have been operating without any complaint for many years. The figure of 1,000 has been well received by parish councils and at recent New Forest Consultative Panel meetings – the Panel has 80 local organisations as members. The important thing is that these measures should enable all road users to go about their business as usual even when an event is taking place.

‘We have always said we have no powers to regulate events and the charter is voluntary. With the SAG we jointly set up the Cycling Liaison Group to help explore the common ground between polarised opinions and find ways in which they can be more easily accommodated in the National Park.

‘We hope that all event organisers will follow the Charter’s criteria even if they don’t agree with it all.’

The charter will be sent to all cycle event organisers. Events will also be considered against the charter’s criteria on a case-by-case basis by the SAG. The SAG website register of events has a feedback form for each event which will enable monitoring of the charter.

Mr Crosthwaite-Eyre said: ‘The charter obviously does not supersede the Highway Code but the New Forest is unique in that it is a working forest with forestry, farming and equestrian activity on its narrow roads as well as free-roaming animals. Much greater care than normal is needed when using our Forest roads.

‘Cycling is an important way for people to get around the Forest, whether for work or pleasure, and a great way to enjoy its special qualities. We welcome responsible cycling and in particular continue to support initiatives that encourage people to swap their cars for sustainable transport.’

What the heck are the pony round ups and why do they take precedence?

I think thats the cause of the issue, lots (1000’s) of people turning up who have no idea about the workings of the area and potentially causing a danger to animals.

I think thats the cause of the issue, lots (1000’s) of people turning up who have no idea about the workings of the area and potentially causing a danger to animals.

So presumably they are going to ban all holiday makers from the area too?

The nub of the issue is that there is no evidence to suggest cyclists – in any numbers – cause danger to animals or other users of the park. It has been included because a minority have an agenda against cyclists, not because of any genuine problems/danger with wildlife or other users. If there were then they could have stated examples and statistics to prove it. There are none because there isn’t a danger.

All of this is just giving the verderers and rich folk more reasons to give all cyclists greif.
It all comes from the wiggle sponsored uk cycling mass rides. Whilst these are great for the economy etc, they have stired up this debate.
The national park authority seem to be held to ransom by the verderers and other groups who run the new forest.

Anyway, the new forest is crap, don’t come and visit, unless your coming to the big bike bash, the only mass participation event the nimbys like 😉

I sent an email to enquiries@newforestnpa.gov.uk asking them if they were aware that their decision was likely to deter visitors from going to the NFNPA, and in fact meant that I wouldn’t spend any money there at all because I know when I’m not wanted.
Unlike Italy, France and Belgium who are actively encouraging people like me to visit. so I’ve told them that’s where I’ll spend my money.

It’s arguable that cyclists and cycle sportives make the roads of the New Forest safer by acting as rolling speed controls, preventing cars from travelling at dangerous speeds – thus making injury to people or ponies less likely.

Safety was the main concern wasn’t it?

New Forest is unique in that it is a working forest with forestry, farming and equestrian activity on its narrow roads as well as free-roaming animals. Much greater care than normal is needed when using our Forest roads.

well so long as ‘unique’ means just like a lot of other national parks then i can see his point. 🙄

Screw the New Forest and it’s narrow minded people by not visiting the place (with or without a bike)

New Forest locals are a bunch of weirdos. Cyclist hating, satanic child abusers.

Road signs on entry to the New Forest need amending.

“Visitors Not Welcome”

It really does seem that the New Forest really dont want cyclists there. Anywhere else (i.e. where the monied gentry dont live) would be quite happy to have cyclists in these numbers pootling about in forests spending their money on accommodation etc.
Remember this charter is primarily aimed at road riders using the roads. Most of which have speed limits of 40mph or less. I for one cannot see why there needs to be this continuing animosity from some locals.
As others have said there appears to a few with an agenda against cyclits in the New Forest.
I haven’t been there for a long time, which is a shame as its lovely there in spring. Must get back there for a midweek trundle when things have dried out a bit.