Rushup edge resurfacing

More interesting reading – here’s the 24 July 2012 report to Cabinet on their Green Lanes policy:

http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/2012-7-24%20Policy%20for%20the%20Management%20of%20Green%20Lanes_tcm44-208427.pdf

From that report:

However, the Council will
address the following key concerns:
1. Some consultees felt that the draft document should expressly state
that the County Council should have due regard for the Peak District
National Park and its concurrent powers.
Comment: The County Council has a strong and very positive
working relationship with the Peak District National Park Authority
(PDNPA). A paragraph will be included which expressively
recognises the relationship of the two authorities.

http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/looking-after/local-access-forum

LAF details Rob – Go back over some of their previous meetings as they actually seem quite pro-mtb particularly in respect of their comments to the PDNP cycle strategy.

Kinda reaffirms what I was saying this is the arena Peakmtb need to be feeding into to have any serious input

You may also be able to find details on their recent work if you can get hold of the 2014/2015 RoWIP schedule of works.

Another one…

18/06/2013 report to cabinet on the Rights of Way Improvement Plan statement of action

http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/2013-06-18%20New%20Statement%20Derbyshire%27s%20RoWIP%202013-2017_tcm44-226109.pdf

Some relevant quotes:

Several comments were made expressing concern that the delivery of
the actions could increase the ‘managed’ feel of the network resulting in a reduction in the wilder countryside/natural experience. There are very clear statements within the document in relation to the underlying
themes and the supporting Environmental Statement that should
provide reassurance that this will not be the case.

Aim 5: Greater Community Involvement
• The comments received in respect to this Aim reinforced the support for the actions to empower local community groups, user groups and local councils to encourage greater involvement in the management and
promotion of the network.

I got the same generic row locks from DCC as everyone else too. Lucky me!

I’ve responded via a freedom of information request asking for:
[list]
[*]All information relating to complaints made by users of a rights of way (In particular Chapel Gate) regarding the suitability of that right of way for that users needs [/*]
[*]Information relating to complaints made by users of a rights of way (in particular Chapel Gate) involving personal injury where it was claimed, or considered that DCC or their agents were either negligent or at fault in relation to the maintenance or repair of the right of way.[/*]
[*]Any information relating to the assessment of the maintenance and requirements for the Chapel Gate Bridleway.[/*]
[/list]
I think that covers the basics of: who said it needed repairing, who and how many are these ‘many people’ who are unable to use Chapel gate and how unsafe was the route before they did any work.

I’m looking forward to my next pointless and uninformative copy/paste reply.

Which is presumably why folk have taken to the ground above the sunken route like here

and here

??

It won’t be too long before that path beside the wall causes the wall itself to collapse.

Is that cyclists, walkers, horses (or a permutation of those) that are using those parallel tracks?

Another one…

18/06/2013 report to cabinet on the Rights of Way Improvement Plan statement of action

http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/2013-06-18%20New%20Statement%20Derbyshire%27s%20RoWIP%202013-2017_tcm44-226109.pdf

Some relevant quotes:

Several comments were made expressing concern that the delivery of
the actions could increase the ‘managed’ feel of the network resulting in a reduction in the wilder countryside/natural experience. There are very clear statements within the document in relation to the underlying
themes and the supporting Environmental Statement that should
provide reassurance that this will not be the case.

Aim 5: Greater Community Involvement
• The comments received in respect to this Aim reinforced the support for the actions to empower local community groups, user groups and local councils to encourage greater involvement in the management and
promotion of the network.

The RoWIP is for the whole of the local authority area so any such comments (200 respondents from a LA population of 770,000) are tenuous at best…

Exciting news! (Kind of)

As part of my original barrage of emails, I cc’d my local councilor, Beth Atkins.

She’s said she’ll look into this matter (And told me about her arthritis, which was kind of odd.).

However, she addressed the email “Dear Ms Dan1980″…. 😕

dan1980.

Good work again.

Whatever the councillor’s slight issues with your gender, she sounds like someone who actually bothers with people rather than some feudal lord who gets his underlings to send out generic toss to fob people off.

Keep it going, fella.

Just reading around, it seems momentum is building……….

The path to the side looks harder work than the steps in the bottom picture.

I’m a bit confused: I thought that Chapel gate in the past really was in a mess and genuinely difficult for most users, but can the same really be said for Rushup Edge? I’ve seen and ridden on the “repairs” to Chapel Gate and the horrible surface made from road planings, but I thought we were now talking about what’s in the process of being done to the natural rocky steps of Rushup Edge?

vickypea, Chapel Gate as we know it (the DH into Edale) runs into the Rushup Edge byway that they’re working on now. Technically I think they’re the same ‘Right of Way’ in the view of the council. DCC are referring to both bits of trail as Chapel Gate. I guess this is in part an arse-covering strategy, in that the works currently under way could be presented as part of the original horrible ‘repairs’ they did to Chapel Gate, covered by the same “consultation” and suchlike red-tape.

You might have already seen but having put in a few emails and calls, this will be discussed on BBC Radio Sheffield tomorrow at about 11.15am. Peak MTB will be on

Time to join the forum and participate I reckon. Long time site lurker and PD rider from the Glossop side. I’ll start up with the digital pressure and add another voice to the momentum, I’ve got extended family and friends still here. Having been born and bred here I know what you’re up against with DCC, you literally are pissing in the wind (it’s pointless going into descriptive insults). PDNPA is the key and leverage, hopefully.

Time to rattle some High Peak bones seeing as though it’s Halloween time.

Sancho – Member
You could take a positive view regarding all this.

I mean the council has just dumped tons of perfect trail building material for you.

must be an opportunity to reshape the er natural terrain

I suggested something similar earlier in the thread sancho but i used the same invisible ink as you. I’ll try again and who knows, someone might get it.

Dear angry of England,

Please stop writing pointless angry emails to brain dead council folk and use this energy to get off your lazy arses and build a trail specifically for mountains bikes and leave the footpaths for the walkers and horse people.

Yours

The rest of the forking world.

p.s. The old trail looked shit anyway 😀

…and where shall we build it?

PS the old trail didn’t look shit.

Names are a bit imprecise, and that’s why footpaths and other RoW are given numbers. The northern part (Chapel Gate) is “BOAT 16 Edale parish” and the southern part (Rushup Edge) is “BOAT 144 Chapel-en-le-Frith parish”. But they’re referring to the whole thing as Chapel Gate.

I’ve been watching this thread for ages

i haven’t ridden up their for ages

The trail was great. I think riding up it was my favourite MTB bit of the Peak

EURO I don’ think your helping

The Fredom of information application seems sensible

What is the answer to the side trails? It’s clearly an issue that needs adressing

…and where shall we build it?

Seriously? I’d stick to to the angry emails if you have that little imagination.

I’ll admit that the trail was visually interesting but to ride it on anything with suspension would be really boring unless you went full tilt and as it’s a shared path that’d be dumb. I truly can’t see what all the fuss it about.

Thanks for the clarification mintimperial

To quote Euro:

p.s. The old trail looked shit anyway

Then within four posts:

I’ll admit that the trail was visually interesting

Strange man. Or just possibly trolling?

Safe to ignore on all counts.

Strange man. Or just possibly trolling?

Safe to ignore on all counts.

Probably never riden a bike outside a trail centre / bike park

Iain1775, we’ve only had trail centres here for the last couple of years and that’s probably why my experience seems so different to the majority of STW. We’ve cut/built our own trails in Ireland for decades and even though we now have several trail centres, we still prefer to build and ride our own stuff. If you think that rocky walking path makes for a good trail, you wouldn’t last 2 minutes in the wild over here 😀

Dannyh, visually interesting and interesting to ride are two different things. I’ll admit i’m a strange man round these parts, and you know what? I’m kinda glad. You all seem happy to fire off Points of View style letters but how many of you are prepared to lift a spade and barrow and build something? Call me a troll if that makes you feel better, but actions speak louder than words.

Mr Euro, go back under your bridge. If you want an argument I’m sure there are plenty threads on here where people will be only too happy to oblige but this isn’t the place.

Back OT, assuming the works are not suspended (which would seem likely), what would be the legal implications of a load of people going up there with spades and wheelbarrows and making a symbolic gesture of removing some of the rubble? In terms of a protest I think it could be quite effective, but I doubt anyone wants to get into trouble over it.

Let’s not bicker about this. DCC will happily wait us out if they can. In fighting will just make their job easier. Those who know the trail love it as it is. For some people it’s a challenge getting down, for some the challenge is getting up. Some make it, some don’t. However, the fact remains, of all those who ride it, no one wants it turned into something you can find in a suburban park.

Let’s stay united against the common enemy that is DCC.

@Euro, we generally can’t go round building our own trails here as we don’t have the land nor the right to do so. The Peak is a National Park so we certainly can’t do it there. I am one who enjoys riding natural trails and given a choice would always ride that rather than a man made trail. I suppose this comes partly from the fact that I’ve been hiking for 35 years and riding MTB for 10, I took up MTB so I could further enjoy the outdoors and cover more ground than walking.

@Onzadog, well said

I was wondering if we should protest near county hall in matlock. Filling in cracks in roads and pavements with jelly and squirty cream.

DCC couldn’t object as their M.O. seems to be unnecessary repairs with inappropriate materials without warning or consultation.

Clocking off time on a Friday might get their attention.

Ok folks, im not trolling with this i promise. Many issues aside i think i can kind of see where they are coming from. Some of those step downs look lots of fun but you wouldnt let a beginner roll them? so it needs fixing as its obviously causing the track to widen as people walk around them. the only other option would be to put another track in i guess and i cant see them doing that.

its not a trail centre is it..

Mr Euro, go back under your bridge

+1

There’s a certain ammount of irony in an Irish poster commenting on natural trails.

Ok folks, im not trolling with this i promise. Many issues aside i think i can kind of see where they are coming from. Some of those step downs look lots of fun but you wouldnt let a beginner roll them? so it needs fixing as its obviously causing the track to widen as people walk around them. the only other option would be to put another track in i guess and i cant see them doing that.

its not a trail centre is it..

I don’t think there is any legal requirment to make a bridelway passable for bikes, beginner, mountainbiker, experienced gnarr shredder or otherwise. They have to be passable for horses and walkers, but bikes are allowed to use them, we don’t have the same right to expect them to be maintained.

As others have said, horses and their riders hate the looser sandy surface as it shifts under them, they much prefer a solid but uneven surface that keeps the horse thinking.

And eveyone hate’s f****** water bars, which are far harder to ride than steps anyway.

Rather than flatten it, why not use the £70k to reinforce and flat to ribbon on top of the bank.

Just because not everyone can ride it yet, doesn’t mean it should be flattened to the point where everyone can.

If you can’t ride the bigger ones, walk them until you’re happy enough on the smaller one to then give them a go.

How do you think those who can ride them learned to do so?

He’s sort of right, it’s not the most exciting trail but it is one of the last untouched bits on a generally excellent route and that makes the smoothing of it more pertinent than its original quality.

Andybrad- They have, ironically, got two parallel trails leading up to it along Rushup Edge. A rough, rocky one for walkers and a smooth boggy one with no technical bits for cyclists and horses. I see no reason why they couldn’t have put in a proper gravel track on the edges where an alternative line has already developed.

Edit-

why not use the £70k to reinforce and flat to ribbon on top of the bank.

Good idea!

Would have been a better idea had it not been for fat fingers and auto correct, but you get the idea. 😆

dazh – Member
what would be the legal implications of a load of people going up there with spades and wheelbarrows and making a symbolic gesture of removing some of the rubble? In terms of a protest I think it could be quite effective, but I doubt anyone wants to get into trouble over it.

Probably death 😆 Do and see, what have you got to lose?

@Euro, we generally can’t go round building our own trails here as we don’t have the land nor the right to do so.

Neither do we, but if we didn’t, we would have had nowhere to ride up until a couple of years ago. Every once in a while trails like this are sanitised to make them suitable for walkers so we just cut a new one. No big deal really.

There’s a certain ammount of irony in an Irish poster commenting on natural trails.

Us Irish are a bit thick so you’ll need to explain those big words and their meaning.

I’m not trolling or looking for an argument, just suggesting an alternative that has worked for us here and in other parts of the world.

so it needs fixing as its obviously causing the track to widen as people walk around them. the only other option would be to put another track in i guess and i cant see them doing that.

In my experience of that section, the path on the bank has been created by walkers trying to give people descending more room to pick their line and I expect because walkers don’t want to be in a sunken path when a group of bikes arrives from the other direction.

Smoothing the main track out means bikes arriving even faster though, so I fully expect just as many walkers to keep taking the alternate path.

Us Irish are a bit thick so you’ll need to explain those big words and their meaning.

The reason you have to dig cheeky trails is the difference in access laws between the UK and Ireland (and including N.Ireland in that as the whole cerfuffle dates back to when the two shared the same legal system). In Ireland you don’t have access to many tracks like this because with the exception of ‘mass roads’ there was a presumption in favour of the landowners right to his private property over any public rights of way. Thus any rights of way in Ireland were the result of landowners declaring them as such, which as a generalisation didn’t happen.

We dig trails too, we also have trail centers and natural trails. If you ride one type exclusively you’re missing out.

Do and see, what have you got to lose?

In relation to digging up the path? That’d definately be criminal damage. So, a lot f money paying damages, your freedom if they opt to jail you, and probably you job as a result.[awaits a soundkeyboardbite form someone about DCC’s actions being the criminal etc].

I’m not trolling or looking for an argument, just suggesting an alternative that has worked for us here and in other parts of the world.

Euro, there are 4.5 million people in the whole of Ireland. There are over 16 million people living within an hour of the Peak District National Park. That’s nearly four times as many as live in your whole country, in a much smaller area. It’s possible because of this that things might be a bit different over here. Things that work for you in your part of the world might not work for us. And just setting off digging trails across the hills wherever we fancy definitely won’t.

Smoothing the main track out means bikes arriving even faster though, so I fully expect just as many walkers to keep taking the alternate path.

The ‘alternate’ path is a Public Footpath, not just a cheeky walk-around.

Ok folks, im not trolling with this i promise. Many issues aside i think i can kind of see where they are coming from. Some of those step downs look lots of fun but you wouldnt let a beginner roll them? so it needs fixing as its obviously causing the track to widen as people walk around them. the only other option would be to put another track in i guess and i cant see them doing that.

its not a trail centre is it..

Exactly, it’s not a trail centre! Probably the two biggest user groups, walkers followed by mtbers, don’t really care for flat boring trails in the countryside. Sure, there will be people with access difficulties who require easier paths, but they’re very much a minority – not that they shouldn’t be catered for, but there are plenty of other paths in the area that meet those specific requirements…

The Radio Sheffield article has just started. here