“Link to BBC article.
Good news? Bad news? Discuss…

My point of view is that due to the actions of a few, some trail conflict is inevitable, and this seeks to minimise this, so probably a good thing, although I wish it were not necessary.

Came to post the same story!

Seems reasonable enough for me.

This has always been on the radar and the TVTA position was that to further the development of ‘wild trails’ some form of zoning would be a necessary compromise. It’s a sensible way to reduce trail conflict and is used in NZ for example – areas that are zoned non bike and areas that are development areas. No biggie really but an example of FLS engaging and trying to manage conflict without blanket banning. The handwringers and conspiracy theorists will of course claim it’s an impingement one their human rights buy that’s normal.

1. Cademuir
Two areas will be created in Cademuir Forest, as shown in separate map below. Within the southern area unauthorised mountain-bike trails will be managed using FLS and NAF guidance. The area to the north will be a quiet area with formal walking trails. Unauthorised mountain-bike trails in the north will be closed and removed. Mountain bike events will be welcomed using trails in the South.

2. Cardrona
Cardrona is a quiet forest for walking, horse riding and additionally mountain biking limited to existing tracks and trails. Horse riding and mountain biking is encouraged on old trails but not on current waymarked trails. Unauthorised trails found will be closed and removed. Smaller gravel bike events using forest roads as part of a longer Tweed Valley Route would be considered on a case by case basis.3.

Glentress

A forest for mountain biking, walking, horse riding and mountain bike events. The mountain bike trail offer will be developed by FLS or by FLS in collaboration with volunteers, event organisers and the mountain bike community. Unauthorised trails will be managed using FLS and NAF guidance. Existing unauthorised trails will remain, however any recent unauthorised trails will be closed and removed.4.

Traquair
(Innerleithen)Mountain biking, walking, horse riding and mountain bike events are welcomed and unauthorised trails will be managed using FLS and NAF guidance.

5. Elibank
(Innerleithen)A quiet forest for walking, horse riding and mountain biking limited to existing tracks and trails. Long distance marathon events will be accessed on an event by event basis.
6. Caberston

Mountain biking, walking, horse riding and mountain bike events are welcomed to Caberston. Unauthorised trails will be managed using FLS and NAF guidance. FLS are working in collaboration with Tweed Valley Trail Association who have adopted some of the trails. Over time FLS will work in collaboration with the TVTA in several Tweed Valley forests to enable safer enjoyment of our forests.
7. Thornielee

Two areas will be created in Thornielee Forest, as shown in separate map below. To the west unauthorised trails will be managed using FLS and NAF guidance and to the east a quiet area for formal walking trails will be established. Currently mountain bikers use the walking trail to climb to the top of the hill to access the unauthorised trails, which is acceptable. Any unauthorised trails to the east for Thornielee will be closed and removed. Mountain bike events in the forest will be assessed on an event by event basis.

8. The Yair
Mountain biking, walking, horse riding and events will be welcomed to the Yair. Our Land Management Plan feedback indicated all users are enjoying the forest without conflict, although mountain bike management in the forest would ensure no impact on the Glenkinnon car park and trail. Unauthorised trails will be managed using FLS and NAF guidance

The new trails at Glentress will be missed if they’re removed!

Curious what the definition of a new unauthorised trail at Glentress is?

I can see the benefits but at the same time it makes me feel a bit uncomfortable. On the plus side it’s allowing the managed construction of trails, avoiding potential conflicts and allowing FLS to stop policing the whole area. On the down side, it could lead to other access restrictions as folk expect not to see any cyclists at all on other areas nearby. Ghettoisation of a sort.

However, I’m reminded that we’ve been down this road before. Many moons ago, when the West Highland Way was first proposed, the walkers, climbers and ramblers were all concerned that its creation would lead to a restriction on freedom of access on the areas alongside it. This failed to materialise.

Edit: I’m also not particularly happy about DMBinS potentially negotiating away my rights, though access is one thing, trail building another.

Largely it seems like an acceptance of the current situation, which removes any grey area – which for years has been so confusing, with trails been used for races one weekend, and the other 363 days of the year the trails being ignored.

There has been a decent amount of building in recent years, the majority of it without issue, the main issues occur when more than one user type come into contact. Or folk build without context of local agreements/sensitivities.

TVTA and the guys involved are very aware and sensitive to those issues, so this feels like very sensible transparency that’ll help avoid those conflicts.

Cademuir and Thornielee are the most sensitive, as they’re small, and the trails are shared and crossed at multiple points by different users. So a zoning of these two is great. The important thing is that we respect that zoning, but also remain respectful to walkers and horseriders, and always act as if we represent the cycling community.

The new trails at Glentress will be missed if they’re removed!

If they are the ones I’ve recently discovered, they appear to have no impact on horse-riders or walkers – and are the most-fun MTB trails on the hill.

Overall a sensible and progressive approach though, on the face of it.

If they are the ones I’ve recently discovered, they appear to have no impact on horse-riders or walkers

This one is way more complex. Chainsaws being used, residents on the Soonhope not being pleased with riders zooming past their houses.

The trails also exit onto the main fireroad, and do make a right mess. Optics matter as much as physical issues.

They are amazing trails, and I’d prefer they stay, but the MTB community can’t win every battle, the forests are for everyone not just us. So, I’m happy to lose them, if it means we get to keep other trails and improve our relationship with other user groups and the forestry commission.

RIP Turbo Ferret.

I’d heard that all the Soonhope Glen stuff was being removed to make it a walkers only area, but Jailbrake has become more ridden in recently and I can’t see how they could possibly remove or block it.

” residents on the Soonhope not being pleased with riders zooming past their houses.”

Haven’t heard it being an issue- the MX riders going past are tolerated well after a couple of polite chats. Certain cars on the lane are a much bigger concern. That said, some of the hutters are a bit grumpy about the speed of riders coming down the hill, and the gate removal can’t have helped.

Is the stuff on Soonhope side unofficial? Some of it looks pretty well made so I had assume it was officially unofficial rather than just hacked out by a few locals.

tjagain
Full Member

Seems reasonable enough for me.

Can’t believe I’m typing this but I agree with TJ.
Access maintained, just a sensible approach to (illegal/unauthorised) trailbuilding.

The new trails to the Soonhope side Thunderstruck , Careless whisper and Jailbreak . All great and better than most of existing Glentress stuff. I get what people say about people bombing down back to the Hydro side. I think most people will push back up the hill and arrive throught the wall at Zoom or bust so they can then do Daves trail or the existing red.
As for thornie losing Turbo ferret isn’t a great loss to be honest as the best trails are over the full defination side.
All in all it seems to be very fair and sets out where people can and cant build . I think we are very lucky to have the Valley area . It will also be interesting to see when the felling work is finished at the Wolves side off the Golfie if they can be saved. Lets hope so.

The numbers riding down through Soonhope is very low, and similarly the number of walkers is low. Other than riding too fast past the huts, which are almost deserted 99% of the time, there’s really no issue with riders.
There is a bigger impact from noise (and language) associated with the FC built Happy Ending being so close to houses, and from the riders clustering and parking at the Hydro entrance blocking access…

Edit: I’m also not particularly happy about DMBinS potentially negotiating away my rights, though access is one thing, trail building another.

No one is negotiating away your rights. You’ll still have responsible access rights to all areas, just not be able to build any trails in some areas.

It seems like a good idea. It also seems a little bit late. And I’m not sure there’s a force in the universe that can stop mountain bikers riding footpaths if they look fun or get us to the top quicker.