This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
DCC at it again - this time the sunken track on Rushup Edge:
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/rushup-edge-resurfacing
https://www.facebook.com/groups/PeakDistrictMTB/
In reply to ChrisJD:
What a bummer, that was a classic section of track. It will be interesting to hear why the council felt repairs were necessary.
What a bummer, that was a classic section of track. It will be interesting to hear why the council felt repairs were necessary.
In reply to blurty:
Especially when this last happened, it was agreed that all parties would be consulted, including user groups, which doesnt appear to have happened. The peak district mtb group on facebook are protesting and calling for a halt to try to save the lower psrt of the path that hasnt been ruined yet.
Especially when this last happened, it was agreed that all parties would be consulted, including user groups, which doesnt appear to have happened. The peak district mtb group on facebook are protesting and calling for a halt to try to save the lower psrt of the path that hasnt been ruined yet.
In reply to ChrisJD:
As a non mountain biker, perhaps someone could clarify something.
Is the objection on aesthetic grounds, or, is it because a pleasurable/challenging route for mountain bikers has been removed?
As a non mountain biker, perhaps someone could clarify something.
Is the objection on aesthetic grounds, or, is it because a pleasurable/challenging route for mountain bikers has been removed?
In reply to FactorXXX:
Both, and a lot more. Its bloody ugly. Look at the pictures
70,00 reasons = £70k to do this.
.. and they quarried gritstone somewhere to fill the track like this!.
.... And its got a permanent TRO on it, so it can't be driven along, so that can't be the justifiable reason for doing it.
... Priorities - many roads in the Peak are full of potholes and DCC chose to 'repair' this (and many trails others it has to be said - the list of DCC vandalism is quite long).
... its also horrible to walk on surfaces like that
As a Hope Valley resident for >20 years I'm pretty unhappy about how DCC are behaving and what they are doing to loads of trails in the Peak, They have 'form' and are running rough shod over legitimate concerns from user groups. It's a National Park, yet consultation is a word DCC don't seem to get. Old -School Council mentality.
A very different relationship has formed between MTBers on the eastern side with Sheffield Council, so it doesn't 'have to be' like the way DCC are dealing with it.
Plus the Eastern Moors Partnership (RSPB & NT) is another great example of how good relationship and consultation can work to keep everyone happy (or at least content, knowing that they are trying to act in the best way for all parties).
Survey to fill in here:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/HLP6YZC
Both, and a lot more. Its bloody ugly. Look at the pictures
70,00 reasons = £70k to do this.
.. and they quarried gritstone somewhere to fill the track like this!.
.... And its got a permanent TRO on it, so it can't be driven along, so that can't be the justifiable reason for doing it.
... Priorities - many roads in the Peak are full of potholes and DCC chose to 'repair' this (and many trails others it has to be said - the list of DCC vandalism is quite long).
... its also horrible to walk on surfaces like that
As a Hope Valley resident for >20 years I'm pretty unhappy about how DCC are behaving and what they are doing to loads of trails in the Peak, They have 'form' and are running rough shod over legitimate concerns from user groups. It's a National Park, yet consultation is a word DCC don't seem to get. Old -School Council mentality.
A very different relationship has formed between MTBers on the eastern side with Sheffield Council, so it doesn't 'have to be' like the way DCC are dealing with it.
Plus the Eastern Moors Partnership (RSPB & NT) is another great example of how good relationship and consultation can work to keep everyone happy (or at least content, knowing that they are trying to act in the best way for all parties).
Survey to fill in here:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/HLP6YZC
In reply to FactorXXX:
It's about 80% removal of the challenge, 20% aesthetic.
I suspect that because these routes may be classified as highways and so the council feel that they are obliged to bring them "up to standard" even though there's better places to spend the money. From the pictures I've seen the council (or their contractors) haven't done a particularly good job.
It's about 80% removal of the challenge, 20% aesthetic.
I suspect that because these routes may be classified as highways and so the council feel that they are obliged to bring them "up to standard" even though there's better places to spend the money. From the pictures I've seen the council (or their contractors) haven't done a particularly good job.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Walna Scar in the Lakes has a permanent TRO but they still sanitised that. The sanitisation was done during a temporary TRO but no doubt the council had an eye to make it permanent.
I was told last night that some tracks like Loughrigg Terrace have been sanitised - someone has been given a wad of cash to encourage cycling and they see this as a way of doing it.
Walna Scar in the Lakes has a permanent TRO but they still sanitised that. The sanitisation was done during a temporary TRO but no doubt the council had an eye to make it permanent.
I was told last night that some tracks like Loughrigg Terrace have been sanitised - someone has been given a wad of cash to encourage cycling and they see this as a way of doing it.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Social Media responds:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-Ruining-Our-Trails-In-The-Peaks/3787883...
Social Media responds:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Stop-Ruining-Our-Trails-In-The-Peaks/3787883...
In reply to Bob:
If you think Walna scar is a bad job, I can tell you it is now similar in difficulty (albeit steeper) to the way rushup edge was. It would appear that DCC thinks that off-road cycling means families on old railway lines - everything should be the same level of difficulty as the Monsal/Tissington/high peak trails. Sheer vandalism, stunning waste of money and incredible arrogance.
Btw - The lower part of loughrigg terrace was being bulldozed when I was there in July, but there was a better alternative going via rydal cave. More technical, but You do miss the fun of cycling through the lake.
If you think Walna scar is a bad job, I can tell you it is now similar in difficulty (albeit steeper) to the way rushup edge was. It would appear that DCC thinks that off-road cycling means families on old railway lines - everything should be the same level of difficulty as the Monsal/Tissington/high peak trails. Sheer vandalism, stunning waste of money and incredible arrogance.
Btw - The lower part of loughrigg terrace was being bulldozed when I was there in July, but there was a better alternative going via rydal cave. More technical, but You do miss the fun of cycling through the lake.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Walna Scar is a tale of two halves - the western side of the pass has managed to keep its new surface and for quite a length of it has begun to grass over so I think it's safe to say that barring a flash downpour it's going to stay that way. The eastern (Coniston) side however is reverting to how it was before the "improvements". The shallower sections have kept the new surface but it's sloughed off the steeper bits as well as the "rock gates" lower down.
I've only been over Rushup Edge a couple of times and the last time was several years ago and from memory that lower section used to be basically bare bedrock so it was hardly going to erode. I can understand "fixing" sections across boggy ground so that the path/track doesn't get ever wider as people seek to avoid the gloopy bits but not something as hard wearing as bedrock. As you say, it's got a permanent TRO on it so no vehicles (other than possibly farm vehicles) are going to use it. Anyone on a horse is going to be using an animal that's used to the fells and rough ground rather than a racing thoroughbred and there's a path on the bank for those who don't wish to use it.
Perhaps the best line of attack is "Council wastes taxpayers' money doing unnecessary work on functioning bridleway while ignoring road repairs and pot holes". One question that hasn't been answered (to my knowledge) is why? Even the cost of putting up a warning sign by the roadside needs justification, usually a death or serious accident or two.
Walna Scar is a tale of two halves - the western side of the pass has managed to keep its new surface and for quite a length of it has begun to grass over so I think it's safe to say that barring a flash downpour it's going to stay that way. The eastern (Coniston) side however is reverting to how it was before the "improvements". The shallower sections have kept the new surface but it's sloughed off the steeper bits as well as the "rock gates" lower down.
I've only been over Rushup Edge a couple of times and the last time was several years ago and from memory that lower section used to be basically bare bedrock so it was hardly going to erode. I can understand "fixing" sections across boggy ground so that the path/track doesn't get ever wider as people seek to avoid the gloopy bits but not something as hard wearing as bedrock. As you say, it's got a permanent TRO on it so no vehicles (other than possibly farm vehicles) are going to use it. Anyone on a horse is going to be using an animal that's used to the fells and rough ground rather than a racing thoroughbred and there's a path on the bank for those who don't wish to use it.
Perhaps the best line of attack is "Council wastes taxpayers' money doing unnecessary work on functioning bridleway while ignoring road repairs and pot holes". One question that hasn't been answered (to my knowledge) is why? Even the cost of putting up a warning sign by the roadside needs justification, usually a death or serious accident or two.
In reply to ChrisJD:
The thing about it is, these tracks aren't exclusively for mountain bikers to get 'rad' they're access tracks for all kinds of vehicles, no point surfacing a track with big ruts in. I remember riding back in the day, fully rigid in the late 80's and a lot of these Peak trails were in the same condition as they are again now. A few years again and they'll ride back in. I can't believe modern dirt bike riders are so precious, just get thi sen to Cave Dave or Wharners if you want some ruts or rocks, and welcome the new blood into the sport.
The thing about it is, these tracks aren't exclusively for mountain bikers to get 'rad' they're access tracks for all kinds of vehicles, no point surfacing a track with big ruts in. I remember riding back in the day, fully rigid in the late 80's and a lot of these Peak trails were in the same condition as they are again now. A few years again and they'll ride back in. I can't believe modern dirt bike riders are so precious, just get thi sen to Cave Dave or Wharners if you want some ruts or rocks, and welcome the new blood into the sport.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Or, on the other hand, perhaps expecting a council to maintain a public right of way in precisely the state of disrepair that happens to match your preferred use of said track is "incredible arrogance."
Look at the first post - "sunken track" - why sunken? Likely because it's been in use long before bicycles were invented, let alone mountain bikes. The track is entirely artificial. Like many other non-metalled tracks, the surface will degrade worse and worse, and eventually someone will come along and tamp down some rubble or rocks etc. Then it will gradually degrade over time for a few decades, then some mountain bikers will assume that its current state was given to them by god for their exclusive pleasure, and will then throw their toys out of the pram when it has its next bout of maintenance.
People have probably been walking that track for more than 5,000 years. I dare say intermittent efforts have been made to improve the surface over that whole time.
What do you want the council to do? Come and build an engineered surface that is exactly difficult enough to be challenging to keep the proles away but not so tough as to be impassible to you?
> Sheer vandalism, stunning waste of money and incredible arrogance.
Or, on the other hand, perhaps expecting a council to maintain a public right of way in precisely the state of disrepair that happens to match your preferred use of said track is "incredible arrogance."
Look at the first post - "sunken track" - why sunken? Likely because it's been in use long before bicycles were invented, let alone mountain bikes. The track is entirely artificial. Like many other non-metalled tracks, the surface will degrade worse and worse, and eventually someone will come along and tamp down some rubble or rocks etc. Then it will gradually degrade over time for a few decades, then some mountain bikers will assume that its current state was given to them by god for their exclusive pleasure, and will then throw their toys out of the pram when it has its next bout of maintenance.
People have probably been walking that track for more than 5,000 years. I dare say intermittent efforts have been made to improve the surface over that whole time.
What do you want the council to do? Come and build an engineered surface that is exactly difficult enough to be challenging to keep the proles away but not so tough as to be impassible to you?
Post edited at 15:13
1
1
In reply to wintertree:
Have you ever walked along this track ? I could be wrong but I suspect that the sunken nature of it is due to a top layer of soft, peaty soil has been worn down over millennia to a rocky base. MTBers are not saying that the track should be prepared to our benefit, or vital maintenance be ignored so we can get our kicks. We just can't work out why any work is being done at all. There are sections that were very boggy, where the track was being widened because people are avoiding them. I could understand work being done there to keep the erosion under control. But this work is being done on the area that was well drained. The rock steps, much beloved by MTBs, weren't a problem for walkers or horsey folk.
The arrogance is that various groups have tried to talk to DCC about such works, the anger they provoke and the impact they can have on local businesses. DCC refuse to discuss them and ploughs on without any warning or consultation. It's a national park FFS, strict planning laws and all that. If they were trying to restore the land then fine, but this is urbanisation
Have you ever walked along this track ? I could be wrong but I suspect that the sunken nature of it is due to a top layer of soft, peaty soil has been worn down over millennia to a rocky base. MTBers are not saying that the track should be prepared to our benefit, or vital maintenance be ignored so we can get our kicks. We just can't work out why any work is being done at all. There are sections that were very boggy, where the track was being widened because people are avoiding them. I could understand work being done there to keep the erosion under control. But this work is being done on the area that was well drained. The rock steps, much beloved by MTBs, weren't a problem for walkers or horsey folk.
The arrogance is that various groups have tried to talk to DCC about such works, the anger they provoke and the impact they can have on local businesses. DCC refuse to discuss them and ploughs on without any warning or consultation. It's a national park FFS, strict planning laws and all that. If they were trying to restore the land then fine, but this is urbanisation
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Regardless whether mtb'ers are right or not, as someone who both cycles and climbs, this was an absolute classic bit of peak riding and to me feels like some demolishing the unconquerables to build a staircase, I am actually quite upset.
Regardless whether mtb'ers are right or not, as someone who both cycles and climbs, this was an absolute classic bit of peak riding and to me feels like some demolishing the unconquerables to build a staircase, I am actually quite upset.
In reply to wintertree:
No - people just want them to not waste large amounts of money (in a time of 'austerity') making an ugly and unsustainable mess of a perfectly fine bit of path that used to be made up of interesting/characterful bedrock - for the benefit of no-one.
> What do you want the council to do? Come and build an engineered surface that is exactly difficult enough to be challenging to keep the proles away but not so tough as to be impassible to you?
No - people just want them to not waste large amounts of money (in a time of 'austerity') making an ugly and unsustainable mess of a perfectly fine bit of path that used to be made up of interesting/characterful bedrock - for the benefit of no-one.
In reply to wintertree:
My issue with a lot of these footpath changes is the use of materials which aren't 'native' to the local landscape.
It would almost certainly increase the cost, but I'd much rather local stone was used to fill in any dips or hollows deemed to be challenging.
These tracks are often centuries or more old, and the introduction of plainings /rock chips from elsewhere onto the paths to make them uniform and smooth, for want of a better way of putting it, is geologically and historically wrong, in my opinion.
My issue with a lot of these footpath changes is the use of materials which aren't 'native' to the local landscape.
It would almost certainly increase the cost, but I'd much rather local stone was used to fill in any dips or hollows deemed to be challenging.
These tracks are often centuries or more old, and the introduction of plainings /rock chips from elsewhere onto the paths to make them uniform and smooth, for want of a better way of putting it, is geologically and historically wrong, in my opinion.
Post edited at 20:13
In reply to Timmd:
You are not alone in your opinion. It is raised as an issue here:
http://singletrackworld.com/2014/10/rushup-edge-picnic-protest/
You are not alone in your opinion. It is raised as an issue here:
http://singletrackworld.com/2014/10/rushup-edge-picnic-protest/
In reply to Timmd:
When you go to the Peak District do you also think all the roads aren't native to the landscape, and what about the car parks. Or is it just the surface dressing on this particular piece of track?
When you go to the Peak District do you also think all the roads aren't native to the landscape, and what about the car parks. Or is it just the surface dressing on this particular piece of track?
Post edited at 22:18
In reply to John Simpson:
The same applies to tracks which are within walking distance of where I live, which have also had planings applied (next to the Sportsman Pub near to Lodgemoor). Or which have had builder's waste used as the hardcore before a surface dressing is applied for forestry machinery to use like going up the track to Stanage Pole, and now that some erosion has happened, you can see the odd bit of brick or white electrical wire starting to surface. Whoever budgeted to use the building rubble as hardcore presumably didn't think about erosion later on.
The same applies to tracks which are within walking distance of where I live, which have also had planings applied (next to the Sportsman Pub near to Lodgemoor). Or which have had builder's waste used as the hardcore before a surface dressing is applied for forestry machinery to use like going up the track to Stanage Pole, and now that some erosion has happened, you can see the odd bit of brick or white electrical wire starting to surface. Whoever budgeted to use the building rubble as hardcore presumably didn't think about erosion later on.
Post edited at 23:34
In reply to Timmd:
It's the rubbish that winds me up more, at one point I went through a stage of collecting as much as I could but it's like trying to stand on a beach and stop the tide by staring at it. Mountain bikers are generally on a whole are as bad as the average with energy bar wrappers and the like. And whilst I think this job up Rushop edge is a bit thoughtless for some reason it doesn't really bother me, as in a couple of winters it'll be back in condition. I have been riding MTB since 1986 though so I've seen a lot of these tracks in different stages of flux, and credit where credit is due, they did a first class job on the bogfest which was cutgate.
It's the rubbish that winds me up more, at one point I went through a stage of collecting as much as I could but it's like trying to stand on a beach and stop the tide by staring at it. Mountain bikers are generally on a whole are as bad as the average with energy bar wrappers and the like. And whilst I think this job up Rushop edge is a bit thoughtless for some reason it doesn't really bother me, as in a couple of winters it'll be back in condition. I have been riding MTB since 1986 though so I've seen a lot of these tracks in different stages of flux, and credit where credit is due, they did a first class job on the bogfest which was cutgate.
Post edited at 06:46
1
In reply to ChrisJD:
https://twitter.com/peakchief/status/526985128074305536
Work being paused whilst PDNPA investigate
https://twitter.com/peakchief/status/526985128074305536
Work being paused whilst PDNPA investigate
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Not quite the Peak Chief has "asked" them to pause, whether DCC have agreed to that is not known.
Not quite the Peak Chief has "asked" them to pause, whether DCC have agreed to that is not known.
In reply to Horse:
True, and DCC aren't very good at listening
Very interesting letter from Cy Turner, someone whose business is affected by such vandalism
http://www.cotic.co.uk/news/
True, and DCC aren't very good at listening
Very interesting letter from Cy Turner, someone whose business is affected by such vandalism
http://www.cotic.co.uk/news/
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Are any of the other user groups objecting - the twitter feed etc seems very much MTB dominated. Are the ramblers or the BHS getting involved?
genuine question - I'm not convinced by DCCs way of doing business here, but footpath repairs always seem to get a hard time from one group or another
Are any of the other user groups objecting - the twitter feed etc seems very much MTB dominated. Are the ramblers or the BHS getting involved?
genuine question - I'm not convinced by DCCs way of doing business here, but footpath repairs always seem to get a hard time from one group or another
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Vandalism sounds a bit knee jerk don't you think? A better choice of word may be wiser, if you don't want to sound too self righteous.
Vandalism sounds a bit knee jerk don't you think? A better choice of word may be wiser, if you don't want to sound too self righteous.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
I'd not be putting vandalism into anything submitted to the DCC if it was me.
> True, and DCC aren't very good at listening
> Very interesting letter from Cy Turner, someone whose business is affected by such vandalism
I'd not be putting vandalism into anything submitted to the DCC if it was me.
In reply to John Simpson:
I wonder if it will take longer, but I guess 'eventually' the planings will erode away with the rain and the passage of feet and wheels, and the bed rock will come though again.
> And whilst I think this job up Rushop edge is a bit thoughtless for some reason it doesn't really bother me, as in a couple of winters it'll be back in condition. I have been riding MTB since 1986 though so I've seen a lot of these tracks in different stages of flux, and credit where credit is due, they did a first class job on the bogfest which was cutgate.
I wonder if it will take longer, but I guess 'eventually' the planings will erode away with the rain and the passage of feet and wheels, and the bed rock will come though again.
In reply to Timmd:
For a point of reference that 48 hour storm in 2007, took some hardcore roads in Wharncliffe back to base, so unless they metal the surface, I'd give it 2 to 4 years.
For a point of reference that 48 hour storm in 2007, took some hardcore roads in Wharncliffe back to base, so unless they metal the surface, I'd give it 2 to 4 years.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
I've found it's the kind of word which can cause people who don't share the same point of view to scoff or to close their ears/minds, meaning it can take a while of careful explaining to get them to see what one means
It's just my personal point of view, but I think one might as well just do the careful explaining to start with.
I've found it's the kind of word which can cause people who don't share the same point of view to scoff or to close their ears/minds, meaning it can take a while of careful explaining to get them to see what one means
It's just my personal point of view, but I think one might as well just do the careful explaining to start with.
Post edited at 20:48
In reply to Timmd:
Have you seen the pics ? A bit more than just planings. But yes once the top gravel has eroded (and washed down onto the road), channels will appear. There are quite a few places where you get a channel that's 2 foot deep but only a foot wide - lethal for cyclists, walkers and horse riders. There was one such bridleway near eckington that DCC closed for over a year - in fact for all I know it might still be closed.
> I wonder if it will take longer, but I guess 'eventually' the planings will erode away with the rain and the passage of feet and wheels, and the bed rock will come though again.
Have you seen the pics ? A bit more than just planings. But yes once the top gravel has eroded (and washed down onto the road), channels will appear. There are quite a few places where you get a channel that's 2 foot deep but only a foot wide - lethal for cyclists, walkers and horse riders. There was one such bridleway near eckington that DCC closed for over a year - in fact for all I know it might still be closed.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
We did the Doethie Valley route in Mid Wales earlier this year. The track leading from Saor Mynydd to the valley is an old right of way but it's been washed out in places, the channel is about 2ft wide and anything up to 6ft deep. We did wonder why the council had padlocked the gate!
We did the Doethie Valley route in Mid Wales earlier this year. The track leading from Saor Mynydd to the valley is an old right of way but it's been washed out in places, the channel is about 2ft wide and anything up to 6ft deep. We did wonder why the council had padlocked the gate!
In reply to ChrisJD:
Good (ish) news
http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/outdoor-features/rushup-edge-work-halted-for-t...
It remains to be seen whether they will remove the limestone aggregate they have already dumped
Good (ish) news
http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/outdoor-features/rushup-edge-work-halted-for-t...
It remains to be seen whether they will remove the limestone aggregate they have already dumped
1
In reply to ChrisJD:
Perhaps a cheeky way to comment...
https://jobs.derbyshire.gov.uk/jobdetails.asp?jobid=43616
Perhaps a cheeky way to comment...
https://jobs.derbyshire.gov.uk/jobdetails.asp?jobid=43616
In reply to Chris the Tall:
And not so good news:
http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/41-urgent-update-re-rushup-edge-ch...
And not so good news:
http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/41-urgent-update-re-rushup-edge-ch...
In reply to Chris the Tall:
I have done now, it doesn't look like gritstone from what's to go on in the pictures, more large chunks of limestone.
I don't suppose it's easy to find a method of surfacing paths which is vaguely cost effective and keeps everybody happy, mind you
> Have you seen the pics ? A bit more than just planings. But yes once the top gravel has eroded (and washed down onto the road), channels will appear. There are quite a few places where you get a channel that's 2 foot deep but only a foot wide - lethal for cyclists, walkers and horse riders. There was one such bridleway near eckington that DCC closed for over a year - in fact for all I know it might still be closed.
I have done now, it doesn't look like gritstone from what's to go on in the pictures, more large chunks of limestone.
I don't suppose it's easy to find a method of surfacing paths which is vaguely cost effective and keeps everybody happy, mind you
Post edited at 10:13
In reply to Timmd:
Simple - works recently done on the nearby 'The Roych'.
Not perfect, but generally considered to be a good compromise.
> I don't suppose it's easy to find a method of surfacing paths which is vaguely cost effective and keeps everybody happy, mind you
Simple - works recently done on the nearby 'The Roych'.
Not perfect, but generally considered to be a good compromise.
In reply to Timmd:
Simple example 2: Houndkirk work by Sheffield City Council - left at least half the wide track untouched, created smoother path on side.
Again, not perfect for everyone, but an acceptable compromise for most.
> I don't suppose it's easy to find a method of surfacing paths which is vaguely cost effective and keeps everybody happy, mind you
Simple example 2: Houndkirk work by Sheffield City Council - left at least half the wide track untouched, created smoother path on side.
Again, not perfect for everyone, but an acceptable compromise for most.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Statement from Ride Sheffield/PDMTB
http://www.ridesheffield.org.uk/2014/11/rushup-cock-up-the-fight-continues/
Good to see the BMC and Friends of the Peak have given their support
Statement from Ride Sheffield/PDMTB
http://www.ridesheffield.org.uk/2014/11/rushup-cock-up-the-fight-continues/
Good to see the BMC and Friends of the Peak have given their support
In reply to ChrisJD:
Latest update:
http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/49-what-s-the-latest-with-rushup-e...
Latest update:
http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/49-what-s-the-latest-with-rushup-e...
Good things could be happening:
http://www.peakdistrictmtb.org/index.php/51-positive-news-on-rushup-edge
In reply to ChrisJD:
Very worrying letter in today's sheffield telegraph from a British horse society access officer on behalf of hallam riders group
Congratulates DCC for restoring the paths on Stanage causeway and rushup edge. Says that the routes had been badly degraded due to the upsurge in mountain biking. Makes some other, valid points about respect and access for all, but utter rubbish on the degradation point.
Very worrying letter in today's sheffield telegraph from a British horse society access officer on behalf of hallam riders group
Congratulates DCC for restoring the paths on Stanage causeway and rushup edge. Says that the routes had been badly degraded due to the upsurge in mountain biking. Makes some other, valid points about respect and access for all, but utter rubbish on the degradation point.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
See this too:
http://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2014/11/13/council-halts-work-on-chapel-ga...
Bizarre article but heartening and informed responses. Is this the same Liz Roberts that works for BBC Sheffield (i.e. possibly doesn't know much about paths in the Peak?)
See this too:
http://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2014/11/13/council-halts-work-on-chapel-ga...
Bizarre article but heartening and informed responses. Is this the same Liz Roberts that works for BBC Sheffield (i.e. possibly doesn't know much about paths in the Peak?)
In reply to Stig:
"The route, an ancient packhorse track, is a byway open to all traffic but the national park authority introduced a permanent ban on its use by motor traffic at the beginning of the year. Theoretically, horses and carts can still legally use Chapel Gate."
I didn't realise the permanent TRO was that recent. It makes me wonder whether the DCC work is actually in response to that permanent closure in some way ('if we restore the track surface, the TRO can be lifted'). There certainly seems to be a breakdown in communications between the PDNPA and DCC. It sounds like there's also something of a gulf between them on policy regarding this route.
My suspicion is that the 'delay for consultation' will be a PR exercise, and the 'consultation' will take the form of 'this is what we are going to do' (which meets one dictionary definition).
"The route, an ancient packhorse track, is a byway open to all traffic but the national park authority introduced a permanent ban on its use by motor traffic at the beginning of the year. Theoretically, horses and carts can still legally use Chapel Gate."
I didn't realise the permanent TRO was that recent. It makes me wonder whether the DCC work is actually in response to that permanent closure in some way ('if we restore the track surface, the TRO can be lifted'). There certainly seems to be a breakdown in communications between the PDNPA and DCC. It sounds like there's also something of a gulf between them on policy regarding this route.
My suspicion is that the 'delay for consultation' will be a PR exercise, and the 'consultation' will take the form of 'this is what we are going to do' (which meets one dictionary definition).
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...