Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

New Forest presents draft charter for cycling events

Latest attempt to placate NIMBYs teaches granny to suck eggs

A draft charter for cycling events in the New Forest has been published after several years of acrimonious protests from a small number of locals opposed to sportive rides in the national park.

But sportive organiser UK Cycling Events says there's nothing in the charter they're not already doing.

In the most recent incident, nails were thrown on the route of the Wiggle Spring Sportive. After the event, 18 riders were banned from subsequent events for breaches of event rules including urinating in public.

The draft charter has been drawn up by a cycling liaison group involving more than 20 organisations. The New Forest National Park Authority is now awaiting feedback from from parish councils, authority members and New Forest District Council before the final version is published.

Martin Barden of UK Ccing Events, which organises the biggest sportives in the forest, told road.cc: "We were heavily involved in helping to shape the Charter as part of the Cycling Liaison Group. There is nothing in the Charter we are not doing currently and we intent to comply with the Charter going forward."

Nigel Matthews, Head of Recreation Management and Learning at the National Park Authority, said: “The National Park Authority convened this group to encourage responsible cycling which is in keeping with the special qualities and purposes of the National Park.

“The draft Charter confirms the central role played by the New Forest Public Events and Safety Advisory Group – which brings together the Highway Authority, District Council, the Police and others - through which individual events are assessed in advance and monitored.”

The draft Charter provides guidance on: planning cycle events; liaising with local communities, landowners and organisations; advising participants in advance about appropriate behaviour; responsibilities of event organisers during and after the event (for example: effective marshalling, signage, litter picking, mechanisms for feedback).

Many of the charter’s recommendations are already standard procedure for event organisers in the forest. For example, organisers should plan a year ahead and avoid dates that clash with pony round-ups. But when UK Cycling Events planned last year’s Wiggle New Forest 100 Sportive, they gave substantial notice of the date, only to have round-up organisers choose the same date.

Some of the recommendations will be difficult or impossible to implement. The charter says organisers should take action “against participants who contravene event rules (e.g. banned from future events for unlawful racing or cycling in a peloton).“

The charter provides no definition of a peloton, or what would constitute racing, and elsewhere says riders should be started in groups.

Matthews said: “Obviously the charter 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 and tracks and free-roaming animals. Great care is needed to avoid unnecessary conflict and ensure the safety of all.

“A number of forest organisations, cycling organisations and cycle event companies are members of the Cycling Liaison Group and have helped draw up the charter, so we are confident that event organisers will find it useful and implement its recommendations. We will review the charter after a year.”

To view the draft charter for cycle event organisers go to www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/cycle-charter.

John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.

He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.

Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.

John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.

He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.

Add new comment

37 comments

Avatar
antigee | 9 years ago
0 likes
Quote:

a single file means an overtaking vehicle spends longer on the dangerous side of the road

its not dangerous if you don't feel pressurised to overtake inappropriately

"squeezing" past single file cyclists with no effort to move over the centre line to give adequate passing space is dangerous but not to car and other vehicle drivers

hatred of cyclists riding 2 a breast is irrational but then again so are a lot of other types of behaviour seen on the road

now what was the topic?

Avatar
madonepro | 9 years ago
0 likes

This topic shows what's wrong with 'forums'.

It had gone off topic quickly, it has comments from people who cannot be bothered to read the whole OP and all the comments before adding the same non sensical comment.

It has chosen another topic, and proceeded to debate it verbatim with trolls adding fire.

Grow up people, and go and ride your flaming bikes...

Avatar
goggy replied to Neil753 | 9 years ago
0 likes
Neil753 wrote:

There's a certain irony to the use of the pic in this post, that shows a group of riders whose road positioning suggests they either have no idea that there is a car behind them, or are aware of the car and have decided to just carry on as they are.

Come on guys, pick your pics more carefully  3

Two abreast in group rides - that's what my club does. when there is space to overtake, like they would a car, then they can pass. it stops close passes.

Avatar
a_P | 9 years ago
0 likes

Apart from the perennial and painful arguing about riding two abreast, as far as the good folk of the New Forest are concerned don't spent your money there. I'm never going to cycle there, I'd rather go to Italy or France where they want my cycling money.
Eventually it gets through to them, cyclists often have large disposable incomes, if those cyclists feel that the locals don't want them they won't spend those large disposable incomes in the local's businesses.

Avatar
Al__S replied to CarlosFerreiro | 9 years ago
0 likes
CarlosFerreiro wrote:

That'd be one idea to base it on. Another idea would seem to be that maybe "narrow" might be where a car cannot overtake a bike, giving the appropriate DoT dynamic envelopes, without crossing the centre-line. That's a LOT of roads.
But not sure what the specifics are actually intended to be.

The vast majority of single carriageway, two lane roads, a car cannot safely overtake a single bike without crossing the centre line (as illustrated by the Highway Code)

Avatar
madonepro replied to a_P | 9 years ago
0 likes
a_P wrote:

cyclists often have large disposable incomes

what a crock... traditionally that isn't true, and if you look through the pro peloton, all of it, including all levels, and let me know what riders come from a non working class background? And those with a degree!

Once upon a time, those that wanted to network played golf, since the Lance machine got working, 'those' have started to ride, and the cost of everything bike has gone up, and it's become a corporate playground. I hope that they all get bored and piss off back to golf and leave the sport alone.

Avatar
thereverent | 9 years ago
0 likes

I was intested with this from the code:

4.5 If riders’ times are to be categorised or recorded, they should be provided individually or in a form that cannot be sorted into order of time.

So they've not heard of Strava then?

'Provided in a form which can't be sorted' is hard as you can easily cut and paste into excel and sort that way.

Pages

Latest Comments