MTBers 'terrorising' walkers on Cornish forest trails

What a daft non-story. Anyone careless enough to walk on a designated MTB trail is putting themselves and others at risk, as seen in this video. 

https://www.facebook.com/115231578576910/videos/783861671713894/

I've ridden those trails and can confirm that they are excellent and a real credit to the area. The trails don't really share any of the walk ways apart from the first climb - I wouldn't have described my pace up there as "excessive speed" haha. Beyond that it occasionally crosses walk ways so the interaction with walkers would be minimal.

Either way - littering is unacceptable. I hope all cyclists, walkers and other park users get their shizz together and stop it.

In other news, roger yokel the farmer has made a complaint that the cars are travelling too fast down the big six lane road and are scaring his cows as he walks them to the slaughterhouse. When queried about the cow dung left on the road, he insisted it must have been the cars that left it there.

If riders had the right to roam (as in Scotland and Scandinavia) then MTB would not be limited to Trail Centres and artificially concentrated by over regulation. Strict Liability could help as much here as it could on the roads by allowing cyclists access to the whole of the UK to both rambles and off road cyclists with the proviso that if you crash into someone it's assumed to be your fault.

 This all stems from a bulls**t story in the local paper trying to whip up some readership and click bait as is often the way with sinking media these days.. negative stories about cycling are easy fodder...https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1103668099693092&id=27...

"It's not ordinary local cyclists who are causing the problems, but dedicated trail cyclists who come to Cardinham from various parts of the country, attracted by the Forestry Commission advertising the trails."

There are so many points that are likely to irk cyclist about this 'one' persons opinion, and others have already pointed out some.  But let's be clear, for most mountain bikers (of which I include myself), Cardinham Woods are unlikely to be attracting people from across the country. 

I don't know much about mountain biking but would you really need an energy drink or gel for a 12km route? 

I'm local to Cardinham and use the trails a couple of times a week. These claims are a nonsense.

The trails are cycle specific and apart from transitional areas are separated from the walking paths. They have a warning at the beginning of each section not to walk up them and in most cases start with steep sections of track which no leisure walker would entertain climbing on foot.

Due to the size of the forest and the divergent nature of the walking and cycling trails it is fairly rare that you will actually encounter any walkers and where the paths are shared it is done so amicably and respectfully. (We have a great tradition in Cornwall of saying things like "Hello" to other people as we pass.)

The walking trails are well used, often by families of those who have come to ride the trails. Anybody who suggests they've been abandoned should try getting a parking space at the weekend. 

There is also zero sign of littering on the cycle trails (cans, gel wrappers or otherwise).

Litter as cans is usually the stuff thrown out of cars. On a footpath/cycle path, it's more likely to be pedestrians. How does the "one person" know that the energy drinks cans are down to the MTBers?

Littering is certainly a common theme but, energy drink CANS? That's unusual and I smell a bit of a rat there.

No idea about the veracity generally of these complaints, but the one about cyclists being litter bugs, splattering the country side with empty gel wrappers, rings very true. The tendency to litter by other cyclists really disgusts me. How hard can it be to put it back in your pocket and bring it home?

All I will say is, it's obviously only cyclists who litter.

I think that the Rights of Way act needs updating to suit modern times.

At present there is a basic hierachy of
Footpath - Pedestrian only
Bridleway (and Restricted Byway) - Pedestrian, Cyclist and Horses
Byway Open To All Traffic - Peds, Cyclists, Horses and Motors

Instead we need an extra, maybe Cycleway for bicycles only.
That would indicate to pedestrians that it is a trail designed for bikes and would help segregate pedestrians from cyclists on trails with restricted sightlines and fast downhill courses (Probably only 20 miles worth in many counties)
 

Totally agree with you on this, if the trails were built purely for the bikes why do people use them ?

There must be numerous other walks for hikers and the general public, unless of course some one can correct me on that point ?

As for littering, its a disgusting habit regardless of who is responsible.

"One walker says the routes are now dangerous, and has written to her local MP".

There always will be "one" and I am not sure why "one" voice should have greater weight than the many who happily rub along in the area ? Sounds like it's a case of "one" prejudiced individual having their moment in the sun.  If these are built marked trails, what on earth are you doing walking on them when there's the rest of the forest to enjoy ? "Dialled in Dave" doesn't sound like the place to go for a relaxing stroll given its promotional description.

Where I mountain bike, I do occasionally encounter people walking up trails and usually it is people getting lost and I will always politely caution that there might be others coming down faster than myself and they might not anticipate your presence round a blind corner or a dip.  Most are friendly enough but sometimes you will encounter belligerence but you can't educate the stupid can you ?

I don't know the area but I am presuming the trails have not been built on shared use paths, in which case, they have designed in conflict which is stupid in itself.

As for littering, there is no excuse, it's obnoxious and gives ammunition to the whining minority.

The other point that needs to be made to this individual is that people coming to ride in "their" forest bring money, spending and jobs to an area that undoubtedly will need it, hence the promotion. So please, understand that it is not "your forest" in the personal sense, it is "your forest" plural.