Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

New Forest sportive riders slammed by motorists for not riding single file

New Forest 100 participants 'cause anguish to Forest stock' say critics in re-run of row from last year...

A sportive event in the New Forest has come under fire, with motorists and farmers complaining that cyclists are inconsiderate when riding in the area.

The New Forest 100, which was held two weeks ago, was the latest cycle event to anger locals. Last year we reported how an increase in the number of cyclists there is posing a danger to pedestrians and livestock, according to the chairman of a body representing the rights of Commoners in the New Forest.

Frances Baye, a motorist, told the Salisbury Journal that she had been held up by the New Forest 100. She said: “I was trying to overtake the cyclists as I was approaching Burley and it was virtually impossible.

“A group of cyclists refused to get into single file and continued to overtake each other, despite knowing there was a queue of traffic behind them.

“I am not against these cyclists enjoying the fresh air and getting fit but think consideration has to be the priority.”

A resident, who asked not to be named, said: “Despite these types of events not being classed as a race, the competitors are consistently in a hurry to pass other competitors at speed and in large packs.

“They can cause anguish to Forest stock and other cyclists, including children, who are not involved in the race, as well as cars and other vehicles.

“Last weekend was really the last straw with a ridiculous numbers of competitors.

“There were as many as four cyclists abreast on each side of the road; they were nearly crashing into each other at speed, going downhill, never mind the traffic trying to go up and down the road.

On the cycling section of its website, the New Forest National Park Authority says “You are welcome to cycle on public roads, byways open to all traffic, public bridleways, restricted bridleways, and dedicated cycle routes. You are not permitted to ride over the Open Forest, or on Forestry Commission tracks which are not dedicated cycle routes. Cycling on public footpaths is also not permitted.”

The National Park’s boundaries roughly correspond to the area of heathland and woodland within which some 500 commoners are entitled to graze livestock including cattle, donkeys, pigs, sheep and, most famously, ponies.

Last year, Dr Graham Ferris, Dr Graham Ferris, chairman of the New Forest Commoners’ Defence Association (NFCDA), established in 1909 “in response to the increasing conflict between the spreading urban populations around the New Forest’s fringes and the commoners’ animals,” said that the number of cyclists riding in the New Forest nowadays meant that “The roads are effectively obstructed and confrontations leading to a breach of the peace are likely.”

Concern for livestock was cited then and now as reasons to keep cyclists in line during mass events.

But data compiled by the New Forest National Park Authority clearly demonstrate that it is motorists, not cyclists, who pose by far the the greater risk to livestock in the Forest.

During 2009, 24 foals and 41 mares were either killed outright or had to be put down following collisions with motor vehicles in the New Forest. There were no reported occurrences of animals being killed in incidents involving cyclists.

Director of UK Cycling Events, organisers of the New Forest 100, Martin Barden said: “Some 1,300 people took part in the New Forest 100, many of whom travelled from all over the country to take part, to experience the beautiful national park and assist the local economy in these difficult times.

“There are one or two people who live in the New Forest who believe they own the New Forest roads.

“The roads are public highways and cyclists have every right to cycle along them and get fit and enjoy the New Forest.

“The event on Sunday was a non-competitive event, with riders’ start times spread out from 7.30am to 10.15am.

“As per our terms and conditions, anyone who is deemed to be racing would be disqualified.

“We ask cyclists to ride considerately and in single file where possible, although riders are legally allowed to ride two abreast.”

As well as the New Forest 100, UK Cycling Events runs the Wiggle New Forest Spring Sunday Sportive, and it is also home to the New Forest Rattler and a recent ride out with the Garmin pro team.

Add new comment

156 comments

Avatar
Brummmie | 11 years ago
0 likes

The cyclists that insist on riding 2 abreast on narrow lanes whilst having a nice chat and won't just move to let a single car passed piss me right off. It's selfish and unsafe.

When I'm out riding I make a point of moving from riding 2 abreast as soon as I'm aware of a car behind. I also make a point of thanking patient driver, just a raise of the hand and a nod goes a very long way !

I cycle around Lichfield, Tamworth and Derbyshire areas and it shocks me how many dickhead cyclists there are with no regard for drivers or their fellow cyclists. Most cyclists acknowledge each other with a hand, nod or a simple "morning mate" but more and more are just plain fecking ignorant to any kind of extended pleasantry ! These guys don't love cycling, no. These are SERIOUS CYCLISTS..............

You know who you are guys. Assos, Pinarello, no helmet, designer glasses, on your way out when I've already done my morning miles !

Knobbers................

Avatar
nbrus | 11 years ago
0 likes

It should be made an offence for cyclists not to move into single file when faster moving traffic approaches ... imagine coming round a bend, at a legal speed, only to be confronted by a pack of slow moving cyclists taking up the full width of the lane ... they are a danger to themselves and others. Even two abreast this is still not a safe way to ride on the public highway. Yes there are some idiot drivers out there too, but that doesn't mean we need to be idiots too.

Avatar
Brummmie replied to nbrus | 11 years ago
0 likes
nbrus wrote:

It should be made an offence for cyclists not to move into single file when faster moving traffic approaches ... imagine coming round a bend, at a legal speed, only to be confronted by a pack of slow moving cyclists taking up the full width of the lane ... they are a danger to themselves and others. Even two abreast this is still not a safe way to ride on the public highway. Yes there are some idiot drivers out there too, but that doesn't mean we need to be idiots too.

Exactly, drivers do their bit. BUT we need to do ours as well.

Avatar
djpalmer32 replied to crazy-legs | 11 years ago
0 likes

the speed limit is 40mph

Avatar
Chuffy replied to Bob's Bikes | 11 years ago
0 likes
FATBEGGARONABIKE wrote:

I had an unpleasent incident with a silver pick up truck coming towards me and bullying his way past rather than put his near side wheel on the grass verge,

FBOAB - have sent you an e-mail re: this incident. We've reported him to the police and the more witnesses, the better.

Avatar
PaulVWatts replied to Bob's Bikes | 11 years ago
0 likes
FATBEGGARONABIKE wrote:

Having just done the Gridiron Audax last Sunday and thoroughly enjoying myself (thank you to all the people involved in the organising and running of this wonderful event) I personnaly can't say that I saw any cyclists more than two abreast even the pairs singled out on small lanes, what I did encounter was a group of ramblers spread all across the road/lane who took their own sweet time about moving to the side of the road to let a ROAD USER through (two went to the opposite kerb to the rest of the group making the gap between narrower than it needed to be and then tutted as I went past) I used my horn, then bell, then my voice to warn them of my approach (nice gentle words only). I had an unpleasent incident with a silver pick up truck coming towards me and bullying his way past rather than put his near side wheel on the grass verge, and then I came across the accident that Chuffy commented on but was not aware of the commotion caused by the little twerp throwing his toys out of his pram! until I got to the village hall/tea & cake stop later (he threatened a cyclist, then told the ambulance driver to move his vehicle then threatened the ambulance driver when he didn't get his way used his van as a weapon nearly hitting a group of cyclists by all accounts deliberatly when turning round before speeding off) These are the people we need to REMOVE from OUR roads then everybody can use the roads properly and sensibly

If there is no pavement a rambler is, as you put it, a ROAD USER and has as much right to use the road as a cyclist. That the ramblers not breaking into a synchronised run to get out of your way annoys you shows that you are just as bad as the drivers you criticise. You want car drivers to understand the vulnerability and speed reaction limits of cyclists but don't seem to be able understand that pedestrians have their own vulnerability and speed reaction limits.

Avatar
Chuffy replied to Forester | 11 years ago
0 likes
Forester wrote:

I ride in the new Forest every day and the speed limit is either 30 or 40 mph; don't know any 20 mph limits. The animals can be very jumpy, especially with cyclists, and there are many horse riders whose competence varies and whose horses often spook at bikes. Riding in 'club peletons' is neither safe nor considerate in the Forest, and leaves those of us who defend cycling in the forest without a leg to stand on in the face of the orchestrated opposition of the commoners, who hate cyclists. I think the Wiggle rides will be banned for 2013 and they have only themselves to blame for promoting 'quiet 20mph roads' which don't exist.

Jumpy animals? Really. The Forest animals are about the least jumpy I can think of, even the ones with foals, calves etc. Same goes for the animals on Dartmoor. They'll move off the road in their own sweet time, not before.

"Riding in 'club peletons' is neither safe nor considerate"
Why? Unsafe for who?

"The Wiggle rides will be banned"
By who and on what grounds? And what about the Gridiron? These are public roads.

As for the commoners who hate cyclists - tough. They don't own the Forest and they don't own the roads.

Avatar
jova54 | 11 years ago
0 likes

PaulVWatts wrote; "If there is no pavement a rambler is, as you put it, a ROAD USER and has as much right to use the road as a cyclist."

If the pavement peters out pedestrians/walkers/Ramblers are required by the Highway Code to walk on the right hand side of the road in single file facing the oncoming traffic.
If they are in an organised group, which should apply to Ramblers I suppose, then they should walk on the left hand side of the road and have look-outs posted at the front and rear of the group.
They have no right to sprawl themselves across the road and expect other ROAD USERS to play slalom around them.

Avatar
PaulVWatts replied to jova54 | 11 years ago
0 likes

If you are going to quote the highway code get it right:

If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light keep close to the side of the road.
It may be safer to cross the road well before a sharp right-hand bend so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Cross back after the bend.

So single file is not required by law. Right hand side of the road? depends on the circumstances on some bends on country lanes the code recognises it would actually be suicidal. Your reaction is just as bad as the I pay road tax brigade. All the person I commented on needed to do was slow down to a speed that allowed the walkers to get out of the way and for him to easily maneuver around them. Just what we cyclists would like most car drivers to do.

Avatar
doc | 11 years ago
0 likes

In the light of all these issues, the local region has stopped all racing in the forest except for a couple of short evening events, and then not in mid-summer. This is simply because the forset is an area which has been overtaken by all kinds of recreational events (not just cycling). I think there is a triathlon or two, and what LVRC/TLI do I don't know. You could say that the mass participation events which are good in that it allows everyone to access the sport, have actually had a bad effect on racing.
This has not just happened in the forest, a race in the south west was cancelled because it clashed with a sportive, and the police having no way of stopping the sportive, revoked permission for the race. Interesting approach, and one which we may find increasing, so where's road racing going?
perhaps there is a need for some proper co-ordination, and a bit of imagination so that organisers communicate and don't use the same or very similar routes all the time?
If nothing happens, eventually I can see the time when the government will start legislating, restricting routes, numbers, and all kinds of stuff. Best we put our own house in order first.

Avatar
crazy-legs replied to nbrus | 11 years ago
0 likes
nbrus wrote:

It should be made an offence for cyclists not to move into single file when faster moving traffic approaches ... imagine coming round a bend, at a legal speed, only to be confronted by a pack of slow moving cyclists taking up the full width of the lane ... they are a danger to themselves and others. Even two abreast this is still not a safe way to ride on the public highway. Yes there are some idiot drivers out there too, but that doesn't mean we need to be idiots too.

Hmm, not sure if trolling or just stupid...
How do you propose that this law is to be enforced? Presumably by the same police force that ensure that no motorist ever breaks the speed limit or drives while under the influence/using a mobile/uninsured?

Is it not more dangerous to have one long line of single file than one short line of double file? Single file means you've just doubled the distance you need to drive on the opposite side of the road to do a safe overtake.

Avatar
nbrus replied to crazy-legs | 11 years ago
0 likes

@crazy-legs:

Hmm, not sure if you're stupid...

so you're saying that speed limits are pointless because the police have a hard time enforcing them?

On a reasonably wide road it is possible to move safely and slowly past single file cyclists even when there is oncoming traffic and if you do find yourself overtaking on the other side of the road, then there is still a possibility to pull in and avoid a collision.

Obviously not the case on a narrow road, but with pack cyclists you have no options but to wait for a very long gap in the traffic with plenty of clear road ahead ... a pretty rare occurrence, so traffic simply queues up behind.

You're obviously of an opinion that you can do as you please because the current law allows it. That's not helpful at all.

Avatar
stewieatb replied to nbrus | 11 years ago
0 likes
nbrus wrote:

It should be made an offence for cyclists not to move into single file when faster moving traffic approaches ... imagine coming round a bend, at a legal speed, only to be confronted by a pack of slow moving cyclists taking up the full width of the lane ... they are a danger to themselves and others. Even two abreast this is still not a safe way to ride on the public highway. Yes there are some idiot drivers out there too, but that doesn't mean we need to be idiots too.

What's the difference between going around a blind corner to find a "slow moving" bunch - I'd add that most club rides and sportive bunches will be doing around 20mph on the flat - and finding a crashed or broken down car, or other obstruction? Answer: None. If the corner is blind, you should travel around it at a speed such that you can stop if there is an unseen obstruction.

Secondly, what's the difference between a bunch in single file and a bunch in double file? Well, the single file bunch is twice as long. If you want to overtake safely, you should be leaving at least 3-4 feet between the left side of your car and the nearest cyclist. A cyclist is around 20-22" wide at the shoulders and handlebars, and should be at least 3 feet from the kerb/verge. This means whether the cyclists are double or single file, you should be overtaking by using at least part of the other lane. A single file group is twice the length, so you will have to go twice as much time and distance while at least partially occupying the other lane. I would therefore conclude that safely and legally overtaking a single-file group is more dangerous than a safe and legal overtake of a double-file with the same number of people.

Double-file groups also give more opportunity to rotate those working on the front (by chaingang-style rotation), meaning such groups are may be faster and encounter less motorised traffic.

Why, therefore, do you think that riding double file is "not a safe way to ride on the public highway"?

Avatar
stewieatb replied to nbrus | 11 years ago
0 likes
nbrus wrote:

On a reasonably wide road it is possible to move safely and slowly past single file cyclists even when there is oncoming traffic and if you do find yourself overtaking on the other side of the road, then there is still a possibility to pull in and avoid a collision.

As I alluded to in my other post, if you are less than 3 feet from the cyclists, then you are not overtaking safely. The cyclists should also be 3ft from the kerb or verge, and have their own width of up to two feet. Would you care to point out where in the UK has single-carriageway lanes that are 7-8 feet wider than a family car?

Avatar
nbrus | 11 years ago
0 likes

@Stewie:
Lets look at the reality of the situation...

As a car driver if you come around a corner and find a pair of cyclists in front of you with oncoming traffic you will panic and if you aren't paying attention you could end up ploughing into those cyclist as there will be nowhere for you to go. Yes, you may very well be at fault, but this won't affect what may happen to those cyclists. Humans make errors.

When it comes to overtaking, it is possible to slow right down to similar speed as a single file cyclist and carefully move past with much less space than normally required when travelling at speed. You cannot attempt such a manoeuvre when cyclists are two abreast, so traffic will build up behind them. Most cars that overtake me when I'm cycling don't move fully over to the other lane ... how much room they give me is directly proportional to their speed. In the Tour-de-France, cyclists often ride up alongside support vehicles to top up on their hydration. This is pretty safe to do as they are going at the same speed with no sudden movement.

If you are caught in the opposite lane overtaking a pack of cyclists, where do you go? You're stuck and have to hope that the oncoming traffic can brake before hitting you. If cyclists are in single file, then you can slow down to their speed and move across to the same lane as far as reasonable without causing an accident, hopefully leaving enough room for oncoming traffic to squeeze past. Yes this would be poor judgement when choosing a safe place to overtake, but the reality is that this happens. Humans make mistakes. Cyclists need to account for this when out on the roads.

Cycling two abreast exposes the cyclist to greater risk as well as making it more likely that other road users will take risks in order to get past. This will make accidents more likely ... that's the reality, regardless of whom is to blame. If I was forced to cycle two abreast I'd make sure I was on the inside.

Avatar
Dr_Lex replied to nbrus | 11 years ago
0 likes
nbrus wrote:

... imagine coming round a bend, at a legal speed, only to be confronted by a [tractor] taking up the full width of the lane ...

Drive/ride appropriate to the conditions and consider all road users.
One can dream...

Avatar
northstar | 11 years ago
0 likes

pea brained motorists in thinking they own every road shocker, got news for you, you don't.

Avatar
Forester replied to Chuffy | 11 years ago
0 likes

I have seen stampedes of ponies during the New Forest Ma rathon- another event unpopular with the commoners, and my son left a 2meter line of rubber in the road when a new forest pony jumped out at him on the Orchid Ride. The donkeys and ponies look half dead (and probably are) but you need to give them leeway and hard to see how 30+ club riders can do that in a group, not to mention coping with the cattle grids. Will be doing charity rides and the Round the Isle of Wight Randonee next year, not mixing it with lookalike TdF riders who pick the Forest because they can't do hills. Was nearly wiped out by a car in the forest yesterday- so not a fuddy duddy!

Avatar
the_mikey | 11 years ago
0 likes

The new forest isn't the only place with livestock on it and is popular with cyclists, and is also used by motorists, so why is it so consistently seen as a problem there?

Avatar
Seoige | 11 years ago
0 likes

I remember on the Wicklow 200 this year, the car in front of me would not pull over to one side and let me pass. In the end, I gave up and thought of Sparticus, went for gold but nearly lost it on the verge overtaking, a scary moment. Coming out of Avoca after those never ending hills(hate them seem to go on forever). After those climbs, I was like a demon and embellished the slopes. Hit a tee junction, travelling way too fast, locked up the back wheel in a controlled slide but no amount of crunching numbers in quantum physics in my mind as my life flashed in front of my eyes would prevent this accident. The female motorist ahead of me was like predictive text,very smart and gave me the right of way(I was totally in the wrong).The Tee junction just came out of the blue and I was on a mission. There was no way I was going to make it even with the back wheel locked up. I love the Shimano RS30s and I know they are bullit proof. Was not really wanting to test them out out with an impact collision.  24 I can laugh now but bless that woman, she saved my ass. Forever grateful! Some motorists are good and some bad I guess. Can not knock them all.

Avatar
NeilXDavis | 11 years ago
0 likes

Great comments as always on here - honestly cant say anything that hasn't already been said.

Haven't done a sportif yet (ex roadie here) and Im on the fence mostly due to the large volume of inexperienced group riding cyclists - having been taken out by one earlier this year I may just stick to solo/club runs..

Avatar
Bez | 11 years ago
0 likes

+1 for any just about any point counter to what Nic is saying.

Are you really saying that close passing is ok because they manage it on the Tour, where the rider in question is in the middle of the road away from any drains and potholes and broken glass, where the road is closed so there is no oncoming traffic that may cause some swerving, and where the vehicle in question is there precisely for the purpose of getting that rider to the end of the race quickly and safely? If you think that's any sort of analogue to road riding then frankly you're on crack. If a cyclist is forced into the gutter at 20mph by a car doing 21mph, who by your logic can safely pass within a gnat's knob of his bars, then that's not safe. Not remotely.

Anyway, the New Forest. It's fantastically Nimbyish, I used to ride there a lot (more off-road) and you never felt welcome if you were on a bike. That said, I hate riding in large groups because I know that it irritates drivers, and I know as a driver that most groups don't do anything (or even think about doing anything) to help anyone get past safely.

Avatar
OldRidgeback replied to crazy-legs | 11 years ago
0 likes
crazy-legs wrote:
Quote:

The cyclists I saw were riding up a hill and had made the congestion worse. They could've ridden single file but didn't

Note that I'm not defending the actions of the cyclists, but one explanation: cycling uphill exacerbates even tiny differences in speed between riders. A group doing 18mph in neat double lines arrives at a climb and drops to 10mph (for example). But the rider at the back can't do 10, maybe he wants to do 11 or 12 (and before anyone says "well he should bloody slow down", consider that he might be on much higher gearing or a fixie). And the rider in the middle can't do 10mph, he's actually doing 8mph. So the group fragments, people pull out round each other, give other riders more space and end up blocking the road for a short time. They'll reform their neat 2-up lines when they're back on the flat but basically the issue is not really any different to being stuck behind a tractor, or some horseriders. Yet for some reason it's OK to bully cyclists...  2

None of them were on single speed bikes and from what I saw, they were having a nice old chat and paying no attention to the long tailback of vehicles behind. That stretch of the A303 is bad for congestion and they were making it worse, which is selfish and inconsiderate road use in my book. Riding like that just adds fuel to the fire for the anti-cycling lobby.

Avatar
Bob's Bikes replied to PaulVWatts | 11 years ago
0 likes
PaulVWatts wrote:

That the ramblers not breaking into a synchronised run to get out of your way annoys you shows that you are just as bad as the drivers you criticise. You want car drivers to understand the vulnerability and speed reaction limits of cyclists but don't seem to be able understand that pedestrians have their own vulnerability and speed reaction limits.

Paul I was doing 10mph I used my horn from a distance to give them plenty of time, I didn't expect them to run to get out of my way but I still had to brake to give them longer than was reasonable I wasn't annoyed as you say so please don't put words in my mouth.

Avatar
BigDummy | 11 years ago
0 likes

I particularly love the idea that this causes "anguish".

HTFU.

Avatar
James Warrener | 11 years ago
0 likes

The number of clubs in my local area who have started doing "group riding" and "bunch skills" courses indicates that it is an issue.

Unless they can be accused of profiteering in the same way a sportive organiser can be !

Avatar
Simon E | 11 years ago
0 likes

I wonder what the traffic count of cars in the New Forest on Sundays would be.

Every weekday morning and evening the main (and side) roads leading into and around Shrewsbury are chock-a-block with cars.

No-one ever tells them that they should split up, travel in smaller groups, leave work at 15 minute intervals to avoid clumping or anything else to aid the passage of other road users so why should cyclists have to do it?

Avatar
nbrus replied to Simon E | 11 years ago
0 likes
Simon E wrote:

I wonder what the traffic count of cars in the New Forest on Sundays would be.

Every weekday morning and evening the main (and side) roads leading into and around Shrewsbury are chock-a-block with cars.

No-one ever tells them that they should split up, travel in smaller groups, leave work at 15 minute intervals to avoid clumping or anything else to aid the passage of other road users so why should cyclists have to do it?

I think you could call that disorganized chaos. Cyclists create organized chaos ... they choose to ride in groups.

Avatar
nbrus replied to Bez | 11 years ago
0 likes
Bez wrote:

+1 for any just about any point counter to what Nic is saying.

... I hate riding in large groups because I know that it irritates drivers, and I know as a driver that most groups don't do anything (or even think about doing anything) to help anyone get past safely.

So you do agree with me...

Avatar
Al__S | 11 years ago
0 likes

If it's a fully (but narrowish) two lane road (rather than a wide single lane road) riding two abreast should make the riders easier to overtake- there's often not room for two motor vehicles and a bicycle anyway, so riding two abreast the group is "shorter", meaning the motor vehicle can spend less time on the "wong" side of the road, surely?

Pages

Latest Comments