A group of conservation volunteers have been accused of leaving a wooded area “in a mess” after a popular children’s mountain bike trail was dug up and destroyed in what locals have described as a “malicious and vindictive” act targeting young cyclists.
However, a local councillor who took part in the “unsanctioned” track’s destruction has insisted that the work was necessary to repair the damage allegedly caused by the trail, while arguing that it will “remove the danger speeding cyclists pose to other woods users”.
Last week, a park ranger and 15 volunteers from the Friends of the Porter Valley (FOPV) conservation group dug up and removed an “unapproved” bike track on a steep slope in Trippet Wood, in Sheffield’s Bingham Park nature reserve.
According to the park’s Ranger Service, the track was “much larger in scale” than similar trails in the valley, containing a series of jumps, bankings, and ramps, “causing a significant amount of damage due to excavation (at depth) of the ground”.
The Friends of the Porter Valley added that the section of Trippet Wood where the track was installed is designated as ancient woodland and within a Local Nature Reserve, bringing with it enhanced legal protection.
Cease and desist notices had been installed by the council in 2024, but these were allegedly ignored and the track “extensively increased”, making the work necessary, the conservation group said in a statement. Further signage was introduced last month warning that the trail would be removed, with FOPV volunteers called in due to the extent of the damage.
“There were a number of large structures on a massive scale all the way up the hillside incorporating pits dug for material, berms, ramps and jumps, and the destruction of the remnants of the old field boundaries to use the large stones in the construction,” the group said.
“The devastation to the woodland is impossible to appreciate without actually seeing it and the photos do not convey the full extent of it. There was also evidence of trees having been chopped down to be used in the construction of the various structures.
“We weren’t aiming to restore the woodland, that wouldn’t be achievable given the size of excavations and damage, but to pull the material onto the trail.”
In a statement, the Ranger Service said that they were “keen people to enjoy their local woodlands responsibly”.
“Jon Dallow, the Woodland Officer for this area, supports many of Sheffield’s official MTB trails and works closely with groups like Ride Sheffield to promote safe and fun riding,” they continued.
“In this case, it’s unfortunate the digging happened in the wrong place with the wrong trail. Playing in the woods is good, unsanctioned trail building at this size and depth isn’t.
“It’s not fair to blame young people entirely – many social media influencers are setting the wrong example.
“Sheffield has a thriving, welcoming MTB scene with plenty of chances to get involved in trail building and events.”
However, despite this somewhat half-hearted attempt to shift the blame away from Sheffield’s young mountain bikers, many locals responded to the destruction of the trail by arguing that it targeted the children using it, while criticising the lack of communication, the reasons cited for the track’s removal, and the volunteer group’s depiction of the damage caused to the wood.
“There was no communication with the community at all,” wrote Anthony Mercer on Facebook. “What is most concerning is that the status of the land is ambiguous at best – can someone explain how an area suddenly ‘becomes’ an ‘ancient woodland’ after just a few years?
“Many bike trails much bigger than this reside in nature reserves across South Yorkshire, it is now commonplace for the Forestry Commission to allow the use of land like this. It was a short trail built by a few kids, writing a load of synonyms for ‘massive’ doesn’t make it so.
“All that aside, there is clearly a need for a bike trail around Bingham Park. How do we work with the rangers to make this work?”
Meanwhile, Melanie English said that “the woods have been left in a mess and the whole situation does seem to be some sort of vindictive action.”
“Was there any reason for it being left in such a hazardous state?” asked John Williams. “At a minimum I would have expected the boulders to be moved and not left discarded over the old track – and notices placed at the top to warn riders of the significant hazards introduced by this work.
“Neither of these risk mitigating measures were done. This, coupled with the lack of response to direct questions by over a hundred people to councillor Barbara Masters, makes this seem particularly vindictive and malicious.”
Simone Anne also pointed out “that locally there was and is overwhelming support for this trail, not just by people who use bicycles”.
Robert Cook agreed, writing: “Regardless of the apparent necessity of the works, the jokey tone here and lack of warning (and complaints – no-one seemed to have an issue with it!) stand in quite stark contrast with those who used the track who have commented about how devastated they are at the destruction of the track.
“It just gives the impression that this was done spitefully and because bikes and kids aren’t welcome in the woods and the valley.”
“Absolutely appalling behaviour destroying something that so many put so much time, effort, and heart into building,” a member of the Friends of Sheffield 11 Facebook group said. “Something that promotes being outside, working as a team, using your body and being fit, and developing biking skills in a new generation of Steve Peats this city so proudly boasts about.”
“God forbid kids have fun doing something healthy,” said another member. “Let’s make them all go back inside and play on video games instead.”
However, local Liberal Democrat councillor Barbara Masters, one of the 15 volunteers who took part in the trail’s destruction, has responded to this backlash by insisting that the destruction of the trail was not about “spoiling anyone’s fun”, criticising the framing of the issue as “old against young”.
She also defended the nature of the trail’s removal, saying in a statement: “The work may be unsightly but will help undo a lot of the harm, allowing the woods to regenerate, and remove the danger speeding cyclists pose to other woods users.
“The action is not against young people, Parks and Countryside has a legal duty to maintain the woods.”
She continued: “What’s regrettable is that parks staff have been heavily involved in creating and managing official mountain bike trails and facilities across the city’s woodlands and countryside.
“They’ve worked with well-known organisations, supported fundraising, secured planning permissions and necessary surveys, and helped train volunteers in trail maintenance and management.
“There’s nothing to stop a bike group approaching them to ask what can be done, but none that I’ve suggested this to have yet done so.”
The row over Trippet Wood’s unsanctioned mountain bike trail isn’t the first time enterprising young cyclists have found themselves at odds with the authorities after constructing their own makeshift cycling facilities.
Last month, we reported that police in Shropshire were criticised by local cyclists for taping off a grass area in the grounds of a village hall, which has reportedly been used by schoolchildren on mountain bikes as a ramp, sparking concerns about potential collisions with passing motorists.
And in July 2024, a group of young cyclists in Lancashire were also criticised by conservationists for allegedly causing “serious” damage to a nature reserve by digging up parts of the earth to create mountain bike jumps.
According to the Wildlife Trust, a section of wildflower meadow at Cross Hill Quarry, a former quarry site and green space located just outside Clitheroe, was dug up to create a number of small jumps, an act the Trust claimed was “unlawful”.
That criticism came around the same time children in South Wales were threatened by residents and stopped from entering a woodland which they had cleared of litter to use as a cycle track, which the local housing association claimed was anti-social behaviour that was causing “severe damage” to the area.
Throughout June, the group of local kids, all around primary school age, spent their weekends clearing rubbish from Garw Wood, which runs between houses in Croesyceiliog, a suburb of Cwmbran, to create a makeshift bike park.
However, at the end of the month, the Bron Afon community housing association fenced off the entrances to the ancient woodland, a decision it claimed was due to “anti-social behaviour in the area which has caused damage” – but which local parents have claimed was due to pressure from residents who had threatened and swore at the children.
58 thoughts on ““They’re saying bikes and kids aren’t welcome”: Conservationists slammed for “vindictive” destruction of children’s bike track – but councillor says work will stop speeding cyclists and “undo harm” in wood”
Nothing brings the boomers
Nothing brings the boomers out like a chance to stop the young having fun.
Gloucester_Dave wrote:
Not a boomer myself but I know lots, several of whom like nothing better than a shred through the woods on their MTBs, often with grandchildren in tow, and all of whom are mad for said grandchildren having as much fun as possible. Nothing like reducing an entire generation to a stupid cliche. By the way I can see a few of the conservationists there who are possibly boomers, I can also see a number of them who look under thirty.
Gloucester_Dave wrote:
lazy stereotyping right there. Sure it’s not only youngsters that enjoy riding through there.
Gloucester_Dave wrote:
lazy stereotyping right there. Sure it’s not only youngsters that enjoy riding through there.
You didn’t read the full
You didn’t read the full article, did you.
Seems the parks staff are very accommodating toward MTB riders and go out of their way to help create trails. Of course, such evidence gets in the way of stereotyping.
Hmm, quite a few boomers are
Hmm, quite a few boomers are keen MTB riders too.
I have to say that I really dislike lazy stereotyping like this. Would you dare make a comment like this about anyone black, or gay or Jewish for example? I was brought up to be against bigotry of all sorts. Seriously, give your head a wobble.
FaceSpace Expert wrote:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/southyorkshire/i_love_sy/localhistory/walk_through_time/08.shtml
🤔
“There’s nothing to stop a
“There’s nothing to stop a bike group approaching them to ask what can be done, but none that I’ve suggested this to have yet done so.”
hmm, I can just imagine that conversation…
Bike group: can we have a bike trail featuring berms, drops and big jumps that we can speed down on our cycles?
Parks staff: No
Given the article quite
Given the article quite clearly states,
&
the answer would likely have been yes.
Maybe, but what you’re
Maybe, but what you’re suggesting is they’ve destroyed this trail because they weren’t asked nicely first, which seems a bit vindictive.
A quick scan of the “friends of porter valley” site shows them digging holes and creating gulleys – for footpaths. Some of which make a much wider cut through this forest. Were the friends of porter valley consulted on the establishment of each one of these paths?
If you scanned their site,
If you scanned their site, maybe you saw the post where they explain why they removed the track and the legal reasons for doing so. There’s nothing vindictive about it.
Also, you’re being a bit disingenuous about the footpaths when you see what they’re doing on the website.
Indeed I did, and that is my
Indeed I did, and that is my point, all the reasons they give why this bike trail is damaging the forest, are activities they can be seen to be carrying out themselves on footpaths in their other blog posts! Double standards at play here.
I also would not call this “large structures on a massive scale” nor “devastation to the woodland”
Never mind the mountain bike
Never mind the mountain bike trail, some bastard has put a tarmac road right through the woods
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3675485,-1.5210891,3a,89y,181.05h,78.8t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sOThLpF06V1sQInHEINfTbw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D11.203130614570895%26panoid%3DOThLpF06V1sQInHEINfTbw%26yaw%3D181.05221329951806!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDYwMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
When is the councillor going to dig that up?
I presume none of the
I presume none of the conservationists fly to their holiday destinations.
Don’t really see what that’s
Don’t really see what that’s got do with the price of fish.
Quote:
And how did the kids MTB track help preserve and protect the woodland?
It doesn’t, no more than
It doesn’t, no more than driving there to let your dog shit in it does.
levestane wrote:
Technically, that would be helping to create food for the trees.
(When you see a tree, much of the bulk and mass of that tree – its carbon – it pulled literally from the air).
It may be but the whole range
It may be but the whole range of pollution caused by modern travel including but not limited to air travel does ancient woodlands absolutely no favours at all.
Paul J wrote:
I presume none of the conservationists fly to their holiday destinations.
— Paul J Technically, that would be helping to create food for the trees. (When you see a tree, much of the bulk and mass of that tree – its carbon – it pulled literally from the air).— levestane
You need to look up the carbon cycle: the planet is (was) pretty well balanced for carbon emission and sequestration until humans started adding massive amounts of extra carbon to the atmosphere, far more than plant life can absorb so it remains in the atmosphere to accelerate global warming. The idea that human carbon emissions help to feed plants is one much beloved of CC deniers and it’s about as realistic as saying a foie gras goose must be happy because it’s getting so much extra grub.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Yeah, but in approx 600 million years, we’ll be running out of carbon dioxide
That’s a bit short-sighted.
That’s a bit short-sighted. OTOH on the order of 5 billion years any folks on earth will have other things to worry about than the cost of holiday flights or house prices.
levestane wrote:
Like Indigo Rumbelow? Before her gaoling
When people call themselves
When people call themselves friends of a forest or common, they believe they own it.
There’s a group in York
There’s a group in York called the ‘friends of’ a local wood. They really do think they own it; last year they ‘decorated’ the wood with plastic Christmas decorations which ended up all over the floor, broken. They responded to all requests not to do this by suggesting that it was somehow ‘their’ wood, to do with as they wished.
Just a bunch of little Hitlers and it sounds like it’s a nationwide thing.
One group of people tried to
One group of people tried to turn a forest into a dog theme park.
Is that those little green
Is that why those little green bags are hung from tree branches? It all makes sense now….
Slartibartfast wrote:
I’m sure I saw that in NOS4R2…
To be fair to the individuals
To be fair to the individuals involved in getting rid of this mountain bike trail, the local authority almost certainly have a legal obligation to do this – if it is a nature reserve, and scheduled ancient woodland. It’s not necessarily an anti-cyclist thing.
the little onion wrote:
Similar has happened locally here in the last couple of months, Puddletown Forest has had MTB trails (unoffically constructed) since the 90s with no issues, now being dismantled by Forestry England for safety reasons.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnvq2j9q460o
https://www.trailforks.com/region/puddletown-forest/
It will also be a matter re
It will also be a matter re insurance. If the plan for the woodland doesnt set out the inc of this facility, could not be deemed ad-hoc and is clearly at scale that cannot be ignored – the Council are aware. If they do nothing they are not taking their laibilities seriously – someone dies; Corporate Manslaughter.
Robert Cook wrote:
Well no, it seems from the rest of the article that cyclists are very welcome with plenty of trails through the woods, they’re just not welcome to be digging the place up to make berms, jumps etc and, allegedly, pulling down the remnants of old dry stone walls and even cutting down trees to do so. It’s not the same as the other times “enterprising young cyclists have found themselves at odds with the authorities after constructing their own makeshift cycling facilities” that have been reported, which are mainly kids using a bit of unregarded wasteland to have fun with. Absolute fair play to them, but altering sections of ancient woodland to make a track is very different.
Come on. It’s a well known
Come on. It’s a well known “rule” in MTBing that landowners will often tolerate natural trails that use the environment & don’t do unnecessary damage. Lots of us love natural flowy trails that connect you with nature. Most trails in “local woods” are kept on the down low. Discoverable with local knowledge or extensive Strava heat map research if you really want to. But. Someone then decides the trails aren’t interesting enough so they decide to build features (it’s always bloody gap jumps near me) & that’s when the line gets crossed. Then the local busybody goes from “stick man” to destructor. But, the “builders” have brought it on themselves. Stick to bike parks if you need gnarly sick features bro.
I live very close to the
I live very close to the trails in question here
The location appears to be beyond the boundary of what has been designated ancient woodland – there are some aerial photos from the 70s posted on a local group showing no trees in the affected spot
There has been building in that area for decades, although I wasn’t aware that they had been worked on lately – last time I passed through that area they were pretty worn down
It was always the way of
It was always the way of things. I am now late 50’s but back in the late 70’s in suburban NE London I was part of a group of 8-14 year olds who repeatedly did something similar and created tracks to use with our ‘trackie’ bikes then BMX when they became a thing. As a bike obsessed youngster we were doing nothing wrong, creating tracks and features on wasteland or unused car parks. It gave me hours of exercise, fresh air and probably kept me out of more serious trouble . I felt I was doing no harm but we got moved on on numerous occasions and our carefully engineered features removed by the landowners or local council.
As an adult, I was probably an annoying little git who damaged their property. Especially the case if I were an adult who doesn’t see litter, dumped cars and and uncared for scrubland full of rubbish as a problem.
All the same arguments were used then, approach us and do it properly, dangerous / damaging etc. Nothing changes
Reading this article, I can’t
Reading this article, I can’t help but feel, Ryan, that you’re tacitly siding with the kids and Facebook complaints on this issue—simply because those being criticised are cyclists.
The tone of the article really caught my attention given that most cyclists—and road.cc itself—are typically environmentally conscious. Yet the environmental damage caused by this unsanctioned track appears to be dismissed as inconsequential because the culprits are cyclists (with possible help from their parents). If a group of motocross or quadbike riders had done the same, I suspect this article would have taken a much harsher tone.
Taking such a selective approach to applying criticism only reinforces the negative perception many have towards cyclists. We all know that a large proportion of the public think we have a sense of entitlement and holier-than-thou attitude, and when some among us, no matter their age, engage in such behaviour it reinforces that stereotype.
And let’s not overlook the following:
Clearly, the parks staff are highly accommodating toward MTB riders and actively support the creation of proper, sanctioned trails.
We can’t exempt other cyclists from scrutiny and criticism simply because they’re cyclists.
Wandering Wheels wrote:
Well said
True, cyclists should not be
True, cyclists should not be exempt from criticism just because they are cyclists and the pictures on the FoPV website do seem to show a fair few bits of damage. Why cut down the trees? Why get all the material by digging large pits that then just present a danger to cyclists and others? Why break down historic field boundaries for stones? None of that was necessary or helpful.
But let’s also look at the Council and FoPV’s actions. They took could have done much better. They issued a Cease and Desist – they told the cyclists to stop, but did they explain why, did they offer solutions? From what they say in their press release, it appears unlikely beyond the “we support bike tracks, as long as they are elsewhere so stop and go away”. Just the kind of attitude that is well known to work well with teenagers. The whole thing sounds a little one sided. “There is nothing stopping a bike group approaching them to be ask what can be done”. Sounds a bit like there is an unsaid follow up of “and then we will once again say cease and desist and go somewhere else or put hoops so massive in your way as to make any suggestion impractical”. Now that may be overly cynical but I note that nowhere do they actually give any hint or suggestion that anything could be done. It only needs the addition of “There are some areas of the valley that we have identified could be suitable for a well constructed bike features built to agreed standards and properly maintained at no cost to us” or similar to encourage engagement.
LeadenSkies wrote:
Beyond the signage, it’s likely very difficult for them to engage directly with the particular group responsible, since they probably don’t know who they are – they’re probably not building the trails at times when the volunteers are around.
I am not from Sheffield so a
Not sure whether it’s in the original, can’t be arsed to check, or if it’s just a copying error when it was posted here, but I am am not overly reassured when I go to look at the website they link to for more info, just to find it doesn’t exist.
I am not from Sheffield, don’t have a clue about the geography of the area and the website link didn’t work so I couldn’t look it up. How local are the alternatives and what’s the cost? Most of this “track building” is probably being done by local, fairly young, kids, they won’t be going miles across Sheffield to use other facilities and they won’t have lots of resources.
I did similar stuff years ago when I was 9, 10, 11, that kind of age. I was often told to use the “local facilities provided”. Local if you drove, not to a 10 year old on a bike. I wasn’t allowed to go a few miles across London to use the Eastway Cycle Track (now under the Olympic Park) or Romford BMX park, they were both too expensive for regular use and out of bounds to me at that age. There were enough free places within half a mile of my front door where I could get into a whole host of trouble or have a lot of fun building my own ramps and jumps depending on what view you took. Did I, or any of my friends, do any real harm? Maybe we repurposed one neglected ‘between the rows’ flower bed in a car park that had more dumped cars than parked cars to build a mud jump. But we also cleared up the broken glass and rubbish that the local council never saw fit to do anything about. And yes, we caused a few muddy tracks through some overgrown scrubland near the M11, but that was it.
Hmm – I think that’s an error
Hmm – I think that’s an error with the comment functionality – it’s tried to turn it all into one big link instead of two. Let’s try this instead:
https://bolehills.com/
and
https://ridesheffield.org.uk/
Fair points – I don’t know the geography either. Nonetheless, ‘there are issues with the alternatives they’ve offered’ is still a bit different to ‘they haven’t offered any alternatives at all’.
The bigger question, though, is why are nature reserves and children playing contending for the same scraps of land in the first place? Why hasn’t our planning and land allocation made enough room for both? And it’s not really the conservationists to blame there – it’s, well, all of us.
[Edit: it had also inserted a random ‘eh’ in the middle of the first link! Should work now]
mdavidford wrote:
Thanks for fixing the links.
I accept they believe they have offered suitable alternatives, and very possibly have. I guess the local planning dept would say they have made allocation for both, the allocation for children’s play being at least partly met by the facilities in the links you included. So why do the locals feel the need to build their own track, damaging the woodland in the process?
Is the problem that a larger allocation is required, is it that the alternative facilities are too expensive, is it that kids can’t easily, cheaply and safely access the facilities, or is it that the facilities don’t meet what the local kids want? Given the fact they have expended significant time and effort in building their own track in these woods, it must be one of the above. Hopefully the councillors will ask that question as I suspect failure to do so will just see another unauthorised track built elsewhere in the woods, causing more damage or possibly worse the local kids will get bored and transfer their energies to something more destructive.
[Edit – I consulted a map – it’s 3 miles across the city from Tippets Wood to Boles Hill BMX track by the recommended cycling route – doable but probably a bit far for younger kids to venture safely these days. Ride Sheffield, whilst undoubtedly a worthy organisation, doesn’t seem to be a realistic alternative in this case. It appears to be primarily involved in MTB routes on the moors east of Sheffield, not an environment suited to, or in range of, kids from a Sheffield suburb.]
Completely agree
Completely agree
For anyone interest, I took a
For anyone interest, I took a look at the Friends of Porters Valley website and found this on their blog which gives more information on the site of this trail and why they removed it.
[Writer: Lyndon]
Lyndon
May 28
5 min read
Hello Conservation Volunteers
We recently received a request from Ranger Matt to help remove an unapproved bike track in Trippet Wood, much larger in scale than anything else he had come across in the valley, causing a significant amount of damage due to excavation (at depth) of the ground. Historically this section of Trippet wood was pasture land, but the Forestry Commission compartment within which this (and the entirety of Trippet wood resides) is designated as ancient woodland and is also within a Local Nature Reserve (LNR) which brings with it enhanced legal protection.
We met Matt at the top of Bingham Park where he gave us a full run down of what had been done and why it was necessary to remove it and prevent further damage to the woodland, explaining the council has a statutory duty (Section 40 Biodiversity Duty) for conservation and as such had put up “please cease and desist” notices in May 2024 but not only had these been ignored but the track had been extensively increased. Further signage had also been installed in early May 2025 warning the trails would be removed which is where FoPV were asked to help as there was far too much damage for the Rangers to undertake alone and it was impossible to get a small digger down without causing further damage.
Armed with mattocks, spades and the odd rake we walked down to the bottom of the track just above the PROW footpath, where we came across the first structure, a banking (berm) built up with large rocks and earth to allow bikers to go around a corner at high speed. Here we were given instructions on what we needed to do – we weren’t aiming to restore the woodland, that wouldn’t be achievable given the size of excavations and damage, but to pull the material onto the trail.
Next Matt walked us all up the actual track itself. This was a number of large structures on a massive scale all the way up the hillside incorporating pits dug for material, berms, ramps and jumps, and the destruction of the remnants of the old field boundaries to use the large stones in the construction. The devastation to the woodland is impossible to appreciate without actually seeing it and the photos do not convey the full extent of it. There was also evidence of trees having been chopped down to be used in the construction of the various structures.
As we got to one large structure Matt explained more about the damage to the trees by measuring the tree’s diameter and calculating the Root Protection Area (RPA) which is a defined area around a tree where any activity could damage the tree root, through root damage or ground compaction. The distance in this case was 19 feet and the excavation work was well within this distance – only a few feet away from the trunk. The lateral and fine roots, essential for nutrient and water absorption, could be seen sticking out having been cut through and this wasn’t an isolated example.
The whole track had been cleared of ground cover and flora and is now just compacted bare earth which will exacerbate soil erosion where nothing will grow. Such depth of excavation will also prevent the seed bank from regenerating these areas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_seed_bank
Although hard work, with 15 volunteers including Councillor Barbara Masters, the work was completed as required.
A note from the Ranger Service
The Ranger Service and SCC Woodland Officers are keen for people to enjoy their local woodlands responsibly. Jon Dallow, the Woodland Officer for this area, supports many of Sheffield’s official MTB trails and works closely with groups like Ride Sheffield to promote safe and fun riding.
In this case, it’s unfortunate the digging happened in the wrong place with the wrong trail. Playing in the woods is good, unsanctioned trail building at this size and depth isn’t. It’s not fair to blame young people entirely – many social media influencers are setting the wrong example.
The good news? Sheffield has a thriving, welcoming MTB scene with plenty of chances to get involved in trail building and events. Jon recently attended the Bolehills opening jam and the Ranger Service has supported the Steel City Downhill event since the very start. Bolehills BMX and Ride Sheffield at Lady Cannings are always looking for people to be involved. Check out https://bolehills.com/ and https://ridesheffield.org.uk/ for more info.
Some legal information
The Council has a statutory duty (Section 40 ‘Biodiversity Duty’) to the conservation of priority habitats. Biodiversity Duty was further strengthened under the Environment Act 2021, to the ends that the Council must take action to conserve habitat, as part of the Council’s statutory commitment to ‘nature recovery’.
Trippet Wood and the Porter Valley itself is designated a LNR. LNRs have significant protection, as follows:
Legal designation: LNRs are protected by law.
Planning weight: LNRs carry more weight in the planning process, making it harder to build on or damage them.
Management duty: Local authorities are required to care for and manage LNRs as a legal duty.
By ‘law’ is referring to:
The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981
Countryside & Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000
Natural Environment & Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006
While I’m not an expert and
While I’m not an expert and ultimately I’ll concede to the authority of Ranger Matt this does seem strange.
I was under the impression that a dead tree left to rot is better for biodiversity, and the overall health of an ecosystem, than a living tree (assuming we’re not talking about cutting down the whole forest.) The real damage happens when you add to, remove from, or isolate an ecosystem.
Also if you want kids to care about nature you need to let them have a personal investment in it.
Why do the people digging up
Why do the people digging up the trail look like reform voters. They’ll be complaining when kids cycle through their heritage estates built in the 70’s and 80’s
Barraob1 wrote:
Something to do with prior biases, I imagine.
Barraob1 wrote:
Ah, great to see more ageist bias on this thread – look they’re old they must be Reform voters! In fact the lady in the top picture is the Liberal Democrat councillor Barbara Masters who, one imagines, is unlikely to be voting Reform any time soon.
How many Reform voters would
How many Reform voters would actually become conservation volunteers?
60somethingcyclist wrote:
Who knows? Who are you to judge?
The council is a Labour/Liberal Democrat/green alliance, Try doing your homework
How many Reform voters would
How many Reform voters would actually become conservation volunteers?
60somethingcyclist wrote:
What patronising, middle-class statement
Barraob1 wrote:
What are you then ? Metropolitan, middle-class champagne socialist?
Read the article Liberal Democrats councillor and the council is Liberal Democrats/Labour/Green controlled!
To me they look like Green and Liberal Democrat councillors and the facts support that !
Why don’t they build a cycle
Why don’t they build a cycle path along an agreed route? That way children and adults can cycle and enjoy the area?
But that wouldn’t address a
But that wouldn’t address a key concern (which is probably what this was all about anyway):
“The work may be unsightly but will help undo a lot of the harm, allowing the woods to regenerate, and remove the danger speeding cyclists pose to other woods users.”
It gets kids off the streets,
It gets kids off the streets, they have a hobby and they’re doing some exercise. People moan that kids sit indoors and play on games and phones. These ‘do gooders’ have nothing better to do.
I really wish councillors and
I really wish councillors and wardens had something better to do than waste time and resource being miserable old sods.
I understand that building a bike trail in a wood might upset someone.. (it’s usually some grey haired NIMBY dog walkers who have nothing better to do) but as long as it’s reasonablly static.. then surely there’s something better to focus council resources on that this.
All I see here is moan moan moan, send the kids away somewhere else.
A general point not specific
A general point not specific to this site in the article of which I am not familiar.
I’ve been mountain biking since the early 90s, as well as road biking and cyclo-cross. But mountain biking is my first passion. However it does no-one any favours for us to be tribal or entitled about building trails on unsanctioned land.
This is one of the most nature depleted countries in Europe. We have pushed nature to the fringes and areas of ancient woodland and nature reserves are precious and deserve protection and respect. People need to be aware that what looks like an awesome area for riding to us, is precious to others for being left unspoilt and natural – a place for people to recharge their mental health and vital habitat for animals and plants.
It’s about respecting other people’s perspectives and not just digging what you want regardless.