- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
New Forest rider and pony (CC licensed by iNew Forest:Flickr)Cycling organisations oppose "discriminatory and disproportionate" New Forest events rules
An attempt to impose a cap on the number of riders that can take part in sportives in the New Forest looks set to fail as cycling groups and the largest event organiser in the forest have refused to sign up.
The limit of 1000 riders is part of a proposed cycling events charter, which will be discussed at a meeting of the New Forest National Park Authority (NFNPA) on Thursday.
A letter to the authority from local representatives of British Cycling, CTC and Sustrans calls two aspects of the charter "discriminatory and disproportionate": the cap, and the requirement for riders to wear numbers front and rear.
A small but very vocal number of New Forest locals has campaigned against sportives being held in the forest. Their demands have included a cap on rider numbers as low as 500, and identifying numbers on riders.
Incorporating those demands into the events charters makes it "both discriminatory and disproportionate" the cycling organisations say.
They write:
Advisory limits are not recommend by the NFNPA for the number of participants or vehicles attending non-cycling commercial events that also lead to local traffic congestion, such as the New Forest Show or events at the Beaulieu Motor Museum.
Nor have limits been recommended in other areas where local issues have arisen such as the number of dog walkers during the ground nesting bird season or the number of riders of shod horses; indeed the NFNPA has previously undertaken significant policy changes when challenged by the equestrian community.
They also point out "that the wearing of numbers in general, let alone front and rear, are not being advised by the NFNPA for any participants in any other recreational activity.
"It was clear from some attending the Cycle Liaison Group that the requirement for all riders to wear numbers front and rear was motivated by a desire to photograph and report riders during events.
"This form of vigilantism, only one step removed from the illegal removal of signs and the spreading of tacks on the road, can only lead to confrontation and danger to participants."
They add that the numbering requirement is "disproportionate in that the advice on numbering is more onerous that that required by the law on motorcyclists and disproportionate given the low frequency of the primary event involved."
CTC head office opposes the cap. A spokesman for the cycling charity told road.cc: "The current cap as suggested by the New Forest Charter is purely an arbitrary figure that has no basis in real evidence beyond the anecdotal. What we would like to see is each event judged on a case by case basis, with the number of riders agreed with a Safety Advisory Group beforehand.”
At Thursday's meeting the NFNPA will discuss a report on the charter by Nigel Matthews, head of recreation management and learning for the park.
In the report, Mathews points out that only one organisation, UK Cycling Events, has run events involving more than the proposed 1000-rider limit.
The report says:
The company that has organised the largest and most prominent cycle events in the New Forest is UK Cycling Events, often sponsored by Wiggle, run by Martin Barden.
In recent years, theirs are the only cycle sportive events that have exceeded 1,000 riders (on about five days/year).
Martin has fully engaged with the Liaison Group and made a number of changes to his events as requested, but he does not support the cap or the need for rear identification numbers.
The Cycling Liaison Group was created in March 2013 to establish a code of conduct for cycling in the park and a new charter for cycle event organisers. It initially included representatives of 31 groups and organisations, though the New Forest Dog Owners Group and the New Park event venue subsequently dropped out.
Of the remaining 29 groups and organisations, only ten represent cyclists or cycling event organisers.
In the report to the authority, Matthews writes:
Two national cycle organisations are represented on the Liaison Group: British Cycling (BC) and the Cyclist’s Touring Club (CTC). They support most of the Charter, especially the role of the Safety Advisory Group. However, they have consistently argued against the cap and blanket statement about rider identification.
They might have supported road- and event-specific limitations provided these were specified by the SAG (e.g. no more than x riders/minute on roads a, b and c), and if such limits were based on recorded incidences of serious impacts.
The New Forest National Park Authority will only suport the charter if it contains a cap.
The report says: "In June 2014 Members resolved that they would only support the Charter if it includes a cap of 1,000 cyclists and requires that riders wear rear numbers."
However, that's not the unanimous point of view of the authority. Totton councillor David Harrison, who sits on the authority's board, told the Southern Daily Echo's Chris Yandell: “It would have been so much better if the charter had concentrated on things that are necessary and achievable but stubbornness has meant that we’re likely to publish a charter that the cyclists won’t sign up to.”
But his fellow NPA member Maureen Holding said: “I’m not anti-cycling but I am against flooding the Forest and thus spoiling the quiet enjoyment that’s there for everyone.
“I’ve always said the cycling charter needs more teeth – it hasn’t got the bite that it needs.”
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.
Latest Comments
- David9694 0 sec ago
Man taken to hospital after vehicle crashes into pub...
- David9694 9 min 46 sec ago
Car flips in Millennium Way, Sheerness, near former Aldi supermarket that reopens as Home Bargains this weekend...
- RoubaixCube 39 min 5 sec ago
Ive been using the same £2-3 dish brush I bought from wilko, tesco or pound land for as long as I can remember. I dont understand why anyone would...
- S.E. 2 hours 14 min ago
I'm thinking CX tyres...
- kingleo 2 hours 25 min ago
Crossing the road is the big danger for pedestrians, not the cycle path.
- Hirsute 3 hours 44 min ago
More of an oblique reference to a cyclist being taken out when in the cycle lane in the same scenario. Of course the cyclist pretty much gets the...
- slc 5 hours 20 min ago
Lavable neigbourhoods? Could be handy on bins day
- chrisonabike 6 hours 36 min ago
Wait - have those wafers been upgraded to chocolate wafers now (or maybe those pink ones?) Or is it all the sugar in the communion wine?
- Scribe Cycling 7 hours 20 min ago
Hi username983, thank you for the comment, and it's great to hear you rate the wheels. The new models have a slightly different design which come...
Add new comment
42 comments
FFS - It's a "National" Park - it's there for us all to enjoy, not some independent republic where the local population can dictate what people are allowed to do!
Every CC within 100km of the area arranges a free 'disorganised' ride on the same day. All different routes and start points, all ending at the same place. We could make it an annual thing. Everyone agrees not to spend a single penny in the local economy. We all wear the same number.
“I’m not anti-cycling but I am against flooding the Forest and thus spoiling the quiet enjoyment that’s there for everyone."
I've never been to this quiet tranquil part of the country (and given the anti-cylcing attitude, am unlikely to ever bring my family to visit and contribute to the economy of the region either). However, I was wondering how most people visit the area in a manner that ensures it is always quiet? Are all motorised vehicles banned? Are only electric cars allowed? Do the locals only walk or cycle themselves? I am trying to understand how locals and visitors, who are not cyclists, ensure the area remains quiet, in a manner that clearly cyclists who visit a few times a year do not...
Shall I send you a white flag you can run up a pole somewhere?
If you don't want to go there because you don't like forests or national parks or great scenery and lovely cycling (there's a reason it's popular you know) then don't go there. But if a relatively small number of recently arrived NIMBYs who "weekend" in the forest and want it all to themselves put you off going by being a bit loud and shouty then it will be your loss and their win.
the way I see it the more they complain the more cyclists should go there.
Je suis un cycliste Ce'st ma route aussi. Je rouler sur mes routes
Its not really practical for me to visit the area even if I wanted to - its a long way away and the age of my children makes such a journey unreasonable. However, the miserable attitude of some locals certainly is not an inducement either. I agree with you though - the attitude of such people is perhaps exactly why those who want to and can go to such events should continue to do so. To stop going would be to give the NIMBYs what they want - their own exclusive-use part of the country, not withstanding that its in a national park.
As a side note: I find such NIMBY attitude almost incomprehensible. I come from a city where an event is held annually for 30000+ cyclists, roads for the entire 100km+ of the route are closed for the duration of the event so that everyone is safe. Rather than protesting that it inconveniences them or prevents them from accessing their favourite spot on the day, locals embrace it, support it or just ignore it - its only a day of inconvenience.
Ah common sense, it is a thing of beauty when it is used.
Maldin, are you perhaps speaking about Cape Town? Either way, the Cape Argus (or whatever it is called this year) is an example of a closed-road event - a huge one - that drastically restricts traffic flow on the day given that it goes around the mountains on pretty much the only road that exists. Yes, the locals complain on occasion, but also come out in droves to support the event, make a nice day of it, and generally be in good cheer.
Woe betide anyone in the New Forest who would want to maybe add some good cheer and support for fellow mankind doing what most of them wouldn't do.
Let me see now .... my cycling itinerary for this year
1) Cape Town - tick
2) Mallorca - tick
3) South of France - tick
4) London to Paris- tick
5) RideLondon 100 - tick (I hope)
6) Cambridge Gran Fondo - tick
7) (East) Sussex Little Lumpy - tick
8) Wales Velothon - tick
9) Weekend rides anywhere other than the New Forest - tick
10) New Forest sportives (and the cash for the weekend hotels, food, tourist trash etc - DEFINITELY NOT
The "Cape Town Cycle Tour" as it's now known, is extremely well-supported locally. One small issue is tourists who unwittingly book accommodation located on part of the closed route and then find out their ride to the airport is going to be three hours late
Another issue is there are plenty of testosterone-infused "training" rides using the route (at least the roads open to cycles) in the lead-up. Some of these riders don't seem to see a problem creating a peloton on roads open to traffic, or ignoring traffic controls, and that creates hard feelings between motorists and cyclists. We all get blamed for the actions of a few.
But overall a great, successful and well-supported event. Pray the Southeaster isn't blowing.
the noise of which Councillor Holding complains is probably the loud BANG! made by cycle tyres as they explode going over the tin tacks strewed in the road by the locals.
Funny, last time we were in the New Forest the place was flooded with cars and impossible to navigate. When visiting my parents we now go elsewhere. We were not on bikes at the time.
"But his fellow NPA member Maureen Holding said: “I’m not anti-cycling but I am against flooding the Forest and thus spoiling the quiet enjoyment that’s there for everyone"
I'M NOT RACIST BUT...
Yes. 'quiet enjoyment'.
As anyone trying to drive through Lyndhurst of a sunny summer's weekend afternoon knows, a 2-mile tailback of cars is indeed both 'quiet' and 'enjoyable'. I'm sure the locals living on roads nearby also welcome motorists 'quietly enjoying' the National Park.
Two miles?? You'll be lucky! When I last went through the Forest on the Lyndhurst Road, the traffic was in a stationary queue all the way back to almost as far as the Cadnam interchange on the M27. That's nearer six miles.
I would never dream of going to the New Forest in a car in summer - the only reason I did so that time was because I was collecting a boat, and they are a little too heavy to tow behind a bicycle!
Pages