Horse riders ask New Forest Show to stop renting car parking to sportives

I've ridden some great sportives in the new forest and the Isle of Wight starting and finishing in brokenhurst. What both cyclists and equestrians should remember is that we both share the same precedent to our right to use the road ( free of VED): we are both the original users of the roads. The roads were built originally for our mutual use.

Any cycling event that people drive to in great numbers is something to be discouraged.

Isn't it the case that we have to share the world we live in and get some pleasure out life while we are around?

Whether you ride a horse or a bike, in an organised event or not, can't we do so in a more harmonious manner?

I would fully understand the NF Horseriding community's views if the NF authorities were scheduling a Sportive event on the majority of Saturdays or Sundays of the year or even once a month might wind me up, but for gods sake no single group have the right to expect preferential treatment over any other, surely?

I fully understand how upsetting it must be for a horse owner to see their horse injured because of inconsiderate 'sportivers' and if anything I would suggest that the organisors of the events, such as Wiggle, have a responsibility for ensuring their participants are made aware of expected standards of courtesy and behaviour, towards other users of the Forest. Better notification of the events for other NF users, reducing numbers of riders on each event and penalising bad behaviour might help. All in all its organisation that matters and if it is done poorly and without the consideration of others clashes will always happen.

Toff cunts.

It's clear from many of these comments that even cyclists are becoming uneasy about the effect sportives have on the whole cycling "cause".

Interested groups - cyclists, residents, local businesses and local agencies, need to sit down and create a sportive "roadmap" for the future.

I wonder if I was the land owner of the show ground and 3000 folk offered to pay me to park on their land what I would say, "No go away I make far too much out of the horsey brigade who use this half a dozen times a year" or rather "money money money".
Agreed the sportives should have a restricted numbers say 1000 at a time.....then three times as many events.

I'm feeling a bit Les Dawson this afternoon so lets have a little game:

"What is the only animal to have a *blank* on it's back?"

Unfortunately I can offer neither a chequebook nor a pen for this Blankety Blank.

I used to ride in the New Forest every week, but have since stopped due to the abuse given from car drivers and funnily enough some of the horse riders.

Local residents and horse riders using the Wiggle sportives as their main gripe is just tosh in my opinion. Without fail, every ride I would get some abuse thrown at me from cars and horse riders alike, regardless if I was riding solo or in a group single file. Cyclists are just hated in the New Forest. Period.

Tea shops in Beaulieu, Lepe, Lyndhurst, Brockenhurst and all the other New Forest locations favoured by us enjoy a massive trade from cyclists, but this goes unheard. You never hear a cafe owner moaning about cyclists!

As has been screamed at me by both driver and horse rider a plenty as I ride quietly through the forest "these are our roads"
We should therefore neither be seen nor heard. It seems we should not be there at all.
How can one communicate, argue the point or negotiate with a mindset like this?

MDC 06 - While I understand your approach, and appreciate your appreciation of cycling, but I have to agree with La Domestique, 700cc and Mercury One.

Sportives represent an undue pressure on local infrastructure for a sustained period unlike any of the other events you mention.

I don't think people are saying that sportives don't have a place in the pantheon of cycling experiences. I've done enough of them. But I also recognise the issues they throw up, and that some areas seem to be over sub-scribed with events/riders. I recognise the need for the companies to try to make a profit, but the only thing limiting numbers is probably how many people they can get into their car park, rather than anything else. There doesn't seem to be too much preventing companies organising events in the same areas.

What I see now in and around the South-East is sportives criss-crossing the area. I've almost pulled into the wrong feed station due to this. I've also waited at the bottom of Box-Hill for a mechanic to pass and seen 3 different sportives pass by in different directions. If you are just trying to do your basic grocery run or trying to get some place and it happens to be on the route of a sportive or two it must be hellish. Especially if it is repeated weekend on weekend like they do in Surrey - I did the Ride London 100 and the London Revolution - the routes were identical in places, except in reverse, about a month apart. Not too long after there was the Prudential Ride - with roads closed.

I'm surprised sometimes that there are not more incidents at the top of hills with the way people stop on narrow/single track ascents. The point people are making is not to ban these events, but just have a bit more sensitivity to local populations - that is all that they seem to be asking for.

The smaller rides for 50 riders or so seem like a perfect sort of event, and if it benefits a charity, or a local cycle club that sounds excellent.

Or play them at their own game, 3000 horses… imagine having to pick up after that lot

Lets get 3000 cars together to drive round the New Forest and park up somewhere....No-one will ever notice!

One of the things that annoy me in the reporting of issues like these is the lack of data. Like, how many organised rides are taking place per year in places like the New Forest and Surrey?

We need to understand the scale of the situation. At the moment we seem to be focusing on the major events like Wiggle New Forest and Ride London, whereas there are other rides out there. A quick search on Google for sportives in the NF shows a fair few events being organised and I suspect that is just the tip of the iceberg.

If there really were large organised bike rides occuring there every weekend in the season, It's not hard to imagine people getting pissed off with it.

Anyone can organise a Sportive - I know this for a fact because I organise one myself. Well, it's more of a charity ride in the Chilterns for about 50 riders. But I have no qualifications, licences or permission to do such a thing, just the organisational skills I've built up over the years.

I've thought about scaling things up and organising a sportive-style ride just on the basis of what logistics would be involved and how much money I could make.

If I can do it, anyone can. And that seems to be the problem here. There are no restrictions and no centralised process, which makes it a free for all.

Yes, the roads are for everyone and no laws are being broken, but if you are going to channel thousands of bike riders into the most densely populated national park in the UK (New Forest) every weekend of the year then it will eventually annoy the hell out of the people that live there.

And stop with the 'economic benefits' of tourism too. That's something else that needs quantifying. Too many people on these threads spout off about how much money cyclists bring into an area without actually realising that most of the cash is going into the hands of the people organising the rides.

Like MDC 06 I was a road runner and the current popularity of sportives reminds me of the running boom of 30 years ago. Every town and city had its 10k, half or full marathon.

That was a craze and it soon faded away, as will sportives.

Sportives are great for the cyclists and great for making money, however, they're getting too big and are not the best way of promoting cycling with everyone else. A restriction on numbers is needed and better publicity so horse riders and cyclists can look out for each other and preferably avoid each other.

The points made by gazza_d and MDC 06 are correct,.in that nobody opposes other events quite as these horsey people are opposing the new forest ride / people in Surrey are complaining about road closures / Box Hill over crowding.

However... The point about a 3000 strong cycling event, is that not only does it cause traffic for the the 1000 cars driving to the show ground, but the event itself involves slow moving traffic for the 6 hours or whatever that it takes the peletons to complete the circuit.

So not really a valid comparison!

I also think that because I'm not local to these areas, and am fortunate to ride where cyclists are tolerated, without this perception of groups competing for limited space on the roads, it's not fair for me to simply brand locals as NIMBY's in order to rubbish their argument.

This kind of anti-cycling backlash really disappoints.

Do the horse rider groups campaign against

Car boot sales
Caravan rallies
Gymkanas
Pony Clubs
Antique fairs
Wedding fairs
Firework displays (with Bonfire night almost on us)

I could go on, but there are an awful lot of other events besides cycling going on in the New Forest and you never see the natives rail against them.

Ignore them and carry on as normal. As long as the Police and other authorities are happy then the nimbies can bog off

There is someone on this site who has the signature tagline "if bicycles were invented now - they'd be the solution not the problem" and I just think it sums the situation up so well.

I find it depressing that there is so much anti-cycling sentiment / resentment in the UK generally and also how willing cyclists are to criticise each other's choices as to how they enjoy the sport.

I started cycling for a bit of fitness but really started to put miles in of the road when I signed up for L'Etape du Tour' - one of those dreaded events so regularly criticised on these forums for 'paying to ride free roads'. As part of my milestone targets for my training and my education of pacing, riding in groups, eating, drinking I entered a sportive each month building up to the Etape. I started with the Cheshire Cat and developed my training with The Charlie B, Granfondo Cogolin, The Tour de Lac Lemond and Grandfondo Ventoux. For me, entering these events was an incentive, an education and an enjoyment (for the most part) - so why the negativity about them?? They work for some - not all.

A few years ago I was running regularly and entered a number of big city marathons. Not once did a club runner criticise why I would want to pay to run on the free roads. It was always encouragement and "great - someone else enjoying the sport", getting out there and living life. I was never going to trouble the scorer but I still got out there and challenged myself in a way that appealed to me even if not you.

As for all the comments about riding more than two abreast and slightly holding up traffic (The Forest is a bit short of climbs to break up the groups) - You can be sure that nobody worries about the disruption to local traffic as 60,000 come and go each week to football matches , just as when F1 goes to silverstone, the horse racing at Ascot, Classical concerts in Hyde Park or even the New Forest Show gridlocking part of the New Forest each summer for 1 to 2 weeks..... We all have different ways to enjoy life - we just need some give and take. Even if there were 5 large sportives a year in the Forest (and I think there are less) this is still a fraction of the time that the Forest is available for all other users to share and enjoy - and the benefits to the local economy is great (I suspect that a great number of the complainers are retired and 'financially secure' - not the local B&B's).

It bemuses me that it generates so much hostility - not that appreciation and respect to the community and the environment is not equally required from cyclists whilst being "accommodated" ...

-------

Just a sub note as have rambled too much already but you can be sure these conversations are not happening in France where even a local club sportive has assistance from the police, traffic stopped at junctions rolling road closures and large peletons etc etc etc.

The racketeering going on is not in the interest of cycling, the people making the money are not doing the image of cycling any good with repeated sportives in one area.

@Neil753, great post.

Neil753 - not sure how workable that would be in practice, but a lot of that makes a lot of sense. Pouring the profit directly back into the local economy, such as carrying out repairs on the road, is a particularly good idea.

Again, people here are too quick to diminish the views of non-cyclists, or perceived anti-cyclists.

So the equine community has seen itself disrupted by the cycling events. I can understand that they ask about the scheduling of the cycling events. It doesn't sound like they are asking for a ban. Just a but more consideration.

I can imagine that an event which takes up 100 miles of round, has multiple routes and lasts 10hrs would also cause a fair bit of local disruption.

My experience of sportives is that there are belligerent elements who treat the experience with all the due care and consideration of someone who has paid their £30 entrance and expects to cue jump every ride i.e. None. So I can see why groups of locals are gathering themselves together to register their objections.

Why can't people just try to get along and pay due respect? I think that is all that is being asked for really.

Pssst! Want to make sportives the "acceptable face of cycling", and put a smile on the face of even the most ardent sportive saboteur? It's radical, but it could be a winner...

We need "non profit" organisations (such as local authorities with the support local cycling groups) to run sportives on closed roads, rather than private organisations for commercial gain.

We need to ensure that non-interested parties (such as residents) are inconvenienced no more than once a year.

No complicated legislation would be required because, when faced with a choice of mixing it with the traffic or riding on closed roads, riders would probably be keen to ride local authority events and other events run by commercial concerns would wither on the vine.

And here's the radical bit. Plough all revenue from each sportive into filling potholes along that particular sportive route, something which everyone using that route, or living on that route, will appreciate. It doesn't have to be pothole filling, but it's one hell of an effective benefit for the very people that tend to resent our sportives.

The only losers will be a few entrepreneurs, but let's face it, running an event that causes local inconvenience, for profit, and for that profit to be taken out of the community, and frequently enough for people to get seriously upset about it, is just plain wrong. OK, some cafes and B&Bs might benefit, but that's not the same as the whole "community".

Would sportives become bigger, more exciting and, crucially, more accepted by the communities through which they pass? Absolutely! You'd probably get residents petitioning to have a sportive run through their neighbourhood, so they can have some potholes fixed, and you might find the sort of "once a year" resident participation that you see by the side of the road during the Paris-Brest-Paris. In fact, how would you like to have people cheering as you're tanking along, rather than spreading tacks on the road and pulling down direction signs? The potential to boost both the popularity and acceptance of cycling, rather than being dragged into the arena of conflict, both physically and politically, is enormous!

Ok, perhaps I'm getting a bit carried away here, but you get the point. Most people can tolerate disruption once a year, and particularly if the community becomes the signicant beneficiary financially.

Let's me state what many cyclists are already thinking - sportives are starting to have a seriously adverse effect on the communities through which they pass, our efforts to persuade people that cycling is a good thing are being compromised, more and more groups are starting to really hate us, and things are starting to get out of control, to the detriment of all cyclists, not just the ones who ride these events.

The concept of ploughing back profits from sportives into those communities through which these rides are routed, and limiting the inconvenience to just once a year, needs to be considered as a possible solution to this whole attritional situation.

why does our gut feeling seem to be "what are we cyclists doing wrong" where in fact the very large majority of us are incredibly good at almost making us 'invisible' on public roads so as not to antagonize other users. Cyclists in general are very good at accommodating others - one could only hope others would do likewise.

It is totally unwarranted for a very small minority of horse riders to claim their enjoyment/safety is being jeopardized by cycling events. These people should be made to do a house swap with continentals to realize how normal it is for a cycling event, race or sportive, to be both supported and tolerated by the wider community.

I can't say that I would agree with those who put horse riders and cyclists in the same position. As road users we wish for respect and will try to accommodate traffic behind us, horsey people are not accommodating in the slightest. Par example driving around a bend at 50 and slowing and alerted by oncoming drivers to discover two horse riders on the road. If these were cyclists any hold up would be minimal, we don't get spooked by passing traffic. What's wrong with fields for horses.

hum going against the grain here but i think there are to many sportives period. what happened to just going for a ride around a route?

when did it become the norm to pay £40 to ride the roads that every other day of the year are free?

i live on dartmoor and did the classic route in reverse this year cost me nothing and i didnt have to worry about the phycotic riders who dont know the decents and cattle grids stacking it left right and centre and generally cycling with no regard for the people around them?