No Bikes Allowed!!!

[AARONM3]

Over the past month I've really got back into mountain biking after a considerable break and as such I've been hitting the old trails which is great fun aside from the fact that pretty much one half of the old routes I used to ride now have signs that say 'No Bikes'. Basically there's a road separating one side of the woods from the other and although one side is managed by one conservation group the other, another.

My question is- what is the worst that could happen if I get 'busted' and isn't it grossly unfair that people can take there dogs crapping around the woods but I can't take my bike in there?? I presume nothing would come of Ranger Smith feeling collar (if he could catch me!) but my cycling partner is more concerned than I.

[jwb]

If it is a footpath then nothing much. The worse you can be done for is trespass by the land owner. If this happens then offer to pay for the damage, a nominal fee, say £5. If it ever went to court then you will have a plus as you tried to settle amicably.

If it is private land then I guess its respass again.

This may help

www.cheekytrails.co.uk/

JB

[AARONM3]

It's just a normal bit of woodland as far it's open to the public and the signs seem to be from the council...?

Cheers for the link.

[Rednut05]

Say you were going to fast and missed the sign or something.

Just blag it. Talk yourself out of trouble of just don't listen to them and ride off.

If horses are allowed on them then go for the "every other horse trail you are allowed to cycle on" one and see how it goes.

[AARONM3]

Oh, the sign also says 'No Horses'... :-/

[PhillVR6]

Bikes are not allowed on any footpaths. Only bridleways, please avoid riding on footpaths as it gives us all a bad name.

[AARONM3]

Excuse my ignorance but what changes the classification as previously it was open to bikes. I'm not looking to pick an arguement here, I am just asking.

There is also currently a campaign to save the area from housing development so if they're worried about the environmental impact of a few bikes then perhaps they could do with the support of the large biking community in the area.

[PhillVR6]

Not knowing the area, I'm just guessing but perhaps a large number of people where just using their bikes on a footpath. The easiest way to get a definitive answer would be to check the route on an ordnance survey map and see whether it is marked as a footpath or bridleway.

[theboymoon]

jwb said:

www.cheekytrails.co.uk/

JB

That's the spirit!

[bor]

Presumably it's p1ssing off walkers, which is fair enough if there's enough trail nearby for bikes. My 6yr old and I were utterly blasting along some single track in our local woods last Sunday, when we came round a corner and scared a large group of walkers, so I can understand limiting access to some trails.

[AARONM3]

I am going to look into this in more detail when I have a moment but I thought I'd come to PH as it seems to be the font of all knowledge on pretty much anything and everything! I wouldn't mind if there was a separate route for bikes but it is a whole detached area of woodland that consists of wide open trails that is apparently off-limits to bikes.

I would like to point out that I am a courteous rider and always stop for pedestrians and only hoof along wide trails with clear visibility. Plus I can't hoof that much as I am sttill terribly unfit at the moment!!

[pdV6]

There's a set of woods near me that's chock full of cracking trails.

There's one specific cycle path through it, but its very boring, in parts gravelled and extensively used by walkers so not ideal.
A couple of years ago lots of small "no bikes" signs started appearing at the start of all the main side-trails. Walkers don't use these trails at all and MTB-ers tend to stick to them (i.e. not go crashing off at a tangent through the undergrowth) so I can't really see why they bothered.

To reinforce the (ignored) signs, logs started appearing across the trail heads... which just made it more fun so then they doubled up on them, such that if you hop one log you hit the next head-on. My trials skills aren't up to that, so I (and countless others) just hop one and step over the next.

Others take to forcing a path around the logs, so in fact what happens is the trail heads get wider and more obvious, thus encouraging more MTB-ing on them! Good result for the "no bikes"-types, then... not.

[beyond rational]

I thought people put the logs there to use as the basis for some new jumps well thats what they become anyway