New Forest Cycling Code published, sportive charter to follow in New Year

This looks like a bit of a dogs dinner.

I did see yesterday that the New Forest National Parks Authority (@newforestnpa) was getting a bit of a kicking on Twitter.

Aparently "try to be out of the Forest by sunset" was for offroad riding, but that isn't clear.

"Ride in single file on tracks and narrow roads, leaving gaps for overtaking vehicles to pull into. Never ride more than two abreast."
If the road is that narrow then vehicles shouldn't be overtaking.

Why no code for motorists in the New Forest?

2.4 Ride positively and well clear of uneven road edges.

Yes OH YES, lets all go down next week set off at one minute intervals making sure we keep the gap and keep primary position the cage drivers would really have something to moan about then!

Reading this article has made me realise its time to vote with my pedals and not ride in the New forest. The clue is in its title National Park so for everyone, so to be dictated as I am a cyclist is not on.
The fecking horse fraternity are the only ones with an opinion in the area so if you get ride of cyclists there is more space for the burger meat to shat on the road.
No mention of that in the code of conduct is there!!!

Facebook page here, and link is from 20th Dec https://www.facebook.com/NewForestNationalParkAuthority

I'm glad someone commented on the need for 30 mph speed limits in the New Forest. I used to do a lot of cycling in that area and couldn't believe that the speed limit was 40 in most places, which is much too fast for the narrow roads where there are wandering animals.

Despite all this trouble and fuss about the dangers caused by cyclists, the speed limit remains at 40 except in the villages.

No mention of 25 organisations getting together to get that sorted. How surprising!

I'm glad someone commented on the need for 30 mph speed limits in the New Forest. I used to do a lot of cycling in that area and couldn't believe that the speed limit was 40 in most places, which is much too fast for the narrow roads where there are wandering animals.

Despite all this trouble and fuss about the dangers caused by cyclists, the speed limit remains at 40 except in the villages.

No mention of 25 organisations getting together to get that sorted. How surprising!

2.7 you must provide your own bog roll for defecating on the village green.

Load of BS as usual.

I know personally a number of people who attended various meetings and the whole "PROBLEM" has got nothing to do with disruption that a small number of events every year allegedly cause. It's about power and control, pro horse riding lobby and anti-cycling prejudice/bias.
Those people, if they only could, would love to ban all cycling events in the area and perhaps club runs, too.

Anyone genuinely concerned about the well-being of the forests would simply want to ban or restrict as much of a motorised traffic as possible and reduce (and enforce) speed limits to 30mph in many places.

P.S. Just another boring reminder about 80 or so animals killed a year by drivers and the fact that the authorities do f**k all about it.

So basically you should use the roads as stated by The Highway Code, just like EVERY other road user does, resulting in EVERY road user getting where they want to go with the minimum hassle EVERY time.

I sincerely look forward to this becoming a reality.

Also, "ironmancole" suggests, " I have for a long time thought it's about time a nationwide network of lesser used roads were removed from vehicle use and turned over to form a safe network for cycling."

First of all, a cycle is a "vehicle".

Secondly, the "network" of lesser used roads do tend to have along them peoples homes. Most people, rightly or wrongly, access these homes by means of motor vehicles........ Can anyone spot a potential problem here?

Personally, I think this code kind of overlooks the fact that the main threat to livestock and a quiet sustainable countryside is the motorist. Now, I am a motorist myself so I am not just bashing the tin boxes but this code of conduct is like debating what music the band on the Titanic should be playing whilst the ship goes down.

Anyone who's been to the New Forest will know that the roads are quite narrow and there is a 40mph speed limit which is largely observed. You will always get selfish twats in cars same as you get selfish twats on bikes.

As some earlier posts have said a quiet bike suddenly appearing in a horses peripheral vision is worse than a loud car it has heard from some distance. My partner is both a cyclist and a horse rider so I can see this from both sides of the fence.

Quote:

There are so many bridal paths in the forest

Point of fact: there are no bridle paths within the boundary of the New Forest.

Found out recently that horse riders are meant to only use designated routes off road that were set after WWII using aerial photos from the Luftwaffe and based on traditional cattle driving paths used for hundreds of years.

So, you have to respect the quiet and not startle the horses: fair enough, it's a lovely part of the world and only a complete arse would deliberately scare the livestock. But you have to use your bell, which isn't a legal requirement.

And as for trying to be out of the Forest by sunset... er... huh?

What I find hard to comprehend is that there is in the region of 246,000 miles of road in the UK.

Can I find just 10 miles to use in peace knowing that I don't have to risk losing everything by sharing it with drunken/drugged/uninsured/banned/reckless/impatient/self-entitled people enclosed in 2 tonnes of steel cage that are more interested in looking at Facebook than looking out for people they can 'whoops carelessly' take the life of?

Course not. I have for a long time thought it's about time a nationwide network of lesser used roads were removed from vehicle use and turned over to form a safe network for cycling.

What difference does it make for any of us whilst in our cars if we have to make a slightly longer route anyway? There are many rural roads across the country that could be identified for this purpose to form such a network also becoming viable commuter routes between towns and cities that offer safety and segregation from the bleary eyed latecomers in the office who look to make up time by sticking their foot down on the rural rat runs.

Such a network would offer a pretty immediate solution to many problems and the cost would be minimal, just a few things to consider such as barriers at each access point to stop cars turning in as well as consideration of field access fir farming..all possible to resolve.

We could even start a licence scheme to help with upkeep of the surface and small businesses could spring up to cater to those on the routes.

Long story short, if cyclists were given such provision there would be more opportunity to avoid conflict with the more dangerous vehicle users by using such networks.

Ugh, what a load of patronising guff. Where are the rules for the idiots in cars who do real damage?

The self-appointed guardians of the New Forest have made it abundantly clear that people like me aren't welcome there over the past couple of years. I certainly won't be visiting there any time soon, whether I'm travelling by bike or not, the place sounds like a thoroughly unpleasant Little Englander's paradise. There's plenty of other places in the UK that are much more friendly. If I was an event organiser I'd definitely be looking at taking my event and its associated cash somewhere less incredibly selfish.

I really hope that we do not have to legally reduce our spend to walking pace when passing horses. How do cars manage to do this ? Oh, they don't, they are much louder, more dangerous and alarming to a horse than a bicycle would ever be. There are so many bridal paths in the forest this 'battle for the road' makes no sense.
Whilst attending the Wiggle isle of Wight this year, we were joined by the tvr owners club. Loud, fast and driving around in groups. Made us look like saints.
I welcome the non posting of times, sportives are not races. Join a club and race properly.

Seems to me to have been a complete waste of time and money, particularly if this is the result of "months" of discussion between the parties involved.

Interesting that it refers to the need for "mutual respect and courtesy" but then nowhere does it give any instruction as to how drivers should behave towards cyclists.

"1.1 Ride in single file on tracks and narrow roads, leaving gaps for overtaking vehicles to pull into. Never ride more than two abreast"

Nice to see that they realise we're allowed two abreast, but the rest of that is very poor advice: if the road is narrow, other vehicles should not overtake.

I also like the contradictory instructions to use a bell or call and to be quiet.

CTC and sustrans should be ashamed of endorsing yet another nice way code containing dangerous advice.

"try to be out of the Forest by sunset."

What does that have to do with being "considerate"?

So as you'd expect it's essentially a list of how to behave for those doing or likely to cause the least damage to others whilst motorists continue slaying cyclists, walkers, horse riders, animals and each other.

I suppose it's still fine to take my sports car and use the lanes at high speed knowing I'll be excused if I do kill anyone so long as I don't drop an empty KFC box out of the window.

Rules for everyone then but for those doing the real damage business as usual?

Respect the quiet of the forest? Is this a serious list? Presumably they're banning any Harley Davidson motorcycles along with boy racer baked bean can exhaust carrying Corsas then? How much noise can a cyclist actually make?

Over £300k into the local economy from one event in October. This surely is a significant sum, and ought to be a good leverage point in future event planning when presumably other events in the warmer months would bring more revenue in.

As with most laws, rules and codes of practice, the mantra of 'Don't be an arsehole' would cover pretty much everything if adhered to.....