[DAVETHOMAS90]

Quite. In the Peak it is all about the sense of wildness.

I can only suspect DT has missed the sarcasm in a couple of my posts.

Completely! 

I also thought you could have been the real Hong Kong Phooey



but that was A long shot.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Ran up over Derwent again tonight, with my mate Jim.

Unfortunately set off a bit too late to get any decent photos - my phone was struggling with the light, and refused to save some of them.

Anyway, I apologise for any undue concern caused by my reference to "motorway", as the path clearly resembles a dual carriageway:



I remember a similar road widening scheme many years ago, on the M5, South of Birmingham. You'd think people would learn; this will need widening again in a few years time, to soak up the extra traffic.

Seriously though, this changes the character of the area, and I for one feel robbed of what was there before. Would be great to have some other opinion from others who have been up there recently too. I still think it's appalling.

Less seriously, I have a "better" shot of Jim, but he promised to buy me beer for a year, if I didn't upload it. Good lad 

[a dense loner]

After walking around burbage north, south, carls wark for the last few days I can safely say the Derwent dual carriageway looks loads better. Most people will stay on the path instead of turning the surrounding area into a quagmire. In the pic the lane on the left will eventually succumb to nature again. What's more the new pic makes me think the job has been done better than your old pics suggested. My opinion anyway

[Johnny Brown]

From the enquiries I've made it sounds like the spec was decent but the contractors had their own ideas. There may be more to it, but it sounds like Moors for the future weren't supervising closely enough.

[Snoops]

Ran up over Derwent again tonight, with my mate Jim.

Unfortunately set off a bit too late to get any decent photos - my phone was struggling with the light, and refused to save some of them.

Anyway, I apologise for any undue concern caused by my reference to "motorway", as the path clearly resembles a dual carriageway:



I remember a similar road widening scheme many years ago, on the M5, South of Birmingham. You'd think people would learn; this will need widening again in a few years time, to soak up the extra traffic.

Seriously though, this changes the character of the area, and I for one feel robbed of what was there before. Would be great to have some other opinion from others who have been up there recently too. I still think it's appalling.

Less seriously, I have a "better" shot of Jim, but he promised to buy me beer for a year, if I didn't upload it. Good lad 

There is a fine line between leaving the outdoors 'wild' 'natural' an preserving/preventing erosion - but this is taking the piss.

I'm a cynic but surely the main driver for all this stuff going on in the west Peak is part of this 'making Sheffield the outdoor capital of England' stuff. i.e they just want bums on seats (bums on paths in this case!), smash all the paths into roads,  increase the visitor centres (which they are planning on doing), make it easier and easier for people to access these places and ergo increase revenue.
Sadly it is/will make it all a bit less natural/wild/romantic for some of us.

[Neil F]

I'm just catching up on this thread after a couple of weeks, and whilst I've not seen the 'Derwent Motorway' with my own eyes, I am firmly in the OP camp on this one.

Actually, I think the photo of the Cowperstone path is extremely helpful, because it perfectly illustrates why I find that attempt at restoration 'acceptable' and the Derwent one (along with many of the monstrosities 'Fix the Fells' (sic) has been responsible for in The Lakes), so abhorrent. The main difference is that traditional restoration projects (such as the many miles constructed by Caff's dad) were the result of hard physical graft and crowbars, whereas the 'modern' (though I would call it backward) approach is to bring in a hydraulic excavator to do the grunt. And basically the potential to damage irreparably the fragile environment increases a thousandfold when you introduce such machinery.

Contrast the beautiful natural gritstone slabs, formed by natural erosion over millennia. At the Cowperstone their beauty an robustness is valued such that they are incorporated (with no visible damage) into the repaired path, whereas at Derwent equivalent slabs have had great chunks torn out if them, doubtless in a matter of seconds, by the crass dragging of a hydraulic excavator bucket.

And if that upsets you, I'd make sure you steer clear of the upper slopes of Lingmell in Wasdale, where another excavator (presumably helicoptered in) has ripped apart the hillside leaving a whole series of perfectly symmetrical hairpins up what was once a natural slope.

My firm view is that in the rush to 'get things done' conservation bodies are allowing the use of industrial plant which is completely inappropriate, without the necessary controls to temper the hand of gung-ho operators who are only interested in working to a budget.

Neil

[Johnny Brown]

Agreed.

I don't get the logic of making a new path. Once the soil is gone, particularly if the path forms a drainage line as above, the vegetation will take decades to creep back in.

[cofe]

Looking at Dave's photo, it looks like they've smashed the new path through the heather along the desire line that had been worn away by walkers etc. Must have been the cheapest way. The original path is the rocky path to the left, I think. It's really not sympathetic work is it. Doesn't bode well for the Cutthroat BW. 

[tomtom]

I'm amazed there's not a greater fuss about this - it's a national park ffs. If you so much as put up a satellite dish in a Nat Park the Feds come in and execute your family...

[Snoops]

I'm amazed there's not a greater fuss about this - it's a national park ffs. If you so much as put up a satellite dish in a Nat Park the Feds come in and execute your family...

It's cause its the Feds doing it innit.....

[Little Weed]

Have been up there again today with Dave, and just beyond Cutthroat Bridge we bumped into the 'Moors for the Future' guys responsible for commissioning this work. They are pretty appalled at the way things have turned out too ('gash' was the way he described the quality of the work the contractors have inflicted on such a previously beautiful wilderness setting).

You've really got to go and see for yourselves to get a proper picture of how truly appalling this is. I felt like crying - this has been one of my favourite running areas for nearly 30 years, and the level of erosion as far as I could tell had hardly made any noticeable dent up there in all that time. This was a very special place for me with lots of happy memories. Since the relatively recent Mountain-biking craze and Vertebrate Graphics MB guidebooks being published, the scarring on some boulders had become an eyesore but nothing too intrusive altogether. It's destroyed up there now, like a bunch of vandals have been let loose. Absolutely unforgivably incompetent.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Great to hear everyone else's views on this.

Personally, I want to refrain from selecting quotes from replies that seem to support only my own views, but I do find it comforting to hear from others who feel a similar way. I know I'm the OP, but it's just been good to highlight the issue.

I find it interesting that some people focus on the immediate visual appearance, and Dense, you clearly don't mind what you see. Other people will feel the same way.

What is hard to convey, is what has been lost, directly as a result of the "smashing through" - which is a good way to describe what has been done. But I think it's worth remembering the particular and personally intimate involvement and attachment we have with these areas as climbers and/or runners; we probably register change, loss and threat to these environments  more than most. That most certainly isn't an attempt to mitigate the sense of impact. It's probably more important that we speak up about things like this.

       *****

As it happens, I've just been out to Derwent again with a friend, Jim Twohig (thanks for the lift out Jim).

We met four guys from the Peak Park and Moors for the Future who were out there to survey the works. Without going into all the details of what was discussed, it's clear there was agreement about the excessive intrusiveness of this work, and that there are lessons to be learnt. I understand there is ongoing dialogue between the various partners/contractors, and it wouldn't seem right to attempt to summarise things at this stage, other than to recall the word "gash" being used at some point. 

(Edit. Yes, I seem to remember that too; good you posted your own views too Jim.)

I've agreed to get back in touch for a little more information soon, although I acknowledge some people posting here have far more direct and ongoing dialogue with the Peak Park/Moors for the Future, and that there are some upcoming meetings.

I've taken some more photos which I'll try to upload shortly.

Dave T.

[lagerstarfish]

definitely going to have to name a hold on my wall "Moors Fo' Future"

[DAVETHOMAS90]

More from today:







I would like to add that I felt reassured to some extent by what was said today by the representatives of the Peak Peak and Moors for the Future. While it doesn't change what has been done, it's clear that there is a critical review ongoing, of how this work was carried out.

(If any of you are reading this, it was great to be able to talk openly about the work, and hear about your own views and involvement with it. Sorry I couldn't remember all your names, so preferred to leave that out.)

More photos here:

https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/93311068@N07/sets/72157652282644339/

Dave T.

[bigtuboflard]

I'm amazed there's not a greater fuss about this - it's a national park ffs. If you so much as put up a satellite dish in a Nat Park the Feds come in and execute your family...

couldn't agree more. in my village (in the NP) the architect business opposite wasn't even allowed to put up a shop sign on the exterior of the building I believe for fear of damaging the delicate aesthetics of the place. Definitely in Dave and other's camp on this; the opportunity to do a sympathetic job which minimised its intrusion has pretty much been lost here now for good, and sets a tone for surrounding BW's as Cofe rightly points out

[a dense loner]

Yep that looks absolutely shocking! What I was referring to when I said it looks like a decent job was the laid path itself

[mrjonathanr]

There's a bitter irony in that signpost title. Good work Mr 90 in publicising this.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Following on from my earlier post (May 12th), the four gentlemen we (myself and Jim T) met at Derwent, were Matt Scott-Campbell, Matt Buckler and Jamie Freestone from Moors for the Future, and Mike Rhodes from the Peak Park.

What was abundantly clear, was that, together, they shared the same concerns as most people who've expressed an opinion on the new path, and an overriding concern to get things right - which is great to hear.

I think I've taken a little too much liberty with some of the things that were discussed on Tuesday, so it's important I make sure people understand just how open and forthcoming the guys were, and how much they want to hear from people about this, and similar work. In that respect, I think there's a real opportunity to work together and make a difference.

Generally, I suppose, we notice when things don't go right. But there's as much onus on the rest of us, to bring things to them - in this case, the Peak Park and their partners. It's too easy to look for someone to blame, when something happens that we don't like; there's a real opportunity for dialogue and cooperation here, and I think we should embrace it with the good faith in which it's offered!

Dave T.

edit. I understand from Bob Berzins and Matt Scott-Campbell, that some runners have emailed the Peak Park directly with their views about this. They are aware of the thread too.

[slackline]

Could be worth highlighting this on http://www.ukhillwalking.com/ I'd imagine its a topic right up their street off-the beaten track.

[Little Weed]

Following on from my earlier post (May 12th), the four gentlemen we (myself and Jim T) met at Derwent, were Matt Scott-Campbell, Matt Buckler and Jamie Freestone from Moors for the Future, and Mike Rhodes from the Peak Park.

What was abundantly clear, was that, together, they shared the same concerns as most people who've expressed an opinion on the new path, and an overriding concern to get things right - which is great to hear.

I think I've taken a little too much liberty with some of the things that were discussed on Tuesday, so it's important I make sure people understand just how open and forthcoming the guys were, and how much they want to hear from people about this, and similar work. In that respect, I think there's a real opportunity to work together and make a difference.

Generally, I suppose, we notice when things don't go right. But there's as much onus on the rest of us, to bring things to them - in this case, the Peak Park and their partners. It's too easy to look for someone to blame, when something happens that we don't like; there's a real opportunity for dialogue and cooperation here, and I think we should embrace it with the good faith in which it's offered!

Dave T.

edit. I understand from Bob Berzins and Matt Scott-Campbell, that some runners have emailed the Peak Park directly with their views about this. They are aware of the thread too.

The 'real opportunity for dialogue and cooperation' is supposed to happen before 'something happens' though Dave, not through bumping into the culprits by chance at the scene of the crime afterwards.

 This didn't just 'happen', it was a hugely well-funded project effected for supposed environmental protection reasons, by a body whose whole raison d'etre is to be custodians of the moorlands. Notwithstanding that their assessment of the need for the work in the first place was flawed, the planning, implementation and supervision/ongoing-evaluation of the project has been disastrous. And plans are afoot to continue the degradation down the lovely remaining traversing path as far as Cutthroat bridge itself, as outlined on their own website.

There is no comparison with the relatively benign and unobtrusive flag-stoning work done fifteen odd years ago on the section up to Back Tor. That would be like comparing the Sistine Chapel ceiling to the daubings of a mentally impaired chimpanzee.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I would like to distance myself from some of the comments in the last post.

In particular, the reference to "culprits".

Dave T.

[Little Weed]

I would like to distance myself from some of the comments in the last post.

In particular, the reference to "culprits".

Dave T.

 We didn't bump into four holograms up there, they're real people being paid a salary to protect the moorlands. They're responsible for their actions, and they were ashamed of the result, as they should be. Culprits is not too strong a word to use. You don't 'give opportunities for dialogue and consultation' after the event, what possible sense does that make? I would certainly be hoping for a chance for dialogue & consultation regarding their plans for the rest of the track, I can't see any reference to such "D&C" proposals regarding those plans on their site.

[cofe]

I've still not been able to find out if they had a duty to consult on the Derwent Edge path (private land, not a RoW), the only reason they might have had to is because it's a national park. Or because they had chosen to (but they didn't).

Dave's photo of the sign indicates a pause in the works. Perhaps now's the time for them to get their act together and do a decent job of finishing the work when work resumes in July, making good (as best they can) the landscape that's been trashed so far.

You'd hope they'd consult on the Cutthroat BW works as it's a RoW, but as has been demonstrated countless times in the Peak, and especially when DCC are involved, they pretty much do what they want.

[tomtom]

I would like to distance myself from some of the comments in the last post.

In particular, the reference to "culprits".

Dave T.

 We didn't bump into four holograms up there, they're real people being paid a salary to protect the moorlands. They're responsible for their actions, and they were ashamed of the result, as they should be. Culprits is not too strong a word to use. You don't 'give opportunities for dialogue and consultation' after the event, what possible sense does that make? I would certainly be hoping for a chance for dialogue & consultation regarding their plans for the rest of the track, I can't see any reference to such "D&C" proposals regarding those plans on their site.

At this stage I'd say that casting blame is not constructive. I'd suggest focussing on how to prevent this work from continuing and for the damage (these new paths) to be made good....

[Little Weed]

I would like to distance myself from some of the comments in the last post.

In particular, the reference to "culprits".

Dave T.

 We didn't bump into four holograms up there, they're real people being paid a salary to protect the moorlands. They're responsible for their actions, and they were ashamed of the result, as they should be. Culprits is not too strong a word to use. You don't 'give opportunities for dialogue and consultation' after the event, what possible sense does that make? I would certainly be hoping for a chance for dialogue & consultation regarding their plans for the rest of the track, I can't see any reference to such "D&C" proposals regarding those plans on their site.

At this stage I'd say that casting blame is not constructive. I'd suggest focussing on how to prevent this work from continuing and for the damage (these new paths) to be made good....

 This is an open forum and as Dave said in a previous post, the 'Moors for the Future' people are reading this input, so inasmuch as there has been no consultation so far, they'll be able to get the tenor of my feelings at least!