[john horscroft]

Agree Dave that it will blend a bit in time but the materials used appear to be completely out of keeping with the local substrate. It will also without fail encourage more mountain bikers to head up there. It also ruins as you say one of the nicest sections of trail running about. 

....far from it fella.  The last thing most mountain bikers want is sanitised trails.  Most MBers want natural trails that fit in with the landscape.  This doesn't....

[dave]

Isn't that the big elephant in the room here? On most landscapes/surfaces, especially peak moorland, traffic from bikes in any kind of volume is likely in the mid-long term to require trail repair/maintenance that will probably render the path unappetizing to riders?

[a dense loner]

My armchair hill walker status? Cheers Dave that almost feels like a compliment. It looks to me like the path has been laid down over where the existing "path" was. Tho that's from memory, 310 days on the grit in 01 apparently. They may be trying to spread the load from stanage and burbage, which in summer is disgusting to see cars parked on grass verges, here there and everywhere. Tho this will also not be in your thinking since it's entirely speculative.
As for your statement of being the voice of people to be adequately heard? You made your stance more than clear in every single one of your posts on this subject. I, for one, don't think it looks anything like as bad as you're making out. Lord lets not forget the controversy of wood chips being used at the trackside boulder, curbar.

[john horscroft]

Just to add to what Cofe has said, the work is being carried out under the auspices of Moors For The Future and funded by Natural England.  The spec was for no imported material, which has to be the preferred option, but it means that the standard of work has to be very high as it effectively means exhuming the sub-soil and putting it on top.  I think I'm not speaking out of turn to say that once the work had commenced, certain concerns about the scale of the path and the removal of boulders were passed on to the contractors.  Let's just say that, in my opinion, it hasn't been done in the most sympathetic fashion given the remoteness of the location and the landscape in which it sits.  Of course, it also begs the question, what happens to Cutthroat Bridge path as that's next on the agenda and a similar level of engineering would be not to the liking of either the ramblers, MBers or anyone else I'm guessing.  The idea for that was to only use on-site material but that's been scuppered because it's a scheduled Ancient Monument, so it looks like they'll be importing crushed gritstone leading to very real concerns that we'll end up with another Stanage Causeway....

[Snoops]

Agree Dave that it will blend a bit in time but the materials used appear to be completely out of keeping with the local substrate. It will also without fail encourage more mountain bikers to head up there. It also ruins as you say one of the nicest sections of trail running about. 

....far from it fella.  The last thing most mountain bikers want is sanitised trails.  Most MBers want natural trails that fit in with the landscape.  This doesn't....

Well everytime I'm up there, I see a shitload of them cycling illegally across it.

[andyd]

I think I agree with Dense on this. It's there for everyone, it will weather in I expect and let's be realistic; if you want it looking all natural it would be covered in trees. The Peak is a honey pot site. Climbers are passionate about the place, including me, but it's not a SSSI that needs to be treated with lid gloves. I'm sure there are a lot of people who are really pleased about it.

[tomtom]

Are these areas not SSSI's or of such like?

ah - just seen Andys post.

[Jim]

Do you even know what a motorway is? ?????

[tomtom]

Do you even know what a motorway is? ?????

sadly I have 25000 miles a year of motorway education...

[Jim]

That question was meant for the OP with tongue firmly in cheek incase it wasn't obvious

[tomtom]

That question was meant for the OP with tongue firmly in cheek incase it wasn't obvious

[bigtuboflard]

Agree Dave that it will blend a bit in time but the materials used appear to be completely out of keeping with the local substrate. It will also without fail encourage more mountain bikers to head up there. It also ruins as you say one of the nicest sections of trail running about. 

....far from it fella.  The last thing most mountain bikers want is sanitised trails.  Most MBers want natural trails that fit in with the landscape.  This doesn't....

I hope that's the case, I do a fair bit of biking myself so I get the attraction of technical trails but I suspect it my lure the odd biker off the usual loop too. Time will tell and I hope I'm proven wrong. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Hmmm I am with Dense and failing to understand the fuss. This upgraded path looks similar in construction and width to the standard for popular trails in provincial parks here in BC. Seems to me the problem is purely an aesthetic one ... that the new material stands out in the open moorland terrain. Here that's less of an issue as vegetation is kind of vigorous (temperate rain forest).

Please read the posts, at least. Or go and have a look for yourself perhaps; I get the feeling that a lot of people saying "it looks fine to me" are expressing their opinion based solely on the photos I've posted.

The descent from C&H to Whinstone Lee Tor has been pretty much blasted through, ruining some technical terrain, but not withstanding that, unnecessary and unsympathetic to the landscape. Not particularly to do with aesthetics.

It's good to hear the opinion of those who feel it's fine, but there will always be those who aren't particularly bothered, and their view will probably be a less critical one. To those who have expressed a positive opinion, I would ask, is your motivation merely to trump the thread?

There are other concerns too, for instance, changes in management philosophy regarding the "upkeep" of Stanage.

I'll try to go back for more photos soon.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

From Twitter:

Conservefor Ltd
Oct 23
Conservefor Ltd ‏@conservefor
Whinstone Lee Tor multi-user path is coming together nicely, the new stone pitched section looks fantastic, great job

[a dense loner]

My opinion is not merely to trump the thread Dave, and asking people who don't agree with you to read your posts is a little condescending. I've read your posts and don't agree with them. You also said "I get the feeling that a lot of people saying it looks fine to me are expressing their opinion based solely on the photos I've posted" is that some kind of joke? What else are we supposed to be basing our opinions of how it looks on? The power of imagination?
I've never been to Venice, looks nice from pics.

[lagerstarfish]

I've never been to Venice, looks nice from pics.

I heard it smells bad

[tomtom]

I've never been to Venice, looks nice from pics.

I heard it smells bad

Yup. It'd make much more sense to cover over their open sewers canals and then you could drive around and keep the sanitation from view...

[a dense loner]

But the point is it looks nice

[john horscroft]

Bloody hell, some of these responses leave me scratching my head!  You make it sound as though we're discussing a suburban park, not the Peak District.  Questions we need to ask. Are we happy to see more and more paths in the Peak upgraded to this kind of scale?  That has been the direction of travel for some time largely at the behest of local authority Rights of Way Officers who love a bit of engineering - it's easy and cheap to blast through in the way they've done on Derwent Edge.  I understand the call for increased access for those with limited mobility, but how far does that go?  Do we flatten and widen trails throughout the Peak fundamentally altering the character of the landscape?  I'm not sure that most users would be happy with that kind of one size fits all approach.  It's like installing bolt-on-holds on a few classic Peak boulder problems just so anyone can climb them!

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Bloody hell, some of these responses leave me scratching my head!  You make it sound as though we're discussing a suburban park, not the Peak District.  Questions we need to ask. Are we happy to see more and more paths in the Peak upgraded to this kind of scale?  That has been the direction of travel for some time largely at the behest of local authority Rights of Way Officers who love a bit of engineering - it's easy and cheap to blast through in the way they've done on Derwent Edge.  I understand the call for increased access for those with limited mobility, but how far does that go?  Do we flatten and widen trails throughout the Peak fundamentally altering the character of the landscape?  I'm not sure that most users would be happy with that kind of one size fits all approach.  It's like installing bolt-on-holds on a few classic Peak boulder problems just so anyone can climb them!

Very, very well said.

+1

[mrjonathanr]

You make it sound as though we're discussing a suburban park, not the Peak District.  Questions we need to ask. Are we happy to see more and more paths in the Peak upgraded to this kind of scale? 

Exactly, that's the nub of it. BC for example has a bit more National Park to footle around with, the Peak is a very limited resource.

I don't like what I see in the photos on the whole, but will have to go and look and properly before forming a clear view.

I think Dave's point that the photos may not be a fairest basis for judgment is sound enough but for those not local they'll have to do.

honestly, I'd say thanks to Dave for publicising this - and Shark too with this sticker thing (for good or ill). Best to be aware of developments, isn't it?

[tomtom]

Bloody hell, some of these responses leave me scratching my head!  You make it sound as though we're discussing a suburban park, not the Peak District.  Questions we need to ask. Are we happy to see more and more paths in the Peak upgraded to this kind of scale?  That has been the direction of travel for some time largely at the behest of local authority Rights of Way Officers who love a bit of engineering - it's easy and cheap to blast through in the way they've done on Derwent Edge.  I understand the call for increased access for those with limited mobility, but how far does that go?  Do we flatten and widen trails throughout the Peak fundamentally altering the character of the landscape?  I'm not sure that most users would be happy with that kind of one size fits all approach.  It's like installing bolt-on-holds on a few classic Peak boulder problems just so anyone can climb them!

Very, very well said.

+1

That's pretty much how I feel. There's some sort of interesting philosophical debate about what countryside means to people - and that it's a human modified landscape anyway etc.. But I'm too knackered to think this evening. I need a g&t and watch some car chases on the idiot lamp.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Hopefully, a lot of people won't have to think too much when they view the worst of it, which is probably the section down towards Whinstone Lee Tor. This is the section where the most excavation work has taken place. Sorry for not getting photos of this.

I do feel saddened by some of the responses, particularly those that seem to be an attack on the opinion and feelings I've expressed.

We need everyone's views. I would have thought, given the vitriol expressed on the donkey mark thread, there would have been less complacent approval. Clearly, opinion is quite polarised between those that apparently care little, and those that care very much, but I'm somewhat at a loss as regards the real purpose for challenging the views of those who find this work unnecessarily destructive.

Let's be honest, some of us would no doubt prefer an unmetalled road up to Detwent Edge, and those responsible for decisions on management of the Peak Park probably have to do a lot of juggling when considering what interests to preserve etc.

I'm concerned about what seems to be something of a trend towards more aggressive management, "access for all" decisions etc; there does seem to be a change in policy/philosophy. In what way do contractors tender for the work? What criteria do they have to consider?

In this case, i feel that mistakes have been made. It's been really quite hard to convey the sense of loss i felt up there the other day.. At the time, i also made the analogy with management of inner city parkland.

Thanks for everyone's views.

[mrjonathanr]

Sure, discreet erosion prevention should be the priority. Whether that has been the outcome here or not isn't clear, hence my not rushing to judgment.

If park land is not being preserved as effectively as it could be the limited area of the peak amplifies the significance.

In many ways we all need to get more involved in its future management given the challenges of competing user interests and financial challenges.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Yes, difficult to know what the purpose of the work was at the moment. Was going to do some phoning around today to find out a bit more.

Looking through some of the Twitter feed from the contractor, sounds as though it was just to make the trail easier.