Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Summits | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

G/SP-015 - a change of heart #grumbles

It appears that it is now legal to cycle up to the summit as the landowner has re-designated the path as a shared space for walkers and cyclists. However, as the current path appears to have been laid specifically to deter cycling (under the old regime), dont expect an easy ride.

Let the cycling activations commence.

Dreadful developments.

As you correctly state, the design of the paths means that, in itself, it is not a desirable site for cycling.

Its popularity with cyclists can only be in the appeal to annoy walkers, which it would seem they like to do almost as much as they do motorists.

1 Like

I believe in live and let live, but I have had a few dreadful experiences with arrogant and selfish cyclists in the hills, so I can sympathise with Tom’s comment. Most of them are considerate towards walkers but its the relatively few that aren’t that you remember!

How to walk on a shared walking / cycling path.

  1. Walk up the ride down paths.
  2. Walk down the ride up paths.

This gives you the best chance of seeing cyclists and avoiding them. It’s what I do when walking in the 7 Stanes paths in the Scottish Borders.

If only the cyclists on G/SP-015 would respect the up/down routes which are clearly signed.

Yes, that will be a problem. Seems not to be an issue on Minch Moor GM/SS-133 but mainly because the up rides are less steep than the downhill sections.

1 Like

I’m not sure how it is on private paths however on public shared paths over here, the cyclists always have to give way to pedestrians - who have “right-of-way”. If the cyclists don’t give way or do something that could cause an accident the police can and will be called. I do both along these paths by the way - walk and ride and find with this rule in place it is very rare if at all that problems occur.

Ed.

I think that’s a bit of a sweeping statement, Tom. The race-through-red-lights types, much publicised in the tabloid newspapers, are a small minority. As someone who commuted to work by bike for decades, I found many motorists (about 5%) drive dangerously close to cyclists or ‘cut them up’ at junctions. Cyclists have to cycle defensively for their own safety (e.g. move to the middle of the lane to dissuade drivers from squeezing pass at a bend or restriction). Drivers, denied shaving 50ms off their journey time should not get annoyed but cool it and think about Climate Change or something.

Me too Brian, it’s always the competitive alpha-male type who thinks shared trails are for their exclusive use, and when politely asked to be more careful around other people, give you or your misses verbal abuse.

In my (former) local woods the ‘No Cycling’ badges put on the ‘barrier gates’ to walking paths by the Forestry Commission ranger would be torn off usually within days

I speak as a keen walker, on-and-off-road cyclist and motorist.

Andy, G8CPZ

1 Like

Not here in Tewkesbury, they aren’t.

Here in Tewkesbury, they routinely:

  1. Ignore traffic lights
  2. Cycle in darkness with no lights and wearing black clothing
  3. Cycle on the road, even where a cycle path has been provided at public expense
  4. Cycle at high speed on the pavements in town, forcing pedestrians to jump clear
  5. Overtake queues of stationary motor vehicles on the left side when approaching traffic lights, which they then ignore
  6. Cycle two or three abreast on narrow roads, deliberately to obstruct the progress of motorists.

And that is a majority of cyclists … not a minority. I have no time for them at all.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

Good. That’s exactly the way it was intended. :wink:

I think about climate change every time I start my 300+ BHP car engine. That’s because while it has significantly lower emissions than my previous 242BHP car had, the VED is £450 / yr compared to the previous £200 (or so) / yr for the more polluting. Go figure.

Still having paid so much to get it on the road, I drive it more than my previous car which is not what the smart people in power want.

I think I’ll make a “Thunburg Dis-approved” sticker to put in the back window along with the On-Digital Monkey :grin:

1 Like

Wow. Jeremy Clarkson is clearly alive and well and living in Tewkesbury with a country estate in Scotland.

3 Likes

I have to dismantle too much of the bike to fit it in the estate car. So I use the pickup to move the bike about and its emissions make the Torrey Canyon look minimal :slight_smile:

I intend to do many more bike activations in 2020.

Don’t forget to fit sword blades to the wheels!:wink:

What like some kind of dystopian Mad Max inspired vehicle?

I agree with Andy and Brian…

In case you meet this Gammon:

(Note the brilliant ending Gammon gets comeuppance)
[WARNING BAD LANGUAGE ON THIS VIDEO CLIP]:

(https://twitter.com/MarieAnnUK/status/1208687483577393152)

73 Phil

Yeah, either Tewkesbury’s the centre of the universe of bad cyclists OR this is another classic case of confirmation bias, i.e. when you remember only those events that reinforce your strongly-held opinion and ignore those events that don’t.

3 Likes

I believe he lives not far from here, in Chipping Norton, so no doubt his experiences are similar to mine.

“Climate change? What climate change?”

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

There is plenty of evidence of climate change. The argument is whether it is man-made or a natural cyclic event. Irrespective of whether you believe it’s man-made or not, reducing pollution and emissions seems to be a reasonable thing to do. I did that by buying a car that is much less polluting than the one it replaced only to find that the VED is no longer based on emissions (because too many people bought low-emission cars and government income dropped) but on the retail price. And not what you pay for a pre-owned and cherished example but the price it was when some fool paid for it new at the dealer!

Please refrain from feeding the trolls!