[Closed] Trail building on Leith Hill.

Did you have a word with them?

Perhaps they don't know the grief they are causing?

They have been building there for a while now.
Some of the jumps look very large indeed.

Seem to be nice guys when we came across them
and they was not chopping trees down.

Theres no Downhillers in Holmbury in Pitch Hill yes
but only us Hard Core Trail riders in Holmbury mate.

seems the Ranger was using it has a reason to demolish what
was not causing a problem.

Maybe you need to have a chat with the Rangers about the Barbed
wire been placed along the bottom section of Summer Lightning
On the top of wired fence

As far as I am aware that fence has had barbed wire on it for years.

Holmbury Hill is part of a larger area known as "The Hurtwood". It is privately owned. To avoid any build-up of the problems being experienced between mountain bikers, horse riders and walkers due to the congestion of this ever-more popular area which was beginning to generate confrontation and other problems, local riders got together with the owners of this PRIVATE LAND and joined the "Friends of Hurtwood Control" so that our reasonable voice could be heard.

After a great deal of selfless effort on all sides, the result has been that known trails are now maintained and all comfortably share the area.

The Bray family are keen to encourage use of their land by all comers, but will (quite reasonably so) not tolerate more trail digging in sensitive woodland, leading to the destruction of pristine countryside, or the risk of entertaining uninsured activity on their land amongst other things, by ignorant ****s like you who seem to think you're somehow outside of all this and can do exactly what you please.

If you came and built trails in my back garden and ploughed up the lawn, frankly I'd deck you before having you arrested.

Like I said - you're not welcome. Piss off.

frankly I'd deck you before having you arrested.

And quite rightly end up in a lot more bother 😆

LOL quite rightly so
But for what I had seen they have not dug up a 15 feet drop or cut down 300 mm thick
tree trunks to make the jumps but do collect from what the rangers cut down.

LOL been riding there for years and know the history very well
Just a shame there still going to dig for oil, Gutted about that.

Not sure if the Holmbury ranger and Leith Hill issues should be mixed up. As you point out Holmbury is private land (albeit with a *lot* of footpaths / bridle ways going through it, they'd have a problem buttoning it up) but Leith Hill is on National Trust land (correct me if i'm wrong).

Note i'm not saying I agree with people building new trails on either, but the two are not really related as they're under different management regimes.

Just to play devils advocate for a second, the trails that are now 'sanctioned' on Holmbury/Pitch had to be built orginally - they were unsacntioned at that point. That said, building near the tower is pretty silly.

But it is not very close to the Tower, and not near any foot paths etc way out of the way.
Now that I would agree with and yes your very right about land ownership.

Could always go and build in the bit of woodland to the west of pitch hill.... that's owned by an (apparently) grumpy south african who likes to let the dogs on bikers. No access rights to loose there!

Having a family / individual / organisation own a massive tract of land like that is a complete load of b0ll0cks anyway, esp somewhere as populated as the south east. You've got to wonder who did they f over at some point to get hold of it all (be it 10 years or 150 years ago). That is possibly a different discussion tho!

The Leith Hill ranger is as upset about illegal trail building without permission on his patch (owned by the NT) as is the Holmbury ranger about the same on HIS patch.

The two situations are exactly the same in all but location.

It is to the credit of the Bray family that they allowed the existing trails to not only continue, but be improved and maintained by a hard working core of volunteers. This decision was helped by the involvement of responsible local bikers who were prepared to put their money and time where their mouths are and join in for the common good of all.

There really is no excuse. What makes it worse is that the numb-nuts who are doing this are costing time and other people's money putting their unwelcome intrusions beyond use - it's not as if this subject hasn't been discussed ad neauseum on this very forum so they can't claim ignorance. Especially the Kona Stinky-riding father of one of the younger members who really should know better at his (presumably adult) age. They're draining charitable donations that are intended for the upkeep of existing acreage for all sorts of reasons that are nothing to do with mountain biking.

They're putting at risk all the hard work done to make accommodations on all sides by all involved to keep the hills MTB-friendly.

Bunch of selfish, thoughtless dicks, basically.

The bottom line is it causes problems for the majority when it's discovered. I've been riding the Surrey Hills since 1989 and it's taken that long to get a nice system going that suits everyone. There is a jump spot near the tower anyway and the quarry is also there. It's better to go through the right channels if you want to build than to do what you like or isn't that "hardcore". Trails like Barry's and the others are there through consultation and I expect with a bit of talking these guys may be allowed to build something they like. It's worth noting that we are not alone up there, walkers, families and what have you all use the place too and need to be safe while they do so.

"Having a family / individual / organisation own a massive tract of land like that is a complete load of b0ll0cks anyway, esp somewhere as populated as the south east."

I rest my case.

How's that then? You've said nothing to refute the argument.

Personally I don't agree with building more trails on Leith or hurtwood (see devil and advocate above), but I do happen to think it's a bunch of arse that something that should clearly be a community resource can be controlled by the whim of one person or family. Which is exactly the situation on hurtwood.

There is no reason why the Hurtwood should be a "community resource". The situation as it is, is perfectly fine. The land is maintained and beautiful. It's open to all. The owners like us, we like the owners. Everybody's happy.

Kindly take your little kiddy revolutionary playpen and shove it.

Well the family at Hurtwood are more than happy to have MTB all over their land, asking that new trails are requested rather than just built seems reasonable to me. Leith is National Trust and full of wildlife so it's best to check what you're building is OK first. I've seen people cross the firebreaks at full tilt scaring people and once almost taking out my son when we were walking up there. As you can imagine I was more than a little pissed off with that stupid c***.

Pardon my French.

.

Kindly take your little kiddy revolutionary playpen and shove it.

Well I stand corrected that's an entirely mature well thought out response, have you always been a ****er or do you practice?

The point is that should the owners have a change of heart we'd be fked, wouldn't we? If you can come up with a decent argument as to why in a country with 61 million people in it, one single family should control 3000 acres of country side i'd be more than happy to change my mind and stand corrected. But I suspect you can't.

Just because you don't agree with my point, doesn't make it any less correct.

Mr Woppit

There really is no excuse - it's not as if this subject hasn't been discussed ad neauseum on this very forum so they can't claim ignorance. Especially the Kona Stinky-riding father of one of the younger members who really should know better at his (presumably adult) age.

Did it ever occur to you that they may not all frequent this website? Believe it or not there isn't much in the way of downhill content on here.

Why don't you stop being a keyboard warrior and go call them selfish thoughtless dicks to their face and tell them to piss off. Go on. Let us know how that pans out.

NT only have certain sections of land on Leith hill. The area where the jumps are being built I do believe belongs to the Wotton estate. The nearest NT land is the open land around the tower.

As for Holmbury, you may request to build trails, but the answer will be no. It has been clearly stated that any new unsanctioned trails will be put beyond use.

seems the Ranger was using it has a reason to demolish what
was not causing a problem.

That is a typical response from someone who doesn't understand the potential liabilities involved, not to mention that there is the wildlife to consider and of course shockingly it's not just a playground for mountainbikers other users use the land as well.

Swinley has lots of jump trails and is easy to get to if that's your thing. Surrey hills is what it is and should be treated with some respect.

Out of interest how could a trail be sanctioned over there?

They frequent.

"Why don't you stop being a keyboard warrior and go call them selfish thoughtless dicks to their face and tell them...": Don't be ridiculous, what are you nuts? They might hurt me. It's much safer here.

Maybe you could deliver the message for me. I'm sure it wouldn't worry you at all, being as how you're so tough, like...

Ewan: I can't think of one decent reason why one family shouldn't own that piece of land, given their expertise at it's upkeep and community-spirited attitude. I can't imagine what would become of it being run by the type of "people's committee" that you evidently prefer. Possibly a John Prescott-style "we will never build on the green belt" newtown.

Just because you think you're right, it doesn't mean that you are.

Er, comrade...

Ewan, the Hurtwood Control is not just managing land on behalf of the Bray family - it does so on behalf of other landowners as well.

Frankly, you don't seem to know what you're talking about, which is a bit of a shame, eh? I'd suggest you have a chat to Hurtwood Control - you know, get some primary evidence to make your mind up. That said, here's a brief potted history:

The Brays opened their land *voluntarily* to the public in the 1920s, and have always tried to manage it for the benefit of the public ever since. This is one of the reasons why we have such incredibly good access on the Hurtwood. As has been pointed out above, you should compare and contrast the freedoms we have there with what goes on on other bits of land like the Wooton Estate, MoD land and Crown Estates land.

One reason why the owners may have a change of heart is if - and this has been stated explicitly - one group of users starts inconveniencing the others. Three years ago, the Hurtwood had a meeting, and invited all mountain bikers with an interest in the area to attend. They said there that mountain biking was very welcome on the Hurtwood, but that it was starting to have a deleterious effect on other users of the land - horse riders, walkers and everyone else. They would rather not have to do anything that prevented mountain bikers having their fun, so they wanted to work with local riders and trail builders to create a situation that was equitable for everyone.

Basically, if we carry on with the '**** you, got mine' approach you are talking about, where we as a group don't take into account what anyone else wants, as a user group we are absolutely screwed.

What's going on on the Hurtwood is being watched by all of the other landowners around this area to see how it works out. If it works well, then there's a really good chance that we'll get a similar deal to what we've got at the moment on the Hurtwood. If it doesn't, well, it's back to square one.

By the way - land ownership on Leith Hill: It's patches of land. Some is privately owned, some is owned by the National Trust, some is owned by the Forestry Commission. The patch that Summer Lightning and the other Four Redlands Trails trails are built on is owned by FC. Other patches are leased by FC.

There are also numerous SSSIs dotted around Leith Hill, and a lot of recently - introduced wild cattle that are grazing the land back to its pre-war state.

Finally, Ewan - if you want some contacts at the NT or Hurtwood to talk to, then drop me a line. That might be a bit better than putting words in their mouth based on something someone once told you.

" bent_udder - Member "

Yes. And with that I exit stage left, pursued by a bear.

Nightnight all.

:o*

At least bother to read what i'm saying, eh? Note from the above, I'm not advocating the building of any more trails on Leith or Holmbury hill.

I do actually know what i'm talking about, i'm fully versed on the ins and outs of the hurtwood control issue and have been for years. I've even been on one of the trail building days. Just to be clear I don't have a problem with the bray family per say, or how they're choosing to run the hurtwood.

My point was a more general one, I think think it's all well and good that this landowner has chosen (to their credit) to use the land for the good of everyone. However should the ownership change of a large tract of land then it's as likely as not that the access to it will change - this can be for the better or worse. Community ownership of large areas of country side would at least negate that to some degree, at the very least it'd give the people who use it some degree of legal control.

As far as I can see, short of someone buying the land with the money you get from a Nobel prize, someone has to have screwed someone else in order to own thousands of acres of land. Be it 10 years ago when they made a killing at the stockmarket, or be it 1000 years ago when they killed a bunch of peasants and were made a Baron by the king. The bigger the tract of land the bigger the screwing that was adminstrated. That is my point. Clearly i'm being a bit of an idealist here, but I think it's fundementally unfair for one person to own such a large piece of land.

Call me a communist if you want, but there you go.

Bentudder - what words have I placed in the mouths of NT or Hurtwood? Please point out where i've been factually incorrect?

Ooh, Woppit, you big stirrer.

😀

Its a great trail that.. 😀

Ewan, you don't seem to be *that* well versed, and to top it all, you also seem to be confusing me with MrWoppit, bless his hand knitted woolen sleepysocks.

You're arguing that the Hurtwood should be communal land. That would not allow us the same access rights as we enjoy now. If you look at communal, or as it's better known, Common land, then rights of access are governed by existing Rights or Way laws. So we'd not have had access in the first place.

At the moment the land is *owned* by a variety of owners, including the Bray estate. It is *managed* by a charitable trust. You need to separate ownership from management first. FC and NT own and manage land. They sometimes lease and manage land. Hurtwood Control is a very different kettle of fish.

but I do happen to think it's a bunch of arse that something that should clearly be a community resource can be controlled by the whim of one person or family. Which is exactly the situation on hurtwood.

Again: 'The family' don't control Rights of Way on the Hurtwood - including other peoples' land. By concentrating ownership, they have - oddly - created a way of opening up access for walkers, horse riders and cyclists to go off those RoWs and roam.

Of course, if you'd rather that didn't happen, then that's cool. English Heritage - about as close as we can get to communal ownership - had a very simple solution to the problem of Parklife going over a scheduled ancient monument - shut the entire thing down. Rather than doing that, the Trust asked that it be rerouted. A bunch of us helped do that. Strangely enough, the Trust isn't made up of capitalist running dogs. It's made up of pretty normal people and even a couple of mountain bikers.

However should the ownership change of a large tract of land then it's as likely as not that the access to it will change - this can be for the better or worse. Community ownership of large areas of country side would at least negate that to some degree, at the very least it'd give the people who use it some degree of legal control.

I think we've just agreed that communal ownership does not automatically equal better land management. Maybe back in the dim distant past, someone in the Bray family screwed someone or a bunch of people over to get the land. That shouldn't really be held against the current owners, should it?

Worrying about whether such a huge chunk of land ownership is a good thing or not is a bit pointless; it is what it is, and at times it has brought a great deal of good to the local community. Still waiting for an explanation of why it's been, or will be, particularly bad.

Oh, and the offer's still open, Ewan - email in my profile. I'll even buy the pints in the Star if you want to chat it over face to face.

I'm sure we can keep doing this, but you're still applying my general point to a specific instance (Hurtwood). If every piece of land in Britain was run in the way that Hurtwood was then I'm sure i'd be less stuck in my argument. But it's not. A good example is the bit of land to the west of hurtwood, the ones behind the ridiculously formal gates, run by the bloke who chases people off his land.

Ewan, you don't seem to be *that* well versed, and to top it all, you also seem to be confusing me with MrWoppit, bless his hand knitted woolen sleepysocks.

You're arguing that the Hurtwood should be communal land. That would not allow us the same access rights as we enjoy now. If you look at communal, or as it's better known, Common land, then rights of access are governed by existing Rights or Way laws. So we'd not have had access in the first place.

I wasn't acutally advocating turning it into Common land. The arrangement i'd like would be quite simular to the way that Hurtwood (as a specific example) is run, i.e managed by a community of users.

At the moment the land is *owned* by a variety of owners, including the Bray estate. It is *managed* by a charitable trust. You need to separate ownership from management first. FC and NT own and manage land. They sometimes lease and manage land. Hurtwood Control is a very different kettle of fish.

Again this is a specific instance. Not all land is run in the same way is it? And even in this instance if the owners had a change of heart and chose to stop working with the Hurt Wood Control Trust they could shut down every trail that isn't a ROW as quick as they like. That's the bit I don't like, it's like the sword of damocles - all it'd take is some really agressive illegal trail building (and maybe a resultant death) and it could all go, despite all the hard work and good will built up over the years by people such as yourself and Redlands.

I think we've just agreed that communal ownership does not automatically equal better land management. Maybe back in the dim distant past, someone in the Bray family screwed someone or a bunch of people over to get the land. That shouldn't really be held against the current owners, should it?

Completely agree with not holding anything against the current owners of hurtwood, I think i've been pretty clear in my previous posts to say that I don't have any problem with the Bray family (or hurtwood control for that matter). Again my *general* point is that not all large land owners are as fair, so the best solution would be to remove that ownership from everyone. Or just apply the Scottish system of go where you like (pretty much) but don't cause any damage.

Worrying about whether such a huge chunk of land ownership is a good thing or not is a bit pointless; it is what it is, and at times it has brought a great deal of good to the local community. Still waiting for an explanation of why it's been, or will be, particularly bad.

Well this is the internet, surely the home of pointless debates. I can't think of a better place to a) wind Mr Woppit up and b) make a philosophical point than the STW forum.

Or just apply the Scottish system of go where you like (pretty much) but don't cause any damage.

No right to build trails under "right to roam" and very little chance of legal trail / jump building anyway - unless you get the owners consent.

You could ride footpaths tho, which would more than compensate I suspect.

Fair dos, Ewan. 🙂

The bloke with the gates and the dogs is also involved in Hurtwood, by the way.

Ben, a beer down the star sounds like a cracking idea, Wednesday evening?

Didn't realise that about the guy with the dogs. What's his take on the whole thing then? From what i've 'heard' (hearsay I guess!) he's pretty anti bike / anyone on his land.

yeah, his woodland that used to have loads of singletrack (and may have had some more recent stuff built in:)), has recently been clear felled and thinned in other sections.

Not much left now

Mr Woppit I can't tell what your real problem is? Is it the building of unsanctioned trails? Or is it that you don't have the minerals to try some of the gaps?

I ride those trails and they are some of the best in the North Downs. The people who build them obviously know how to ride and build a decent trail; even if they are a little unsustainable.

I've met the riders that built them and a majority are just young lads looking to build some more interesting trails than already exist on Leith Hill. Why do you think coming onto this forum and telling them they're not welcome and 'to piss off' is going to change anything?

The fact that they go to the effort of building all of this, and they've shifted some dirt to make some of the features, means they are willing to work on the trails (how much building have you done recently?). If it's such a problem why not work with them. They won't stab you for talking to them. Unless of course you approach them with the same attitude displayed above. Sure go ahead, make a fuss, if the jumps and trails are ploughed they will turn up somewhere else, guaranteed.

How do you think the UK has so many world-class downhillers? The likes of Brendan Fairclough didn't make it to where he is cause he rode Summer lightning and BKB a few times.

Why don't you take your brainsquawk somewhere else.

Davef - yep - planning on being there with Mark C on Wednesday evening.

R979 - not many world class downhillers from Surrey, I'm afraid. Natural features like huge hills are notably lacking. If you're one of the builders, please drop me a line - my email's in my profile - as we do need to talk, regardless of what you think of BKB or SL. 😀

but I think it's fundementally unfair for one person to own such a large piece of land.

As my Mum would say - life's unfair!

So what should be done about it? Nationalise it?

Bent-Udder - I used Brendan F as an example for a reason! It's the attitude of some people that prevents more quality coming out of the south of England - got nothing to do with lack of terrain.

No, I'm not one of the builders, but would happily help with some trail building. I am not local so I can't commit a great deal of time. I will be in touch shortly.

FWIW the bloke behind the big gates asked me to move from his land a couple of years ago when I stumbled off a bridleway. He was polite, if a little firm and his wife was very polite.

I've been riding Surrey Hills for a few years now, and you can easily do 40 miles of mostly excellent singletrack if you want without building new trails. There's some pretty good stuff on Pitch Hill if the more sanctioned ones on the others are too 'soft' for you.

Personally, if I want to ride more extreme stuff I'll go ride somewhere else (swinley, aston hill etc).

By the way, I assume there are some trailbuilders on here - I love the new end of yoghurt pots and its also nice to see some berms getting built up on the new beginning. Filling in some of the roots halfway through it though - really necessary?

Surrey Hills arestill my favourite riing spot, and it would be a shame if people got carried away building unsanctioned stuff and lost it for everyone. But Mr Woppit - calm down and stop posting like such a ****ing tit.

There's some lovely secret singletrack all over the Surrey Hills, some technical features too. I do ride BKB and Summer Lightning if I'm with an organised (not immediately local) group, as they have read about the trails and naturally want to ride them - I find them a bit dull to be honest, and dare I say it over managed - sorry trail maintenance peeps!

I can kind of sympathise with most opinions in part here. I would be gutted if my local from the door riding area, was peppered with wooden riding structures, and kicker jumps. I tend to be quite protective of that, and who I show round, and to what extent I show them - a bit selfish perhaps, but it stops any potential conflict with landowners and lessens the risk of confronting families, dog walkers etc on the trail, if folk respect the natural fauna and lanscape, and not open up the place with trail building tools.

As I said there is plenty at the Surrey Hills, hook up with Nirvana Cycles on a few of their Sunday rides, you will get to see a much bigger picture.

Good points R979, Scottie and Woodsman.

dare I say it over managed

We must be the worst managers *ever* 😀 We've worked on neither BKB nor Summer Lightning for over six months now. Last time we did anything with SL was a half day in May deberming and sorting some drainage - before that, about a year without maintenance. One of the good things about these trails is that they take a pounding without much need for maintenance, and stay ridable.
BKB we last worked on in the spring. I can think of quite a lot of other secret singletrack that has a lot more work done on it on a regular basis. Ahem.

As has been said before, there's scope for stuff that's built or maintained to a spec and for trails that have grown more organically. However, short term stunt-type stuff that involves moving logs and earth, with no mind to longevity or impact, is bad for mountain bikers locally and a nightmare for landowners. Which is why the bods building stuff on Leith need to start talking to the landowners, anonymously if necessary.

It is fascinating how people will derive grandiose and revolutionary general principles of human society such as [b]The Earth and all its fruits are a common or general good and are not be owned or monopolised by any person[/b] from propositions such as "I wanna build some sick jumps ina wood".

Big D as a point.
What will happen the day the FC/ranger/owner of the land will get pissed off about wild trail building and decide to ban MTB?
What would have that achieve? Not much I guess. There is plenty of amazingly nice epic ride that we add to stop because mtb have been ban from the area or trail are simply not manageable any more. And why all that because very clever (and skill apparently) lazy fat asses that can't pedal uphill have start doing some shuttles, going down at full speed without any respect for walkers and cutting trough hairpins.

So what that kind of attitude will achieve...

Ironically it is the lattice of different strips and pockets of land on Leith, all owned by very different people (Wotton Estate, FC, NT) and made more complicated by leasing and management (some bits are managed by the Surrey Ranger, even if the ownership is not council, for example) that makes Leith Hill slightly more tricky to come up with any kind of strategy but also sort of ideal for sneaky building.

Anyone that thinks they have a "right" to do full on DH/Freeride just any old where though is mistaken. There's a big safety difference between trundling around and enjoying the countryside by bike and building big gaps with serious consequences if the rider cocks up.

I should clarify some of my points on this matter. Firstly, the trail was referring to was the one jump line and trail that leads down the from ridge-line which faces (i.e. opposite) the ridge where summer lighting runs. No doubt there are others. That area is littered with all sorts of stuff and to discriminate against one group of riders only highlights the ignorance and inadequacies of the original poster.

A few quick points:

- Despite how it may have appeared, I'm not actually advocating building uncontrolled trails either. What I can't stand is individuals who focus on some people as the problem and use ridiculous arguments like it is a) dangerous (it's not really is it?) and b) destroying wildlife (how? knife-crimed I imagine).

- I can think of several examples of unsustainable trails in the Leith- Holmbury-Pitch area. e.g. Areas around deliverance where weekend warriors have turned a single line into a motorway, the section dropping into the Pitch car park and several trails near the Holbury St Mary Car park. Oh and how about the bottom of BKB? I could go on. I actually think the mini-DH is one of the better trails up there - it doesn't go directly down the hill!! If you ride it, you don't drag half the hill down with you...

If the real problem is with trails that truly causing damage through erosion and poor routing then we're in agreement. However, it's not the downhillers doing this, it's every rider that rides unsustainable trails, of which (unfortunately) there are too many! If we're honest, I suspect the environmental problems and perceived dangers are not really the issue though, are they MrW?

PS Bent Udder - Don't worry, I think SL, SL(DH) and BKB are brilliant! The work of the Redlands Crew and Friends of Hurtwood Control are very much appreciated.

I'm Not Local, and have only a passing familiarity with the trails in question, but I do wonder why some people feel the need to build their "own" trail in a mountain biking honeypot that already has a lot of trails for varied abilities. If you look through a trail building thread on Pinkbike you'll see all sorts of mud and sticks-built eyesores, which are probably just a stone's throw away from something virtually identical, but better located and better made.

I'm Not Local, and have only a passing familiarity with the trails in question, but I do wonder why some people feel the need to build their "own" trail in a mountain biking honeypot that already has a lot of trails for varied abilities. If you look through a trail building thread on Pinkbike you'll see all sorts of mud and sticks-built eyesores, which are probably just a stone's throw away from something virtually identical, but better located and better made.

It's called progression: One thing that we seem to completely ignore in this country. How are you supposed to become a better rider if you continue to ride the same things over and over again? Yes, I know you can learn to ride smoother and faster, but after a while you want something to push your limits further. I think this is also a problem at some trails centres, such as Afan i.e. there is no facility for progression. Building your own stuff helps you improve the areas you want to improve.

Building your own stuff helps you improve the areas you want to improve.

that doesn't allow you free reign to build whatever you want wherever you want, if you want cool rad dude riding buy some land or move to canada
what if people just want to ride on trails sanctioned by the landowner/management? indiscriminate building just jeopardises the existing trail network. lets not forget it could all be taken away after a committee meeting.

Why do they feel the need to build? Because they feel the need to push themselves. As others have mentioned, there's a LOT of nice flowy XC-type singletrack in the Surrey Hills. But that can only keep you entertained for so long. Sometimes there's simply no substitute for going big. It's a different skillset and a different mindset. Now you will never, ever get properly big stunts built "officially", simply because they are inherently dangerous, which no landowner can admit to being happy with. So they get built illegally. Even places like Chicksands or Esher which are managed don't have much in the way of *big* stunts, simply because you can't write a risk assessment for them

I'm well aware of the trail we're talking about. The features are pretty well built, and the lips blatantly obvious enough that if you decide to ride over them without checking them first you've only got yourself to blame. There's also ample chicken lines around the big hits. One day I'll drag the big bike out and knock the entire line off, in the meantime I'll stick to the smaller stuff on the XC bike.

Once that trail gets officially discovered and trashed, all that will happen is another one will get knocked up somewhere else, equally illegal. Whilst I'd far rather the existing trails were well managed and maintained, than we ended up with more shonkily built stuff, I'm deeply in awe of the dedication of the guys who spend days and days building what they want to ride.

And yes, sure they can "ban" us from the hills officially. How much do you think that's going to bother those who are already building illegally? It will just mean there's less people travelling there to ride having read about it in a magazine. Locals will *still* be going out. Hell, we all know a certain south african didn't like bikers on his land - didn't stop many people riding the trails there did it?

It's all about live and let live at the end of the day. Ride. Don't affect other users, and don't let them affect you. That goes for everyone - XC, DH, horses, walkers, landowners whatever.

Mikey, in the case of Leith Hill, I'm a bit confused because there are already some decent sized gaps and natural hucks dotted about the place. If there are people who are nailing every single one with their eyes shut (and as I say I'm not sure if this is the case) then maybe you need to move on to another location instead of just building something very similar a couple of miles away, where it's going to attract adverse attention.

I never said it did give you "free reign" to build wherever you wanted, I was just answering the guy's question about why people would want to build their own stuff.

if you want cool rad dude riding buy some land or move to canada

I have to say that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard: Why can't we have progressive riding in this country? I agree the north downs may not be the place to do it, but there is no reason why we can't have some trails, somewhere, that push people's limits, like the trails in Canada. I was in Canada in July and the xc trails there not only allow to push your limits, but are also extremely varied and extremely sustainable. The attitude you express above will only serve to hold mountain biking back as a sport, and is very short-sighted, not to mention narrow-minded. That's a bit like saying to a musician "you can't play the music you want, you have to play one particular type of music that suits everyone else".

Now you will never, ever get properly big stunts built "officially", simply because they are inherently dangerous, which no landowner can admit to being happy with.

Hmm, I havem't seen the line in question but I seriously doubt that, even though this is the gnar-core capital of the UK we're talking about, the stunts are significantly bigger than the stuff you can find at FC DH tracks and freeride parks.

Mikey, you seem to be wilfully ignoring loads of new trail developments that have sprung up over the past 10 years. Even a middle of the road centre like Afan has had two new sections added for the rad doods, although maybe you're good enough to nail all the jumps on Energy and throw in a few cheeky no-handers, in which case I apologise. 😉

I think what you really mean is "There aren't enough trails in the South East that cater to the style of riding I want to do", in which case that's unfortunate but it does come across as a bit of a me me me view of the world.

What is it with people on here (particularly from users with names that all seem to start with Mr)? Why post this tripe using absurd language they saw on the extreme channel last weekend?

There a few voices of reason on here. Others don't seem to like certain types of trail just because they can't ride it or don't want to talk to riders who they've put in box labelled 'downhillers'.

but it does come across as a bit of a me me me view of the world.

Actually I was thinking of both myself and other people who I have spoken to - who else can I comment for?

And I would totally agree that there aren't enough areas in the SE that cater for the type of riding that I want to do, but the type of riding I want to do is becoming more and more popular throughout the world, spearheaded by Canada, and England (Scotland not so much) is being left behind, because of people, such as MrSmith who are all "me me me" and don't look at what is happing in the sport on a wider basis.

if you want cool rad dude riding buy some land or move to canada

I have to say that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard: Why can't we have progressive riding in this country? I agree the north downs may not be the place to do it, but there is no reason why we can't have some trails, somewhere, that push people's limits, like the trails in Canada. I was in Canada in July and the xc trails there not only allow to push your limits, but are also extremely varied and extremely sustainable. The attitude you express above will only serve to hold mountain biking back as a sport, and is very short-sighted, not to mention narrow-minded. That's a bit like saying to a musician "you can't play the music you want, you have to play one particular type of music that suits everyone else".

there is progressive riding in this country. most of it either at private locations that can be ridden for a small fee or on land that has certain access rights and where people have been allowed to build with permission from management or landowner. you can even have somebody drive you back up to the top. it's just that the areas mentioned by the o.p do not allow the building of 'extreme stunts' and the illegal building is putting the other trail network at risk with the potential that one day the commitee could possibly turn round and say that's it no trails only the existing bridleway network. now to me anyone who builds big gaps/jumps/drops on those areas is being short sighted as they don't see the problems it causes with the owners/management. ride at porc/aston hill tilgate or build on your own land don't put other 'tame' trails at risk by your own narrow mindedness.

R979, more that I'm baffled as to why, when I go down to my local DH spot, there's often a new line or jump that adds nothing in terms of difficulty, is smaller and worse built than the existing lines, and goes over a footpath to boot. As an earlier poster says, you aren't going to get in touch with the people who built it via this forum, but it does show that it isn't all as simple as a bunch of stuffy XCers holding back the progress of mountain biking.

[i]I agree the north downs may not be the place to do it...[/i]

You think? A hugely popular National Trust-owned beauty spot used by thousands of people which is managed for wildlife conservation might not be the place to build the trails that will allow mountainbiking to progress as a sport? Good thinking. 😉

No-one who gets to decide what goes on at Leith Hill cares about "the progression of mountainbiking", whatever that is. As suggested, anyone who wants to create trails on which mountainbikign can "progress" is assuming a hell of a lot of risk. Oddly, the national trust doesn't want that in an area which is mainly used by sunday walkers, and nightjars. Getting one's own hill, rather than using one that thousands of other people manage to use without digging huge holes in it, does seem quite a sensible suggestion.
🙂

Actually I was thinking of both myself and other people who I have spoken to - who else can I comment for?

And I would totally agree that there aren't enough areas in the SE that cater for the type of riding that I want to do, but the type of riding I want to do is becoming more and more popular throughout the world, spearheaded by Canada, and England (Scotland not so much) is being left behind, because of people, such as MrSmith who are all "me me me" and don't look at what is happing in the sport on a wider basis.

in an ideal world there would be a network of graded 'mincing' to 'extreeme rad doode' trails with a ski lift to the top and a coffee shop and parking at the beginning of each trail. i would love that to happen but it's obvious that's it never will. in wales or scotland but not on leith/pitch/holmbury.
as for the "Me Me Me" comment that's laughable. we are talking about an area that has a lot of other vested interests beside mountainbiking.
an insular attitude towards others is what causes problems. i.e not thinking about the consequences of unsanctioned building. and you think i have a "me me me" attitude?

Even a middle of the road centre like Afan has had two new sections added for the rad doods, although maybe you're good enough to nail all the jumps on Energy and throw in a few cheeky no-handers

You're having a laugh right? The Energy trail, Rad? Its utter sh!te! Sure theres a few "jumps" without any kind of lip (so that if you can't be bothered to learn to jump you don't get punted over the bars) near the start. Wow. Then it's just yet more middle of the road singletrack. I *almost* prefer the old fireroad route. Almost. Again its a safe trail. Dirt Merchant it ain't.

The black section a little further up is more like it - once you hit the steep bit it actualy feels like a raw natural trail - a few different line options and a couple of little jumps and drops which do take a little care in their approach and landing. Still not BIG though.

I'll take the point about the FC DH courses - thing is (as far as I understand) they're only open on race/uplift days which cost and gives you limited runs, and they're usually over the far side of the country. If you're young, skint, and without much transport, your local woods are always going to be far more appealing.

One of the things I've always liked about the Surrey Hills, is that with a little imagination, and a good mental trail map, you can prepare yourself for riding anywhere in the world. Going to Whistler? Spend some time on the steeper bits (albeit short), and doing the big stunts. Going to the Alps? Likewise hunt out for the tight tech stuff (and the steep bits too). Sure it won't prepare you for an hour of solid descending, but no individual bit of trail should be beyond you.

an insular attitude towards others is what causes problems. i.e not thinking about the consequences of unsanctioned building. and you think i have a "me me me" attitude?

Erm, excuse me, where have I said that I condone the building of unsanctioned trails on Leith hill? Please go through my posts and point me to the bit where I said that.

What I dislike is the lack of understanding of other types of riding expressed here. If you don't understand it, you refer to it as "extreeme rad doode" of other such nonsense. The point I am trying to make is that there is a world outside of your seemingly narrow view of mountain biking that is just as ligitimate as yours and the people who take part in that sort of riding should not be excluded. I do not condone the building of unsanctioned trails on Leith hill, but I do support their efforts in trying to push their limits and the sport in general, and therefore whoever is building this stuff should be entered into a dialogue, rather than being the subject of a spiteful diatribe.

As Jon says above: "If you're young, skint, and without much transport, your local woods are always going to be far more appealing."

MrA, completely agree. Poorly built trails, particularly jumps, will always be dangerous. As you've said you've not seen the trail I'm referring to. In my opinion it is very well built, and, while illegal, actually embodies some good trail design principles, like not going directly down the hill. The few jumps up top aside, it's not really a proper DH track so I don't know why it is getting treated as such.

Look, everyone who has come on here to defend this *one* trail has been polite and reasonable. The anti-DH brigade (other than being puerile) keep citing poor, unsubstantiated reasons why this will have us all excluded.

Several other legacy trails have been shut down because they were unsustainable. Is this not what should be focused on - sustainable trails? As I've already said, this seems to be ignored by some others who post here. These people are being hypocrites by highlighting some rather minor unauthorised trail building (because they don't like the style of trail) and ignoring a vast amount of damage occurring due to their (all of our) trundling on the legacy trails.

If they really did have such a deep environmental concerns about the damage mountain biking does, they should give up riding all together.

The point I am trying to make is that there is a world outside of your seemingly narrow view of mountain biking that is just as ligitimate as yours and the people who take part in that sort of riding should not be excluded

you know nothing of my view of mountainbiking. i'm certainly not very good at it but that doesn't preclude me from watching/enjoying it as non participant. i like watching DH and 4x plus a bit of bmx I know a fair few people who's livelihood depends on all types of cycling and i myself sometimes work for the cycling industry. you are confusing my terminology for a dislike of people who own body armour or have more than 6in of travel, your presumption is incorrect.

you mention "legitimate" well the trail building in question isn't and there lies the problem. if mountainbiking is going to "progress" then legitimate building is the way forward not the "me me me" attitude of unsanctioned indiscriminate trailbuilders.

If they really did have such a deep environmental concerns about the damage mountain biking does, they should give up riding all together.

This has been my arguement for ages: A pre-planned, organised, schedule of trail building and maintenance, agreed with the land-owners is essential for the survival of mountian biking in this area. This would, done properly and in accordance with IMBA guidelines, result in sustainable trails for all abilities and styles - is this going to happen? Possibly when hell freezes over.

If the trails already there aren't 'rad' enough - then they're overbiked - **** em on a rigid hardtail and suddenly the gert big DH dudes learn they aren't quite as good as they thought they were

I offered to help out on a Hurtwood dig day a while back, but was effectively told that as I didn't have trail building experience I wasn't welcome. I found it a slightly surprising stance, and I'm guessing some of the people posting here are/were involved with the digging.

Perhaps those people could explain that stance, and why I should volunteer again, and how they can expect people not to go elsewhere if they're not allowed to get involved and help with making the trails they want to ride?

Ta

This has been my arguement for ages: A pre-planned, organised, schedule of trail building and maintenance, agreed with the land-owners is essential for the survival of mountian biking in this area. This would, done properly and in accordance with IMBA guidelines, result in sustainable trails for all abilities and styles - is this going to happen? Possibly when hell freezes over.

Mikey, it's in the process of happening *now*, so don't forget to pick up your skates if you're heading to the 9th circle for a barbecue today - it's time to get building a few snowmen. 😀

Why do you think Parklife has suddenly got a lot more pleasant to ride? Keep an eye on BKB over the winter, too - the fall line's about to get fixed but good.

There is a lot of stuff happening in the background in terms of landowners, managers and NGOs at present. In terms of illicit building that affects others, most of the managers I've talked to have a pretty simple strategy - put it beyond use. As soon as something becomes big enough to be a liability problem - for example, numpties finding it and falling off it - then it will be closed down. Simple as that. Which is why the smart cheeky trail builders do not build stuff in a high-traffic area like Leith Hill, where there are lots of different interest groups about, near saturation trail use and a bunch of SSSIs and protected species around. That stuff gets found and closed down.

I know many of these trails and the illegal builders, they wont read this as they don't bother with forums

But keep ranting :thumb:

If the trails already there aren't 'rad' enough - then they're overbiked - **** em on a rigid hardtail and suddenly the gert big DH dudes learn they aren't quite as good as they thought they were

Lol, it's this attitude that really annoys the hell out of me: The downhillers I know also ride xc, road, etc and are some of the best bike handlers I've ever seen. To assume that just because they choose to ride dh, they have no skills is just narrow-minded nonesense and will only serve the purpose of giving xc riders a bad name.

Good point Dango - we are all wibbling webmongs after all!

lcj - who told you that? Did you volunteer to Hurtwood or Redlands? If Hurtwood, then there's a pretty straightforward reason; we're swamped with volunteers. This was a problem in the past with Redlands, where we got 50 volunteers turning up on a dig day, with only eight committee bods to manage the build and maintenance. It was fairly disastrous.

With Hurtwood Volunteers, we took advice from Ian Warby at the CTC (The guy that built Aston Hill, basically) and one of his pieces of advice was to have build days invite-only, so that we didn't get swamped. So that's what we've done. With a 1:1 or 1:2 ratio of experienced builders to beginners, we can get people up to speed much quicker. Once they're experienced, we can then get them training up other people. This is the theory, and to date it works better than the 1:5 sort of ratio we used to have on days.

Drop me a line (my email's in the profile) and I'll see if we can get you on the list for one of the next days. Because it's been so dry, the only work done this summer has been on Parklife.

PS: Mikey - one of the best downhillers I know is also a keen roadie and XC rider. He's likely to be out on one of the shop xc rides tonight. He has some pretty scathing opinions of some of the shonky building. If it helps, I should add that I raced about three seasons of the Dragons back when Jason's uplifts involved two gravel lorries and a ladder. I was / am sh!t, but I still did a fair amount of falling off hillsides while dressed as a Stormtrooper. It was fun.

Jon, you can ride most of the FC courses any time subject to stuff like logging, although a lot of them don't have any facilities, private uplifts are a big no-no, and pushing up to the top is a mission. Afan, well, regardless of what you think of the Energy trail it's still worth a trip isn't it? And there's a proper DH course coming soon, apparently.

I think if people want to have their rad freeride cake and eat it, they should be following the model of the Woodland Riders in Tavistock, the Black Canon Collective at Longleat, or Jedi off here, where you lease the land, set up your own club, and build what you want to ride. Surprised this doesn't happen in more places, given the depth of feeling that this seems to evoke. And if you've got your shiny new mountain bike, another twenty or thirty quid on membership isn't that much, or is it?

FFS Mr agreeable: Will you get off your high horse for one minute. DH riding is just as valid an activity as your chosen discipline - get over it.
It's your condescending attitude in this thread that is probably responsible for most of the angry replies you get.

mikey74 - Member
FFS Mr agreeable: Will you get off your high horse for one minute. DH riding is just as valid an activity as your chosen discipline - get over it.

Not if it endangers other riders and puts the entire network of authorised, existing trails at risk it isn't.

As others have said, the Surrey Lumps are an area that is both populated, well used by all manner of people doing all manner of things and is also in large parts privately owned. Many people have worked [i]exceptionally[/i] hard over the years to create a great riding environment that really works. ****monkeys who build stupid cr@p illegaly risk ruining all those efforts.

Want your DH kick? Go ride a DH course. Want to ride lovely trails in a lovely part of the world, go to the Surrey Hills and soak up all the trail goodness.

DH is great. But is really needs suitable locations. Like DH tracks. Progression is a natural thing to want in your riding - but you don't have a [i]right[/i] to expect to be able to achieve that progression just anywhere.

Leith Hill and Hurtwood (by the way, that's Surrey Hills, not North Downs, which is somewhere else) are already used for stuff - they aren't wild areas just looking for a user.

DH riding is just as valid an activity as your chosen discipline - get over it.

What does that even mean? I know that pottering around the woods on my XC bike doesn't throw up anything like as many potential issues for a landowner as getting together with some mates and digging out a track with some gap jumps that someone could paralyse themselves on.

Spot on Mr_A.

I have no idea what "valid" means in this context.

mikey74 - Member
Are there? PORC is about 12-15 miles away. I do keep meaning to head over there but haven't got round to it. May have to check it out.

[url= http://www.ukdirt.com/porc/ ]http://www.ukdirt.com/porc/[/url]

maybe anyone who wants to build jumps/gaps that are unlikely to be trashed by a ranger should check porc out.
[i]
"It's been a busy time at PORC, and new tracks are starting to take shape. We have a new road-gap, and atleast 2 new DH sections, plus work has started on some new XC single track. If you want to help with track building, and the benefits that come with it, please call Rob on 01892 870136."[/i]